• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Farmed vs. Wild Salmon


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 19,074 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 08 January 2006 - 05:17 PM


I know a favorite food of many LE practioners here at Imminst is salmon. Does anyone have any preference of farmed vs. wild salmon? I eat it about once a month, but I was thinking of increasing that a bit because of it's good nutritional profile. How worried are you about contaminants? I read this article and thought 1 or 2 servings per month seems awefully low. It is hard to believe there are that many toxins in farmed salmon. They reccomend no more than 8 servings of wild salmon per month.

The researchers applied U.S. Environmental Protection Agency fish consumption advisory methods to determine consumption recommendations. Farmed salmon purchased for the study from supermarkets in Frankfurt, Edinburgh, Paris, London, Oslo, Boston, San Francisco, and Toronto triggered consumption recommendations of one-half to one meal of salmon per month. (A meal is defined as 8 oz. of uncooked meat.) Farmed salmon from supermarkets in Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., Seattle, Chicago, New York and Vancouver triggered a recommendation of no more than two salmon meals per month. Farmed salmon from Denver and New Orleans supermarkets both triggered a consumption recommendation of two meals of salmon per month. With very few exceptions, farmed salmon samples tested significantly exceeded the containment levels of wild salmon, which could be consumed at levels as high as eight meals per month.



#2 Shepard

  • Member, Director, Moderator
  • 6,360 posts
  • 932
  • Location:Auburn, AL

Posted 08 January 2006 - 06:21 PM

Wild salmon are your best bet, particularly Alaskan.

#3 eternaltraveler

  • Guest, Guardian
  • 6,471 posts
  • 155
  • Location:Silicon Valley, CA

Posted 08 January 2006 - 07:53 PM

I eat lots of salmon. Wild costs more but is certainly worth it. If you can't eat that much you should take a high quality fish oil supplement.

sponsored ad

  • Advert

#4 Pablo M

  • Guest
  • 636 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Sacramento

Posted 08 January 2006 - 09:36 PM

I eat organic chicken and take fish oil. Fish, even salmon, is actually pretty low in the EFAs EPA and DHA: http://www.thepaleod...ls/omega3.shtml. Plus, most people overcook salmon, damaging the volatile fats and rendering them less useful at best. With molecularly distilled fish oil, there are no contaminants and I can be sure to get my EPA/DHA daily.

#5 xanadu

  • Guest
  • 1,917 posts
  • 8

Posted 08 January 2006 - 11:58 PM

I do both, I eat a couple oz a day of salmon and I take fish oil capsules. I just never seem to tire of salmon. I figure that means I need what's in it. I noticed that sometimes cottage cheese tastes great. That's probably when I need more calcium.

#6 chubtoad

  • Life Member
  • 976 posts
  • 5
  • Location:Illinois

Posted 09 January 2006 - 03:46 AM

most people overcook salmon


I eat tuna and salmon sashimi fairly often (3-4 times a week). What are your opinions on the nutrition of eating the fish raw?

#7 eternaltraveler

  • Guest, Guardian
  • 6,471 posts
  • 155
  • Location:Silicon Valley, CA

Posted 09 January 2006 - 05:54 AM

I eat tuna and salmon sashimi fairly often (3-4 times a week). What are your opinions on the nutrition of eating the fish raw?


tuna isn't as fatty and has more containments as it's further along the food chain. It does taste damn good though [lol]

#8 Mind

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 19,074 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 09 January 2006 - 07:23 AM

Also, tuna is really cheap. Too bad it has more contaminants. I eat it about once a week.

#9 xanadu

  • Guest
  • 1,917 posts
  • 8

Posted 09 January 2006 - 05:55 PM

And what's this business about farmed salmon being contaminated? The farmer has total control over the fish's diet. Are they feeding the fish contaminated food? Are they building ponds on contaminated soil?

#10 kevink

  • Guest
  • 184 posts
  • 1

Posted 09 January 2006 - 06:43 PM

And what's this business about farmed salmon being contaminated? The farmer has total control over the fish's diet. Are they feeding the fish contaminated food? Are they building ponds on contaminated soil?


