TOXICITY OF FISH AND

SEAFOOD
PORTOFOLII

PRESENTATION 1
ENGLISH TEXTS 1
1 Contaminants in Seafood 1
2 Fish contaminants 2
3 Contaminants in fish: weighing up the risks 4
4 Mercury rising: Seafood contamination and a consumers right to know 6
5 Should We Eat Fish? 6
6 Fish: Pollution Risks 7
7 Are We Nearing the End of the Line for Edible Ocean Fish? 9
8 No More Edible Fish by 2050? 11
9 Protect Yourself and Your Family 12
10 The 5 Fish That Are Most ContaminatedAnd 5 You Should Eat Instead 13
11 Top 15 Contaminated Fish You Shouldnt be Eating 14
12 Baltic fish may be too toxic to be sold in the EU 18
13 Agriculture and Environment: Salmon 20
ROMANIAN TEXTS 21
1 Petele, aliment-medicament sau otrav? Ct pete poate duce la intoxicaie cu
mercur 21
2 Macrou contaminat cu o substanta periculoasa, scos la vanzare in mai multe judete
din tara 23
3 Contaminarea crnii de pete cu metale grele 23
4 In urma dezastrului de la Fukushima Oceanul PACIFIC a fost otravit. Cum ne dm
seama dac PETELE pe care l cumprm este CONTAMINAT? 25
TRANSLATIONS 27
EN-RO 27
1 Top 15 pesti contaminati pe care nu ar trebui sa-i mananci 27
2 Nu va mai exista peste comestibil in 2050? 27
3 28
RO-EN 28
1 28
2 28
3 28
GLOSSARY 28
1 28
2 29
3 30
4 30
5 31
6 32
7 32
8 33
9 34
10 34
11 35
12 36
13 36
14 37
15 38
16 38
17 39
18 40
19 40
20 41
21 42
22 42
23 43
24 44
25 44
26 45
27 46
28 46
29 47
30 48
31 48
32 49
33 50
34 50
35 51
36 52
37 52
38 53
39 54
40 54
41 55
42 56
43 56
44 57
45 58
46 58
47 59
48 60
49 60
50 61
PRESENTATION

ENGLISH TEXTS

1 Contaminants in Seafood
Contaminants in fish and other seafood for human consumption do not exceed levels established
by Community legislation or other relevant standards
Marine fish and other seafood such as crustaceans, mollusks or seaweed constitute an important
food source for human consumption.

Why should we pay attention to the contamination of fish and seafood?

Substances accumulating in an organism are likely to be transferred in the food chain, also
referred to as biomagnification, a process where the concentration of a contaminant increases
within the food chain. This has been observed for pesticides, which work their way into rivers and
the marine environment from their use in agricultural practices, and which are then taken up by
aquatic organisms, which are eaten by fish, which in turn are eaten by larger fish, birds, animals
living on land or humans. Negative impacts on human health due to exposure to chemical
components have been observed. An example is methylmercury, to which people can be exposed
if they eat fish and shellfish which contain that substance. Exposure in the womb to methylmercury,
from a mother's consumption of intoxicated fish or shellfish, can adversely affect a baby's growing
brain and nervous system.
Important marine contaminants giving rise to concern and for which regulatory levels have been
laid down (see box Link to relevant European legislation") include organochlorine pesticides,
organotin compounds, phthalates, brominated flame retardants, polyflourinated compounds,
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), dioxins, dioxin-like PCBs and non-dioxin-like PCBs,
heavy metals (mercury, cadmium, lead), radionuclides and arsenic.
To achieve Good Environmental Status (GES), the Marine Directive says that the concentration of
all contaminants should be below the maximum level set for human consumption, and preferably,
should be declining. Indeed, concentrations of contaminants in fish and sea food, which are not in
compliance with regulatory levels and which exceed them, are also indicators of bad environmental
status.

What are the sources for the contamination of fish and seafood?

Contamination of marine organisms from human activities can come from many different sources,
either from activities that are directly connected to the marine environment, such as accidental
spills from offshore platforms, aquaculture and shipping lines, or from waste spread to the marine
waters via land-based activities, such as agriculture or discharge from urban areas.
There are a number of contaminants in the marine environment which give rise to concern both
from an environmental and a public health point of view.
These are contaminants which are known to bio-accumulate in marine organisms. Bioaccumulation
occurs when an organism absorbs a toxic substance (from its environment or from dietary sources)
at a rate greater than that at which the substance is lost, leaving the organism with a high internal
concentration. Thus, the slower the rate of decomposition of the toxic substance the greater the
risk of chronic poisoning, even if environmental levels of the toxin are not very high.

What can be done?

Similarly to Descriptor 8, some measures can reduce the number of compounds, sources and
waste of contaminants. The EU REACH Regulation (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and
Restriction of Chemical substances), which was introduced in 2007, aims to improve the protection

1 of 64
of human health and of the environment through better and earlier identification of the intrinsic
properties of chemical substances.

Under the REACH regime, manufacturers and importers are required to gather information on the
properties of their chemical substances and to register the information. The Regulation also calls
for the progressive substitution of the most dangerous chemicals when suitable alternatives have
been identified. By registering and limiting the use of dangerous chemicals in the industrial
production chain, REACH will indirectly reduce the contamination of marine waters and marine
organisms by toxic substances, hence decrease the risk of contamination of fish and seafood for
human consumption.

Source : http://ec.europa.eu/environment/marine/good-environmental-status/descriptor-
9/index_en.htm

2 Fish contaminants
Several organic and inorganic compounds can find their way into fish and seafood. These
compounds can be divided into three major groups:
Inorganic chemicals: arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, selenium, copper, zinc and
iron.
Organic compounds: polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), dioxins and insecticides
(chlorinated hydrocarbons). This is a very diverse group with a wide range of industrial uses and a
chemical stability that allows them to accumulate and persist in the environment.
Processing-related compounds: sulphites (used in shrimp processing),
polyphosphates, nitrosamines and residues of drugs used in aquaculture (e.g. antibiotics or
hormones).
Many of the inorganic chemicals are essential for life at low concentration but become toxic at high
concentration. While minerals such as copper, selenium, iron and zinc are essential micronutrients
for fish and shellfish, other elements such as mercury, cadmium and lead show no known essential
function in life and are toxic even at low concentrations when ingested over a long period. These
elements are present in the aquatic environment as a result of natural phenomena such as marine
volcanism and geological and geothermal events, but are also caused by anthropogenic pollution
arising from intensive metallurgy and mining, waste disposal and incineration, and acidic rain
caused by industrial pollution. This is in contrast with organic compounds, most of which are of
anthropogenic origin brought to the aquatic environment by humans.
Increasing amounts of chemicals may also be found in predatory species as a result of
biomagnification, which is the concentration of the chemicals in higher levels of the food chain.
Similarly, they may be present as a result of bioaccumulation, when chemicals in the body tissues
accumulate over the life span of the individual. In this case, a large (i.e. older) fish will have a
higher content of the chemical concerned than a small (younger) fish of the same species. The
presence of chemical contaminants in seafood is therefore highly dependent on geographic
location, species and fish size, feeding patterns, solubility of chemicals and their persistence in the
environment.

Risks from fish contaminants

But what are the risks to human health caused by these contaminants as a result of consuming fish
and seafood?
Several studies indicate that in the open seas, which are still almost unaffected by pollution, fish
mostly carry only the natural burden of these inorganic chemicals. However, in heavily polluted
areas, in waters that have insufficient exchange with the worlds oceans (e.g. the Baltic Sea and
the Mediterranean Sea), in estuaries, in rivers and especially in locations that are close to industrial
sites, these elements can be found at concentrations that exceed the natural load.
Likewise, several studies have concluded that levels of these chemicals in fish intended for human
consumption are low and probably below levels likely to affect human health. Nevertheless, they
can be of potential concern for populations for whom fish constitutes a major part of the diet and for

2
pregnant and nursing women and young children who consume substantial quantities of oily fish.
These concerns can only be clarified if updated and focused risk assessments are conducted.
While scientists and other experts recognize that certain of these elements are present naturally in
fish and seafood, some consumers regard their presence even at minimal levels as a hazard to
health. Consequently, food scares can be easily started and further amplified if communication is
mismanaged particularly given the growing speed of communication and information
dissemination facilitated by the Internet. A number of such scares concerning fish contaminants
have recently led to significant negative impacts on fish trade flows.
Example 1: Mercury in fish
In 2003, the Codex Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA), administered by FAO
and the World Health Organization (WHO), revised the guideline for mercury in fish to 1.6
micrograms of methyl mercury intake per day per kilogram of body weight, nearly half the original
guideline of 3.3 micrograms. At the same time, the JECFA review emphasized that people should
continue to eat a normal diet of fish, pointing out its many health benefits. Included in its
considerations was the recently released Seychelles Islands study, which analyzed mother and
child pairs and fish consumption for almost ten years. That study determined that high levels of fish
consumption led to no adverse effect to a foetus or childs neurodevelopment.
In order to translate the recommended weekly intake of mercury into national maximum mercury
levels in fish it is necessary to take into account consumption patterns, other sources of mercury
intake and other relevant information. However, public pressure often leads to consumer confusion
between the maximal allowable levels necessary to protect human health and the limits
recommended to protect the environment. The latter require that appropriate actions be taken
consistently and for a significant period of time in order to reduce the environmental burden of the
contaminant. In the case of mercury, for example, proper energy policies would be required to
reduce reliance on coal-fired power stations and the reduction of waste incineration; these two
factors combined account for 70 percent of new, human-made mercury emissions to the
atmosphere.
Unfortunately, a number of media articles and public health warnings exacerbated the pre-existing
consumer confusion and sent out conflicting messages regarding the health benefits of fish and
seafood and the mercury risks from fish to the point that local authorities in California, the United
States, instructed grocery retailers to display signs cautioning consumers about the dangers of
mercury in fish and threatened to sue those that did not abide.

Since then, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) in the United States have released a consumer advisory document along the lines of the
recent JECFA guidelines but stressing that fish and shellfish are an important part of a healthy diet.
Despite this measure, the tuna industry considers that the damage already inflicted will be difficult
to repair.
Example 2: Organic pollutants in salmon
A recent study published in the magazine Science reported on Global assessment of organic
contaminants in farmed salmon.1 Concentrations of 14 chlororganic compounds in farmed and
wild salmon were examined. Each of these compounds is thought to cause cancer. The study
revealed that all the substances tested were present in higher concentrations in farmed salmon
than wild salmon. This applied in particular to fish produced on European farms. Although the
levels found were consistent with results from earlier surveys and official controls, the researchers
concluded hastily that consumers should tightly limit their consumption of farmed salmon and
suggested that anyone who does not want to additionally increase the risk of getting cancer should
restrict consumption of one portion of farmed salmon to a maximum of once every two months.
On the basis of the identified concentrations of toxic substances, the authors of the study then
calculated the portion sizes for wild and farmed salmon that could be consumed without increasing
the risk of cancer. The recommended quantities fluctuate strongly depending on the salmons
origins. Whereas, for example, eight portions (227 g) of salmon from Kodiak (Alaska) could be
consumed per month, consumers should not eat more than one portion of Chilean farmed salmon
per month, no more than one portion of Norwegian farmed salmon every two months, or one
portion of farmed salmon from Scotland or the Faeroe Islands no more than every four to five
months.

