4 ms·

Tuna is nice and fancy (and expensive). Few eat it every day. Tilapia is cheap, sustainable, and has low mercury. I’m no nutritionist, but what’s the big deal

Tuna is nice and fancy (and expensive). Few eat it every day. Tilapia is cheap, sustainable, and has low mercury. I’m no nutritionist, but what’s the big deal with eating tuna every now and again, but mostly sticking to smaller fish?

coldtea 8y ago
>Tuna is nice and fancy (and expensive). Few eat it every day. In which country? Tuna cans and tuna sandwiches and salads are some of the most popular foods in lots of countries. Nothing fancy (tuna is no lobster or caviar) or especially expensive about it. It's available as a Subway sandwich for dog's sake!
- y4mi 8y ago
  you're talking about different things... fresh tuna is pretty expensive. its just the cans that are dirt cheap
  - coldtea 8y ago
    I see. But you can get your precious oils (or mercury) from either, right?
    - oAlbe 8y ago
      Not sure about the oils/omega-3, but the fish used to make the canned tuna is generally regarded as a much lower source of mercury compared to, say, the tuna used for sushi, and thus safer to eat.
- jessaustin 8y ago
  Real tuna is delicious. Canned tuna is worse than pet food. (perhaps this explains the slip in your last sentence?) We probably shouldn't be eating tuna at all, for environmental reasons. GP's point that there are lots of non-apex-predator fish in both fresh and salt water still holds.
  - coldtea 8y ago
    >Real tuna is delicious. Canned tuna is worse than pet food. Don't know, I like both for their own tastes. Some canned tuna is worse than pet food (especially the one made into a mush), but some canned tuna is great. >perhaps this explains the slip in your last sentence? No, I wanted to give it a lighter slant than "god's sake" for our American friends, sort of like "heck".
    - speedplane 8y ago
      If you really care about canned tuna, you can buy high quality stuff for $6/can that starts to approach the fresh stuff. No one does though. They buy the $1/can stuff that’s mostly junk.
  - akvadrako 8y ago
    What's wrong with pet food?
    - zamber 8y ago
      Depends on the price range and quality but in general it's highly processed, designed to addict, pumped with grains as filler/fiber. Dry feed is linked to kidney failure in cars and small dogs. Veterinarian food is marginally better but it still isn't comparable to a close-to-natural diet. Pretty much the same business model used by toothpaste brands sold by dentists (piggy-backing on profession trust). There are higher quality cans and options like BARF which cost a bit more but are far better (and tastier) for pets. It can also be done at home at a lower cost but it's pretty messy. Time-wise takes around 8 man-hours per month for us (recepie calculation, getting supplements, grinding and cutting meat, getting it all together and packaging). We've been feeding our cats with it for over 2y now. Their blood tests are far better and there's a visible increase in fur quality. Partner is a vet tech and has easy access to the clinic to checkup on our pets. She also daily sees effects of cheap dry stuff on patients.
    - speedplane 8y ago
      Dogs have been genetically selected to process human food scraps. They have succeeded as a species because they eat what humans throw away. It’s not reasonable to think humans could extract proper nutrition from animal food (but if you’re starving, you’d probably deal).
cies 8y ago
> what’s the big deal with eating tuna every now and again Once a week builds up merc in the body. Merc is toxic. That's the big deal. Smaller fish have less of this problem, but still add to it. Better avoid most fish at this point, we've destroyed the oceans to much, sadly. https://nutritionfacts.org/video/which-brand-of-tuna-has-the-most-mercury/ https://nutritionfacts.org/video/which-brand-of-tuna-has-the...
loeg 8y ago
'cies is repeatedly linking a vegan advocacy website. Infer from that what you will.
- cies 8y ago
  Those doctors recommend a WFPB diet. Veganism is an ethical stance, not promoted professionally that I know by any of them (Greger, Campbell, Furman, Eisselstyn, McDoughal, Klaper, etc.). Is there a chance that a diet that is similar to chimps, bonobos and utangs is most healthy for us as well? No refined food, mostly fruits+leaves and some seeds and bugs. It "maybe" that simple. These doctors are aware of this, and promote --to my best knowledge-- based on science what can logically be derived from our evolutionary ancestery. Calling it "vegan advocacy" is besides the point. It's WFPB advocacy, because it's showing to work in studies/practices. High meat cultures never produced the longest living people. High fruit+leaves have, repeatedly.
  - arcturus17 8y ago
    > High meat cultures never produced the longest living people. This is a lie. Spain has the fourth longest living country in the world according to the WHO, and ranks 11th in the world in meat consumption at 97 kg per person according to the FAO. Australia, tied at 4th with Spain in life expectancy, consumes a whooping 111 kg per person, 3rd in the world. Japan and Iceland, first and fifth in life expectancy, consume metric shittons of fish. How would you bend this crushing evidence to support the argument that "high meat cultures don't produce the longest living people"?
    - cies 8y ago
      That, as you said, of the developed nations Japan is the first (they eat fish rather than meat). Also in Japan you can find the longest living people, Okinawa, and they barely eat meat (traditionally). A food culture is not defined by national borders: we have to look inside the countries to see what culture work for longevity. See the bluezones book. Then I must say that I said something wrong: "longest living" alone is not enough, we want to be healthy too. Being sick for the last 30 years of my life, kept on my feet by a medical system (as what happens a lot in developed nations), it not a good prospect for me.
bonoboTP 8y ago
Canned tuna is quite cheap, isn't it?

