March, 10 2014, 02:39pm EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Summer Kupau-Odo, Earthjustice, (808) 599-2436
ichael T. Bender, Mercury Policy Project, (802) 223-9000
Mercury: Groups Sue FDA for Seafood Health Information
Agency failed to respond to a petition filed in July 2011
WASHINGTON
Today, consumer protection and environmental advocates filed a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for failing to respond to a July 2011 petition in which the groups asked the FDA to give consumers clear, accurate and accessible information about toxic mercury in the seafood they eat.
Read the complaint.
The lawsuit, filed by Earthjustice on behalf of the Center for Science in the Public Interest and the Mercury Policy Project, a project of the Tides Center, seeks a court-ordered deadline for FDA to respond to its request that the agency require signs at market seafood counters and labels on packaged seafood to inform consumers of the relative amounts of mercury in fish and other seafood. Under its own regulations, FDA had 180 days to respond to the petition, but ignored that deadline. Its failure to issue a final decision violates federal law.
"FDA's failure to respond to our petition is frustrating and disappointing," said Earthjustice attorney Summer Kupau-Odo. "Citizens expect that the public health agency charged with ensuring that food is safe and properly labeled will respond to their valid food safety concerns in a timely manner, especially when the health of some of the most vulnerable members of our community--infants and children--is at risk."
Mercury exposure via seafood consumption has been a health concern for decades. Originating mainly from coal-fired power plants and artisanal and small scale gold mining, airborne mercury is deposited into the ocean, where it converts into methylmercury, a neurotoxin that is particularly harmful to developing fetuses and children. Methylmercury accumulates in fish and shellfish. Methylmercury exposure has been linked to learning disabilities, lowered IQ, and impaired cognitive and nervous system functioning.
"The public--and especially at-risk groups such as pregnant women and heavy fish eaters--urgently need updated information," said Michael T. Bender, director of the Mercury Policy Project. "It is unconscionable that FDA continues to drag its feet when the latest science indicates a far greater methylmercury exposure risk than when the Agency developed its fish consumption advisory in 2004."
FDA acknowledged these health risks in 2004, when, in collaboration with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), it issued an online advisory, "What You Need to Know About Mercury in Fish and Shellfish." Aimed at women of childbearing age, pregnant women, women who are nursing, and children, the advisory established guidelines for seafood consumption to minimize mercury exposure. The advisory is inadequate, lacking vital information for making healthy seafood choices. For example, while it advises such women and children not to eat shark, king mackerel, tilefish, or swordfish--predators at the top of the food chain that accumulate large amounts of the toxic chemical--it offers little information about healthier alternatives. Also, the advisory's encouragement to consume canned tuna, the largest source of mercury exposure for most Americans, is out of step with the science, which suggests the government's recommended levels are excessive and unsafe.
In addition to being inaccurate and inadequate, studies have confirmed that the information in the government's on-line advisory is not reaching the general public, particularly those who do not have Internet access, or simply do not know they can seek advice online. The plaintiffs' petition asks for regulations that would require package labeling and clear point-of-sale charts at grocery stores and fish markets to enable consumers to make healthier seafood choices that maximize the benefits of eating seafood while reducing the risk of mercury exposure.
Caroline Smith DeWaal, Food Safety Director, Center for Science in the Public Interest, commented: "Consumers deserve to have the information they need to enjoy heart-healthy seafood while avoiding dangerous mercury--particularly if they are pregnant or feeding young children. It's FDA's responsibility to provide that information, and it's long past time for the agency to do so."
Earthjustice is a non-profit public interest law firm dedicated to protecting the magnificent places, natural resources, and wildlife of this earth, and to defending the right of all people to a healthy environment. We bring about far-reaching change by enforcing and strengthening environmental laws on behalf of hundreds of organizations, coalitions and communities.
800-584-6460LATEST NEWS
Trump Signs Executive Order to Advance 'Deeply Dangerous' Deep-Sea Mining
"The harm caused by deep-sea mining isn't restricted to the ocean floor: It will impact the entire water column, top to bottom, and everyone and everything relying on it," one campaigner warned.
Apr 24, 2025
Amid global calls for a ban on deep-sea mining to protect marine ecosystems, U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday signed an executive order to advance the risky practice and "restore American dominance in offshore critical minerals and resources."
"The broad order avoids a direct confrontation with the United Nations-backed International Seabed Authority and seeks essentially to jump-start the mining of U.S. waters as part of a push to offset China's sweeping control of the critical minerals industry," notedReuters, which had previewed the measure aimed at attaining nickel, cobalt, copper, manganese, titanium, and rare earth elements.
"The International Seabed Authority—created by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which the U.S. has not ratified—has for years been considering standards for deep-sea mining in international waters, although it has yet to formalize them due to unresolved differences over acceptable levels of dust, noise, and other factors from the practice," the agency reported.
