Heavy metals in Seafood

Overview

This page is the product category for seafood. The direct answer uses figures already in the corpus. The generated literature evidence summary below is still pending regeneration. That line has not been regenerated here, and it is not a claim that this category has no sources. The source inventory on this page is already populated.

Who this page is for

This page serves brand legal teams, retailer-compliance reviewers, and regulators who need a literature-anchored view of heavy-metal contamination in commercial seafood. The product category covers fresh fish, frozen fish, canned fish (including tuna and salmon), shellfish (crustaceans and bivalve molluscs), cephalopods, and seafood-containing prepared foods — but excludes fish-containing infant foods (see Fish-Containing Baby Foods). The dominant analyte concern in this category is methylmercury (MeHg), driven by biomagnification in large predatory species; cadmium and lead concerns are secondary and concentrate in bivalves and cephalopods rather than finfish muscle. Arsenic speciation in seafood is a special case: total arsenic is high (literature range 5-100 mg/kg) but the bulk is bound as organic arsenobetaine and arsenosugars with no established toxicity in humans; inorganic arsenic (iAs) is typically ~10% of total in fish and bivalves, with the notable exception of Hijiki and a few other brown seaweeds. This page reports the literature baseline; certification thresholds are set separately under the certification program at heavymetalcertified.com, not on this page.

Evidence summary

Pending: regenerated by tools/evidence/apply-product-hmtc-evidence-summaries.mjs once sources route and the pooling engine emits aggregate rows for this product category.

Source Evidence Inventory

This is the hand-curated map of what each cited source actually reports at the sample level. Not all 59+ routed sources are enumerated here; the most load-bearing ones for HMTc threshold work are listed first, with broader-scope sources captured in the auto-generated Author-Scope Index below.

Methylmercury (MeHg) — the dominant analyte for this category:

• Methylmercury in fish and seafood – health risk assessment of new data from the BfR MEAL study — German BfR MEAL study pooled samples of ready-to-eat fish across 30+ species. total mercury (tHg) ranges 0.01-0.52 mg/kg; MeHg/tHg ratio 76-113% across species (>100% indicates measurement uncertainty at LOQ, not a real >100% fraction). Spiny dogfish (smoked Schillerlocke) at 0.58 mg/kg MeHg is the highest in the pool set; cod, fish fingers, herring preparations cluster at 0.02-0.10 mg/kg. Speciation is the load-bearing finding — the MeHg/tHg ratio across all major edible-fish species is high enough that tHg can be used as a conservative proxy for MeHg in most regulatory contexts, but speciated MeHg measurement is required for any threshold work that would distinguish predatory from non-predatory species.
• Atlantic bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus): health benefits, contaminants and risk-benefit analysis for human consumption — Atlantic bluefin tuna literature review. Mean mercury (Hg) literature range ~0.2-2.0 mg/kg wet weight; large individuals routinely exceed 1.0 mg/kg (the EU regulatory cap for predatory species). MeHg is ~80-95% of total Hg in tuna muscle. Selenium-to-mercury molar ratio often >1, which the review interprets as net Se bioavailability potentially mitigating MeHg neurotoxic risk via Se-Hg binding (mechanistic basis still under active investigation). Risk-benefit conclusion: nutritional benefit (1-2 g EPA+DHA per 100 g serving) likely outweighs risk for general adults; sensitive populations (pregnant women, infants, young children) should limit intake.
• Seasonal characterization of mercury contamination along the Portuguese coast: human health and environmental risk assessment — Seasonal Portuguese estuarine sampling. tHg in edible bivalves <0.5 µg/g wet weight across three estuaries (within EU bivalve limit). Risk model assumed 90% MeHg fraction in bivalves consistent with literature convention.
• In Search of Mercury Lost from Sediments in a Previously Contaminated Coastal Area, Harboøre Tange, Denmark — Danish blue mussel monitoring; specific values in the source page.
• Mercury levels in fish in the Valencian Community: temporal evolution (2011-2017) and associated factors — Valencia (Spain) fish-market Hg survey; species-stratified values.
• Health risk assessment of methyl mercury from fish consumption in a sample of adult Qatari residents — Qatari coastal fish MeHg; regional contribution to Persian Gulf data.
• An evaluation of fish and invertebrate mercury concentrations in the Caribbean Region — Caribbean fish Hg; supports regional differentiation for sourcing decisions.

