Index  |  Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3     Page 4     Page 5  |  Page 6   |  Download 

IWMC - World Conservation Trust
MAINPAGE

SUSTAINABLE USE

ELEPHANTS
FISH
MAMMALS
REPTILES
SEALS
SEA TURTLES
SHARKS
WHALES

ABOUT IWMC

CENSORED

CONTACT IWMC

eNEWSLETTERS
August
EVENTS CALENDAR
MEDIA RELEASES

SEARCH

WEB LINKS

eNewsletter

August 2000

IWMC
World Conservation Trust

NGO Anti-Whale Meat
Campaign Expanded to Norway

The extent and sophistication of the forces, both from NGOs and Government Agencies, marshaled against whaling cultures and nations can be seen in the most recent evolution of the anti-consumer campaign being waged against the consumption of whale meat and blubber. The latest effort to stir up public hysteria over "contaminated" whale meat has surfaced in Norway and is being fronted by the prestigious Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF).

WWF announced that samples of whale products purchased in Norwegian markets "turned up more than 50 PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls)" and that long term exposure to these chemicals "may cause an increase in cancer, affect the immune system and reduce sperm counts." Of course, the WWF spokesman never mentioned the alternative, namely that they "may not" cause such reactions.

Portraying whale meat and blubber as "tainted" by toxic substances was a tactic taken by critics of whaling cultures prior to CITES' COP 11. A handful of self-styled researchers claimed that their analysis of Japanese consumer products showed whale products in Japanese markets were contaminated with mercury and other harmful substances. However, as Dr. Milton Freeman pointed out in IWMC's Convention Tribune published during the recent International Whaling Commission meetings, the Japanese study was neither peer reviewed, nor did it reveal anything not already known by the scientific community.

Dr. Freeman noted that definitive studies of Inuit people consuming so-called "tainted" marine foods, including a six-year research effort by 80 medical and biological specialists, found that the "well-known health benefits of consuming marine foods far outweigh the potential negative health consequences."

Dr. Freeman cites numerous studies, including one by the prestigious U.S. National Research Council that show the presence of contaminants such as heavy metals and others (all of which are produced from volcanic reactions and found naturally on ocean bottoms) do not equate into health risks when consumed by humans. Ironically, most of the ailments predicted as associated with eating whale meat are found among non-whale eaters and are virtually non-existent among whale and marine mammal consuming cultures.

One could dismiss the Norwegian and Japanese "reports" as shameless emotionalism and shoddy research. One could even suggest that both efforts are deliberate attempts to politicize science and to misinform the public and policy makers. Resisting such temptations, one could take another tack. Dr. Freeman simply points to the work of Cancer Researchers Drs. Bruce Ames and Lois Gold of the University of California who pointed out that a single cup of coffee contains over one thousand chemicals, more than half of which are known to cause cancer in laboratory animals.

WWF's spokeswoman, Cassandra Phillips, stated that "the average Norwegian consumes only seven ounces of whale meat per year." Hardly a rate that would threaten the existence of the millions of minke, sperm, and other whale species inhabiting the earth's oceans.