I don't eat seafood at all. But if you must - farmed fish is pretty much garbage.

The other problem is that I've seen a couple of TV news stories about the amount of "wild salmon" for sale cannot be possible given the supply. They go and buy "wild salmon" from several fish markets and almost all turn out to be "farmed salmon". Considering the price of "wild salmon" is much higher than farmed, people are lying all the way from the suppliers down to the local fish market.

You might want to check out Vital Choice seafood:
http://www.vitalchoice.com/purity.cfm


And with farmed imports...Enforcement of the regulations against high antibiotic use seems to not be enforced. That means the farmers are using everything under the sun in harmful amounts so they can maximize profits.

Here's a few quotes from different sources...

At first the farmers tried to recreate their natural diet, feeding them lots of fish. But salmon can eat ten times their body weight, which meant they were killing 10 pounds of fish, or some substantial fraction, for every pound of product. So fish feed manufacturers started adding vegetable proteins, such as soy, canola, corn gluten, animal by-products, including poultry and feathers, and vitamin and mineral supplements. Fish feed currently consists of only 35 percent fish, and falling. Like herbivorous cattle fed meat, carnivorous fish are now largely vegetarians. The result is a blander fish, which, according to Swecker, is just what the public wants. "American consumers generally prefer bland white fish as a major preference," he says. "It’s not so ‘fishy.’"

It also has less nutritional value, says Frank Hu, the lead author of the 16-year study of omega-3 and cardiac disease that appeared in April’s Journal of the American Medical Association. Hu is assistant professor of nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health. "Farm fish usually doesn’t contain much omega-3 at all. Only fish from the oceans contain many omega-3 essential fatty acids." Essential fatty acids are not produced by the body and must be absorbed through food. The April study did not look at farmed fish, although Hu says "previous studies have documented that."

"Depending on what kind of food they’re eating, it will store in the body as omega-3 or [its counterpart,] omega-6. Fish in farms eat mostly corn or soybean and will store omega-6 in the body. Wild fish and algae will be stored as omega-3."


Domestic bird waste is widely used as food and fertilizer in fish farming and in agriculture, and infected poultry are known to excrete virus particles in their feces. The use of untreated chicken feces in fish farming was recently described by the United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organization as a "high risk production practice." Russian fish farms have begun using chicken feces as fish farm fertilizer, and this practice is also employed in Eastern Europe on agricultural land. The Government of Vietnam has warned its population against the risk of dumping tons of chicken feces into rivers and lakes as fish food.


Fish Farms also contribute to water pollution—farmers cram thousands of fish into tiny enclosures, and the accumulation of feces and other waste means that aquafarms are little more than open sewers. The massive amounts of feces, fish carcasses, and antibiotic-laced fish food that settle below fish farm cages have actually caused the ocean floor to rot in some areas, and the sludge of fish feces and other debris can be toxic for already-strained ocean ecosystems.


A study of more than two metric tons of North American, South American and European salmon has shown that PCBs and other environmental toxins are present at higher levels in farm-raised salmon than in their wild counterparts. Researchers at Indiana University and five other research centers say increased toxin levels in farm-raised salmon may pose health risks to people who eat the economically important fish. Their study, which appears in this week's (Jan. 9) Science, is the most comprehensive analysis to date of salmon toxin concentrations.


Salmon reared in cages around Scotland are contaminated with high levels of toxic chemicals suspected of causing cancer, according to an authoritative new study. The revelation has already sparked a call for consumers to boycott farmed fish.
Experts from universities in Britain and Belgium have analysed salmon from Scottish fish farms and discovered that they contain a wide range of dangerous industrial pollutants. These include poisonous pesticides, cancer-causing PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls) and "gender-bender" chemicals known as PBDEs (polybrominated diphenyl ethers) which disrupt hormones.


In West Virginia and Maryland, scientists have recently discovered that male fish are growing ovaries; they suspect that this freakish deformity is the result of factory-farm run-off from drug-laden chicken feces.