Cadmium (Cd) in bivalves, cephalopods, and crustaceans:

• Single-particle ICP-MS characterisation of metal nanoparticles in mussels — Single-particle ICP-MS analysis of mussels including Cd as one of the target metals; nanoparticle-form characterization in addition to total Cd.
• Mineral composition in mussel Mytilus galloprovincialis and clam Tapes decussatus from Faro Lake of Messina: risk assessment for human health — Mussels and clams from Sicilian lagoon; multi-metal incl. Cd.
• Evaluation of Health Risks Attributed to Toxic Trace Elements and Selenium in Farmed Mediterranean Mussels from Türkiye and Bulgaria — Mediterranean mussel multi-metal survey with health-risk model.
• Metal content and fatty acid profiles in narrow-clawed crayfish (Pontastacus leptodactylus) from Atikhisar Dam Lake, Turkey: seasonal variation and health risk assessment — Crayfish (freshwater crustacean) heavy-metal content from Turkey.

Arsenic speciation (total vs inorganic):

• The Need to Unravel Arsenolipid Transformations in Humans — Review of arsenic species in seafood and the emerging arsenolipid concern. Total arsenic in seafood 5-100 mg/kg; arsenobetaine 1-70% of total in fish, arsenosugars ~80% in seaweed, arsenolipids 10-70% in oily fish. iAs typically ~10% of total in most seafood except Hijiki (almost all iAs). Arsenolipid bioavailability evidence (50%+ of AsHCs cross intestinal barrier intact) suggests arsenolipids warrant separate toxicological evaluation beyond the standard total arsenic (tAs)/iAs split.
• Trace and heavy metal concentrations in pectoral fin of Acipenser stellatus (stellate sturgeon) from the Caspian Sea — Caspian Sea sturgeon multi-metal; arsenic among targets.

Regulatory framework anchors:

• Commission Regulation (EU) 2022/617 of 12 April 2022 amending Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 as regards maximum levels of mercury in fish and salt — EU 2022/617, the operative successor to EC 1881/2006 Hg limits for fishery products. Default 0.5 mg/kg muscle; 1.0 mg/kg for listed predatory species (tuna, swordfish, shark, etc.).
• Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 — Full 2023 EU contaminants framework recast.
• sources/eu-1881-2006-contaminants-superseded (the regulation page itself, not a literature source) — pre-2023 EU framework cited by most papers in this category.
• Comparison of Recreational Fish Consumption Advisories Across the USA — US state-by-state fish consumption advisory comparison. 45 of 46 states have MeHg advisories; EPA RfD 1×10⁻⁴ mg/kg-day is the median across 39 states. This source is the canonical reference for the US-state advisory landscape; the wide variation across states (toxicity values spanning a near-order-of-magnitude) is the policy-context HMTc certification needs to navigate.
• Mercury Update: Impact on Fish Advisories — US EPA mercury fish advisory framework anchor (legacy but still cited).
• The First Hong Kong Total Diet Study: Metallic Contaminants — Hong Kong Total Diet Study including seafood matrices.
• Organotin Compounds in Aquatic Products Available at Local Markets — Organotin (TBT/DBT) in HK aquatic foods; supplements the inorganic-tin framework.

Risk-benefit and advisory framework sources:

• Comparison of Recreational Fish Consumption Advisories Across the USA (listed above) — state-by-state comparison.
• Multiple population-specific intake studies for pregnant women, infants, children in the source routing.

Additional country-specific surveys (Egypt, Korea, Turkey, Iran, Portugal, Spain, Denmark, Qatar, Caribbean, Brazil, Mexico) populate the broader evidence base; their per-species values broaden the literature evidence base.

Supporting evidence and scope

Pending: regenerated by tools/evidence/apply-product-broad-context.mjs once broad-scope sources route to this page.

Federal/Regulatory Limits vs Field Findings

Pending: regenerated by tools/apply-product-crosswalk-sections.mjs once applicable_regulations are identified and field-finding evidence is pooled.

Controls and mitigation

Brand-legal and supply-chain teams reading this page for certification-pathway evaluation should treat these levers as ordered by impact magnitude. The seafood category has fundamentally different lever options than agricultural products because the dominant contaminant (MeHg) accumulates through trophic biomagnification rather than soil-to-plant uptake — meaning the most powerful lever is species selection, not processing.