Trump's order directs Cabinet members including Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick—whose department oversees the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)—to expedite the permit process and work on various related reports.
"Authorizing deep-sea mining outside international law is like lighting a match in a room full of dynamite—it threatens ecosystems, global cooperation, and U.S. credibility all at once."
Deep-sea mining is opposed by over 30 countries as well as academics and advocacy groups worldwide. Among them is Greenpeace USA, whose campaigner Arlo Hemphill said Thursday that "authorizing deep-sea mining outside international law is like lighting a match in a room full of dynamite—it threatens ecosystems, global cooperation, and U.S. credibility all at once."
"We condemn this administration's attempt to launch this destructive industry on the high seas in the Pacific by bypassing the United Nations process," Hemphill declared. "This is an insult to multilateralism and a slap in the face to all the countries and millions of people around the world who oppose this dangerous industry."
"But this executive order is not the start of deep-sea mining. Everywhere governments have tried to start deep-sea mining, they have failed. This will be no different," he added. "We call on the international community to stand against this unacceptable undermining of international cooperation by agreeing to a global moratorium on deep-sea mining. The United States government has no right to unilaterally allow an industry to destroy the common heritage of humankind, and rip up the deep sea for the profit of a few corporations."
No exaggeration, deep sea mining could cause the massive collapse of the entire deep sea ecosystem and food chain. This is an existential risk to every person on this planet. www.nytimes.com/2025/04/24/c...
[image or embed]
— Alejandra Caraballo (@esqueer.net) April 24, 2025 at 5:54 PM
Ocean Conservancy vice president for external affairs Jeff Watters also blasted the move, saying that "this executive order flies in the face of NOAA's mission. NOAA is charged with protecting, not imperiling, the ocean and its economic benefits, including fishing and tourism; and scientists agree that deep-sea mining is a deeply dangerous endeavor for our ocean and all of us who depend on it."
"Areas of the U.S. seafloor where test mining took place over 50 years ago still haven't fully recovered," Watters pointed out. "The harm caused by deep-sea mining isn't restricted to the ocean floor: It will impact the entire water column, top to bottom, and everyone and everything relying on it. Evidence tells us that areas targeted for deep-sea mining often overlap with important fisheries, raising serious concerns about the impacts on the country's $321 billion fishing industry."
He highlighted that "NOAA is already being threatened by this administration's unprecedented cuts. NOAA is the eyes and ears for our water and air. NOAA provides Americans with accessible and accurate weather forecasts; it tracks hurricanes and tsunamis; it responds to oil spills; it keeps seafood on the table; and so much more. Forcing the agency to carry out deep-sea mining permitting while these essential services are slashed will only harm our ocean and our country."
"It's not just our country this executive order would harm: This action has far-reaching implications beyond the U.S.," Watters added, warning that by unilaterally allowing deep-sea mining, "the administration is opening a door for other countries to do the same—and all of us, and the ocean we all depend on, will be worse off for it."
As The New York Timesreported:
The executive order could pave the way for the Metals Company, a prominent seabed mining company, to receive an expedited permit from NOAA to actively mine for the first time. The publicly traded company, based in Vancouver, British Columbia, disclosed in March that it would ask the Trump administration through a U.S. subsidiary for approval to mine in international waters. The company has already spent more than $500 million doing exploratory work.
"We have a boat that's production-ready," said Gerard Barron, the company's chief executive, in an interview on Thursday. "We have a means of processing the materials in an allied friendly partner nation. We're just missing the permit to allow us to begin."
In response to the late March disclosure—which came during International Seabed Authority negotiations—Louisa Casson, senior campaigner for Greenpeace International, said that "this is another of the Metals Company's pathetic ploys and an insult to multilateralism. It shows that a moratorium on deep-sea mining is more urgently needed than ever. It also proves that the company's CEO Gerard Barron's plans never focused on solutions for the climate catastrophe."
"The Metals Company is desperate and now is encouraging a breach of customary international law by announcing their intent to mine the international seabed through the United States' Deep-Sea Hard Mineral Resources Act," the camapigner asserted. "This comes after the Metals Company has spent years exerting immense pressure on the International Seabed Authority to try and force governments to allow mining in the international seabed—the common heritage of humankind."
Casson stressed that "states, civil society, scientists, companies, and Indigenous communities continue to resist these efforts. Having tried and failed to pressure the international community to meet their demands, this reckless announcement is a slap in the face to international cooperation."
Less than a week later, the Norwegian deep-sea mining company Loke Marine Minerals declared bankruptcy—which Haldis Tjeldflaat Helle, a campaigner for Greenpeace Nordic, noted came "on the same day that we shut down a deep-sea mining conference in Bergen."
