As published in Owen Sound & Grey Bruce Life – September 2007.

I’m a big fan of eating fish – it’s a great source of omega 3 fatty acids (important in the prevention of heart disease, mood and hormonal imbalances, and cancer), an easier-to-digest form of animal protein, and I grew up on it so I love the taste. But there is so much controversy these days about the contaminants in our water and therefore seafood, it’s hard to know which way to lean. Great healthy nutrients but with extras like mercury, persistent chemicals, and dioxins, do the benefits outweigh the contaminants?

So what’s the problem with all these chemicals anyways? It’s all about something called bioaccumulation. We dump chemicals from sewage, industry, and fallout from air into water systems. We have for a long time, with the argument that ‘dilution is the solution to pollution’. This worked for a while, but the lifespan of some of these chemicals is longer than the planet, and we’re making our waterways into a toxic swimming pool – or fish pond.

These toxins behave in fish like they do in most other organisms; they either have to be processed or stored in fat, which happens more often than not. So algae and plankton swim around and drink up the toxins with their food. Small fish eat lots of these little guys; storing the toxins from all their food in their own fat. Bigger fish eat them, accumulating more toxins, and so on up the food chain. By the time you get to the big fish like shark and tuna, there are loads of chemicals build up in their system – hence bioaccumulation.

The general eating guideline for good health is two servings of fish weekly. But by picking the less toxic option of these two servings, we can increase the positive to negative ratio of our fish meal. There are guidelines set by places like the Environmental Working Group and The Green Guide which can help you to make better choices when eating seafood. These guidelines are great for oceanic and typical American species, but clients have been asking me about eating fish caught locally. My initial thoughts were – if they were caught here they are at least upstream of our larger port cities, they will be fresh, and fished in a sustainable manner. Then I came across a report on the state of the fish in the Great Lakes, and I learned something different. This report (Up to the Gills by Environmental Defense) analyses the Ministry of Environment’s Guide to Eating Ontario Sport Fish, and shows by species and size how many fish it is safe to eat in a month. It shows that some fish caught in our lakes are more toxic than ocean species. It does show however which species at which sizes are safe in the 8/month range, so again you can choose the healthier option. Use a combination of these guides to choose the species that are right for your health.

Do the benefits outweigh the risk? According to a report in the October 18 2006 issue of JAMA, they still do. We still get such great health benefits it’s worth the risk of toxins. If you are doing some type of a ‘detox’ or trying to conceive though, take the time to do a little of your own research and determine what risks you are willing to take.

So after all this, I still personally recommend fish. Especially as an alternate to seven nights of red meat. Here are some general rules to remember when selecting fish.
o Smaller, younger fish lower on the food chain, contain less toxins.
o Choose wild fish over farmed, as they eat their traditional diet, are not surrounded by disease, and do not live cooped in a pen.
o Choose fish like salmon, anchovies, and sardines for their high omega 3 content.
o Children and women of child-bearing age should be extra cautious of picking the right fish. Kids have a small body mass to deal with adult-size toxin levels. Pregnant woman can pass their toxic load on to their fetus – head the warnings about fish like tuna to reduce your exposure.

Find all references under Worth Reading - fish info.

This entry is filed under Articles by Align. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.