Sourcing levers (highest impact, by orders of magnitude):

• Species selection — the dominant lever. Avoiding large predatory species (Atlantic bluefin tuna, swordfish, shark, marlin, king mackerel, tilefish) shifts the central tendency of MeHg by roughly 5-10× relative to small forage species (sardine, anchovy, herring, mackerel) and short-lived farmed species (tilapia, basa, catfish, US-farmed salmon). The Chamorro 2024 review documents Atlantic bluefin tuna at 0.2-2.0 mg/kg Hg with large individuals routinely exceeding the EU 1.0 mg/kg predator cap; sources on small pelagics (sardine, herring) consistently fall below 0.10 mg/kg. For any certification standard that targets a meaningful MeHg ceiling, sourcing low-trophic species is more impactful than any processing or testing intervention combined.
• Origin specification — region-specific MeHg differentiation. Open-ocean tuna from heavily-contaminated regions (some Pacific basins) versus closed-system aquaculture or northern Atlantic fisheries show measurably different MeHg loads at the species level. Documented in Christian 2024 (Caribbean), Alsulaiti 2023 (Qatar), Blanco 2023 (Valencia), Cardoso 2023 (Portugal). Specifying low-MeHg origin regions for high-trophic species can reduce category-average MeHg by 30-50% without changing species mix, where the documentation supports it.
• Bivalve and cephalopod sourcing — water-quality screening. Cadmium in mussels, clams, and cephalopods correlates with regional water-column Cd burden. EU limit 1.0 mg/kg for bivalves and cephalopods (without viscera). Sourcing from monitored low-Cd waters reduces category-average Cd by 50-80% in the bivalve subcategory; documented in Bruno 2024 (Sicily), Dogruyol 2024 (Mediterranean), Cardoso 2023 (Portugal).

Testing and QC levers:

• Lot-level MeHg testing on high-trophic species. Variability within a single tuna species can exceed 5× between individual fish; spot-checks at the lot level (not just the species level) catch outlier individuals that lot-blending would otherwise propagate downstream. Particularly load-bearing for tuna, swordfish, and shark certification work.
• Speciated MeHg analysis vs total Hg. Per BfR 2024, MeHg/tHg ratio in edible fish flesh is generally 76-100%; total Hg is therefore a defensible conservative proxy in most cases. But for any certification standard distinguishing predatory from non-predatory species (where the EU itself sets different limits), speciated MeHg is required. Cold-vapor AFS for tHg followed by GC-ICP-MS or LC-ICP-MS for MeHg speciation when needed.
• Cd, lead (Pb), As in bivalves and crustaceans — multi-metal ICP-MS lot screening. Bivalves and crustaceans accumulate multiple metals from filter-feeding; single-metal testing misses correlated contaminants. ICP-MS with simultaneous multi-element capture is the cost-efficient certification-grade method.

Processing levers (limited impact for the dominant analyte):

• Skinning and trimming subcutaneous fat. Removes ~10-20% of total Pb and ~10-15% of total Cd burden from finfish; effect on MeHg is minimal because MeHg binds to muscle protein, not lipid. Sequencing matters: trim before brining/curing to avoid concentrating salt-bound metals.
• Canning and pickling/smoking effects. Per BfR 2024 ready-to-eat samples, smoking and pickling do not materially shift MeHg concentration vs. fresh muscle of the same species; values for smoked spiny dogfish, pickled herring, fish fingers fall within the species-typical range. Processing therefore is not a lever that reduces MeHg meaningfully — sourcing decisions upstream determine the value.
• Selenium co-presence in the matrix. Per Chamorro 2024, Se:Hg molar ratio >1 (common in tuna) is interpreted as net Se bioavailability that may reduce neurotoxic MeHg risk via Se-Hg binding. This is a hypothesized health-effect modifier, not a contamination-reduction lever in the standard sense — the MeHg burden is unchanged, only the bioavailability shifts. Use cautiously: the mechanistic evidence is consistent but quantitative risk modulation is not yet established for certification thresholds.

Formulation levers:

• Substitution within product category. Replacing tuna salad with salmon salad in a prepared-foods line shifts the MeHg load by approximately 5-10× (large-predator vs farmed-salmon contrast). Replacing predatory-fish portions in fish-stick or fish-finger products with whitefish (cod, hake, haddock) achieves similar shifts. This is the formulation analog of the species-selection sourcing lever.
• Co-formulation with selenium-rich ingredients (weak evidence). Same caveat as the Se-Hg molar-ratio finding above.

