The Carb-Sane Asylum

Chris Kresser spent quite a bit of time in his Real Food Summit presentation discussing the "inactivation" of mercury by selenium.  The good news about this is that for many of the fish where mercury contamination is of concern -- particularly large coldwater ocean fish -- there is a high level of selenium.  Selenium binds mercury and in essence converts it to a non-toxic form.  Sorta like those amalgam fillings most folks over 35-40 (and younger but less common) have had*.  The good news is if a fish has high selenium, it's a low mercury toxicity risk.  The bad news is if the fish has a high mercury content, there's less of the beneficial "free" selenium you need.    I went looking for mackerel since it was brought up in comments and found this "pamphlet".  Thought I'd share:   Selenium and Mercury - Fishing for Answers                                   ...

Hey gang!  Sean Croxton is holding an online Real Food Summit starting today.  I'm sure you've seen the logo on the blogs/websites of others ... and perhaps you're wondering if I plan to "live blog" on this one as I did for the Paleo Summit.   The short answer is no ... at least not in that same manner, and I'll make a short post on the reasons sometime today. But since we were talking fish here recently, a discussion that included contamination, I recommend listening to Chris Kresser's presentation on Seafood .   If you're going to listen for this reason alone, the selenium "protection" against mercury is discussed around 22 min mark.    Phew ... I don't eat swordfish often enough to worry about it.  He discusses PCB's and dioxins and some studies on cancer risk vs. CVD risk and how these toxins are present in beef, chicken and other protein choices.  So if you're eating animal protein, eating fish vs. beef can alter some exposu...