3
It is these calculations that caused a big stir. The model used for the calculations is highly disputed
among scientists and is not specifically intended for calculations on commercially produced fish; it
had been developed by the EPA to estimate how much of their catches could be eaten by anglers
who regularly fished in contaminated inland waters. By contrast, commercial products should be
evaluated according to the FDA criteria. To refute the model, researchers calculated that on the
basis of the PCB contamination levels cited in the study, after 70 years of regular consumption of
200 g of salmon per week the risk of developing cancer for the high-risk group (pregnant women,
children, nursing mothers) would be one-hundred-thousandth higher equal to a rise in risk of
0.0001 percent. By comparison, the risk of dying of a cardiovascular disease by eliminating fish
completely from the diet can be as high as 30 percent2.
It is therefore understandable that the recommendations made by the authors of the Science study
to limit salmon consumption met with strong objections in Europe, the United States and
elsewhere. Food control and health authorities reacted by announcing that its findings did not raise
new food safety issues as the levels were consistent with results from other surveys and official
controls. They encouraged consumers to continue eating salmon and other fish, the health benefits
of which had been proven beyond all doubt in over 5 000 scientific studies. Unfortunately, the study
had already alarmed the consuming public, and retail orders of farmed fish fell by 2030 percent in
countries such as Ireland, Norway and Scotland. A great deal of time and effort were required to
restore consumer confidence.
Conclusion
Globalization and further liberalization of the world fish trade, while offering many benefits and
opportunities, also present new safety and quality challenges. Fish safety regulators have been
applying a host of control measures, from mandating the use of the Hazard Analysis and Critical
Control Point (HACCP) system to increasing testing, with varying degrees of success. Improved
risk-based scientific tools must be adopted so that the fish safety standards reflect the most current
and effective scientific methods available to protect public health.
In establishing maximum levels of fish pollutants, regulators need to ensure the highest level of
consumer health protection, but they must also take into account the reality of the current
background contamination of the environment in order not to endanger the food supply.
Concurrently, strategies must be adopted to reduce gradually the background contamination of the
environment and lower progressively the maximum levels in feed and foods to follow this
downward trend. In addition, consumer information and awareness programmes will be necessary
in order to improve transparency and consumer education.
Progress in this area will require enhanced international cooperation in promoting scientific
collaboration, harmonization, equivalency schemes and standard-setting mechanisms that are
based on scientific principles. The World Trade Organizations Agreements on Sanitary and
Phytosanitary Measures and Technical Barriers to Trade, together with the benchmarking role of
the Codex Alimentarius Commission, provide an international platform in this respect. Meeting
these challenges will be of the utmost importance for fish trade, both in developed and developing
countries, particularly as the latter contribute more than 50 percent (in value) of international fish
trade.
Source: http://www.fao.org/fishery/topic/14815/en

3 Contaminants in fish: weighing up the risks

With growing consumer awareness of diet and health issues, there is increasing popularity within
Europe for fish as a healthy eating option. Fish is a valuable source of high quality protein,
minerals and vitamins. In addition, oily fish are rich in omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA),
the health benefits of which are widely recognised. Recently, public confidence has been dented
by a report that highlighted the risks associated with dietary exposure to environmental

4
contaminants, such as mercury and dioxins, which are known to accumulate in fish. However, all
available data and the interpretation of the competent authorities indicate that the level of
contaminants in fish is far below the critical danger levels.

Mercury
Mercury is a naturally occurring element, which is released into the environment from both natural
sources and as a result of industrial pollution. In water, inorganic mercury is converted through
microbial action to the more toxic organic form, methylmercury, which accumulates in tissues.
Aquatic organisms acquire methylmercury from both the water and from their diet, and nearly all
fish contain trace amounts. However, species that are near the top of the food chain (e.g. shark,
swordfish, certain species of large tuna, etc.) may accumulate larger amounts through eating other
fish. In general, the older and larger the fish, the greater its methylmercury content.
Although levels in most species that are commonly eaten do not pose a risk to human health, the
safe limit of intake may be exceeded if large predatory species are consumed frequently. Children
and women who are pregnant, breastfeeding or planning pregnancy within the next year are
advised to avoid eating shark, marlin, swordfish and similar species.

Dioxins and PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls)

Dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs are industrial pollutants that are widespread and persistent in the
environment. Tighter controls over their production have resulted in a steady decline in levels over
the past two decades.
Harmful effects on human health, can result from chronic exposure to high levels of dioxins and
PCBs, but the risk is negligible if intake remains below a critical level. Evaluating these risks is the
remit of organisations such as the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and national food
safety authorities, who provide independent advice on food safety issues, based on consultations
with a range of expert bodies and committees.
These authorities set intake guidelines, under constant review, that allow consumers to enjoy the
benefits of a particular food within safe limits of intake.
Public concerns were raised earlier this year following the publication of a study by US
researchers, who suggested that the levels of organic pollutants, including dioxins and PCBs, in
farmed salmon could pose a health risk. Their advice to consume less than one half portion of
farmed salmon (from specific areas) per month was in direct contrast to advice from food
authorities to eat one portion of oily fish per week. This study did not, however, present new data
as levels of contaminants were consistent with those previously reported in smaller studies and
remained within internationally accepted safety guidelines. The discrepancy arose because the
authors based their advice on a method of risk analysis that is not internationally accepted by
toxicologists and other food safety experts. Food safety authorities in Europe and in the USA
agreed that the study did not raise new health concerns and that eating one portion of farmed
salmon per week was still considered safe.
Risk versus benefit
Any potential risk associated with eating fish is minimised if official guidelines are followed, and is
far outweighed by the health benefits. There is increasing evidence that Omega-3 PUFA, found in
oily fish, can reduce the risk of disability and death from coronary heart disease and that they play
a beneficial role in inflammatory conditions, such as arthritis, and in the prevention of some
cancers. The consumers decision to include or exclude any food from the diet should be based on
informed science rather than media headlines.
Source: http://www.eufic.org/article/en/food-safety-quality/food-contaminants/artid/contaminants-
in-fish/

5
4 Mercury rising: Seafood contamination and a
consumers right to know
Mercury contamination in popular fish, industrial waste leaking into our oceans, years long legal
battles to gain access to public information being kept hidden by the government it sounds like
the plot of a movie, but unfortunately, its just what weve been dealing with in our latest battle
against seafood contamination in Spain and in Europe.
Years ago, we requested and were denied the results from a report on levels of arsenic and metals
in fish and shellfish of commercial interest, by the Spanish Institute of Oceanography. After years
of legal battle, we were finally able to get our hands on it, and the news wasnt good it turns out
the contamination was high in several species sold in Spanish markets. In an almost
uncomfortable twist, on April 14, a mere month after we finally got the full report, the Carlos III
Health Institute released a study that showed high levels of mercury in the blood of Spanish
citizens, higher than in other countries.
So, how does Mercury get into our food, and what does it do to us?
Mercury from industrial sources enters the marine food chain where it becomes concentrated
mainly in predators located at the top of it, such as shark and swordfish. When consumed, it affects
the neurological system and can cause damaging health effects, such as lack of coordination,
tremors, irritability, memory loss, blurred vision, headaches and depression. It is therefore
necessary to limit the consumption of those species which contain the highest levels of
bioaccumulation.
What were doing about it:
We are calling on all chlorine plants using mercury cells, the main source of mercury contamination
in the seas and pollution of fish species, to immediately adapt to Best Available Technologies
(BATs). Whats frustrating is that these do exist, there is in fact no reason for these plants to
continue using old and contaminating technologies, and yet the EU recently extended the window
to convert these plants to 2020.
In addition, we are insisting that grocery stores in Spain and around Europe, particularly in
countries that consume fish with higher mercury levels display warning signs so that all
consumers are aware of the potential effects of this contamination. We have a right to know whats
in the food we buy to feed our families.
Source: http://eu.oceana.org/en/eu/blog/2011/09/mercury-rising-seafood-contamination-and-a-
consumer-s-right-to-know

5 Should We Eat Fish?

Fish has some nutritional benefits.
Fish contains high concentrations of protein and other essential nutrients, is low in saturated fat
and provides the valuable omega 3 fatty acids, EPA and DHA. There is overwhelming evidence
that EPA and DHA contribute to brain and heart health and childrens proper growth and
development. For these reasons, choosing fish over other animal products can be sensible.

Fish is one of the most polluted foods we eat.

Unfortunately, nearly all fish and shellfish contain traces of methylmercury, which is poisonous to
the brain. Mercury accumulates in fish when polluted water is filtered through their gills. The longer
a fish lives, the more the mercury accumulates. Large fish eat small fish and accumulate all of the
mercury that was in the small fish. This mounts up exponentially. Our tissues also accumulate the
mercury of all the fish we eat throughout our lifetimes. No fish is completely free of mercury and
other pollutants. If you eat fish regularly, your body is undoubtedly high in mercury. High body
stores of mercury cause brain damage and memory impairment, leading to dementia.

It has been demonstrated that fish contain enough mercury to harm an unborn baby or harm a
young childs developing nervous system. Every year, more than 300,000 newborns are thought to
develop adverse neurodevelopmental effects because of mercury exposure in utero. Women must
avoid fish for a few years before conception to guarantee that the baby is not harmed by mercury.

6
If something can damage a fetus and result in childhood learning abnormalities, it cannot promote
long-term health in adults.

Like mercury, other pollutants including PCBs, accumulate in fish and in the body tissues of people
who eat fish regularly. These pollutants can remain in your body for decades, creating a higher risk
of serious diseases such as cancer. Many people who would be disgusted at the thought of
drinking polluted water think nothing of eating polluted fish, in which the pollutants are much more
concentrated.

Fish, heart disease, and breast cancer

The blood-thinning effects of EPA and DHA can counter the pro-inflammatory diet rich in animal
products and saturated fat that most people eat. However, the best way to prevent a heart attack
or stroke is to follow a high nutrient diet with little or no animal products, so that you do not produce
a pro-inflammatory environment in your body. Also, whereas fish oil has anti-clotting and anti-
arrhythmic effects that may reduce the risk of heart attack, these benefits from eating fish are offset
by mercury exposure, which increases heart attack risk.(1) In fact, scientific studies have shown
that fish consumption increases the risk of heart attack death.

Since fish oils inhibit blood clotting, they present another problem they increase the likelihood of
bleeding from the delicate vessels in the brain, causing a hemorrhagic stroke. Regular
consumption of fish or fish oils should be avoided if a person has a family history or is at risk of
hemorrhagic stroke or other bleeding disorders.

Fish consumption in women has been linked to higher rates of breast cancer. Scientists are unsure
whether the pollution in the fish or the cancer-promoting effect from the high level of animal protein
is responsible for this association. Women consuming little or no fish were found to have
approximately half the incidence of breast cancer compared to high fish consumers.(2)

The bottom line

Eat fish infrequently or not at all. If you do have fish on occasion, only choose the lowest mercury
types such as shrimp, tilapia, haddock, scallops, squid, trout, hake and ocean perch. Never eat the
high mercury content fish- swordfish, shark, tuna, snapper, lobster, grouper and sea bass. It is
probably safest to avoid fish completely healthy levels of omega-3 fats can be maintained by
regularly consuming flaxseeds and walnuts and taking a clean, low-dose DHA supplement or a
clean fish oil supplement.
Source: https://www.drfuhrman.com/faq/question.aspx?sid=16&qindex=6

6 Fish: Pollution Risks

Today, almost all current nutritional advice includes fish as a cornerstone of a healthful diet. But my
recommendations are slightly different from those of other respected health authorities. While the
differences may seem minor, they are significant, and I contend that they will make it possible for
you to achieve extraordinarily good health and an extraordinarily long life span.

Fish: a mixed bag

Fish and shellfish contain high concentrations of protein and other essential nutrients, are low in
saturated fat, and contain the valuable omega-3 fatty acids, EPA and DHA. These food factors are
thought to contribute to heart health and to children's proper growth and development (there is
overwhelming evidence confirming the health benefits of omega-3 fatty acids), which is why fish
and shellfish are considered to be an important part of a well-balanced diet. Unfortunately, in
addition to EPA and DHA, nearly all fish and shellfish contain mercury and other pollutants. Since
these toxins in fish have potential health risks, wouldn't it make sense to look for a cleaner, safer
source for our omega-3 fats?

Fish polluted with mercury

7
Nearly all fish and shellfish contain traces of methylmercury. Mercury accumulates in fish when
polluted water is filtered through their gills. The longer a fish lives, the more the mercury
accumulates. Large fish eat small fish and accumulate all of the mercury that was in the small fish.
Over a lifetime, this mounts up exponentially. Likewise, our tissues accumulate the mercury of all
of the fish we eat throughout our lifetimes.
Authorities could warn us not to eat species of fish that contain high amounts of mercury. Instead,
they warn us not to eat them too often, based on the misguided notion that the benefits of eating
fish outweigh the potential harm from the exposure to mercury.
It has been demonstrated conclusively that fish contain enough mercury to harm an unborn baby
or harm a young child's developing nervous system. Since the risks from mercury in fish and
shellfish depend on the levels of mercury in the fish and shellfish and the amount of fish and
shellfish eaten, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) advise pregnant women, women who may become pregnant, nursing mothers, and young
children to avoid some types offish and only eat fish and shellfish that are lower in mercury.

The advice given by governmental authorities includes:

1. Never eat shark, swordfish, king mackerel, or tilefish because they contain high levels of
mercury.
2. Check local advisories about the safety of eating local fish caught by family and friends in local
rivers and coastal waterways. If unsure, don't eat more than six ounces at a meal, and do not eat
any other fish during that week.

