From The New York Times:

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration commissions report by Institute of Medicine on risks and benefits of eating fish. Institute of Medicine obliges, states that marine-life consumption “may” reduce risk of heart disease, but further study is needed per risk of exposure to PCBs, dioxin, and other nasty stuff. Meanwhile, Harvard School of Public Health conducts different study and declares fish to reduce risk of coronary death by 36 percent. Coauthor of Harvard study declares fish-eating risks to be “greatly exaggerated.” NOAA sponsors press conference for release of Harvard study, much to surprise of Institute of Medicine. Why? Why would NOAA support the study they didn’t commission?

Reader support makes our work possible. Donate today to keep our climate news free. All donations TRIPLED!

“We’re just trying to make consumers feel good,” said William T. Hogarth, assistant administrator for fisheries of the National Marine Fisheries Service, part of NOAA.

Feeling good trumps awareness of risks to my health any day!

Grist thanks its sponsors. Become one.