A title of "..which are sustainable" would be clearer. The article concerns the sustainability of the fish and not the goodness of them as a food. There is for example no mention of the problems of eating catfish farm raised in China (high levels of toxins).
Which Fish: With fish stocks under pressure, which are okay to eat?
21–30 of 99 posts
Re: Which Fish: With fish stocks under pressure, which are okay to eat?
#22Sooo, why is this top link on HN? Am I missing some nifty tech embedded in the site, or is everyone here just interested in fish?
Re: Which Fish: With fish stocks under pressure, which are okay to eat?
#23SeafoodWatch already has a pretty solid iPhone and Android app that does this[1], but I'm all for more options and having raw JSON available. [1] http://www.montereybayaquarium.org/cr/SeafoodWatch/web/sfw_i...
You can also get the same information online here:
http://www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagID=1540 (eco best / worst)
http://www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagID=17694 (health best / worst)
You can even get a pocket guide that goes into your wallet that you can take out whenever you go into a sushi restaurant or fish market. Here in NYC there are a lot of hedge fund managers with serious neurological problems from eating sushi every day for years. They manage billions of dollars in assets but their hands twitch like they have parkinsons.
Re: Which Fish: With fish stocks under pressure, which are okay to eat?
#24A title of "..which are sustainable" would be clearer. The article concerns the sustainability of the fish and not the goodness of them as a food. There is for example no mention of the problems of eating catfish farm raised in China (high levels of toxins).
Yes, this was my impression/confusion exactly. Even seeing "under pressure" at the top, I still thought the list was fish that are safe to eat, in light of or despite pressures.
It would be good to have a second list along side, fish that are safe to eat. Or just one list, safe and sustainable.
Re: Which Fish: With fish stocks under pressure, which are okay to eat?
#25Can't eat beef because of mad cow and the heavy medication used in breeding; same goes for pigs and chicken and all other mass-produced meat. On top of that you have the question of animal cruelty and the questionable necessity of killing animals to eat them attached to it. Plus it is generally not that healthy to eat it all the time and you shouldn't eat meat more than once or twice a week or so.
Can't eat fish for all the mercury and lots of them being close to extinction and it kills dolphins and damages the oceans.
Can't eat eggs or milk, again for cruelty and various possible diseases or other contamination.
And vegetables and fruits? Well, practically all of the mass produced ones never EVER saw any soil or real sunlight but artificial gel to grow on and were picked by poor and heavily underpaid and downright exploited people from (and typically in) poor countries under inhuman conditions and bought by the rich nations for next to nothing. (here is to you, militant vegetarians!) On top of that they are heavily laden with chemicals of all sorts and chances are when you get to buy them, they are far from being fresh.
Plus for practically all the food mentioned above: production heavily, grossly outranks what actually ends up being bought... so we just dump it, burn it or do FSM-knows what with it. We certainly do NOT give it to the starving people in this world because it would cost too much.
And if you go organic and local farmers only? Apart from few choices, you have even less inspections and regulations to protect your safety because you don't know what they are selling, what it grew on and how clean and safe to eat it is. And some of it just taste absolutely horrible.
This is just pathetic... the whole food industry, front to back, top to bottom. If you go by the warnings on what to avoid, what is dangerous for your health and what is immoral and wrong to eat, we better come up with a way to get by on nothing but sunlight and water quickly.
But then again, fresh water supplies are currently being bought up by Big-Food to make lots and lots of money and water in bottles is very often not as clean as one might hope and certain chemicals from plastic bottles could basically work like estrogen in your body.
Re: Which Fish: With fish stocks under pressure, which are okay to eat?
#26"Which are okay to eat?" implies how much mercury is present, but it seems this question is from an environmental perspective.
I think that would make an interesting poll... how many people read it as "Which are okay to eat - for our planet" and how many read it as "Which are okay to eat - for my health"?
for my health, until I scrolled to the bottom.
Re: Which Fish: With fish stocks under pressure, which are okay to eat?
#27I read this as, "with the price of equities in the fish market dropping, which fish are safe to eat, presumably because those companies will be more lax with health codes?"
I was way off.
Re: Which Fish: With fish stocks under pressure, which are okay to eat?
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The best option that should be on this list is to not eat any fish at all. Your logic fails for the following reasons: - not all fish are from the ocean - not all species of fish are in fact overfished. There is no Sardine crisis. - Fish consumption is linked to increased IQ including in babies and children - Piscetarians have lower rates of heart disease than both vegans and occasional meat eaters - Promoting abst…
The person you responded to stated a belief that environmental considerations were the most important. The website that started these conversations has listed only ocean fish. Three of the five points you listed have nothing to do with the environment. Your statement about jeremymims logic is out of place. There are negative environmental impacts from ocean fish farms. I don't enough about non-ocean fish farms to com…
> The website that started these conversations has listed only ocean fish
http://whichfish.org/detail/catfish_us_farmed.html http://whichfish.org/detail/crayfish_us.html http://whichfish.org/detail/trout_rainbow_trout.html http://whichfish.org/detail/tilapia_organic_or_closed_produc...
Re: Which Fish: With fish stocks under pressure, which are okay to eat?
#29Radioactive Japanese Fish are "okay to eat".
Re: Which Fish: With fish stocks under pressure, which are okay to eat?
#30This is a silly list. Not because fish aren't important, but because there's no way to take action on this list. Studies have shown that a huge amount of fish is mislabelled. Yes, pick up a piece of xxxx from a seafood market and the odds are that it's not xxxx. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/27/science/earth/27fish.html Consumers have no effective way to verify what they're eating. This is a situation where there is…
That's a very interesting link, but saying that we might as well not bother because there's labeling issues is rather overstating the problem. The perfect is the enemy of the good.
Did you even read the lede?
>Scientists aiming their gene sequencers at commercial seafood are discovering rampant labeling fraud in supermarket coolers and restaurant tables: cheap fish is often substituted for expensive fillets, and overfished species are passed off as fish whose numbers are plentiful.
The link states that overfished species are being intentionally mis-labelled. I would say that, yes, we might as well not bother if the seafood industry is going to pull these kind of shenanigans, absent some sort of regulation from the government (an unpopular sentiment here).