EPA makes recommendations for what it considers an acceptable level of mercury in a pregnant
woman's body. As the recognition that mercury damages the brains of our children has increased
in the last two decades, EPA has had to lower the "acceptable" level more than once.
I have been telling patients for years that if something can damage a fetus and result in childhood
learning abnormalities, it can't be a practice that promotes long-term health and wellness in adults.
You can't have it both ways. The developing fetus may be seen as a sensitive indicator of the
potential of toxins to cause cellular damage.
This potential damage is a risk to adult cells as well. We just may not see the damage in adults in
as short a period of time. Subtle cellular damage from mercury can be a contributory factor in
combination with other negative influences that lead to the development of diseases seen later in
life. So it is not just youngsters who are at risk of brain damage.

Safe levels a myth

No fish is completely free of mercury and other pollutants. If you eat fish regularly, your body is
undoubtedly high in mercury. You cannot remove the mercury from the fish by trimming the fat or
by cooking because it is deposited throughout the fish's tissues. I've observed that a person's
mercury level correlates exceptionally well with the amount of fish consumed, and medical studies
back up this observation. Individuals eating fish a few times a week have been found to have blood
mercury levels exceeding the maximum level recommended by the National Academy of Sciences,
which is a blood level of below 5 micrograms. Women eating seafood more than twice per week
have been found to have 7 times the blood mercury levels compared with women who rarely eat
fish, and children eating fish regularly were found to have mercury levels 40 times higher than the
national mean.1,2

Fish: no brain food

Mercury is poisonous to the brain. Every year, more than 300,000 newborns are thought to
develop adverse neurodevelopmental effects because of mercury exposure in utero. Because of
their continual exposure to mercury, dentists also are at risk for later life dementia. Female dentists
have been shown to have a higher incidence of malformations and aborted pregnancies in their
offspring, and male dentists have higher levels of hypospermia (low sperm production) and
decreased sperm motility.
Although the FDA wants us to think that eating a variety of fish with different amounts of mercury
assures us we will not be harmed by acute mercury poisoning, they do not guarantee we won't
suffer from dementia or other diseases of brain aging from the continual accumulation of mercury

8
over the years. High body stores of mercury cause brain damage and memory impairment, leading
to dementia in later life.
The risk of brain damage from mercury increases with age and, besides neurological disease,
includes hypertension, heart disease, mental disorders, and endocrine diseases.3
Mercury accumulates in one's bloodstream over time. It can be removed from the body naturally
(the kidney does continually excrete mercury into our urine), but even after mercury-containing fish
are eliminated from the diet,it may take years for the levels to drop significantly.
For women of childbearing age, it is not sufficient to avoid eating fish after becoming pregnant.
Fish must be avoided for a few years before conception to guarantee the baby is not harmed by
mercury. For the same reason, it is not a good idea to remove amalgam dental fillings during
pregnancy because mercury exposure can increase during removal. It is worth noting that fish
consumption dwarfs mercury-containing dental fillings as the primary source of mercury in body
tissues and breast milk.

Other pollutants in fish

Like mercury, other pollutants, including PCBs, accumulate in fish and in the body tissues of
people who eat fish regularly. These pollutants can remain in your body for decades, creating a
higher risk of serious diseases such as cancer. These chemicals also can increase the damage to
the brain from mercury. People who would be disgusted at the thought of drinking polluted water
don't think twice about eating polluted fish with 1,000 times more pollution in it.

Not wild about salmon

Studies published last year showed that dangerous chemicals were ten times higher in farm-raised
salmon compared with wild salmon. I commented on this in a prior newsletter, stating that those
who eat fish once a week should eat only the wild variety. As concerns have risen about the high
levels of pollution and the artificial colors used to turn farm-raised salmon pink, the price and
desirability of wild salmon have risen with it.Wild salmon are suddenly appearing in restaurants and
food stores everywhere.
Where is all of this wild salmon coming from? A recent article in The New York Times confirmed
my suspicions. They reported that most so called "wild Pacific" or "Alaskan" salmon is just farm-
raised salmon with a misleading label. In March 2005, the Times tested salmon sold in eight New
York City stores, going for as much as $29 a pound, and found that most of the fish was farm
raised, not wild (only one sample tested wild).4
They were able to tell the farm raised salmon from the wild salmon because of the presence of the
artificial pink food dye, canthaxanthin, manufactured by Hoffman-La Roche. This pharmaceutical
company distributes its trademarked SalmoFan (which is a color chart similar to paint store
swatches), so fish farmers can choose among various shades used to make the salmon look their
pink-orange color. Salmon in the wild have that color naturally from eating pink crustaceans, but
those commercially raised have a gray flesh from eating fish meal. Europeans are suspicious of
canthaxanthin, which was linked to retinal damage in people when taken as a sunless tanning pill.
The British banned its use as a tanning agent, but it currently is still available in the United States.

Source: http://www.diseaseproof.com/archives/toxins-fish-pollution-risks.html

7 Are We Nearing the End of the Line for Edible Ocean

Fish?
On July 16, The New York Times editorialized that the world's oceans are potentially on the verge
of irreversible catastrophic collapse. Due to global warming and other factors, the marine
ecosystems are being severely compromised.
One of the factors contributing to the degradation of our oceans is massive, industrial, commercial
overfishing. The Times cites a report that many species of fish are "either vulnerable to extinction,
endangered or critically endangered."

9
As reported in Truthout, the White House Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force is formulating a
plan for a collaborative ocean policy. But it is a long way from a task force to implementation of
enforceable international policies.
Journalist Charles Clover wrote the definitive book on overfishing, "The End of the Line: How
Overfishing Is Changing the World and What We Eat." Truthout recently interviewed him.
Clover is the environmental columnist for the Sunday Times and has written on the subject for
more than two decades. He edits a web site that encourages consumers to play a role in
sustainable fishing, Fish2Fork.com.
The Truthout Progressive Pick of the Week, "The End of the Line" (DVD) is a documentary based
on Clover's book in which he also appears.
Mark Karlin: What would be the worldwide impact if edible fish no longer existed in sufficient
numbers in the ocean due to overfishing?

Charles Clover: The picture is that about a third of the world's wild fish stocks have collapsed -
defined as being fished to below 10 per cent of their abundance in 1950 - and for the rest the trend
is down with only one or two places in the world managing their fish sustainability. This has huge
implications for food security in a world with more human beings in it and for the functioning of
whole ecosystems.
MK: What is happening to smaller, less developed nations that depend on fish they catch as a
major part of their diet?
CC: Bad things. This is one of the world's most pressing problems. The availability of fish is a food
security issue. We need to stop our first world fleets taking fish from the mouths of the poor. The
EU fleet goes all up and down the coast of Africa. The same thing goes on in the Pacific.
MK: In the overfishing, what percentage of fish and other creatures such as dolphins, get caught
up in the nets and hooks and are thrown back dead into the sea?
CC: You mean bycatch. Depends on the fishery. In Pacific tuna purse-seine fisheries it's a lot. I
wrote a whole chapter on it. In long-line fisheries it's a lot too, turtles as well as sharks. Prawn
fisheries in the tropics can have 80 per cent bycatch.
MK: What is the impact on the ocean ecosystem when one kind of fish is no longer abundant?
CC: There's absolute extinction, which is vastly hard to prove and then there is commercial
extinction, which means you can't find it to catch any more. The sea's a big place and you should
remember the coelacanth, the missing link fish that everyone thought had been extinct for millions
of years and then turned up off South Africa. On the other hand, the bluefin tuna off Brazil is
commercially extinct because it doesn't now turn up in numbers worth catching if any turn up at all.
Populations are subject to something called the Allee effect [density dependence] which, as I
understand it, means that when they drop too low, they have no way of renewing themselves
genetically. The gene pool isn't big enough. There may still be individuals out there, but not in
significant quantities and the trend is down. That's not somewhere we want to get to with any fish.
MK: In the documentary, the kill-off date for ocean seafood is 2050. How was that date arrived at?
CC: I'd be far happier with saying "some time around the middle of this century, if present trends
continue - which we hope they don't - we could have run down the world's major stocks of wild fish,
just as we have three billion more people on this earth who might want to eat them."
MK: What do you say to those who argue that fish stocks will return after a few years?
CC: They might, they might not. Depends how much we've fished them. Look at the northern cod
off Newfoundland. They said that would come back. It hasn't yet. Every now and again someone
says it's coming back and it's gone up by one percent. Many people think that there has been an
ecosystem flip and other species now live in the niche cod once lived in.
MK: What role does the consumer play in the depletion of certain types of fish, such as the bluefin
tuna?
CC: Greedy and unethical ones continue to eat them and they shouldn't. They should realize that
in a world of scarce resources, it is unethical to eat declining species.
MK: There is an amazing shot in the documentary of an enormous seabed trawler that smashes
coral reefs and lower ocean level sea life to bits as it speeds along. So, the threat is not just to fish,
but to the actual seabed, is that right?
CC: That is actually the first image in my book and shook me when I discovered about it: the image
of a beam trawler smashing its way across the seabed. I transposed it to the plains of Africa and it
became a shocking image. Towed gear does alter the habitat and kills animals on the bottom as
10
well as catching fish and that image explains that. It was worked out that a beam trawler killed 16
pounds of marine creatures to produce one pound of marketable sole.

Source: http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/2227-are-we-nearing-the-end-of-the-line-for-edible-
ocean-fish#

8 No More Edible Fish by 2050?

February 27, 2012 Students, small-business owners and professors convened Wednesday in a
Campbell Hall lecture room at the University of Virginia to watch bluefin tuna get hauled into boats
on a movie screen as they sampled local trout and sustainable barramundi hors d'oeuvres. This
community wanted to talk about the problems facing the world fishing industry and what they can
do about them.
The U.Va. Food Collaborative, a group of people in the U.Va. community who work to promote
research, teaching and community engagement about issues surrounding food, agriculture and
sustainability, sponsored the screening of "The End of the Line," a film about the decline of world
fisheries. It was followed by a discussion with Steven Macko, an environmental sciences
professor in the College of Arts & Sciences, and U.Va. graduate students Jack Cochran and
Doug Dickerson, who started the Charlottesville Community Supported Fishery.
The film showed that modern fishing practices have outpaced the rate at which fish replicate,
forcing many species like the bluefin tuna onto the endangered species list and causing the global
fish catch to sharply decline.
It depicted the many environmental hazards related to mass commercial fishing such as trawling,
which Macko said has turned large areas of the ocean floors into biological deserts. The film
posited the belief of some scientists that if the current method of unsustainable fishing continues,
humans' supplies of edible fish could be depleted by the year 2050.
Audience members had much to say about the film, good and bad. Chris Arseneault, who owns
Seafood@WestMain in Charlottesville, noted that the movie only included about 10 minutes of
optimism. "I'm depressed looking at that film despite what I know and my optimistic nature," he
said.
One student compared marine reserves areas where fishing has been banned in hopes of
allowing fish to naturally repopulate to a swath of managed land near his home. He said that
marine reserves, like forest reserves, can allow humans to mitigate use of their natural resources
without abandoning them entirely.
The panelists were impressed with the knowledge of the audience and the level of discourse. "This
was a well-informed audience," said Dickerson, a graduate architecture student who earned his
undergraduate degree at U.Va. "They knew the right questions to ask."
The film also depicted economic consequences of ecosystem collapse, present and past, such as
what occurred in the wake of the Canadian government's shutdown of the cod fishing industry in
Newfoundland. Macko, who lived in Newfoundland at that time, said that after 400 years of fishing,
a large percentage of the 500,000-person population lost their jobs overnight in an attempt to
salvage the species. "There's a saying: Desperate times call for desperate measures," Macko said.
He noted that in recent years, fishing for the popular rockfish, better known as striped bass, in the
Chesapeake Bay was also shut down.
One of the discussed alternatives to wild sea fishing is aquaculture, the cultivation of fish like
catfish, tilapia and shrimp in farms. Another alternative technique for fish production is aquaponics,
a kind of polyculture that grows different levels of the food chain in ways that draw on one another.
In aquaponics, fish eat plants that grow in water tanks and in return the fish excrement fertilizes the
plants, similar to how a cow eats hay and then provides the fertilizer to allow more hay to grow. But
since no system is perfect, antibiotics, supplemental vitamins and proteins often have to be added
to the tanks and waste must be disposed of, processes which cause health concerns for some.
Cochran and Dickerson created Charlottesville CSF after working on a project in architecture
professor Timothy Beatley's "Sustainable Communities" course. They helped a co-op of Virginia
farmers, who were transitioning from tobacco to freshwater pond fish farming, to market their fish in
a new way, with community members placing orders in advance much the way one would

11
subscribe to a magazine. This model both helps support local farmers who employ sustainable
fishing practices and educates consumers about, and connects them to, their food source.
"Our initiative was both to provide Charlottesville residents with locally, sustainably sourced fish
while directly supporting local farmers and meeting their needs" such as the expenses of being
sustainable and small-scale, said Cochran, who will graduate next year with master's degrees in
urban and environmental planning and architecture.
Cochran and Dickerson are writing their theses on the incorporation of food systems into urban
design.
"I don't think urban agriculture is the answer by itself but like to think it can contribute in its small
way and support the larger system," Cochran said. "I think we need to be more interdisciplinary, to
work in policy and business, instead of just designing a building."
By Kate Colwell

Source: https://news.virginia.edu/content/no-more-edible-fish-2050

9 Protect Yourself and Your Family

With smart food choices you can lower your mercury level in six to eight months; it will take longer
to get it out of the fish -- so let's start now.