Like I said, not my issue since I don't eat fish, but hopefully this helps someone else. I use organic chicken and turkey and fish oil caps, water filters and air purifiers...and I'm probably still getting poisoned because we've done such an idiot's job destroying our planet.
  • like x 1

#11 Mind

  • Topic Starter
  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 19,074 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 09 January 2006 - 07:08 PM

Reducing contaminents in their food intake is a priority among most immortalists. I know the odds of getting a disease like cancer is higher with contaminated food, however, the average american has a really crappy diet filled with sugar, salt, fat, hormones, and carcinogenic chemicals yet the average lifespan is 75 to 80. That's pretty good all things considered. Therefore I have made adjustments to my diet to reduce the "bad stuff" but I haven't gone totally organic. Maybe I will someday when I have more money.

#12 kevink

  • Guest
  • 184 posts
  • 1

Posted 09 January 2006 - 08:32 PM

...yet the average lifespan is 75 to 80. That's pretty good all things considered.


Is that right? I dunno. I suspect the number of mentally sound 75-80 year old males is very small. They may be "alive", but as anyone who’s seen senile dementia or Alzheimer’s up close...you're better off dead.

Don't forget - the age for males (as your picture suggests) is lower than for females.

Nothing beats that feeling of being on a conveyor belt; seemingly speeding up the longer you're on it. Reminds me of how they force the cows along the processing line...300 slaughtered every hour at a single "processing plant". [:o]

You're right though - we do what we can with the information and resources we have.

#13 REGIMEN

  • Guest
  • 570 posts
  • -1

Posted 10 January 2006 - 01:37 PM

1) Farmed fish/salmon are not, as shared in kevink's post, fed the marine algae that is the source of wild salmon's omega-3 content.

2)For lowest mercury-tainted salmon, Wild Sockeye is it. Check your LEF magazine from a few months ago, they have a chart with test results for a few dozen seafood species.

3)I came across this place(www.vitalchoice.com) recently and started dreaming of having slabs of wild sockeye, fresh-frozen berries, and salmon roe arriving at my door every other week. Just a matter of affordability, now.

4)As far as preparation, sashimi, if up to grade IMO, is the best way to have your fish. If you're to heat it, just steam it for a few minutes; if it's salmon then you'll notice a "cream" start to seep to the surface during this process which is just the fats starting to leach out which means you've overdone it but only minorly. Try fileting the thick section of a filet in half and steam that for two minutes with some grapeseed or olve oil drizzled over it and fresh rosemary...my particular favorite. If you're unsure of your steaming abilities, then try citrus marinating as you would for ceviche. Strips or diced, the fish should be covered/mixed with the juice of lemons and/or limes for 15-90 minutes, depending how "done" you like it. You'll notice that if a piece is opened to see the center sometime during the marinating time that the "outside" flesh has a "cooked" look to it(a whitening: the color difference between a raw magenta tuna filet and when it is cooked and has the color of canned tuna). Yet, this "citrus cooked" fish will keep a much softer texture than if heated. Fresh chopped herbs mixed in with the fish and citrus juice makes for some delicious and simple recipes.


Not much science in there. Didn't check www.vitalchoices.com's source of their fish yet. The pictures look scrumptious. That ~should be enough. But I know it isn't... :)

Edited by liplex, 10 January 2006 - 01:54 PM.


#14 Pablo M

  • Guest
  • 636 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Sacramento

Posted 11 January 2006 - 02:54 AM

tuna isn't as fatty and has more containments as it's further along the food chain.  It does taste damn good though [lol]

Yeah, that's what I've read as well. Interestingly, Udo Erasmus (author of Fats That Heal, Fats That Kill, stated that he prefers to get his EPA/DHA from tuna sashimi. But I think his recommendations and products are basically garbage anyway.

The other problem is that I've seen a couple of TV news stories about the amount of "wild salmon" for sale cannot be possible given the supply.

The New York Times had an investigative piece which tested levels of astaxanthin and backed this statement up. The salmon fishing season doesn't last all year, and yet it is being sold year-round. Something doesn't add up.