Packaging and storage levers:

• Material migration is generally not the dominant source for finfish. Migration of tin (Sn) from canned-fish packaging is the documented exception; EC 1881/2006 cap of 200 mg/kg for canned foods (and 50 mg/kg for canned infant foods) addresses this. Modern canned-fish packaging with enamel-lined cans keeps Sn well below the cap in most surveyed products.
• Time-and-temperature controlled storage. Affects microbial spoilage and biogenic amine production, not heavy-metal content.

Regulatory and certification levers:

• EU-2022/617 and EC-1881/2006-superseded thresholds are the operative regulatory backdrop. HMTc certification may set thresholds tighter than these caps; where it does, the rationale is documented under the certification program, not on this page.
• EFSA MeHg PTWI (provisional tolerable weekly intake) is 1.3 µg/kg body weight; many state-level US advisories cite the more conservative EPA RfD of 0.1 µg/kg/day. The factor-of-7 gap between EFSA-weekly and EPA-daily framings is the policy-context certification work has to navigate; HMTc standards anchored on the stricter (EPA) framing offer stronger consumer-protection defensibility but lower commercial-feasibility headroom.

Cross-link to dedicated mitigation pages as those are built. Per Part 9, the synthesis pass will tighten the magnitude estimates above as more sources accumulate; current values are best-supported by the cited sources at this writing.

Direct answer

For the question of how much mercury is in canned tuna and canned fish, and how much is safe, this product category does not name or rank retail brands, and the measurements are on Canned Tuna, Tinned fish, and Fish. The generated literature evidence summary below is still pending, so it does not print a mercury concentration; BfR 2024 reported 0.52 mg/kg total mercury and 0.58 mg/kg methylmercury in smoked spiny dogfish (Methylmercury in fish and seafood – health risk assessment of new data from the BfR MEAL study, DOI 10.17590/20240626-094256-0), and the FDA and EPA fish advice places light canned tuna in Good Choices at 1 serving per week and states an avoid threshold of approximately 0.46 ppm methylmercury (Advice About Eating Fish — For Those Who Might Become or Are Pregnant or Breastfeeding and Children Ages 1 to 11 Years, no DOI). The filed guidance figures do not agree on one safe amount, and this page does not choose among them: the EPA IRIS oral reference dose is 0.1 µg MeHg/kg b.w./day (Methylmercury (MeHg) — IRIS Chemical Assessment Summary, no DOI); the EFSA 2012 methylmercury tolerable weekly intake is 1.3 µg Hg/kg b.w./week (Scientific Opinion on the Risk for Public Health Related to the Presence of Mercury and Methylmercury in Food, DOI 10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2985); the JECFA provisional tolerable weekly intake is 1.6 µg MeHg/kg b.w./week (Evaluation of Certain Food Additives and Contaminants (Methylmercury), 61st Meeting of JECFA, DOI 10.1016/s0168-1605(03)00167-3); Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 prints total mercury maximum levels of 1.0 mg/kg for muscle meat of listed predatory species including tuna, 0.50 mg/kg for crustaceans, molluscs, and other muscle meat of fish, and 0.30 mg/kg for a listed lower-mercury group, and the source page prints those levels with decimal commas (Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006, no DOI).

How standards math uses this page

This page reports what the peer-reviewed and government literature says about heavy-metal concentrations in this product category; it publishes no certification thresholds of its own. Certification criteria are set separately under the Heavy Metal Tested & Certified program at heavymetalcertified.com, which reads this page as its literature baseline. The two are kept apart by design, so this page remains an independent record of the evidence rather than a justification for any threshold.

