sunrat Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 More from mercola.com - Last year, Oceana collected more than 1,200 seafood samples from 674 retail outlets in 21 states, which were then genetically tested to determine if they were honestly labeled.As it turned out, the vast majority of the fish were not at all what they were claimed to be... Overall, a full one-third (33 percent) of the fish samples were mislabeled -- substituted for cheaper, less desirable, and/or more readily available fish varieties.7 The results showed: Mislabeling was found in 27 of the 46 fish types tested (59 percent) 87 percent of fish sold as snapper was actually some other type of fish 59 percent of tuna was some other type of fish 84 percent of “white tuna” sold in sushi venues was actually escolar, a fish associated with acute and serious digestive effects if you eat just a couple of ounces Grouper, halibut, and red snapper were sometimes substituted with king mackerel and tile fish, two types of fish the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advises pregnant women and other sensitive groups to avoid due to high mercury content http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/11/12/shrimp-mislabeling.aspx?e_cid=20141112Z3_DNL_art_2&utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art2&utm_campaign=20141112Z3&et_cid=DM60151&et_rid=724881392 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V.T. Eric Layton Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 There was an article in the paper last week stating that 60% of the shrimp labeled as "Gulf Caught" (Gulf of Mexico, that is) in local fish markets and grocery stores were shown to actually be the cheaper (wholesale) farm raised shrimp from China. BIG TO-DO happening over hear about that news right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LilBambi Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Whatever happened to Truth in Advertising, eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V.T. Eric Layton Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Sharks have balls? I didn't know that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frapper Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 Sharks have balls? I didn't know that. Probably. There are none in D.C. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LilBambi Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Sigh.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V.T. Eric Layton Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 that is, balls scooped out of shark meat Ah. Clarification appreciated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunrat Posted November 14, 2014 Author Share Posted November 14, 2014 Probably more like random fish offcuts ground, mashed with added emulsifiers, stabilizers, preservatives and fillers then reshaped into balls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V.T. Eric Layton Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 So, the bottom line here is if you really want fish, go catch it yourself. Then you'll know for sure what it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cluttermagnet Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 There are strategies... for example, if you buy Alaska Sockeye salmon, it if far more likely to be the genuine item. That industry is pretty closely regulated by the state of Alaska, and they have made it illegal to farm that particular variety of Salmon. The packaging says "Wild Caught" and I tend to actually believe that. I'm also encouraged to see how many local supermarkets here are honest enough to identify which of their offerings are farmed. The issue of mercury is important, however. Salmon can indeed contain mercury. The strategy there: (1.) Limit dietary intake- once a week or less should be 'OK' (2.) Eat ocean fish with strawberries. According to Mike Adams (www.naturalnews.com), strawberries are highly absorbing of mercury when eaten with fish that may contain mercury. Think of them as 'the antidote'. (3.) Consult an online 'mercury in fish' chart, and memorize the thing. It turns out that a goodly number of species pose a much lower risk of mercury. I carry a custom wallet card I made up with a listing of those 'safer' varieties. Fish and poultry are still a better choice than most meat, these days... Above all, eat a good and assorted variety of foods. Folks who focused on canned tuna for years are paying a high price today. Yeah, it was a good buy, but... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crp Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 sardines - good enough for whales , good enough for me. Though keep portion control in mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunrat Posted December 2, 2014 Author Share Posted December 2, 2014 Sardines are one of the best fish to eat as far as nutrients and low mercury level go. Mercury builds up over time and up the food chain, so the longer living, pelagic top predators such as tuna and spanish mackerel will have high levels. Smaller mackerel such as bonito are much safer. Wild caught Alaskan salmon is highly recommended but good luck finding any in Australia. Then you Muricans don't get wild barramundi either which is my favourite. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crp Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 hey, don't forget the iron sardines have. . .. ... from the lead soldering of the special sardine pull tab cans Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.