↓ Skip to main content

Shark fin, a symbol of wealth and good fortune may pose health risks: the case of mercury

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Geochemistry and Health, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#24 of 868)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
Title
Shark fin, a symbol of wealth and good fortune may pose health risks: the case of mercury
Published in
Environmental Geochemistry and Health, February 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10653-014-9598-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yu Bon Man, Sheng Chun Wu, Ming Hung Wong

Abstract

There is a lack of information concerning human health risks due to exposure to mercury contained in shark fins, through dietary intake. Health risk assessment of shark fins, collected from 5 cities in China: Hong Kong (HK), Beijing, Shanghai (SH), Haikou (HN) and Wenzhou (WZ), was conducted, based on total mercury and methylmercury, and analyzed by a cold vapor atomic fluorescence spectrometry equipped with high-performance liquid chromatography, respectively. The results showed that 16.8 % samples from HK, 8.3 % from SH, 33.3 % from HN, and 16.8 % from WZ were regarded as unsafe for human consumption. Extremely high consumption rates of shark fins for an adult and a child (0.150 and 0.0807 kg/day, respectively), at 95th centile, samples from WZ demonstrated high non-cancer risks (adverse health effects) (Hazard Quotient = 16.0) on adults (aged 25-65), and samples from SH, HN and WZ also showed high non-cancer risks (Hazard Quotient = 12.9, 21.0, and 34.4, respectively) on children (aged 1-7). Consumption of shark fins may be detrimental to human health.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 23%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 4 7%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 19 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 25%
Environmental Science 8 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 22 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 March 2016.
All research outputs
#1,455,777
of 24,051,764 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Geochemistry and Health
#24
of 868 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,908
of 225,601 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Geochemistry and Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,051,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 868 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 225,601 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them