Fish Controversy for healthy heart

Recently, separate reports were released from the Harvard School of Public Health (in the Journal of the American Medical Association) and the Institute of Medicine on the health effects of eating fish.

The Harvard report, which was based on a review of medical literature, but was brilliant in its approval of the fish. The authors concluded that modest consumption of fish and shellfish, defined as one or two servings per week was associated with significant decreases in mortality from heart disease and overall mortality. They brushed off the potential health risks of mercury and other contaminants in seafood as weak, and in any event be overwhelmed by the health benefits.

The IOM report was much less brilliant in its approval of seafood IOM found in a comprehensive 400-page report (a summary of what can be found here), that eating fish "May reduce the overall risk of developing heart disease, but that the company data showing that fish can have an impact on health is failing. They have cited a lack of objective evidence in this Concerning the risks of eating seafood, especially, a lack of reliable information on the distribution of contaminants in seafood

They concluded that it is probably more healthy for people to eat two 3 ounces servings of seafood per week, including up to 6 ounces of albacore tuna, but that large predatory fish such as shark, the swordfish, king mackerel or Tile should be avoided. These findings are consistent with previous recommendations issued by the Food and Drug Administration.