5 ms·

I’m very worried about heavy metals, plastics, and chemicals too much to eat any seafood.

dcolkitt 7y ago
The balance of the evidence indicates that the health benefits of fish consumption, particularly omega-3 fats, far outweighs those concerns.
- thepete2 7y ago
  Walnuts apparently have more omega-3 content (by weight) than fish.
  - fredophile 7y ago
    Omega-3 doesn't refer to just one thing. Most plant sources of omega-3 are ALA which your body needs to convert to EPA and DHA. Your body isn't very good at making DHA so it is useful to get it directly from your diet. Fish are a good source of DHA.
    - hombre_fatal 7y ago
      Fish get it from algae. You could go right to the source and eat algae as part of your standard supplementation.
      - thepete2 7y ago
        cutting out the middle fish
- James_Henry 7y ago
  I hate to be one of those people demanding sources, but I'm wondering where I can find someone who's carefully weighed the evidence. The article does mention that smaller fish often found canned are lower in the food chain and thus have less mercury, but I would think that you'd have to look carefully at each species, and the sourcing, and the packaging before you could really say the health benefits are worth it.
  - victor106 7y ago
    https://www.amazon.com/Omega-Principle-Seafood-Healthier-Planet-ebook/dp/B076NTB4FR https://www.amazon.com/Omega-Principle-Seafood-Healthier-Pla... The author goes into lot of detail. TLDR 1. Eat small fish like Sardines, Mackerel, Anchovies etc 2. Get your omega 3 index https://omegaquant.com/ https://omegaquant.com/ 3. Make sure your omega 3 to omega 6 is good
  - clSTophEjUdRanu 7y ago
    https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/fish/ https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/fish/
- alexandercrohde 7y ago
  It's not boolean. There's a lot of options -- salmon (I personally have salmon sushi at least twice a week), omega-3 supplements, a dozen other healthy foods.
- yokaze 7y ago
  My understanding is, that while fish consumption is correlated with better health, the supposed effects of omega-3 fats in observational studies are not proven in controlled studies with omega 3 supplements (https://www.cochrane.org/news/new-cochrane-health-evidence-challenges-belief-omega-3-supplements-reduce-risk-heart-disease https://www.cochrane.org/news/new-cochrane-health-evidence-c...)
troydavis 7y ago
Many varieties of tinned fish are very low in mercury, often due to their short lifetimes or shallow depth: https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2014/10/can-eating-the-wrong-fish-put-you-at-higher-risk-for-mercury-exposure/index.htm https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2014/10/can-eat... (For any readers who haven’t tried a great sardine, look for Matiz, La Gondola, any Portuguese brand, or in France, Rödel.)
- i386 7y ago
  Ortiz sardines is where it is at.
bad_user 7y ago
People get concerned about the toxicity of fish, yet the air they breathe in the polluted city they live it does far more harm than a food can ever do. Not to mention smokers, but the rates of smokers with health concerns about food has been going down, anecdotally speaking. Seafood is very healthy, the populations that eat a lot of seafood are very healthy, the stories about heavy metals or plastics are blown out of proportion and the toxicity claims is not supported by evidence. I'm actually far more concerned about the preservation of wild life, with wild fish populations (such as tuna) going down due to over-consumption. I actually seek farmed fish — the omega 3 content might be lower, but the benefits of omega 3 are probably overblown too. So there might actually be some benefits to the fearmongering, even if irrational ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- tmh88j 7y ago
  >People get concerned about the toxicity of fish, yet the air they breathe in the polluted city they live it does far more harm than a food can ever do. I could see this being a possibility for many Asian countries, but I'm skeptical that this would be true for the US and Europe. Do you have any sources?
  - lowdose 7y ago
    On windy.com they have several realtime graphics for CO2 pollution and it's cousins.
    - tmh88j 7y ago
      Maybe I wasn't clear, but I was asking for a source regarding the claim that air pollution affects humans more than the food they consume (specifically based on location). That website is just some data of current air pollution.
    - drukenemo 7y ago
      CO2 is not pollution no matter how many times this lie is perpetuated. CO2 is what we breathe out and it’s what plants breathe in.