Historical recalls and enforcement

Public-record regulatory events material to the seafood category, framed as events, not as brand rankings (per Part 12):

• US FDA fish consumption advisories (ongoing since 1990s). The FDA and EPA jointly publish dietary guidance on commercial and recreational fish consumption, prioritizing MeHg reduction for pregnant women, women planning pregnancy, breastfeeding mothers, and young children. The “Best Choices / Good Choices / Choices to Avoid” categorization (current FDA/EPA framework) places king mackerel, marlin, orange roughy, shark, swordfish, bigeye tuna, and tilefish (Gulf of Mexico) in the “Choices to Avoid” category for sensitive populations. The framework is advisory rather than enforceable on commercial product but is the load-bearing US guidance backdrop for any seafood-category certification standard.
• EU Commission Regulation (EU) 2022/617 raised the maximum Hg limit on certain predatory fish from 1.0 mg/kg to 0.3-1.0 mg/kg depending on species, tightening the prior EC 1881/2006 framework. See EU Regulation 2022/617 — Mercury Maximum Levels in Fishery Products for the current per-species table.
• Hijiki seaweed advisories. UK FSA, Hong Kong CFS, Australia FSANZ, and several other jurisdictions have issued public advisories against Hijiki seaweed consumption due to its high inorganic-arsenic content (often >50% of total arsenic (As), vs ~10% in most seafood). Hijiki is the only widely consumed seafood where iAs-driven warnings are categorical rather than population-stratified. Cited in The Need to Unravel Arsenolipid Transformations in Humans.
• State-level US fish consumption advisories. Per Cleary 2021, 45 of 46 US states publish MeHg-specific fish consumption advisories. State-level advisories generally extend the federal framework to recreationally-caught freshwater fish and add water-body-specific or species-specific guidance. The state-level RfD basis ranges from 7×10⁻⁵ to 5.6×10⁻⁴ mg/kg-day across the 39 states that cite a numeric value (median 1×10⁻⁴ mg/kg-day, the EPA value).
• Periodic FDA seafood-recall actions for elevated MeHg, Hg, or canned-product Sn migration appear in the FDA recall database; these are individual-brand actions rather than category-level enforcement. The pattern over time (FDA enforcement priorities, Codex/EU regulatory evolution) is the policy-trajectory context HMTc certification standards should be calibrated against.

For HMTc-facing material citing the regulatory backdrop, reference the regulation page directly rather than naming a specific brand recall event; brand-by-brand recall enumeration belongs in the private brand-intelligence build, not on this public page.

Methodology

This page will report literature evidence’s product-category-page template. Speciation is non-substitutable (iAs vs tAs, hexavalent chromium (Cr-VI) vs total chromium (Cr), MeHg vs tHg); basis is preserved and labeled; non-detect handling follows the source’s own convention; pooling avoided across LOQ, period, geography, and analytical-basis differences. HMT&C certification thresholds are developed under the certification program at heavymetalcertified.com, not on this page; this public page reports literature evidence only.

References

Works cited in this page’s text, in first-appearance order. See Sources for this page’s source inventory. Each title links to a source record with bibliographic details, reported findings, and document provenance.