Mercury poisoning is a serious problem, but the solutions are fairly simple: in the short term, watch
your consumption of high-mercury fish; in the longer term, help force power companies and other
giant mercury polluters to switch to pollution-cutting technologies.
The recommendations in this section about eating fish are largely designed for the people most at
risk from mercury poisoning: children and women of childbearing age. Other adults may not need
to restrict their diets as much, but can use these guidelines to make informed choices.

Avoid Contaminated Fish

Children under six, as well as women who are pregnant or planning to become pregnant, are the
most vulnerable to mercury's harmful effects. They should restrict or eliminate certain fish from
their diet, including ahi or bigeye tuna, tilefish, swordfish, shark, king mackerel, marlin, orange
roughy and fish caught in any waters that are subject to a mercury advisory. Women with elevated
mercury levels should ideally begin avoiding or restricting their consumption of mercury-laden fish
as much as a year before they become pregnant. (For more, see our guide to mercury levels in
fish.)

Restrict Your Portions

In general, a woman who is pregnant or is likely to get pregnant should eat no more than two cans
of light tuna per week, or 2/3 of a can per week of white albacore tuna if she wants to stay below
the EPA's level of concern for mercury. Keep in mind that the amount of mercury in a single can
varies depending on the type of tuna and where the fish was caught. Albacore or solid white tuna is
most likely to have higher concentrations, and chunk light tuna, lower concentrations.
Raw tuna and other sushi fish are also something to watch out for. Often the apex predators of the
food chain, these fish tend to be high in mercury. Whenever possible, avoid sushi choices that are
highest in mercury, using this list as a guide.
Since children get most of their mercury from canned tuna, it is important for parents to limit their
children's consumption to less than one ounce of canned light tuna for every 12 pounds of body
weight per week, in order to stay below the level of mercury the EPA considers safe. That means
that a child who weighs 36 pounds should not eat more than 3 ounces (half a standard-sized can
of chunk light tuna) per week. Children should avoid albacore or white tuna because the levels of
mercury are higher.

Check Your Mercury Level

To obtain a quick estimate of your mercury intake, use our Mercury Calculator. For a more
accurate reading, you can request a blood mercury test from your physician. Women with a high

12
blood mercury level who are planning to start a family may decide to postpone pregnancy for a few
months until levels drop; often this occurs within six months.

Stay Informed
The Environmental Protection Agency recently finalized an important set of clean air safeguards to
reduce toxic pollution, including mercury, from power plants. Similar standards were adopted for
cement plants in 2010. Collectively, these standards would reduce many tons of mercury, cut
harmful acid gases, and limit known carcinogens such as arsenic. Moreover, these standards will
save thousands of lives and prevent tens of thousands of asthma attacks.
Unfortunately, mercury standards adopted for industrial boilers in 2013 are now the subject of
litigation. EPA is also reconsidering portions of the standards it previously issued. As a result, there
are currently no national limits on toxic air pollution from industrial boilers -- and these standards
are already almost a decade overdue. These industrial facilities are the second largest source of
man-made mercury emissions in the United States, and it is critical that EPA craft and implement
strong standards that will protect our health and families from this dangerous pollution. Find out
more about the fight to save these important mercury reducing measures.
Another way you can learn about and avoid mercury risks is to urge your grocery stores, fish
markets and restaurants to label fish accurately and advise consumers about the dangers of
mercury in the fish they sell. And be sure to read and print NRDC's mercury guides and to check
the mercury calculator.

Source: http://www.nrdc.org/health/effects/mercury/protect.asp

10 The 5 Fish That Are Most ContaminatedAnd 5 You

Should Eat Instead
From a nutritional standpoint, seafood is a pretty safe bet: It's packed with protein and good-for-
you monounsaturated fats. Unfortunately, though, some types of also contain mercury, which can
affect a fetus or child's neurological development, says Mira Ilic, R.D., a nutritionist at the
Cleveland Clinic Foundation. Since the contaminant stays in your body for more than a year, it's
crucial that you avoid ingesting it even if there's just a chance you could become a mom soon. All
fish contain some mercury, but here are five types you should definitely steer clear of (along with
five better alternatives).

Don't Eat: Shark

Because this fish is at the top of the food chain, it consumes other fish to surviveand oftentimes,
those other fish have already been contaminated with mercury, which means sharks' levels veer
into dangerously high territory.
Eat: Wild Pacific Salmon
A four-ounce serving scores high when it comes to vitamin D, vitamin B12, selenium, omega-3
fatty acids, and flavor. All salmon sport a stellar nutritional profile, but wild Pacific salmon are
considered healthier than the farmed variety. Per the EPA, you should stick to no more than 12
13
ounces per week if you're of childbearing age or are pregnant since all fish contain at least trace
amounts of mercury (this goes for all of the fish recommended in this slideshow).

Don't Eat: Swordfish

This tropical fish is also a top predator that feeds on other fish tainted with mercury.
Eat: Sardines
This inexpensive option is a nutrition superstar, whether you get it fresh or in a tin. Sardines are
loaded with omega-3s and are naturally high in vitamin D.

Don't Eat: King Mackerel

This voracious predator is on the do-not-eat listunless you want to risk mercury poisoning.
Eat: Anchovies
These teeny fish pack big flavor and are perfect in salads and pasta dishes. Besides having high
omega-3 levels, anchovies are also rich in iron.

Don't Eat: Tilefish

There are many types of this fish, but the EPA makes no distinction between them and warns that
women and small children should avoid any and all varieties.
Eat: Farmed Rainbow Trout
Lake trout have a higher risk of being contaminated, but the farmed variety get a "best choice"
rating from the Monterey Bay Aquarium Seafood Watch, a consumer watch group. Trout also
packs lots of omega-3s and protein.

Don't Eat: Albacore Tuna or Tuna Steaks

The rules regarding tuna are tricky: Albacore tuna racks up a medium level of mercury. So if you're
going to have it, the EPA advises limiting yourself to no more than one six-ounce serving per week.
Same goes for tuna steak, which is also considered medium-level on the mercury scale.
Eat: Canned Light Tuna
Awesome news if a tuna salad sandwich is your go-to lunch: This type of fish is considered low-
mercuryand it's also loaded with omega-3s.

Source: http://www.womenshealthmag.com/nutrition/types-of-fish-to-eat

11 Top 15 Contaminated Fish You Shouldnt be Eating

It used to be that eating seafood and fish regularly was a pretty safe nutritional bet. Fish was
packed with protein, healthy monounsaturated fats, omega-3 fatty acids, all those good things
(read more about benefits of fish oil). Unfortunately, due to our continued poisoning of the
environment and the Fukushima power plant meltdown, many fish are now loaded with unsafe
levels of mercury and radiation. All fish, every single fish on this planet, have some level of
mercury; however, some have much higher levels than others.
Take a look at our list of the top 15 most contaminated fish on the market today. Avoid eating these
or eat them in very small quantities, unless you are an expectant mother, in which case, avoid
these fish entirely. We will list some healthier options at the end of this article.

1. Shark
This means any type of meat eating shark such as Longfin Mako, Shortfin Mako, Blacktip, or
common Thresher shark. Because sharks are at or near the top of the food chain, they consume
other types of fish as their main source of food. This means whatever mercury and contaminates
are in the fish they eat accumulate in the bodies of sharks.
Its ironic that many people eat shark products such as soups, health drinks, pill supplements, and
even shark steaks, believing that shark is a healthy meat. In fact, this terrible misconception is so
prevalent that one of the worlds largest insurance companies added shark steaks, while at the
famous Taste of Chicago food fest, as one of their recommendations as a healthy food. The
exact opposite is true. Shark meats, and all shark products, are unfit for human consumption.

14
In fact, if you read the numerous studies available on this subject, there is absolutely no scientific
evidence that eating shark, or taking supplements in any way, will provide any medicinal benefits
whatsoever.

2. Swordfish
This is another very large fish that eats other contaminated fish as their natural diet.
Although swordfish is hugely popular, this beautiful, tropical fish has been found to contain some of
the highest levels of mercury among all larger sized edible fish. These fish contain high levels of a
very strong neurotoxin called methyl mercury. This toxin can easily cross the placenta in pregnant
women, and has the potential to damage the nervous system of the unborn fetus.
Recent studies have shown that excessively high blood levels of mercury can be traced to high or
frequent consumption of swordfish. One study was performed in San Francisco and involved 123
subjects who eat 30 different types of fish. Those with frequent consumption of swordfish had the
highest blood mercury levels that were over and above the maximum amount recommended by the
National Academy of Sciences as well as the United States Environmental Protections Agency.
This study was published in April of 2003 in Environmental Health Perspectives.

3. King Mackerel
This voracious predator is definitely on the no-no list. Even though the Florida Department of
Health Secretary Robert G. Brooks believes that its virtually impossible to get enough mercury
from this fish because they are caught far out in the ocean, hes wrong. Mercury builds up in the
body. The findings are consistent and King Mackerel contain high levels of mercury.
Researchers suspect that mercury, which comes mainly from industrial sources such as waste
incinerators, the manufacturing of chlorine, and coal plants, is being spread through the air and
eventually ends up in the water.
The longer the lifespan of the fish, as well as the larger it grows, the more mercury that fish will
accumulate in their lifetime. King Mackerel have a migratory path that runs from South Florida to
North Carolina.
King Mackerel, sometimes called Kingfish, are a common part of sport fishing. Although some
authorities feel that its safe to eat this fish if its less than 33 inches long and weighs 10 pounds or
less, you should consider that there are plenty of other types of fish that can be safely consumed
without worrying if that mackerel came from a 10 or 15 pound fish. Avoid this fish as its better to
be safe than sorry.
4. Tilefish
There are a great variety of this species of fish, and the EPA makes no distinction between them.
So when they warn people, especially small children, women, and pregnant women, to avoid
eating it, you better just skip all varieties to be safe.
Atlantic tilefish, a yummy predator that ranges from the Gulf of Mexico to New England, appears to
be OK, but unless you know for certain exactly which species you are eating, you are better off just
writing this one off.
Tilefish, despite the warnings about excessive mercury contamination, is often seen on restaurant
menus. Tilefish are popular because its a mild tasting, white meat fish that has a flavor similar to
crabs or lobsters and tends to be a little sweet.
Mercury contamination is a serious problem for many of the states in the Deep South and in South
Carolina where slow coastal rivers are the perfect environment for the buildup of mercury in local
fish. People who regularly eat fish that are contaminated with mercury can suffer brain
damage, as well as disorders of the central nervous system. Young children and the fetuses of
pregnant women are especially susceptible to mercury poisoning.

5. Albacore Tuna or Tuna Steaks

Tuna is a tricky one to keep track of, as some species seem to be OK, while others are downright
scary. Albacore Tuna contamination runs around the middle of the scale so if you are a tuna lover,
eat no more than six ounces of this fish every week.
There are two types of canned tuna: solid or chunk white, which is albacore tuna, and chunk light.
Almost all canned white tuna is albacore tuna. The mercury levels are almost three times higher
than canned light tuna. It gets confusing, so use the following list as a guideline:

15
 Canned White (albacore) Its suggested that children between 6 and 12 can eat
up to 9 ounces per month. Women should eat no more than three 6 ounce portions per month, and
men can eat three 8 ounce portions.
Canned Light This is a safer choice but look out for cans that are marked as
gourmet or tonno tuna, as these come from the larger yellowfin tuna and have much higher
mercury levels.
In fact, why not play it safe; instead of canned tuna, why not eat canned salmon? Its low in
mercury and high in those heart healthy omega-3fatty acids. Pink or Sockeye salmon from Alaska
are wild caught, sustainable, and about the same price as canned tuna.