Reducing contaminents in their food intake is a priority among most immortalists. I know the odds of getting a disease like cancer is higher with contaminated food, however, the average american has a really crappy diet filled with sugar, salt, fat, hormones, and carcinogenic chemicals yet the average lifespan is 75 to 80. That's pretty good all things considered. Therefore I have made adjustments to my diet to reduce the "bad stuff" but I haven't gone totally organic. Maybe I will someday when I have more money.

The more I clean up my diet, the more I want to clean it up. Soon I will be living in a hermetically sealed room surviving on a nutrient drip.

#15 Paul Idol

  • Guest Paul Idol
  • 126 posts
  • 1
  • Location:New York City

Posted 12 January 2006 - 03:10 PM

Farmed salmon is toxic swill, but as noted, salmon sold as wild isn't always wild. Here in NYC, the NY Times tested a bunch of supposedly wild salmons and found only one that wasn't farmed.

Unfortunately, the Vital Choice stuff I tried awhile back tasted pretty nasty IMO. OTOH, YMMV.

The problem with taking fish oil supplements is that even in the presence of adequate E, any EPA and DHA taken without adequate vitamin A (real preformed A, not beta carotene) elevates lipid peroxide levels. OTOH, a clean, high-vitamin cod liver oil is a vastly superior source of omega 3s because depending on which study you look at, CCLO either actually depresses lipid peroxide levels or at least doesn't elevate them.

#16 Pablo M

  • Guest
  • 636 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Sacramento

Posted 13 January 2006 - 05:00 AM

The problem with taking fish oil supplements is that even in the presence of adequate E, any EPA and DHA taken without adequate vitamin A (real preformed A, not beta carotene) elevates lipid peroxide levels.  OTOH, a clean, high-vitamin cod liver oil is a vastly superior source of omega 3s because depending on which study you look at, CCLO either actually depresses lipid peroxide levels or at least doesn't elevate them.

Interesting. I've been looking for a source of vitamin A as well as my diet does not include any food that are fortified with it. And the vitamin D won't hurt either.

What is you opinion on a high quality fish (not cod) oil, taken with a bevy of antioxidant supplements? That is what I currently do.

#17 rfarris

  • Guest
  • 462 posts
  • 7
  • Location:32° 56' 26" 117° 01' 22"

Posted 13 January 2006 - 04:42 PM

I'm taking Mera's Salmon Essentials as well as LEF Super EPA/DHA. Those are both concentrated fish oils. I'm considering adding an unconcentrated fish oil. What would you suggest? Cod oil, or otherwise.

#18 Paul Idol

  • Guest Paul Idol
  • 126 posts
  • 1
  • Location:New York City

Posted 13 January 2006 - 09:00 PM

The problem with taking fish oil supplements is that even in the presence of adequate E, any EPA and DHA taken without adequate vitamin A (real preformed A, not beta carotene) elevates lipid peroxide levels.  OTOH, a clean, high-vitamin cod liver oil is a vastly superior source of omega 3s because depending on which study you look at, CCLO either actually depresses lipid peroxide levels or at least doesn't elevate them.

Interesting. I've been looking for a source of vitamin A as well as my diet does not include any food that are fortified with it. And the vitamin D won't hurt either.

What is you opinion on a high quality fish (not cod) oil, taken with a bevy of antioxidant supplements? That is what I currently do.


Depends on what antioxidants you're taking. Different ones have different functions in the body, and both sufficient E and A are required to prevent PUFA oils from raising lipid peroxide levels. I take a bunch of different antioxidants too, but I make sure to get plenty of A and D. Here's an excerpt from an excellent article a friend of mine wrote which touches on the subject.

While antioxidants protect against lipid peroxidation, consumption of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) raises lipid peroxides. PUFA levels can be low on a vegetarian diet if oils like olive oil or saturated coconut oil are staples, but cod liver oil, an animal product, is the only polyunsaturated oil that has been shown to provide essential fatty acids without raising lipid peroxide levels.

