3 ms·

Perhaps, given the dire state of tuna supplies and consumers who apparently cannot tell the difference without resorting to testing, we should be encouraging mi

by jlgreco 13y ago

Perhaps, given the dire state of tuna supplies and consumers who apparently cannot tell the difference without resorting to testing, we should be encouraging mislabeling. Insisting on a particular rare fish while another more common fish satisfies you just as well is exceptionally silly. Of course it is near impossible to convince consumers of this, but business owners have apparently figured out a solution themselves. (To keep it safe, the FDA could create lists of fish that may be substituted and labelled as each other.)

dragonwriter 13y ago
> Perhaps, given the dire state of tuna supplies and consumers who apparently cannot tell the difference without resorting to testing, we should be encouraging mislabeling. Yes, because fighting ignorance with lies that cater to it is much better than fighting it with information.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  You could, and should, do both of course. If the FDA sanctioned the practice and published lists of approved fish substitutions then only uninformed consumers would be unaware of the possibility that they were being gouged for cheap fish (you can see that gouging as a reward to restaurants that refuse to serve real tuna, and an informal punishment for consumers who are trying to get tuna). These uninformed consumers are presumably un-reached by your media campaign to cut back on tuna consumption. It also eases the transition from tuna to other fish. I like tuna-salad sandwiches, I eat them a few times a month. I wouldn't know if the tuna in them wasn't real tuna, in fact I hope it isn't. I would have no idea what "escolar salad" is though. Mislabeling allows me to get what I want without unnecessary environmental impact. Also, mislabeling fish is not unprecedented, but done for worse reasons in the past. See Vietnamese catfish: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basa_fish#.22Catfish_war.22_in_the_U.S http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basa_fish#.22Catfish_war.22_in_....
  - dragonwriter 13y ago
    > You could, and should, do both of course. No, you should just use the truth, since the lies combat the truth. If you prevent mislabeling, the rare fish becomes expensive rather than cheap-and-adulterated, the price differences drive lots of the people that think they prefer the rare fish to settle and try the cheaper, less rare, fish, and to the extent that the cheaper fish actually is suitable, people learn and it becomes popular. If there is a risk of this transition happening too slowly to meet some social good (like, preserving the rare fish), you enact appropriate protections to the rare fish (either quotas, taxes, or outright bans) that restrict the supply or drive up the retail price, which accelerates the process of conversion. > It also eases the transition from tuna to other fish. No, it actually delays the conversion of demand by masking the cost and delaying people trying the other fish as itself and learning that it is acceptable.
    - jlgreco 13y ago
      Real tuna already is expensive, but that isn't helping the fish. By the time it becomes expensive enough to actually kill demand, the species will be in terrible shape. You can't rely on supply and demand games to keep a species off the brink of extinction, we've learned this too many times the hard way. > No, it actually delays the conversion of demand by masking the cost and delaying people trying the other fish as itself and learning that it is acceptable. Informed consumers would be opened up to the new cheaper fish. For example, now that I am aware of it (and specifically aware that it is like tuna), I will make an effort to buy escolar in the future.
      - dragonwriter 13y ago
        > Real tuna already is expensive, but that isn't helping the fish. It isn't helping the fish because consumer demand for tuna isn't dropping, in part because consumers are insulated from the actual cost of real tuna by mislabelling; if consumer "tuna" was only real tuna (and thus, the supply was restricted to the supply of real tuna, driving the price of consumer "tuna" way up), there would be more consumer experience with tuna substitutes under their own name (rather than mislabelled as tuna), and the demand would shift to the acceptable substitutes (which clearly exist, otherwise they wouldn't be acceptable mislabelled as tuna.) > For example, now that I am aware of it (and specifically aware that it is like tuna), I will make an effort to buy escolar in the future. But if suppliers make more money selling escolar as "tuna", it will make it that much harder to by escolar as escolar.
hcarvalhoalves 13y ago
This happens with "bacalhau" (norwegian codfish). It's appreciated by the europeans for ages, but overfishing made it prohibitively priced. Now you have 5 or 6 different fish sold under this name at markets, fished on Alaska and China, but they taste all the same so it makes no difference (only on the price). The word "bacalhau" now refers more to the kind of preparation (dried fish) than the species itself. It could be the same with tuna ("tuna" being, any red meat fish with the same consistency and similar taste).
- dsrguru 13y ago
  Except escolar is a lot more toxic than tuna.
GigabyteCoin 13y ago
This idea is particularly interesting to myself considering my vegetarian girlfriend just made me a "Tuna Sandwhich" where the meat was substituted with soaked almonds, which actually tasted quite good and similar to the Tuna I know and love.
- dsr_ 13y ago
  Chickpea salad (onions, celery, mayo) is remarkably similar to tuna salad or chicken salad made with the same additions.
  - stephencanon 13y ago
    I absolutely love chickpea salad (just ate it for dinner, in fact), but it bears essentially no resemblance to either chicken or tuna salad. Both the taste and texture are radically different.
  - reneherse 13y ago
    Almonds, chickpeas? I love them both but they're no substitute if your diet requires a decent amount of protein.
    - GoodIntentions 13y ago
      Pretty sure almonds are nearly the same amount of protein per ounce as tuna..
      - stephencanon 13y ago
        More than everything except bluefin, according to the internet.
        jlgreco 13y ago
        And I am pretty sure that bluefin is never used for tuna salad anyway. It is too expensive.
richardjordan 13y ago
this is NOT a stupid idea
fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
>we should be encouraging mislabeling. Not the explosive diarrhea fish. That's cruel, and wrong. Maybe we should just encourage people to eat the fish we have, but be honest about the label.
jbattle 13y ago
Around Chicago we have problems with Asian carp making their way closer and closer to the great lakes. I've often suggested they be renamed 'river tuna' and our problems will be solved.
- pessimizer 13y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_carp#As_food https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_carp#As_food Kentucky Tuna.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  A good re-branding could probably go a long way towards helping with that sea lamprey issue the Great Lakes have too...