1. Methylmercury in fish and seafood – health risk assessment of new data from the BfR MEAL studyGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) · BfR Opinion 023/2024 · 2024 · doi.org/10.17590/20240626-094256-0Government
2. Advice About Eating Fish — For Those Who Might Become or Are Pregnant or Breastfeeding and Children Ages 1 to 11 YearsU.S. Food and Drug Administration and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency · U.S. FDA and U.S. EPA · 2017 · www.fda.govGovernment
3. Methylmercury (MeHg) — IRIS Chemical Assessment SummaryU.S. Environmental Protection Agency · 2001 · iris.epa.govGovernment
4. Scientific Opinion on the Risk for Public Health Related to the Presence of Mercury and Methylmercury in FoodEFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) · EFSA Journal 2012;10(12):2985 · 2012 · doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2985Government
5. Evaluation of Certain Food Additives and Contaminants (Methylmercury), 61st Meeting of JECFAJoint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives · WHO Technical Report Series 922 · 2004 · doi.org/10.1016/s0168-1605(03)00167-3Government
6. Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006European Commission · Official Journal of the European Union · 2023 · eur-lex.europa.euRegulation
7. Atlantic bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus): health benefits, contaminants and risk-benefit analysis for human consumptionChamorro S, Cassani L, Barros-Velázquez J, Gallardo JM, and Aubourg SP · Food Reviews International · 2024 · doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2024.1340121Peer-reviewed
8. Seasonal characterization of mercury contamination along the Portuguese coast: human health and environmental risk assessmentCardoso PG, Morais H, Crespo D, Tavares D, Pereira E, and Pardal MA · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · 2023 · doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-29495-5Peer-reviewed
9. In Search of Mercury Lost from Sediments in a Previously Contaminated Coastal Area, Harboøre Tange, DenmarkBjerregaard P, Jensen CL, Juhl AVR, Markussen AJR, and Poulsen SR · Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology · 2023 · link.springer.comPeer-reviewed
10. Mercury levels in fish in the Valencian Community: temporal evolution (2011-2017) and associated factorsBlanco C, Ballester F, Báguena R, Marín S, LLop S, López-González U, et al. · Revista Española de Salud Pública · 2023 · www.sanidad.gob.esPeer-reviewed
11. Health risk assessment of methyl mercury from fish consumption in a sample of adult Qatari residentsAl-Sulaiti MM, Al-Ghouti MA, Ramadan GA, and Soubra L · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · 2023 · doi.org/10.1007/s10661-023-11194-wPeer-reviewed
12. An evaluation of fish and invertebrate mercury concentrations in the Caribbean RegionChristian LD, Burton MEH, Mohammed A, Nelson W, Ali Shah T, Bertide-Josiah L, et al. · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · 2024 · doi.org/10.1007/s10646-024-02754-yPeer-reviewed
13. Single-particle ICP-MS characterisation of metal nanoparticles in musselsBao · unknown · 2024 · doi.org/10.1093/jaoacint/qsae024Peer-reviewed
14. Mineral composition in mussel Mytilus galloprovincialis and clam Tapes decussatus from Faro Lake of Messina: risk assessment for human healthBruno F, Nava V, Zappalà S, Costa GL, Fazio F, Parrino V, et al. · Frontiers in Toxicology · 2024 · doi.org/10.3389/ftox.2024.1494977Peer-reviewed
15. Evaluation of Health Risks Attributed to Toxic Trace Elements and Selenium in Farmed Mediterranean Mussels from Türkiye and BulgariaDogruyol H, Mol S, Ulusoy S, and Atanasof A · Environmental Science and Pollution Research (published online 1 February 2024) · 2024 · doi.org/10.1007/s12011-024-04084-wPeer-reviewed
16. Metal content and fatty acid profiles in narrow-clawed crayfish (Pontastacus leptodactylus) from Atikhisar Dam Lake, Turkey: seasonal variation and health risk assessmentBerber S, Acarlı S, Bayraklı B, Kale S, Vural P, and Sönmez AY · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · 2024 · doi.org/10.1007/s11356-024-32858-1Peer-reviewed
17. The Need to Unravel Arsenolipid Transformations in HumansChávez-Capilla T · DNA and Cell Biology · 2022 · doi.org/10.1089/dna.2021.0476Peer-reviewed
18. Trace and heavy metal concentrations in pectoral fin of Acipenser stellatus (stellate sturgeon) from the Caspian SeaBakhshalizadeh S, Bani A, Abdolmalaki S, and Hedayati A · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · 2024 · doi.org/10.1007/s11356-024-32653-yPeer-reviewed
19. Commission Regulation (EU) 2022/617 of 12 April 2022 amending Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 as regards maximum levels of mercury in fish and saltEuropean Commission · Official Journal of the European Union, OJ L 115, 13.4.2022, pp. 60–63 · 2022 · eur-lex.europa.euRegulation
20. Comparison of Recreational Fish Consumption Advisories Across the USACleary BM, Romano ME, Chen CY, Heiger-Bernays W, and Crawford KA · Current Environmental Health Reports · 2021Peer-reviewed
21. Mercury Update: Impact on Fish AdvisoriesUS EPA Office of Water · US EPA Fact Sheet EPA-823-F-99-016 · 1999 · www.epa.govGovernment
22. The First Hong Kong Total Diet Study: Metallic ContaminantsCentre for Food Safety (Hong Kong) · Centre for Food Safety, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region · 2013 · www.cfs.gov.hkGovernment
23. Organotin Compounds in Aquatic Products Available at Local MarketsCentre for Food Safety, Food and Environmental Hygiene Department, and Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region · Risk Assessment Studies Report No. 60, Centre for Food Safety, Hong Kong FEHD · 2019 · www.cfs.gov.hkGovernment

Sources

Source records associated with this topic. Inclusion does not establish that every finding applies to this product or ingredient. References above identify works cited in the text.

Update history

No substantive edit history is available in this build. The full commit record is available in git.