6. Spanish Mackerel
This is another mackerel thats contaminated, and like the King Mackerel, its due to its large size.
The Atlantic Spanish Mackerel is another migratory fish that goes to the Northern Gulf of Mexico in
springtime and returns to south Florida, then the Western Gulf of Mexico in the fall. Even with this
migratory pattern, they can be found from the Yucatan of Mexico all the way to the Cape Cod of
Massachusetts.
Spanish Mackerel are actually related to tuna. They tend to stick near the shoreline and prefer
more shallow waters than their cousin the tuna. They can grow to three feet in length and because
they live more closely to the shores, they can easily become contaminated by mercury that is being
released into the ocean via slow moving coastal rivers.
You should limit the amount of Spanish mackerel that you eat, as they are contaminated with high
levels of mercury. They can also contain a toxin called ciguatoxin, which can cause serious
illness.

7. Orange Roughy
Orange roughy, which are part of the slimehead family (sounds tasty, right?) can take as long as
40 years to reach full maturity. Amazingly, these fish can live as long as 150 years! This means
that, besides being easily overfished, they have many years to accumulate mercury and other
toxins into their flesh. Orange roughy live in the deep waters off the Western Pacific Ocean,
Eastern Atlantic ocean, South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, and the Eastern Pacific off Chile.
Although they are actually a deep brick-red color, their flesh fades to a yellow orange after death,
hence their name.
Because of their very long lifespan, orange roughly can accumulate huge amount of mercury
within its flesh. Regular consumption of orange roughy can have seriously adverse effects on
your health. On top of that, compared to other fish, orange roughy is not a good source of omega-3
fatty acids, so you would be wise to choose another type of fish. Make safer choices from the
safer list at the end of this article.

8. Blue Fish
This is another fish that is tricky. It is a great low fat, protein rich source of those omega-3 fatty
acids, but it can be full of dangerous toxins including PCBs, pesticides, and, of course, mercury.
Blue fish can become contaminated from storm run-off, agricultural chemicals, and industrial
discharges, but they can also be contaminated when they eat natural toxins of some varieties of
bacteria, and algae.
Mercury is a natural element in nature that never, ever, breaks down or decomposes. Its a
pollutant that often comes from industrial factories. Mercury binds to the protein in fish, so its found
in every part that humans consume. Fish that are caught in watersheds with mercury warnings
should be removed, and predators, because they eat smaller fish, tend to have higher levels of
mercury and other types of contamination than smaller fish, such as sardines.
Besides mercury, blue fish tend to have very high levels of a highly dangerous toxic chemical
called polychlorinated biphenyls, otherwise known as PCBs. This toxin causes neurological as
well as developmental problems. Avoid blue fish and choose a healthier fish option.

9. Chilean Sea Bass

As if its not bad enough that this fish is contaminated with higher levels of mercury than the United
States, and most other countries, feel is dangerously unsafe, they have also been hunted to the
brink of extinction. If you see Chilean Sea Bass listed for sale, its either a different type of fish with
16
an erroneous label, or it has been caught illegally. In fact, Greenpeace states that, unless fishing
practices change, and people stop eating this fish, Chilean Sea Bass could become extinct within
five years time.
By the way, there technically is no Chilean Sea Bass. This is a marketing makeover name because
many people, especially Americans, find its true name a bit distasteful. Chilean Sea Bass are
actually called Patagonian Toothfish.
Samples of some of these fish often contained much higher levels of mercury and other
contaminants than were listed on the package. Avoid this fish altogether, for your health, and for
the survival of the species.

10. Pacific Ocean Perch

Mercury does more than accumulate in fish; it also accumulates in the human body. This
bioaccumulation in seafood carries over to human beings, where it can result in mercury poisoning.
In human controlled studies of the ecosystems of fish, which are generally done for market
production of a wanted species of seafood, results clearly show that mercury rises through the food
chain from the fish that consume plankton, which are eaten by larger fish, which are consumed by
even larger fish. Each succession of fish absorbs the mercury that came from each fish that was
consumed by the previous fish. Imagine if humans ate one another, and every time you ate
someone you gained their pocket change. Its similar with fish and mercury.
Pacific Ocean perch is commonly served in many restaurants as well as being caught by sports
fishermen.

11. Imported Catfish

We dont mean the catfish that your Uncle Joe catches on Sunday afternoons down at the local
lake. We are referring to imported catfish. Almost 90 percent of the catfish that is imported to
America comes from Vietnam, where they commonly use antibiotics that have been banned for
use in the USA. In fact, the two types of Vietnamese catfish that are commonly sold in the US,
Swai and Basa, really arent catfish at all, at least not by government standards, which means that
these fish arent held up to the same inspection laws that other imported catfish are.

If your Uncle Joe cant catch enough catfish to keep you satisfied, be sure that you buy domestic,
farm-raised catfish, which, for the most part, is responsibly farmed and super plentiful, so it should
be inexpensive as well. You could also try Asian carp, which tastes very much like catfish and is
also super plentiful.

12. Atlantic Cod

It gets confusing sometimes, whether to eat fish from the Pacific or the Atlantic, but it really does
make a difference. Everyone feels badly about adding this to the do not eat list, because New
England fishermen rely on this fish for their economic livelihood, but besides being contaminated
with mercury, the chronic mismanagement of this fish by the National Fisheries Services has
placed this fish just one step above making the endangered species list. Until this fish species
recovers its numbers, eat Pacific cod, which is still extremely plentiful and not nearly as
contaminated.
If you love good old fashioned fish and chips (and almost all of these recipes use cod) then opt for
Pacific cod. Tastes the same and is a better healthy choice. If you regularly use frozen fish sticks
or fish fillets, read the label and choose Pacific cod until the International Union for Conservation of
Natures Red List of Threatened Species says that Atlantic cod is safe to consume once more.

13. American Eel

American Eel is sometimes referred to as silver eel or even yellow eel. This fish, which is most
commonly found in sushi restaurants, found its way here due to high levels of contamination from
both mercury and PCBs. Unfortunately, this tasty fish is also suffering from more than just
pollution, but overfishing as well. If you love the taste of eel, avoid the poisons and contamination
and choose either Atlantic caught squid, or even Pacific caught squid, as both taste almost exactly
the same, but are plentiful and have low contamination levels. Mercury can impair the nervous
system and brain development, especially in infants, young children, and developing fetuses.

17
Although the 2011 Food Safety Modernization Act was supposed to help the FDA better monitor
fish farms and imported fish to be sure that they meet certain standards, lack of funding means this
may or may not happen, so you will need to do some research on your own and avoid dangerously
contaminated, overharvested fish such as American Eel.

14. Atlantic Flatfish

Atlantic flatfish include such fish as sole, halibut, and flounder that are caught off the Atlantic coast
of the US. These, like many of the fish from the Atlantic Ocean, are heavily contaminated due to
industrial waste as well as being overfished. In fact, these fish populations are as low as 1 percent
of what is thought to be necessary for sustainable, long term fishing, according to the Food and
Water Watch. Consider eating other fish that have the same mild flavor and white flesh, such as
tilapia or Pacific halibut.
Although you might consider eating imported fish (more than 85 percent of fish consumed in
America is imported) many other countries do not have the same standards for fish as the US
does, which means imported fish can have banned antibiotics and pesticides such as DDT in the
meat. The FDA cannot possibly test every single fish that comes into the country, so only a very
small fraction is ever tested.

15. Caviar
OK, so its not swimming yet, but fish eggs could be fish one day if left alone! Most of the caviar
consumed in the US comes from wild caught sturgeon or beluga, which have been overfished for
years. In fact, these species are also being threatened by an increase in the production of dams,
which pollute the water in which these fish live. All types of caviar come from fish that take many
years to mature, which means the population take years to recover. Rather than consume imported
caviar, read the labels and choose eggs that come from American Lake Sturgeon or Shovelnose
(sometimes called American Hackleback) Sturgeon from the Mississippi river. Yes, even the eggs
of contaminated fish contain chemicals, heavy metals, and pesticides.
You can reduce your risk of becoming contaminated by varying your seafood choices. When you
do this, you minimize overexposure to any particular contaminant that one species might contain.
Alternately, you could buy from a local fishery who buys direct from distributors. They can often
answer questions about the fish or fish eggs that they are buying. A trusted source is always better
than relying on a government agency when it comes to food safety.
If you are looking for safer fish, try some of the following:
Wild White Sturgeon fish (Oregon or Washington)
Red Snapper from the Gulf of Mexico
Rockfish caught by hook and line
Pacific Halibut
Yelloweye Rockfish
Yellowtail Rockfish
United States Haddock
Widow Rockfish
Sablefish (California, Oregon, or Washington)
Black Cod (Alaska and Canada)
Vermilion Snapper
Whiteleg Shrimp
Tai Snapper
Black Sea Bass
Freshwater Eel
California Halibut
Remember that all fish contain mercury, but you can still have your fish and eat it too if you make
your choices from the list above.

Source: http://naturalon.com/top-10-contaminated-fish-you-shouldnt-be-eating/

12 Baltic fish may be too toxic to be sold in the EU

18
Brussels, Belgium / Gland, Switzerland Fish from some areas of the Baltic Sea are so
contaminated that they may be too toxic for EU markets, warns WWF.
According to a new report, Clean Baltic within REACH?, every year from the late 1980s to early
1990s, 31kg of polychlorobiphenyls (PCBs) accumulated in the fish caught from the Baltic Sea,
and almost certainly ended up on people's plates.
Some of the fatty fish found in the Baltic do not comply with EU requirements for dioxins, and in
1995 the Swedish authorities recommended that women of childbearing age limit their
consumption of Baltic herring and salmon because of the contamination with toxic substances such
as furans, dioxins, and PCBs.
The report also reveals that several fish species, such as Atlantic salmon, sea trout, cod and
turbot, have shown signs of reproductive problems in recent decades.
The level of brominated flame retardants (PBDEs) found in herring is 5 times higher in the Baltic
Sea than in the Atlantic.
But it is not only the fish that is contaminated. The levels of polybrominated biphenyls (PBBs,
banned since 2000) and PBDEs in top predators such as seals, guillemots, and white-tailed sea
eagles are two to five times higher in the Baltic Sea than in the North Sea and Arctic Ocean.
Other harmful chemicals, such as perfluorinated compounds, have been found lately in harbour
porpoises, as well as in various fish and bird species.
"Baltic species are thoroughly contaminated with chemicals," said Dr Ninja Reineke, Senior Policy
Officer with the WWF DetoX Campaign. "This is not just a burden of the past but a major ongoing
problem."
The Baltic Sea is an ecosystem highly sensitive to pollution, as there is little exchange of water
with the neighbouring Atlantic Ocean.
As a result, the sea's contaminated water can remain in place for 25 to 30 years. And, to make the
situation even worse, low water temperatures and ice cover mean that the chemicals biodegrade
extremely slowly.
WWF stresses that the current EU chemical legislation has failed to protect the Baltic ecosystem
and its biodiversity from the toxic threat of hazardous chemicals, but REACH, the new EU
legislation on chemicals, could contribute to the protection of a vulnerable area such as the Baltic
Sea.
The need to identify and replace the worst chemicals that damage the reproduction and
development of marine species is long overdue, the global conservation organization says.
Once implemented, the REACH system will prevent persistent and bioaccumulative substances
from further contaminating the Baltic Sea environment.
"The existing EU chemicals regulation is obviously not able to provide sufficient protection, but the
debate about a new EU chemicals policy gives hope for a clean Baltic," said Lasse Gustavsson,
Director of WWF's Baltic Ecoregion Programme.
"REACH is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to have safer chemicals and a healthier future for
wildlife and people. New markets for safer products and increased trust should make it good news
for the chemical industry too."

NOTES:

1. Perfluorinated compounds are used in the production of textiles, food packaging, and non-stick
coatings such as Teflon. Brominated flame retardants are used in fabrics and TVs.