by jlgreco 13y ago

dragonwriter 13y ago

> Perhaps, given the dire state of tuna supplies and consumers who apparently cannot tell the difference without resorting to testing, we should be encouraging mislabeling. Yes, because fighting ignorance with lies that cater to it is much better than fighting it with information.

jlgreco 13y ago
You could, and should, do both of course. If the FDA sanctioned the practice and published lists of approved fish substitutions then only uninformed consumers would be unaware of the possibility that they were being gouged for cheap fish (you can see that gouging as a reward to restaurants that refuse to serve real tuna, and an informal punishment for consumers who are trying to get tuna). These uninformed consumers are presumably un-reached by your media campaign to cut back on tuna consumption. It also eases the transition from tuna to other fish. I like tuna-salad sandwiches, I eat them a few times a month. I wouldn't know if the tuna in them wasn't real tuna, in fact I hope it isn't. I would have no idea what "escolar salad" is though. Mislabeling allows me to get what I want without unnecessary environmental impact. Also, mislabeling fish is not unprecedented, but done for worse reasons in the past. See Vietnamese catfish: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basa_fish#.22Catfish_war.22_in_the_U.S http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basa_fish#.22Catfish_war.22_in_....
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  > You could, and should, do both of course. No, you should just use the truth, since the lies combat the truth. If you prevent mislabeling, the rare fish becomes expensive rather than cheap-and-adulterated, the price differences drive lots of the people that think they prefer the rare fish to settle and try the cheaper, less rare, fish, and to the extent that the cheaper fish actually is suitable, people learn and it becomes popular. If there is a risk of this transition happening too slowly to meet some social good (like, preserving the rare fish), you enact appropriate protections to the rare fish (either quotas, taxes, or outright bans) that restrict the supply or drive up the retail price, which accelerates the process of conversion. > It also eases the transition from tuna to other fish. No, it actually delays the conversion of demand by masking the cost and delaying people trying the other fish as itself and learning that it is acceptable.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    Real tuna already is expensive, but that isn't helping the fish. By the time it becomes expensive enough to actually kill demand, the species will be in terrible shape. You can't rely on supply and demand games to keep a species off the brink of extinction, we've learned this too many times the hard way. > No, it actually delays the conversion of demand by masking the cost and delaying people trying the other fish as itself and learning that it is acceptable. Informed consumers would be opened up to the new cheaper fish. For example, now that I am aware of it (and specifically aware that it is like tuna), I will make an effort to buy escolar in the future.
    - dragonwriter 13y ago
      > Real tuna already is expensive, but that isn't helping the fish. It isn't helping the fish because consumer demand for tuna isn't dropping, in part because consumers are insulated from the actual cost of real tuna by mislabelling; if consumer "tuna" was only real tuna (and thus, the supply was restricted to the supply of real tuna, driving the price of consumer "tuna" way up), there would be more consumer experience with tuna substitutes under their own name (rather than mislabelled as tuna), and the demand would shift to the acceptable substitutes (which clearly exist, otherwise they wouldn't be acceptable mislabelled as tuna.) > For example, now that I am aware of it (and specifically aware that it is like tuna), I will make an effort to buy escolar in the future. But if suppliers make more money selling escolar as "tuna", it will make it that much harder to by escolar as escolar.

hcarvalhoalves 13y ago

This happens with "bacalhau" (norwegian codfish). It's appreciated by the europeans for ages, but overfishing made it prohibitively priced. Now you have 5 or 6 different fish sold under this name at markets, fished on Alaska and China, but they taste all the same so it makes no difference (only on the price). The word "bacalhau" now refers more to the kind of preparation (dried fish) than the species itself. It could be the same with tuna ("tuna" being, any red meat fish with the same consistency and similar taste).

dsrguru 13y ago
Except escolar is a lot more toxic than tuna.

GigabyteCoin 13y ago

This idea is particularly interesting to myself considering my vegetarian girlfriend just made me a "Tuna Sandwhich" where the meat was substituted with soaked almonds, which actually tasted quite good and similar to the Tuna I know and love.

dsr_ 13y ago
Chickpea salad (onions, celery, mayo) is remarkably similar to tuna salad or chicken salad made with the same additions.
- stephencanon 13y ago
  I absolutely love chickpea salad (just ate it for dinner, in fact), but it bears essentially no resemblance to either chicken or tuna salad. Both the taste and texture are radically different.
- reneherse 13y ago
  Almonds, chickpeas? I love them both but they're no substitute if your diet requires a decent amount of protein.
  - GoodIntentions 13y ago
    Pretty sure almonds are nearly the same amount of protein per ounce as tuna..
    - stephencanon 13y ago
      More than everything except bluefin, according to the internet.
      - jlgreco 13y ago
        And I am pretty sure that bluefin is never used for tuna salad anyway. It is too expensive.

richardjordan 13y ago

this is NOT a stupid idea

fnordfnordfnord 13y ago

>we should be encouraging mislabeling. Not the explosive diarrhea fish. That's cruel, and wrong. Maybe we should just encourage people to eat the fish we have, but be honest about the label.

jbattle 13y ago

Around Chicago we have problems with Asian carp making their way closer and closer to the great lakes. I've often suggested they be renamed 'river tuna' and our problems will be solved.

pessimizer 13y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_carp#As_food https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_carp#As_food Kentucky Tuna.
jlgreco 13y ago
A good re-branding could probably go a long way towards helping with that sea lamprey issue the Great Lakes have too...