“Seafood and seafood can be a more environmentally respectful protein option than other foods of animal origin such as veal, pig and chicken. But you have to carefully choose. Not all fish are sustainable. And the solution is more complicated than opting for some species instead of others, because the nutritional value of the fish are affected by a multitude of factors,” said Sofia Quaglia in an article of The New York Times
The young reporter, a specialist in health and environmental journalism, developed a report along with several experts who advised how to distinguish what are the products of the sea that feed and favor the human being. The interviewees are mostly academics of prestigious American universities and important health centers in North America.
“The small fish They are usually an especially good source of omega-3 fatty acid and of essential nutrients such as iron and zinc. When you eat a small fish, you also usually eat skeleton pieces, which increases your calcium intake. In addition, smaller fish reproduce rapidly, so they are usually more abundant and less vulnerable to environmental changes, ”he said Sebastian Heilpernspecialized scientist in sustainability of Cornell University.
In that aspect, the expert clarified: “The largest fish, on the other hand, usually accumulate more pollutants such as mercury and lead. That is because they are usually predators. They eat many smaller fish. Thus, moderate amounts of pollutants in those small fish can accumulate to harmful levels in the largest fish.”
Within that panorama, Heilpern suggests that the healthiest fish to consume are the sardines and anchovies. “They are very, very nutritious food sources and are usually quite productive and capable of supporting all that exploitation to which humans submit them,” he confirmed.
An exception to the rule are farm shrimp, according to the environmental scientist and epidemiologist Kathryn Fiorella. The shrimp cover the entire range of sustainability much more widely than other smaller fish and seafood. Some comply with good environmental standards. But others – cultivated in different types of ponds in places like China, India and Mexico – do not comply. “I really try Do not eat shrimp”, Detailed Cornell expert.
The bivalves such as oysters, scallops and clams are very nutritious and abundant in Omega-3, B-12 and iron. “Consuming mollusks probably has a benefit to the ecosystem,” said Fiorella and pointed out: “They do not have to be fed by aquakers and eliminate pollutants such as nitrogen and water phosphorus and make them substances that are not surrounding substances. They consume phytoplankton, which can help limit the proliferation of harmful algae.
The 2021 classifications confirmed that farm bivalves are among the most sustainable foods from the environmental point of view in general. At present, more than half of the fish consumed in the world is cultivated. This type of production usually causes less carbon emissions that heat the planet than fishing in nature. But sometimes it is done in dense conditions where diseases can easily spread and pollutants and antibiotics can escape rivers and oceans.
“A good part of the time, if you eat a kilo of salmon, more than a kilo of wild fish is needed to produce it,” he said Alice Moorewho manages the Good fish guide in the United Kingdom Marine Conservation Societya non -profit British non -purposes. Foods designed for animals based on cereals and vegetables do not usually provide fish the nutrients they need.
The capture of fish in nature avoids these problems, but fishing vessels can emit a lot of carbon and damage ecosystems. For example, background drag fishing can devastate the seabed and increase the fuel consumption of a ship. Water column fishing, below the surface and above the bottom, avoid that. But often drag wrong species, reproductive females and fish too small. Moore’s conclusion about this type of activity and how it affects the environment defines it in a description: “It is a mines field.”
Image gallery
