Environ. Sci. Technoi. 1985, 19, 646-648
Whole-fish samples include the viscera, which contains more lipid than does muscle tissue, as well as organs that concentrate organic contaminants. Connor was also advised of this in the cover letter that accompanied the material he requested. Inspection of Connor’s Figure 1 suggests that this caveat was ignored in calculating the risks associated with the consumption of freshwater fish; according to the figure legend, the bar labeled “FW” is based upon “average concentrations from 1979 freshwater fish survey for US.” The only sources cited for freshwater fish residues are our publications (2, 3). We sincerely hope that we have incorrectly interpreted Connor’s article-that he derived estimates of contaminant concentrations in the edible tissues of freshwater fish from FDA market surveys ( 4 ) or that our values for whole fish were adjusted before they were used, which cannot be determined on the basis of information in the published article. If we have misinterpreted, we extend our apologies and await clarification of the methods he used; however, if Connor used the 1979 NPMP information without applying some modification to derive his assessment, then freshwater anglers, commercial fishermen, and fishery managers throughout the United States await his revised estimates.
Literatwe Cited (1) Connor, M. S. Enuiron. Sci. Technol. 1984,18,628-631. (2) Schmitt, C. J.; Ludke, J. L.; Walsh, D. F. Pestic. Monit. J. 1981, 14, 136-206. (3) Schmitt, C. J.; Ribick, M. A.; Ludke, J. L.;May, T. W. U.S., Fish Wildl. Seru. Res. Publ. 1983, 152, 1-62. (4) “FY 79 Pesticides and Metals Program”; FDA 7305.007: Washington, DC, 1982.
Christopher J. Schmitt,” J. Larry Ludke US. Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Columbia National Fisheries Research Laboratory Columbia, Missouri 65201
SIR: Schmitt and Ludke (1)were very kind in providing me access to their data. They very clearly indicated that their data were for whole fish. In fact, it was often necessary for me to transform between data for whole fish or fish liver concentrations to concentrations in the edible portion of the fish. The figure legend does cite the lengthier publication where this transformation is explained in more detail ( ( 2 )ref 13 in my original publication). In brief, I matched fish by age, lipid content, year, and location where information for both whole fish or edible concentration were available. I used the ratio of edible/ whole concentration (for these data, 0.3) to convert the data from Schmitt’s laboratory. Naturally, there can be a great deal of variation in this ratio so I used several independent methods to estimate human consumption of contaminants from fish. As I discussed in the explanatory paragraph for the figure, where the lengthier publication is again cited, the different methods are in general agreement.
Literature Cited (1) Schmitt, C. J.; Ludke, J. L. Enuiron. Sci. Technol., preceding paper in this issue. 646
Environ. Sci. Technol., Vol. 19, No. 7, 1985
(2) Connor, M. S. “Management of Wastes in the Ocean”; Wiley: New York, in press.
Michael Stewart Connor Region 1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Boston, Massachusetts 02203
Comment on “Red Herrings in Acid Rain Research” SIR: Regarding the feature article by Havas et al. (11, I agree that it is time for all concerned to work together and not rely on questionable truisms. However, it seems that regulatory zealots with help from the popular media have been the leaders in espousing untested hypotheses as listed below: (1)Nitric acid in rain has the same effect as sulfuric acid. (2) Liming of lakes is only useful for research while further controls on NO, and SO, should be effected immediately. (3) Effects of alkaline emissions can be ignored. (4) Midwest SO,-NO, utility emissions are responsible for the acidity in Adirondack lakes while rain acidity is proportionate to such emissions. (5) Benefits derived from stringent SO, controls would outweigh their costs. (6) Acid rain causes severe damage to vegetation while benefits are negligible. The lack of validity of these hypotheses is discussed in a recent publication (2). Another unjustified hypothesis is that there are significant human health effects from acid precipitation. Because there is a dearth of evidence on adverse human health effects from acid precipitation, this is usually implied by statements such as used by Havas et al. (“Why must we tolerate decades of emissions, damage to the environment, and often human health before abatement measures are even considered?”). They fail to cite a single reference to support the health effect implication. Pollution control measures for SOz, NO,, particulate, etc. have been considered and effected for decades even though health effects at US. ambient levels remain unproven.
Literature Cited (1) Havas, M.; Hutchinson, T. C.; Likens, G. E. Enuiron. Sci. Technol. 1984,18, 176A-186A. (2) Innes, W. B. Chemtech 1984, 14, 440-447.
W. 6. Innes Purad Inc. 724 Kilbourne Dr. Upland, California 91786
SIR: Dr. Innes (I) is using the excuse of a rebuttal to our paper to introduce more red herrings into the literature. Little of what he has to say relates directly to our paper. The techniques used by Innes and others are classics. One technique is to alter the wording slightly so that the meaning changes substantially and then claim the
0013-936X/85/0919-0646$01.50/0
0 1985 American Chemical Society