coldtea 8y ago

>Tuna is nice and fancy (and expensive). Few eat it every day. In which country? Tuna cans and tuna sandwiches and salads are some of the most popular foods in lots of countries. Nothing fancy (tuna is no lobster or caviar) or especially expensive about it. It's available as a Subway sandwich for dog's sake!

y4mi 8y ago
you're talking about different things... fresh tuna is pretty expensive. its just the cans that are dirt cheap
- coldtea 8y ago
  I see. But you can get your precious oils (or mercury) from either, right?
  - oAlbe 8y ago
    Not sure about the oils/omega-3, but the fish used to make the canned tuna is generally regarded as a much lower source of mercury compared to, say, the tuna used for sushi, and thus safer to eat.
jessaustin 8y ago
Real tuna is delicious. Canned tuna is worse than pet food. (perhaps this explains the slip in your last sentence?) We probably shouldn't be eating tuna at all, for environmental reasons. GP's point that there are lots of non-apex-predator fish in both fresh and salt water still holds.
- coldtea 8y ago
  >Real tuna is delicious. Canned tuna is worse than pet food. Don't know, I like both for their own tastes. Some canned tuna is worse than pet food (especially the one made into a mush), but some canned tuna is great. >perhaps this explains the slip in your last sentence? No, I wanted to give it a lighter slant than "god's sake" for our American friends, sort of like "heck".
  - speedplane 8y ago
    If you really care about canned tuna, you can buy high quality stuff for $6/can that starts to approach the fresh stuff. No one does though. They buy the $1/can stuff that’s mostly junk.
- akvadrako 8y ago
  What's wrong with pet food?
  - zamber 8y ago
    Depends on the price range and quality but in general it's highly processed, designed to addict, pumped with grains as filler/fiber. Dry feed is linked to kidney failure in cars and small dogs. Veterinarian food is marginally better but it still isn't comparable to a close-to-natural diet. Pretty much the same business model used by toothpaste brands sold by dentists (piggy-backing on profession trust). There are higher quality cans and options like BARF which cost a bit more but are far better (and tastier) for pets. It can also be done at home at a lower cost but it's pretty messy. Time-wise takes around 8 man-hours per month for us (recepie calculation, getting supplements, grinding and cutting meat, getting it all together and packaging). We've been feeding our cats with it for over 2y now. Their blood tests are far better and there's a visible increase in fur quality. Partner is a vet tech and has easy access to the clinic to checkup on our pets. She also daily sees effects of cheap dry stuff on patients.
  - speedplane 8y ago
    Dogs have been genetically selected to process human food scraps. They have succeeded as a species because they eat what humans throw away. It’s not reasonable to think humans could extract proper nutrition from animal food (but if you’re starving, you’d probably deal).

cies 8y ago

> what’s the big deal with eating tuna every now and again Once a week builds up merc in the body. Merc is toxic. That's the big deal. Smaller fish have less of this problem, but still add to it. Better avoid most fish at this point, we've destroyed the oceans to much, sadly. https://nutritionfacts.org/video/which-brand-of-tuna-has-the-most-mercury/ https://nutritionfacts.org/video/which-brand-of-tuna-has-the...

loeg 8y ago

'cies is repeatedly linking a vegan advocacy website. Infer from that what you will.

cies 8y ago
Those doctors recommend a WFPB diet. Veganism is an ethical stance, not promoted professionally that I know by any of them (Greger, Campbell, Furman, Eisselstyn, McDoughal, Klaper, etc.). Is there a chance that a diet that is similar to chimps, bonobos and utangs is most healthy for us as well? No refined food, mostly fruits+leaves and some seeds and bugs. It "maybe" that simple. These doctors are aware of this, and promote --to my best knowledge-- based on science what can logically be derived from our evolutionary ancestery. Calling it "vegan advocacy" is besides the point. It's WFPB advocacy, because it's showing to work in studies/practices. High meat cultures never produced the longest living people. High fruit+leaves have, repeatedly.
- arcturus17 8y ago
  > High meat cultures never produced the longest living people. This is a lie. Spain has the fourth longest living country in the world according to the WHO, and ranks 11th in the world in meat consumption at 97 kg per person according to the FAO. Australia, tied at 4th with Spain in life expectancy, consumes a whooping 111 kg per person, 3rd in the world. Japan and Iceland, first and fifth in life expectancy, consume metric shittons of fish. How would you bend this crushing evidence to support the argument that "high meat cultures don't produce the longest living people"?
  - cies 8y ago
    That, as you said, of the developed nations Japan is the first (they eat fish rather than meat). Also in Japan you can find the longest living people, Okinawa, and they barely eat meat (traditionally). A food culture is not defined by national borders: we have to look inside the countries to see what culture work for longevity. See the bluezones book. Then I must say that I said something wrong: "longest living" alone is not enough, we want to be healthy too. Being sick for the last 30 years of my life, kept on my feet by a medical system (as what happens a lot in developed nations), it not a good prospect for me.

bonoboTP 8y ago

Canned tuna is quite cheap, isn't it?