2. The Baltic Sea is the youngest sea on the planet. It has a unique marine ecosystem that plays
an important role for the 85 million people who live in the area. The Baltic Sea is also the only sea
almost entirely within the European Union. Therefore, the EU has a special responsibility for its
health.

3. The EU has developed a strategy to reduce human consumption of furans, dioxins and PCBs
lower than 14 pg WHO-TEQ per kg bodyweight per week. For a transitional period ending on 31
December 2006, Sweden and Finland have been authorized to place on the domestic market fish
from the Baltic region with higher dioxin levels.

19
This allowance has been granted provided that a system is put in place to ensure that consumers
are fully informed about the situation, and particularly about the risks associated with dioxin for
identified vulnerable groups of the population (HELCOM 2004).

4. REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals) is the draft EU law that should
lead to the identification and phasing out of the most harmful chemicals. If it becomes law it will be
enforced in all European Union countries.

Under the law, chemical producers would be obliged to send a registration dossier containing
safety data to a central chemicals agency for all chemicals produced in quantities above one tonne
a year. Less information is required the lower the tonnage of chemicals produced. Experts would
then evaluate the safety data for higher-volume chemicals and other chemicals of concern.
Chemicals of very high concern would be phased out, and replaced by safer alternatives, unless
industry can show adequate control of the risk from their use or that their socio-economic value
outweighed the risks. WWF does not think that the draft law is tough enough.

Source: http://wwf.panda.org/who_we_are/wwf_offices/uk/?18011/baltic-fish-may-be-too-toxic-to-
be-sold-in-the-eu

13 Agriculture and Environment: Salmon

Environmental Impacts of Production: Contamination
with Toxic Compounds
The farming of fish high up the food chain can tend to concentrate contaminants (Staniford 2002).
The artificial food chain built by feeding oil-rich and animal-derived diets to salmon has resulted in
elevated levels of such contaminants as dioxins and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in farmed
salmon compared to their wild counterparts.
Banned PCBs still effect us
The term dioxins refers to over 200 different polychlorinated dibenzo- para- dioxins and
dibenzofurans, seventeen of which are considered toxic. Dioxins are produced as unwanted by-
products, while PCBs are manufactured for use in transformers and insulators (CFIA 2002).
Chlorinated hydrocarbon compounds can accumulate in the fatty tissues of fish, so fish oil has
relatively high levels of these compounds (especially if derived from fish from contaminated areas).
Any of these toxins can pose serious risks to human health.
PCBs and many organochlorine pesticides (which have been found in aquaculture salmon) have
been banned in most of the world, but they still affect humans through their diet. European farmed
salmon can be a significant source of these toxins in the diet (Jacobs et al. 2002).
Contaminated fish posing health risks
The European Union's Scientific Committee on Food found that fish represent up to 63% of the
average daily exposure to dioxins. The Food Standards Agency of the United Kingdom
recommends that people consume only one portion of oily fish per week (Staniford 2002).
A recent study of PCB concentration in salmon showed that some farmed salmon had relatively
high concentrations of he compound. However, wild salmon captured from polluted water had even
higher levels of PCBS. Variation in farmed-salmon PCB levels is attributed to the variation in the
level of contamination in fish meal.
Fish meal from Peru had PCB concentrations 10-20 times lower than those from Denmark and the
Faroe Islands (Jacobs et al. 2002). Farmed salmon in Scotland were shown to have relatively high
concentrations of dioxins and PCBs, presumably due to the sources of the fish meal and oil used
for feed. Concentrations of the compounds in salmon were higher than those of other species such
as cod, because salmon have a higher fat content than other species.
More fatty fish = more toxins retained

20
Thus, salmon retain more toxins per pound of fish than do fish with lower fat levels since the
compounds accumulate in the fatty tissues of the fish (Jacobs et al. 2002). In addition, farmed
salmon have 4-5 times more fat content than wild salmon (Staniford 2002).
In addition to these contaminants, toxic heavy metals can also accumulate in the fatty tissues of
fish. These metals an be concentrated further through the rendering of fish meal and fish oil and
further still in the animals that eat feed made from them. Mercury is a good example; once
consumed by humans, it s readily absorbed into the gastrointestinal tract. Symptoms associated
with the consumption of low levels of heavy metals may not appear until later in life (Quig 2002).
Many studies have examined the concentrations of toxins in fish, fish meal, and fish oil. Results
vary considerably. One study in Canada showed that fish meal and fish oil do not contain high
levels of dioxins, PCBs, DDT, or mercury (CFIA 2002), while the authors of a study in Scotland
recommend that measures be taken to lower these levels because they are too high.
Toxins in almost all food types
An analysis of dioxin toxicity of thirteen categories of food (such as beef, chicken, ocean fish,
freshwater fish, butter, eggs, etc.) found that the freshwater fish (in which the study included many
farmed species and salmon) had the highest dioxin toxicity. In fact, freshwater fish toxicity was
50% higher than butter, which had the second high toxicity. All of the other products had less than
half the toxicity of butter (Schecter et al. 2001).

Source:
http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/footprint/agriculture/salmon/environmental_impacts/toxic_conta
mination/
ROMANIAN TEXTS

1 Petele, aliment-medicament sau otrav? Ct pete

poate duce la intoxicaie cu mercur
Specialitii recomand petele i fructele de mare cu regularitate, fiindc aduc
organismului cteva substane nutritive pe care niciun alt aliment nu le poate oferi. Pe de
alt parte, cei care respect recomandrile i mnnc zilnic pete pot suferi intoxicaii
periculoase cu mercur.
Richard Gelfond, un brbat de 40 de ani din Statele Unite, CEO al companiei IMAX, s-a
considerat ntotdeauna un tip atletic, mai ales c mergea s alerge n fiecare zi. Pn la
un moment dat, cnd, n timpul unei reprize de alergare, a simit c nu se mai poate ine
pe picioare i a czut, pur i simplu, pe strad. Motivele pentru un astfel de incident pot fi
extrem de numeroase, de altfel, medicilor le-a luat destul de mult timp pn s descopere
cauza problemelor de sntate ale lui Gelfond. Cnd a ajuns ntr-un stadiu n care nici nu
mai putea trece strada dect sprijinindu-se de soia lui, dup numeroase analize
amnunite, un medic neurolog a descoperit coincidena: Gelfond era un pasionat de pete
i de fructe de mare i, de aceea, mnca pete de dou ori pe zi. Diagnosticul a fost
simplu dup aceea: intoxicaie cu mercur. Credeam c fac ceva bun pentru organismul
meu, eu fiind foarte preocupat de un stil de via sntos, dar acest lucru s-a dovedit a fi,
de fapt, cel mai nociv gest pe care-l puteam face, spune Gelfond.
O situaie similar este cea a dinamovistului Cristi Borcea i a fostei sale soii, Mihaela
Borcea. Celor doi li s-au depistat n snge, n urm cu aproximativ trei ani, niveluri de
mercur cu mult peste limita normal. Una dintre ipoteze este c intoxicaia cu mercur, care
a afectat aproape toate organele i sistemele celor doi, a aprut pe fondul unui consum
exagerat de pete i de fructe de mare.

Mercurul din pete se acumuleaz n snge

Consumul de pete i de fructe de mare reprezint cea mai comun form de expunere
uman direct la mercur. De altfel, mercurul din aceste alimente este i cel mai uor
absorbit de organism forma metilmercur. Iar partea cea mai proast este c
21
metilmercurul se acumuleaz ntr-o proporie uria, de peste 90%, n eritrocite (globulele
roii).
n plus, forma aceasta a mercurului poate ptrunde oriunde n corp, poate strbate chiar
bariera reprezentat de placent i poate ajunge la ft (reduce considerabil IQ-ul
copilului), afectndu-l ireversibil, dar i bariera hematoencefalic, ptrunznd la creier. Se
acumuleaz, deci, n ft, n creier, chiar i n firele de pr. De aceea, pentru a testa
intoxicaia cu metilmercur se fac mai degrab teste de snge sau se analizeaz firele de
pr (pentru o expunere prelungit), dect testele de urin.
Valorile mercurului n snge nu trebuie s depeasc 5 g/L. Un nivel toxic critic este de
150 g/L, iar letal de 800 g/L, potrivit synevo.ro. Rareori se depete nivelul
sptmnal tolerabil de metilmercur, care este de 1,3 g/kg corp, potrivit EFSA. De fapt,
riscul de a depi acest prag l prezint mai ales populaiile care triesc din pescuit. Cele
mai afectate de expunerea la mercur sunt: pielea (pot aprea iritaii neobinuite), sistemul
nervos central, plmnii, inima i ficatul. Iar ftul este cel mai vulnerabil la metilmercur,
avertizeaz specialitii din cadrul Organizaiei Mondiale a Sntii.
n infografia de mai jos sunt ilustrate organele cele mai afectate i sunt enumerate sursele
de expunere n cazul populaiei generale (consumul pete i fructe de mare, legumele
cultivate pe solul contaminat, cosmetice, spunuri, utilizarea i distrugerea unor produse
care conin mercur, precum termometrele i bateriile, precum i reziduurile) i n cazul
expunerii ocupaionale (producerea de baterii, termometre i alte dispozitive cu mercur,
lucrul n mine de aur, expunere industrial ciment, metal etc.).

Care peti au cel mai mult mercur

Metilmercurul este prezent n aproape toate speciile acvatice i se acumuleaz n lanul
trofic acvatic, ceea ce conduce, inevitabil, la concentraii mari de mercur n pete,
crustacee i mamifere marine. Cel mai mare coninut de mercur l au speciile prdtoare
mari i petii btrni.
n cadrul unui studiu realizat de Agenia European pentru Sigurana Alimentelor
(European Food Safety Agency EFSA), s-a constatat c petii cu cea mai mare
concentraie de metilmercur din Europa (s-au primit mostre din 20 de ri europene) sunt:
tonul, petele-spad, codul, bacaliarul (pete care se gsete i n Marea Neagr,
cunoscut i cu numele de merlan), tiuca.
Toi aceti peti contribuie n mare msur la creterea nivelului de mercur din organismul
europenilor aduli care consum cantiti crescute de pete. n cazul copiilor, riscant este
i merluciul. Raport mercur vs. Omega 3 Un raport al Organizaiei Mondiale a Sntii
privind impactul mercurului asupra sntii globale relev care sunt petii cei mai siguri
din punctul de vedere al concentraiei de metilmercur i cei mai sntoi din punctul de
vedere al coninutului de acizi grai eseniali Omega 3. Bibanul auriu (din Golful Mexic),
rechinul, petele-spad, macroul, tonul (albacore), homarul, halibutul, bibanul, mahi-mahi
i codul au cel mai dezavantajos raport ntre coninutul de mercur i de Omega 3 i, deci,
aceti peti ar trebui consumai cu precauie.

Recomandarea autoritilor pentru consumul sigur de pete Autoritatea american pentru

controlul alimentelor i medicamentelor (Food and Drug Administration) are trei mari
recomandri pentru reducerea expunerii la metilmercur:
1. Nu mncai: Rechin Pete-spad Macroul regal (Scomberomorus cavalla) Biban
auriu (Hoplolatilus luteus)
2. Nu depi 350 de grame de pete (mai multe tipuri cu un coninut redus de mercur) i
de fructe de mare pe sptmn echivalentul a dou porii pe sptmn.
3. Dac mergi n vacan ntr-o zon unde se pescuiete mult, informeaz-te cu privire la
nivelul de contaminare cu mercur. Cum astfel de avertismente nu exist peste tot, cel
mai sigur este s nu depeti o porie de pete pe sptmn.

