Farmed salmon now makes up 80 percent of fresh salmon sold around the country.
Posted on 07/30/2003 1:24:17 PM PDT by bedolido
PORTLAND — Farm-raised salmon contains more cancer-causing PCBs than wild fish and other common foods, according to a report released Wednesday by a public health advocacy group.
The study, by the Environmental Working Group, tested 10 samples of farmed salmon bought in three U.S. cities, including Portland. Farmed salmon now makes up 80 percent of fresh salmon sold around the country.
Opinions differ about whether the risk of polychlorinated biphenyls outweighs health benefits of eating seafood.
The salmon tested by the Washington, D.C.-based group would be safe under U.S. Food and Drug Administration standards for fish sold in supermarkets.
The group applied newer limits set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The study concluded that consumers should not eat farmed salmon from some regions more than once a month.
An environmental agency spokesman said, however, that the agency’s tighter standards were designed to protect sport and subsistence fishermen who may eat contaminated fish as a steady diet.
Salmon farming advocates said the Environmental Working Group used the stricter EPA standard to confuse consumers who know the health benefits of salmon and other fish rich in Omega-3 fatty acids.
Resource Links Environmental Working Group
“If the public listened to this, our health would be negatively affected,” said Charles Santerre, a professor of food and nutrition at Purdue University. “Any small additional risk of cancer is far outweighed by the benefits of fatty acids in the fish.”
The report could boost demand for wild salmon from the Northwest. Last year, the United States imported more than 200,000 tons of salmon raised off the coasts of British Columbia, Chile and elsewhere.
The Environmental Working Group tested Canadian-grown salmon from two Fred Meyer stores and a Safeway in Portland. It also tested salmon from other countries bought at stores in San Francisco and Washington, D.C.
Farmed salmon on average contained PCB concentrations of 27 parts per billion, while wild salmon averaged about 5 parts per billion, the Environmental Working Group report said.
Both fall well within the food and drug administration’s limits of 2,000 parts per billion.
But the EPA recommends against eating fish more than twice a week if it contains PCB levels greater than 6 parts per billion.
The long-term risk posed by PCBs in human diets is poorly known, experts say.
Farmed salmon now makes up 80 percent of fresh salmon sold around the country.
Strange.
(steely)
You're welcome.
Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.
Two, I immediately want to know why farm-raised salmon would have higher PCB levels than wild salmon. PCBs increase in predatory fish because with each step up the food chain, the "food" has more contaminants in it. (Same goes for mercury.) So wild fish consuming wild food should have higher levels than farmed fish consuming feed.
NOW, in another thread I pointed out that farmed fish eat fish meal. So the first obvious thing to do is to test the fish meal for PCBs.
Here in British Columbia, destroying the fish farming industry is now the #1 priority of environmentalists. They repeat the same distortions and outright lies ad infinitum no matter what the actual facts are. The worst offenders are Greenpeace and the David Suzuki Foundation.
It's the ol "Someone answer before I have to start dinner, ploy"
True, but that doesn't mean small amounts won't hurt you. Mercury in particular is so nasty that it's a concern, particularly for nursing mothers, because if mercury transfers to the baby, with a small body mass, it can interfere with brain and nervous system development. I seem to remember that it's basic advice that pregnant or nursing mothers shouldn't eat Great Lakes fish because of the levels of mercury and PCBs.
I read the Washington Post article before I saw this posted on FR. Here's the article:
Report Suggests High PCB Levels in Farmed Salmon
We find in this article that only 7 out of the 10 samples tested had high PCB levels. That's why the statistical significance of only having 10 samples jumps right out. Test 100 samples, from 100 different farms, and then get back to us.
This article does say that the source of the PCBs is the fish meal. Which for me says: switch the farmed fish to vegetable protein! For one thing, it would substantially reduce the demand for the fish that are caught for fish meal, which are important to the whole ocean ecosystem.
Both fall well within the food and drug administration’s limits of 2,000 parts per billion.
But the EPA recommends against eating fish more than twice a week if it contains PCB levels greater than 6 parts per billion.
Whew, good thing the wild fish are just below the EPA threshold, huh.
I would have to eat 100 farm fish or 300 wild fish a week to get to the danger level. I don't foresee this happening anytime soon. (I don't like salmon)
This is nothing more than an attempt to cripple fish farms so we have to rely more on wild fish which we can't fish because of ESA/EPA/TBS (total BS). More bogus data to advance an environmental agenda.
This is the most important sentence in the whole article. The article says 2,000 ppb is considered acceptable, but these numbers are in the less than 30 ppb range. So what is correct??
More scare stuff to a population that is so chemistry-challenged it doesn't know the difference between a PCB and a PVC sewer pipe.
EAT BEEF, THE WEST WASN'T WON ON SALMON CROQUETTES
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.