The Norwegian government in December halted plans to move forward with deep-sea mining in the Arctic Ocean, which Steve Trent, CEO and founder of the Environmental Justice Foundation, had called "a testament to the power of principled, courageous political action, and... a moment to celebrate for environmental advocates, ocean ecosystems, and future generations alike."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Doctors Without Borders Says Trump Aid Cuts 'Are a Human-Made Disaster' for Millions
"We are an emergency response organization, but we have never seen anything like this massive disruption to global health and humanitarian programs."
Apr 24, 2025
As the Trump administration, spearheaded by Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, dramatically slashes U.S. humanitarian assistance, the international medical charity Doctors Without Borders warned Thursday that the cuts are already "having devastating consequences for people who rely upon aid" across the Global South.
"The U.S. has long been the leading supporter of global health and humanitarian programs, responsible for around 40% of all related funding," Doctors Without Borders, known by its French acronym MSF, said in a statement. "These U.S. investments have helped improve the health and well-being of communities around the globe—and totaled less than 1% of the annual federal budget."
"It's shocking to see the U.S. abandon its leadership role in advancing global health and humanitarian efforts."
However, with the Trump administration slashing funding for U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) contracts by 90%, including for programs that fed and provided healthcare for millions of people and fought diseases like malaria and HIV/AIDS, MSF USA CEO Avril Benoît said there will be "more preventable deaths and untold suffering around the world."
"These sudden cuts by the Trump administration are a human-made disaster for the millions of people struggling to survive amid wars, disease outbreaks, and other emergencies," Benoît warned. "We are an emergency response organization, but we have never seen anything like this massive disruption to global health and humanitarian programs."
"The risks are catastrophic, especially since people who rely on foreign assistance are already among the most vulnerable in the world," she added.
Although MSF received no U.S. government funding, the group noted that "we work closely with other health and humanitarian organizations to deliver vital services, and many of our activities involve programs that have been disrupted due to funding cuts."
"It will be much more difficult and costly to provide care when so many ministries of health have been affected globally and there are fewer community partners overall," the group said. "We will also be facing fewer places to refer patients for specialized services, as well as shortages and stockouts due to hamstrung supply chains."
"It's shocking to see the U.S. abandon its leadership role in advancing global health and humanitarian efforts," Benoît said. "U.S. assistance has been a lifeline for millions of people... We urge the administration and Congress to maintain commitments to support critical global health and humanitarian aid."
The MSF warning comes after the United Nations World Food Program said earlier this month that the Trump cuts to lifesaving aid programs "could amount to a death sentence for millions of people facing extreme hunger and starvation."
Keep ReadingShow Less
UN Chief Urges 'Maximum Restraint' as India-Pakistan Tensions Flare After Kashmir Massacre
"Any issues between Pakistan and India, we believe can be and should be resolved peacefully through meaningful mutual engagement," said a spokesperson for U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres.
Apr 24, 2025
United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres on Thursday led calls for India and Pakistan to "exercise maximum restraint" as the nuclear-armed neighbors took tit-for-tat measures against each other in the wake of Tuesday's massacre of 26 people in Indian-occupied Kashmir.
Pakistan warned India that it was committing an "act of war" by suspending the landmark Indus Waters Treaty, which allows both countries to share the vital river system's flow. Pakistan announced the suspension of trade and closed its airspace to Indian flights. Both countries closed border ports of entry, canceled visas, and took other measures against each other.
India said it was downgrading relations with Pakistan, whom it blamed for supporting "cross-border terrorism" after gunmen killed 25 Indians and one Nepali and wounded at least 17 others at a popular vacation spot in Pahalgam, Kashmir on Tuesday.
"May sanity prevail between both nations."
A front group of the Pakistan-based militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba claimed responsibility for the attack, which killed mostly tourists.
Pakistani Defense Minister Khawaja Asif countered that his country's government believes "very strongly" that the attack "was a false flag operation."
Speaking Thursday, Stephane Dujarric, Guterres' spokesperson,
said that "we very much appeal to both the governments of Pakistan and India to exercise maximum restraint, and to ensure that the situation and the developments we've seen do not deteriorate any further."
"Any issues between Pakistan and India, we believe can be and should be resolved peacefully through meaningful mutual engagement," he added.
Progressives from both sides of the border echoed calls for restraint.
"We, the people of Kashmir, have already suffered so much over the years—and now, more than ever, we want peace to prevail in our homeland," Kashmiri social activist Jasib Shabir Bhat said on social media Wednesday. "We stand united for peace, for humanity, and for a better future for all."
Pakistani authori and activist Ehtesham Hassan wrote that "as a Pakistani who visited India and received immense love, I am devastated by the news from Pahalgam."
"I wish peace for the common people of India and Pakistan regardless of religion," Hassan added. "May sanity prevail between both nations."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular