Don't worry too much. IATP, the group that performed both studies, is pretty close to "crackpot hippie". And I say this as a near-crackpot-hippie-type myself. But I get really unhappy with activist groups waving poorly-designed study data around to get media attention. The second study isn't even peer-reviewed (the gold standard of an ATTEMPT at legitimacy).
So yeah, quit worrying----this isn't even close to a legitimate organization.
EDIT: Ugh, just read the full text of the "study", now I'm spittin' mad. Those "scientists", and I use that term loosely, should be ashamed of themselves. They fully admit their sample size was "poor", then whine that it's because they couldn't get enough funding, so it's not their fault. THEN they start whining that the companies they are trying to criticize were not being forthcoming with samples of their product for them to test. Oh yes. And WHY, praytell, should some manufacturer give you samples? The rest of the article goes on to say that "mercury MAY be a problem and COULD cause issues, and so the gov't should investigate this". In 11 of the 20 samples, they didn't even FIND mercury, and their "significant levels" from the other 9 are all ONLY significant in the sense that they EXISTED---not that they were over a "safe level".
Better, the list of glorious research institutions of the authors included a community college in North Dakota, a government research facility dealing with HONEYBEES, the organization that created the study in the first place, and the "Alternate Medicine Review", among others. GEH. GARGHGHGH. This makes me NUTS.