View Single Post
05-08-2013, 08:57 PM
The Seldom Seen Kid
Join Date: Mar 2004
Originally Posted by
Meh, I don't really have a horse in this race (not a big seafood eater other than the occasional generously battered walleye that I'll fish myself).
Can't say I've done a lot of research on the subject, although I will say this. The first link you posted calls Tilapia a fad fish, one of many that comes along every few years. But when it comes to dieting and nutrition, it seems like there are also a lot of fads being pushed (the latest being this gluten free/wheat belly nonsense) that seem to be perpetuated by unscientific sources, including blogs like this one. So I'm basically saying that I'm too ignorant on the subject to outright disagree with you, but I tend to default to skepticism when I read claims like this one and the blog you posted didn't really do anything to convince me the other way (it was basically just a longer post articulating what you're already telling us without a ton of extra info).
I did do some research (full disclosure, it started on Wikipedia) that led me to this link though, which seems more reputable:
Long story short, those guys seem to think Tilapia is an ok fish to eat.
Also, as others have pointed out, a lot of stuff we pull from the water has a diet that includes waste and fecal matter, but it doesn't stop us from eating it. The stuff about Tilapia makes me think that this started because someone who didn't know anything about fish (i.e. when they're still alive) stumbled on to an unpleasant truth and is now sharing it like they've discovered something alarming that the fish farmers didn't want us to know about.
...all of this being said, if I was ever ordering fish in a restaurant I'd almost certainly go with the halibut or the salmon. You're more likely to get a good meal that way anyways and salmon as far as I know is quite nutritious. And if you're looking for a VERY good meal and have some cash to spend, visit the Hardware Grill and order the Sea Bass. I went with some family members recently and tried some of my sister's plate and it was outstanding.
I am not going to get into the debate on the quality of Tilapia although you do make some valid points. The beneficial effects of omega 3's are well documented. Its a shame however that fish are so contaminated. Rarely is there a mention of the heavy metal issue which is a very serious concern with any medium to large fish. Also no mention of the massive radioactive toxicity of the Pacific ocean...eating fish with heavy metal toxicity is bad enough but adding in Cesium 137 makes fish from the Pacific a very unhealthy and uneducated option. The sites you quoted make no mention of these unfortunate realities.
Here is a study done on the existing and projected effects of Fukushima after approx 1 year of radioactive leakage into the ocean. I recommend watching the video as opposed to reading the paper if time is an issue.
The study falls short of the timeline and the actual damage being caused because it hasn't taken into consideration the fact that Fukushima is still leaking into the ocean more than 2 years after the initial damage. Their projection has to be considered extremely conservative. This issue far exceeds the decision whether or not to eat fish from the pacific...its an environmental disaster of a magnitude which makes it impossible to predict the impact on people in the Northern Hemisphere. Very sad and the general media blackout (when is the last time you saw a report on TV regarding Fukushima?) is something that should concern everybody. Due to the lack of coverage it is assumed by most of the public that this just isn't an issue anymore.
Sadly it is and it will remain an issue (media reports or not) for decades.
Not trying to steer a thread on restaurants off course but if the conversation revolves around eating fish (wild and farmed) then these elements have to be considered IMO. This debate could just be centered around the issues of farmed fish but the reality is that there are more pressing concerns regarding Pacific fish in general.
Regarding the other part of your post...I would very much like to see this so called scientific research you speak of that invalidates the research done on the issues with gluten/wheat. Any study on the inflammatory effects of food would be faulty without mentioning the specific role of wheat, gluten and grains in general. I take issue with your representation of this research as being nothing more than a fad.
I have yet to see anything, that wasn't industry supported in some way, trumpeting the health benefits of wheat. If you have something to share I would really enjoy seeing it.
Last edited by guymez: 05-08-2013 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by guymez