22
Sursa: http://adevarul.ro/sanatate/dieta-fitness/pestele-aliment-medicament-otrava-
catpeste-duce-intoxicatie-mercur-1_525aada6c7b855ff563198b3/index.html

2 Macrou contaminat cu o substanta periculoasa, scos

la vanzare in mai multe judete din tara
Inspectorii sanitar veterinari au inceput deja controalele. Desi in majoritatea magazinelor marfa a
fost deja vanduta, specialistii spun ca nu este cazul sa ne ingrijoram. Parazitul ar fi existat in peste,
dar nu ar putea afecta sanatatea oamenilor.
Alerta pe care am primit-o vizeaza peste import insulele Feore, respectiv peste congelat, macrou
importat importator direct Olanda, iar in Romania importat in judetul Bihor, spune Ioan
Dumnbrava, director DSVSA Hunedoara.
Alerta a fost data in mai multe judete din vestul, centrul si sudul tarii, unde autoritatile sanitar-
veterinare fac controale.
Infestatia macroului a fost cu un parazit numit Anisachis, insa acest parazit fiind cu localizare atat
musculara, cat si viscerala. La alerta pe care am primit-o se referea numai la forma viscerala, deci
nu era un pericol pentru sanatatea publica, a mai precizat Dumbrava.
Pericol sau nu, macroul infestat cu astfel de parazit nu corespunde normelor stabilite pentru
comercializare, asa ca ar fi trebuit retras.
Firma din Bihor a facut distributie si in judetul Hunedoara cu o cantitate de 20 pana la 80 de kg pe
societate comerciala. In total sunt 320 de kg distribuite in judetul Hunedoara, la un numar de 25 de
societati comerciale, dupa cum spune chiar directorul DSVSA Hunedoara.
Alte 250 de kilograme de macrou de la aceeasi firma au ajuns in judetul Timis, insa nu s-a gasit in
nicio unitate peste in lotul respectiv. Mai exact, a fost mancat. In total 60 de tone de macrou
congelat din lotul suspectat a fi infestat cu acest parazit au ajuns in 7 judete din Romania.
Inspectorii sanitar veterinari spun ca nici un roman nu a fost infestat cu parazitul Anisakis, pentru
ca acesta se gaseste in intestinele pestelui, iar acestea nu se mananca.
Reprezentantii Directiei Sanitar veterinare au mai spus ca nu au fost inregistrate cazuri de
persoane care sa se simta rau in urma consumului pestelui din acest lot.
Inspectorii sanitar-veterinari cauta acum pestele congelat in unitatile de alimentatie publica din
judetul Hunedoara.
In jur de 300 de kilograme de macrou de acest gen au ajuns in mai multe magazine din Hateg si
Valea Jiului. Intreaga cantitate de peste care se presupune ca ar fi contaminata a fost deja vanduta
din magazine. Produsul a fost importat din Insulele Feroe, anul trecut si se presupune ca ar
contine o substanta periculoasa pentru oameni.
Controlul vizeaza un lot de macrou congelat, importat de o firma din judetul Bihor si distribuit in
partea de vest a tarii.

Sursa: http://observator.tv/social/macrou-contaminat-cu-o-substanta-periculoasa-scos-la-vanzare-
in-mai-multe-judete-din-tara-94458.html

3 Contaminarea crnii de pete cu metale grele

Calitile deosebite ale crnii de pete, alturi de posibilitile de prelucrare industrial sub form
de conserve sau alte preparate, impun o cretere substanial a acesteia n alimentaia populaiei,
aspect relevat i de evoluia ascendent a consumului n majoritatea rilor lumii. Dezvoltarea
industrial ce caracterizeaz prezentul i intervenia brutal a omului, prin exploatarea neraional,
inclusiv prin deversarea unor mari cantiti de deeuri industriale/menajere, ngrminte i
pesticide n ape determin fenomenul de poluare, cu efecte n alterarea ecosistemelor i a
mediului.
Acva-metale grele: plumbul danubian, dincolo de greutatea fizic
Metalele grele sunt considerate deosebit de periculoase deoarece, n procesul de preparare a
hranei, ele nu se descompun; dimpotriv, concentraia lor pe unitatea de msur crete. De
asemenea, metalele posed proprietatea de a se acumula n organismul uman (bioacumulare),
23
astfel acestea frneaz sau chiar blocheaz procesele biochimice intracelulare. Majoritatea
metalelor posed proprieti mutagene i cancerigene, fiind greu de eliminat din organismul uman.
Plumbul face parte din grupa metalelor cu nalt potenial toxic. Din aceast cauz, limita maxima
stabilit de normele oficiale de sntate (Codex Alimentarius) este foarte sever: 0,5 mg/kg pentru
toate categoriile de crnuri. La carnea de crap existent n Romnia media variaz ntre 0,45 i 0,62
ppm. Este totui o limit situat sub cea stabilit pentru alte categorii de alimente, cum ar fi
conservele n cutii metalice.
Desigur, prima surs de contaminare o constituie reziduurile deversate sau emanate de la diverse
industrii, n special industria siderurgic a metalelor (ne)feroase. n cadrul acestora, un loc
important l ocup prelucrarea plumbului i aliajelor de plumb (acumulatoare pentru industria auto,
industria de armament). O parte din aceste reziduuri ajung n Dunre prin apele rurilor, dar i prin
apa pluvial rezultat din ploi i topirea zpezilor, care spal efectiv suprafaa solului antrennd
concomitent reziduurile impregnate.

Nu se tie, fiind impudent de presupus, care din cele opt ri riverane Dunrii au o contribuie mai
mare la poluarea cu plumb a acestui fluviu. Ce se cunoate sigur este faptul c n apa Dunrii
exist plumb din poluare, iar nivelul cel mai mare se gsete n ultima verig a lanului: Delta
Dunrii. n afara faptului c Delta cumuleaz toate sursele de poluare de pe traseul Dunrii, exist
i un alt aspect important care amplific aceast stare. Prin ramificarea Dunrii n brae i canale,
care la rndul lor comunic cu lacuri i bli, se reduce mult viteza de curgere a apei, fapt ce
favorizeaz depunerea microparticulelor de suspensie, sub form de sedimente, n care plumbul
are un nivel de concentraie mult mai ridicat.
Supraimpregnare cu plumb s-a relevat, n timp, la petii cu habitat permanent n Delt. Lacul
Razelm nu se gsete pe firul de curgere al Dunrii, avnd legtur direct cu Marea Neagr,
motiv pentru care coninutul de plumb al alului din acest lac se situeaz n domeniul urmelor.
Este de menionat c plumbul din apele contaminate nu se gsete ca atare, ci sub form de
compui. O parte din acetia sunt insolubili, deci se afl sub form de microparticule.
Plumbul, ca de altfel toate metalele nu este degradabil; deci concentraia lui n sedimente crete
treptat, atta timp ct exist surse de poluare. Exist ns produi ai plumbului care sunt
hidrosolubili; acetia, dei inferiori cantitativ, constituie poate cea mai important surs de
poluare a petelui. Petele preia oxigenul din ap, pe care l transfer sngelui la nivelul
branhiilor. Curentul de ap pentru oxigenare are un circuit permanent pe traseul gur-cavitate
branhial.
n timpul respiraiei petelui, cantitatea de ap care scald branhiile este enorm. La nivelul
branhiilor se rein i trec direct n snge o parte din substanele existente n ap. Exist i compui
ai plumbului liposolubili (ex. tetraetilul de plumb), care pot ptrunde direct prin piele, adugndu-se
la cei ajuni n corp pe alte ci.
Dup vrsarea Dunrii n mare se produce diluarea considerabil a coninutului de plumb. n
carnea petilor cu habitat permanent n mri i oceane (n cazul nostru, macrou i stavrid) nu de
gsete plumb detectat prin tehnicile de analiz cunoscute.
Scrumbia de Dunre, n stare adult, triete n Marea Neagr. Ea ajunge n Dunre numai n
perioada de reproducere, unde habiteaz un timp. Nivelul de contaminare cu plumb, gsit la
exemplarele mature cercetate, este mult mai mic dect la petii cu habitatul permanent n Delt. La
crapul i alul din Delt se gsete constant o cantitate relativ mare de plumb, dar relativ mai
mic dect limita maxim admis pentru alte alimente, deci nu prezint risc de sntate pentru om.
Totui, un examen sistematic i periodic, al petelui din Delt, ar trebui s stea n atenia factorilor
de resort.

Cadmiul, zincul, staniul i cuprul toxice sub limitele plumbului

Cadmiul este un metal a crui toxicitate se pare c depete pe cea a plumbului (limita maxim
stabilit de norme 0,075 ppm). El se folosete pe scar destul de larg, prin cademiere, pentru
protejarea la corodare a suprafeelor feroase. Se gsete rar n speciile de pete din ara noastr.
Zincul este un metal cu potenial toxic relativ redus; se gsete n carnea petilor, n cantiti
dozabile. Cnd ns coninutul este mare, consecina contaminrii fiind sursele de poluare, sunt
necesare msuri de restricionare a consumului. Limita maxim reglementat pentru alimente este

24
de 50 ppm. Valorile gsite la petii studiai constant se situeaz sub aceast limit. Uneori, au fost
descoperite valori mai ridicate (la petele de ap srat), dar situate n limite normale.
Staniul are un potenial toxic aproape nesemnificativ. De aceea, n normele oficiale de sntate
sunt stabilite limite maxime numai pentru conservele n cutii metalice. Staniul se folosete pe scar
larg n industria de confecionare a cutiilor pentru conserve, pentru protejarea tablei prin
cositorire. Stratul de cositor de pe suprafaa intern are ns o stabilitate relativ slab. n contact
ndelungat cu cantitile reduse de hidrogen sulfurat, care poate forma procesul de sterilizare,
acesta formeaz sulfura de staniu, care (relativ solubil) trece n coninut. n acest caz, prima
implicaie o constituie gustul metalic imprimat coninutului. Aliajul de cositorire este format din
staniu cu un aliaj mic de plumb (1% sau chiar mai mult). De aceea, cnd pe faa intern a tablei
cutiilor de conserve se constat pete sau zone ntinse de culoare alb-albstruie (marmorare),
este dovada apariiei sulfurii de staniu
Cuprul se gsete, n mod natural, n majoritatea alimentelor, dar n cantiti foarte mici. Cnd
coninutul este mare, el prezint risc din punct de vedere toxicologic. Limita maxim recomandat
de Codex Alimentarius pentru pete este de 3 ppm. Condiia menionat este, n prezent,
contestat de majoritatea cercettorilor. Prin numeroase analize de laborator s-a dovedit c n
circuitul cuprului n organism, nivelul maxim de acumulare i concentrare se realizeaz n ficat
unde, n mod natural, coninutul depete valoarea de 3 ppm. La speciile de pete provenite din
Delt, coninutul de cupru este cuprins n intervalul 1,3-1,5 ppm, ncadrndu-se astfel n valorile
reglementate. n schimb, la petele oceanic (macrou i stavrid) valoarea depete de dou ori
limita admis.

Sursa: http://www.fabricadecarne.ro/contaminarea-carnii-de-peste-cu-metale-grele

4 In urma dezastrului de la Fukushima Oceanul PACIFIC

a fost otravit. Cum ne dm seama dac PETELE pe
care l cumprm este CONTAMINAT?
La data de 11 martie 2011, un cutremur de magnitudinea 9.0 a avut loc n largul coastei Japoniei,
urmat de un tsunami, care a declanat cel mai mare dezastru nuclear de la Cernobl ncoace
(1986). Criza de la centrala nuclear Fukushima continu i azi, n ciuda autoritilor japoneze care
au ncercat s muamalizeze gravitatea situaiei, ba mai mult, guvernul japonez insist s
reporneasc reactoarele nucleare, mpotriva voinei poporului su i fr s fi nvat leciile
rezultate din acest dezastru.