The balance of the evidence indicates that the health benefits of fish consumption, particularly omega-3 fats, far outweighs those concerns.

thepete2 7y ago
Walnuts apparently have more omega-3 content (by weight) than fish.
- fredophile 7y ago
  Omega-3 doesn't refer to just one thing. Most plant sources of omega-3 are ALA which your body needs to convert to EPA and DHA. Your body isn't very good at making DHA so it is useful to get it directly from your diet. Fish are a good source of DHA.
  - hombre_fatal 7y ago
    Fish get it from algae. You could go right to the source and eat algae as part of your standard supplementation.
    - thepete2 7y ago
      cutting out the middle fish
James_Henry 7y ago
I hate to be one of those people demanding sources, but I'm wondering where I can find someone who's carefully weighed the evidence. The article does mention that smaller fish often found canned are lower in the food chain and thus have less mercury, but I would think that you'd have to look carefully at each species, and the sourcing, and the packaging before you could really say the health benefits are worth it.
- victor106 7y ago
  https://www.amazon.com/Omega-Principle-Seafood-Healthier-Planet-ebook/dp/B076NTB4FR https://www.amazon.com/Omega-Principle-Seafood-Healthier-Pla... The author goes into lot of detail. TLDR 1. Eat small fish like Sardines, Mackerel, Anchovies etc 2. Get your omega 3 index https://omegaquant.com/ https://omegaquant.com/ 3. Make sure your omega 3 to omega 6 is good
- clSTophEjUdRanu 7y ago
  https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/fish/ https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/fish/
alexandercrohde 7y ago
It's not boolean. There's a lot of options -- salmon (I personally have salmon sushi at least twice a week), omega-3 supplements, a dozen other healthy foods.
yokaze 7y ago
My understanding is, that while fish consumption is correlated with better health, the supposed effects of omega-3 fats in observational studies are not proven in controlled studies with omega 3 supplements (https://www.cochrane.org/news/new-cochrane-health-evidence-challenges-belief-omega-3-supplements-reduce-risk-heart-disease https://www.cochrane.org/news/new-cochrane-health-evidence-c...)

troydavis 7y ago

Many varieties of tinned fish are very low in mercury, often due to their short lifetimes or shallow depth: https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2014/10/can-eating-the-wrong-fish-put-you-at-higher-risk-for-mercury-exposure/index.htm https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2014/10/can-eat... (For any readers who haven’t tried a great sardine, look for Matiz, La Gondola, any Portuguese brand, or in France, Rödel.)

i386 7y ago
Ortiz sardines is where it is at.

bad_user 7y ago

People get concerned about the toxicity of fish, yet the air they breathe in the polluted city they live it does far more harm than a food can ever do. Not to mention smokers, but the rates of smokers with health concerns about food has been going down, anecdotally speaking. Seafood is very healthy, the populations that eat a lot of seafood are very healthy, the stories about heavy metals or plastics are blown out of proportion and the toxicity claims is not supported by evidence. I'm actually far more concerned about the preservation of wild life, with wild fish populations (such as tuna) going down due to over-consumption. I actually seek farmed fish — the omega 3 content might be lower, but the benefits of omega 3 are probably overblown too. So there might actually be some benefits to the fearmongering, even if irrational ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

tmh88j 7y ago
>People get concerned about the toxicity of fish, yet the air they breathe in the polluted city they live it does far more harm than a food can ever do. I could see this being a possibility for many Asian countries, but I'm skeptical that this would be true for the US and Europe. Do you have any sources?
- lowdose 7y ago
  On windy.com they have several realtime graphics for CO2 pollution and it's cousins.
  - tmh88j 7y ago
    Maybe I wasn't clear, but I was asking for a source regarding the claim that air pollution affects humans more than the food they consume (specifically based on location). That website is just some data of current air pollution.
  - drukenemo 7y ago
    CO2 is not pollution no matter how many times this lie is perpetuated. CO2 is what we breathe out and it’s what plants breathe in.