Polyunsaturated plant oils rich in essential fatty acids such as soybean oil,52 corn oil53 and the omega-3-rich perilla oil54 all raise lipid peroxide levels. It is not only heated polyunsaturated oils that raise lipid peroxides. Even fresh, unoxidized perilla oil stored at –20C and fresh, unoxidized, purified DHA and EPA—the omega-3 PUFAs found in fish oil and cod liver oil,—stored at –80C, mixed into the diets of rats immediately before feeding, raised lipid peroxide levels in tissues considerably—even when rats were fed adequate vitamin E.54

Cod liver oil, on the other hand, has been shown to inhibit lipid peroxidation. One study found that cod liver oil depressed drug-induced lipid peroxidation in mice under the same conditions by which soybean oil increased lipid peroxidation.52 Another study found that feeding cod liver oil entirely abolished the increased level of lipid peroxidation found in diabetic rats.55 In both studies, the depression of lipid peroxidation was related to a sparing effect on glutathione peroxidase activity, which was also the case in rats saved from a lethal dose of dioxin by vitamin A supplementation, suggesting that the protective effect of cod liver oil is due to its high vitamin A content.

And the relevant citations.

52. Ohtake, et al., "Effects of dietary lipids on daunomycin-induced nephropathy in mice: comparison between cod liver oil and soybean oil," Lipids, Vol. 37 No. 4 (2002) 359-366.

53. Diniz, et al., "Diets rich in saturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids: metabolic shifting and cardiac health," Nutrition, 200 (2004) 230-234. ff

54. Saito and Kubo, "Relationship between tissue lipid peroxidation and peroxidizability index after a-linolenic, eicosapentaenoic, or docosahexaenoic acid intake in rats," British Journal of Nutrition, 89 (2003) 19-28.

55. Hunkar, et al., "Effects of cod liver oil on tissue antioxidant pathways in normal and streptozotocin- diabetic rats," Cell Biochem Funct. Vol. 20 No. 4 (2002) 297-302.

Unless you have some specific reason for avoiding high-vitamin CLO, I'd recommend CLO over fish oil.

#19 Paul Idol

  • Guest Paul Idol
  • 126 posts
  • 1
  • Location:New York City

Posted 13 January 2006 - 09:03 PM

I'm taking Mera's Salmon Essentials as well as LEF Super EPA/DHA. Those are both concentrated fish oils. I'm considering adding an unconcentrated fish oil. What would you suggest? Cod oil, or otherwise.


I'd either add real (not synthetic analog) preformed A or replace those with high-vitamin CLO.

#20 SeekingSerenity

  • Guest
  • 61 posts
  • 3
  • Location:United States

Posted 03 September 2013 - 04:18 AM

Farmed salmon is toxic swill, but as noted, salmon sold as wild isn't always wild. Here in NYC, the NY Times tested a bunch of supposedly wild salmons and found only one that wasn't farmed.

Unfortunately, the Vital Choice stuff I tried awhile back tasted pretty nasty IMO. OTOH, YMMV.

The problem with taking fish oil supplements is that even in the presence of adequate E, any EPA and DHA taken without adequate vitamin A (real preformed A, not beta carotene) elevates lipid peroxide levels. OTOH, a clean, high-vitamin cod liver oil is a vastly superior source of omega 3s because depending on which study you look at, CCLO either actually depresses lipid peroxide levels or at least doesn't elevate them.



But the Vital Choice salmon oil does indeed have high levels of preformed vitamin A. Below is the information for one serving:

Amount Per Serving Calories 30 Calories from Fat 30 % Daily Value* Total Fat 3g 5% Saturated Fat .5 3% Trans Fat 0g Cholesterol 30mg 10% Sodium 0g Total Carbohydrate 0g Dietary Fiber 0g Sugars 0g Protein 0g Total Omega-3s 600mg
EPA 240mg
DHA 220mg
Vitamin A 1440 IU (7% of Daily Value)
Vitamin D 430 IU (86% of Daily Value)
* Percent Daily Values are based on a 2,000 calorie diet. Your daily values may be higher or lower depending on your calorie needs.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users