Dezastrul nuclear de la Fukushima ne-a artat iar c reactoarele nucleare sunt, n mod intrinsec,
periculoase. Nu doar c afecteaz grav mediul, sntatea populaiilor i economiile naionale, dar
cea mai mare parte a costului financiar al unui accident nuclear este inevitabil suportat de ctre
victime, nu de ctre companiile care au proiectat, construit i operat centralele. Niciunul dintre cele
436 de reactoare nucleare din lume nu este imun la erorile umane, dezastre naturale, sau oricare
dintre multele alte incidente serioase care ar putea fi cauza unui dezastru. Milioane de oameni
care triesc n apropierea reactoarelor nucleare sunt supui acestor riscuri.
Vieile a sute de mii de oameni continu s fie afectate de dezastrul nuclear de la Fukushima, mai
ales cei aproape 300.000 de oameni care i-au prsit casele din cauza contaminrii radioactive i
care continu s triasc n incertitudine, fr a beneficia de o compensaie corect, just i
prompt. 100.000 dintre ei triesc i acum n reedine temporare, scrie greenpeace.org.
Cifrele acestea sunt, ns mici, comparativ cu cele care exprim adevratul numr, inestimabil al
victimelor acestui accident deoarece, n lume, n continuare se export mari cantiti de pete
radioactiv, pescuit n Oceanul Pacific. Milioane de oameni sunt poluai n mod brutal (poluarea prin
nghiire este cea mai grav form de poluare care exist), zilnic, n ntreaga lume, fr s aib nici
cea mai mic idee despre pericolul la care sunt expui i despre consecinele fatale pe care
consumarea acestui pete poate s le aib i totul din cauza proastei informri i a neinformrii.
n Japonia s-a votat, n decembrie 2013, proiectul de lege al secretizrii, lege despre care criticii
spun c amenin s recreeze statul fascist n Japonia i care permite desemnarea, de ctre stat,
a anumitor informaii ca fiind secrete, inclusiv a celor privind radiaiile. Presa japonez este

25
intimidat, jurnalitii ameninai cu ani grei de nchisoare dac obin informaii n mod neadecvat,
ns presa internaional, n special cea american, nu se ferete de la a spune adevrul despre
Fukushima, pe care nu-l cunoate nimeni cu exactitate, ns, cu certitudine situaia e mult mai
grav dect vrea Guvernul japonez s recunoasc.
Aceast lege este creat pentru a proteja singurana oamenilor, a declarat primul-ministru Shinzo
Abe.
Fukushima s-a dovedit a fi cel mai mare dezastru nuclear din istoria omenirii. Ca i n cazul
Cernobl, consecinele se observ n timp. Dup 3 ani de la calamitate, acestea nu au ntrziat s
apar. Totodat, putem afirma c Fukushima nc are loc, deoarece, de 3 ani, pentru rcirea
reactoarelor scpate se sub control se folosesc, de la accident, metode alternative aberante i
periculoase, precum pomparea apei srate din ocean (apa de mare sarat corodeaz,
reacioneaz i nrutete situaia), care este pompat n reactoare, pe ct posibil. Dupa
pompare este depozitat n mare parte n bazine uriae peste tot n jurul reactoarelor, restul apei
pompate scurgndu-se n continuu, de 3 ani, n Oceanul Pacific. Aceste reziduuri sunt hiper-
contaminate. n 2013 au fost declarate, oficial, 400 de tone de ap rezidual, care polueaz
oceanul, 24/24 ore, 7 zile pe sptmn.
Apa din pnza freatic, din cauza diferenei de nivel se scurge i ea, la rndul ei, n Oceanul
Pacific. Aceasta este contaminat de cele trei nuclee cu care intr n contact, elibernd aburi hiper
contaminai i ap contaminat cu Cesium-137 si Strontiu-90, scurs tot n Oceanul Pacific, care
este otrvit.
Aadar, Oceanul Pacific este otrvit aproape n totalitate cel puin cu elementul radioactiv Cesium
137, care se absoarbe n oase, cu foarte mare uurin, prin ingerarea petelui otrvit.
Lista neagr a petelui nerecomandat consumului uman crete considerabil, n urma accidentului
nuclear de la Fukushima, cu aproximativ orice tip de pete de provenien pacific. Dac pn
acum, pangasiusul era cap de list a petelui otrvitor, acestaeste detronat de departe de orice
pete pescuit n Oceanul Pacific, conform testelor efectuate.
Pentru a putea identifica zona de provenien a petelui oceanic sau a fructelor de mare pe care le
cumpr, consumatorii sunt sftuii s verifice n ce ape a fost prins (ATENIE, nu sub ce pavilion
a fost nava sau unde s-a ambalat/conservat petele). Cei mai sceptici au tot dreptul s nu mai
consume pete oceanic deloc, n condiiile n care exist mari anse ca cineva s msluiasc
etichetele, operaiune deloc grea, avnd n vedere faptul c difer doar 2 cifre.
Aadar, vom observa pe eticheta petelui oceanic ambalat urmtoarea formul: FAO nr. 0xy. (de
ex: FAO nr. 018 pentru Marea Arctic)
FAO reprezint Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Apele sunt mprite pe
zone de pescuit numerotate astfel:
Area 18 (Marea Arctic)
Area 21 (Atlantic, N-V)
Area 27 (Atlantic, N-E)
Area 31 ( Atlantic, Western Central)
Area 34 (Atlantic, Eastern Central)
Area 37 (Marea Neagr i Marea Mediteran)
Area 41 (Atlantic, S-V)
Area 47 (Atlantic, S-E)
Area 48 (Atlantic, Antarctic)
Area 51 ( Oceanul Indian, V)
Area 57 (Oceanul Indian, E)
Area 58 (Oceanul Indian, Antarctic i Sudic)
Area 61 (Pacific, N-V)
Area 67 (Pacific, N-E)
Area 71 (Pacific, Western Central)
Area 77 (Pacific, Eastern Central)
Area 81 (Pacific, S-V)
Area 87 (Pacific, S-E)
Area 88 (Pacific, Antarctic)
Un studiu din 2013 concluziona c pn n februarie 2014 era ateptat ca Oceanul Pacific sa fie
otrvit n totalitate cel puin cu elementul radioactiv Cesium 137, care se absoarbe n oase.

26
nc din anul 2011, dup 4 luni de la accident se tie ca 15 peti ton Bluefin din 15, prini n apele
coastelor americane aveau o concentraie de cesium 137 mult mai mare dect cea maxim admis,
de 100 becquerels/kilogram. Deasemenea, n 2013, n Pacific nu s-au prins deloc sardine.
Petele murasoi, prins n apele din jurul centralei Fukushima Daiichi este contaminat la un nivel de
2500 de ori mai mare dect cel maxim admis pentru alimente.
Petele nu este, ns, singurul pericol de otrvire a populaiei, n urma dezastrului de la Fukushima
Cesium-134/137 a fost descoperit n proporie de 71% (104 din 146 mostre) n tutunul produs n
2013 n Japonia (conform Japan Tobacco INc). Mostrele au fost recolate din Fukushima, Iwate,
Miyagi, Yamagata, Ibaraki, Tochigi. Aparatele au nregistrat cel mai mult 185.6 Bq/Kg (Cs-134 :
62.6 Bq/Kg, Cs-137 : 123 Bq/Kg).
Standardele de siguran ale JT (Japan Tobacco Inc.) sunt 100 Bq/Kg (Cs-134 + cu Cs-137).
America prima afectat
Testele fcute de Universitatea Long Beach din California
pe algele din apele imediat apropiate districtului Orange indic nivelul de radiaii cu 250 de ori mai
mare comparativ cu testele facute nainte de dezastrul de la Fukushima.
Iarba, fnul i laptele americane sunt contaminate. Trei studii fcute pe laptele cumprat din San
Francisco arat, n unanimitate, c acesta conine radio izotopi.
Explicaia const n faptul c animalele consum iarb i fn contaminate de ploaie. Fa de
nivelul maxim admis, nivelul radio izotopilor apei de ploaie testat n America este de 131 de ori
mai mare dect cel maxim admis de guvern.
Apa de ploaie contamineaz pmntul i nimeni nu prea poate controla acest fenomen.
100 de milioane de tone de materiale iradiate solide purtate de curenii maritimi, aluviuni, flotani
contamineaz toat coasta de vest a Americii.
O platform toxic de resturi contaminate a plutit 4500 de mile n Pacific timp de 280 de zile.
Animalele slbatice sunt puse i ele n pericol. Urii polari sufer de boli misterioase, precum
leziuni la nivelul pielii i probleme cu blana, problem ntlnite i la focile de mare, ns, din pcate,
n cazul lor, pericolul s-a soldat deja cu moartea.
Nu se tie ct va mai dura pn la infectarea celorlalte oceane. Situaia este grav. S-au propus
soluii de redresare a ei, care cost enorm i dureaz ani de zile.

Sursa: https://vremuritulburi.wordpress.com/tag/peste-contaminat/

TRANSLATIONS
EN-RO
1 Top 15 pesti contaminati pe care nu ar trebui sa-i
mananci
A manca peste si fructe de mare in mod regulat obisnuia sa fie un obicei nutritional destul de
sanatos. Pestele continea cantitati mari de proteine, grasimi monosaturate sanatoase, acizi grasi
omega 3, toate acele lucruri bune (citeste mai mult despre beneficiile uleiului de peste). Din
pacate, din cauza otravirii constante a mediului inconjurator si dupa explodarea centralei nucleare
Fukushima, multi pesti au fost intoxicati cu nivele periculoase de mercur si radiatii.
2 Nu va mai exista peste comestibil in 2050?
Februarie 27, 2012 - Studenti, afaceristi de talie mica si profesori s-au intrunit Miercuri in sala de
curs Campbell Hall din Universitatea din Virgunia oentru a se uita la cum tonul rosu este tras in
barci pe un ecran in timp ce se dadeau mostre de pastrav local si aperitive de biban ecologic.
Comunitatea a avut ca scop discutia despre problemele cu care se infrunta industria pescuitului din
toata lumea - si ce se poate face pentru a le remedia.

Grupul Food Collaborative de la Universitatea din Virginia, o comunitate care munceste pentru a
promova cercetarea, educarea si implicarea comunitatii in ceea ce priveste problemele legate de
alimente, agricultura si dezvoltare durabila, a sponsorizat ecranizarea filmului The end of the line
(Capatul unditei) un film documentar despre declinul pescariilor din toata lumea. Urmat de o
discutie cu Steven Macko, profesor de stiinte ale mediului la Facultatea de Arte si Stiinte, si alumni

27
ai Universitatii din Virginia Jack Cochran si Doug Dickerson, fondatorii Charlottesville Community
Supported Fishery.

Filmul dezvaluie faptul ca practicile moderne de pescuit au depasit rata la care se reproduc pestii,
fortand multe specii precum tonul rosu sa intre in lista speciilor pe cale de disparitie si cauzand
declinul enorm al pescuitului global.

A descris mai multe hazarde ale mediului inconjurator legate de pescuitul comercial in masa
precum cel cu traule, despre care Macko a spus ca a facut ca mari parti ale fundului oceanului sa
devina deserturi biologice. Filmul a prezentat convingerea unor oameni de stiinta ca daca metoda
actuala de pescuit fara sustenabilitate continua, rezervele oamenilor de peste s-ar putea epuiza
pana in 2050.

Audienta a avut multe de spus despre documentar, si de bine si de rau. Chris Areseneault, care
detine Seafood@WestMain in Charlottesville, a observat ca filmul a avut doar 10 minute de
optimism. Vizionarea acestui film ma deprima in ciuda a ceea ce stiu si firea mea optimista, a
spus.

Un student a comparat rezervele marine - zone unde pescuitul a fost interzis in speranta de a-i
lasa pestii sa repopuleze intr-un ritm normal- cu o brazda de pamant langa locuinta lui. A spus ca
rezervele marine, precum cele forestiere, pot da oamenilor posibilitatea de a le utiliza resursele
naturale fara sa fie abandonate in totalitate.

Organizatorii au fost surprinsi de cunostintele audientei si de discursurile lor. Am avut o audienta

bine informata, a spus Dickerson, absolvent de arhitectura care si-a obtinut diploma la
Universitatea din Virginia. Au stiut sa puna intrebari care conteaza.

Documentarul a aratat si urmarile economice ale colapsului ecosistemului, din prezent si din trecut,
precum ce s-a intamplat la inceputul declinului

3
RO-EN
1
2
3
GLOSSARY

1
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:

28
 Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

2
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --

29
 Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

3
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

4
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
30
 Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

5
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:

31
 Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

6
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

7
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
32
 Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

8
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:

33
 Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

9
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

10
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
34
 Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

11
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:

35
Statutul desemnrii:

12
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

13
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
36
 Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

14
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

37
15
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

16
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
38
 Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

17
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

39
18
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

19
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

40
 Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

20
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

41
21
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

22
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

42
 Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

23
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

43
24
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

25
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

44
 Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

26
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

45
27
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

28
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

46
 Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

29
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

47
30
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

31
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

48
 Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

32
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

49
33
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

34
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

50
 Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

35
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

51
36
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

37
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

52
 Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

38
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

53
39
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

40
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

54
 Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

41
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

55
42
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

43
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

56
 Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

44
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

57
45
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

46
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

58
 Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

47
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

59
48
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

49
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

60
 Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

50
Term:
I.D. language:
I.D. country:
Source:
Standard definition:
Nota bene:
Definition source:
Grammatical category:
Generic concept:
Hyperonym:
Synonym: --
Context/ Collocations:
Use area:
Commentary field:
Designation status:

Vedeta:
Limba vedetei: romn
ara vedetei: Romnia
Sursa:
Definiia standard:
Nota bene:
Sursa definiiei:
Categoria gramatical:
Conceptul generic:
Hiperonim:
Sinonim: --
Context/ Colocaii:
Aria de utilizare:
Comentariu:
Statutul desemnrii:

61