Shark Fins Contain Toxic "One–Two Punch"

Sharks can accumulate both methylmercury and a toxin called BMAA, which can have synergistic effects on human consumers. Christopher Intagliata reports.

BRAND X PICTURES (MARS)

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Living at the top of the food chain, sharks can accumulate dangerous levels of methylmercury. So much that pregnant women and children are advised not to eat shark at all. But sharks can accumulate another toxin too, called BMAA, which has been linked to the development of neurodegenerative disease. Which could be bad news for shark eaters

"Mercury in combination with BMAA is a one-two punch." Deborah Mash, a professor of neurology at the University of Miami's Miller School of Medicine. "These are two synergistic toxins. So even if there are low levels of exposure from the mercury or the BMAA, when humans are exposed to both of these toxins, then they will have a synergistic effect on the nervous system." 

BMAA starts out in cyanobacteria, and travels up the food chain through crabs and shrimp and fish. And, as previous studies have shown, all the way to sharks. What Mash and her colleagues wanted to know was how widespread the problem was, and if the chemical often appeared alongside mercury. So they analyzed fin and muscle samples from 10 species of shark—55 individuals in all—from the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. And they found BMAA and mercury in all 10 species. Suggesting that exposure to that "one-two punch" could be pretty common. The results are in the journal Toxins. [Neil Hammerschlag et al., Cyanobacterial Neurotoxin BMAA and Mercury in Sharks]


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


It's still not clear at this point what sort of risk this occasional exposure through food might have. Still, Mash isn't waiting. 

"I myself would not want to be exposed to BMAA or methyl mercury in my diet by eating shark fin or shark meat or taking shark cartilage products. We already know that mercury is toxic to our health. And we already know that BMAA plus mercury is a very bad mix for the brain. So people need to be concerned, and I think that's not only for the benefit of us as consumers, but also to the poor sharks, who are threatened with extinction." 

Conservationists have argued for years that sharks should be spared. Maybe now that it's us who are threatened... people might finally start to leave them alone.

—Christopher Intagliata 

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe