The consumption of fish and seafood is a contentious issue at the best of times; even vegetarians do sometimes eat fish due to both the fact that fish seem further removed [than mammals] from our idea of sentient beings, and also because we know that Essential Fatty Acids (EFAs) are needed for human health. But I think there are some very real health and ethical reasons to completely stop eating fish and other seafood right now, particularly for people who do actually eat fish regularly.
Why? Well, because the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico is a huge disaster that will have a long-term effect on the environment.
Even if the well is successfully closed soon there is still the issue of the remaining pollution and its impact on sea-living species (and inevitably on human health). We will have a significant clean-up job on our hands, and the pollution will remain for some time.
Obviously the US government will not allow fishing in the water that is being directly affected by the oil spill, but that does not mean that we are ‘off the hook’ so to speak.
We have two serious issues to examine when we decide whether we are comfortable eating fish and shellfish: firstly what types of toxins could find their way into seafood, and secondly what would be the effects of overfishing in the remaining good fishing locations to make up for the shortfall in the supply of fish?
In terms of toxins, we have a number of different substances polluting oil affected waters which have the ability to build up in fish and shellfish. Firstly we have crude oil and secondly we have the dispersant being used, currently Corexit 9500. Corexit 9500 is a highly poisonous substance, roughly four times more poisonous than oil. Crude oil contains both mercury and lead, which are highly poisonous heavy metals. Crude oil also includes benzene, toluene and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), all of which have been recognised as causing cancer. Research is being conducted as to whether PAH can accumulate in fish, but at the very least it has been shown that it does accumulate in shellfish.
Heavy metals (such as mercury and lead) dispersed in water accumulates in the bodies of fish as the water is filtered through the fish’s respiratory system. Additionally predatory fish tend to eat other fish, resulting in a greater heavy metal load. By the time a larger fish, prized by humans as a tasty morsel, is caught and sold as human food the heavy metals have been recycled and accumulated many times over.
Mercury results in degenerative illnesses (particularly targeting the brain) in humans and crosses the placenta in pregnant mothers. While mercury will cause degeneration of health in adults, it is significantly more concentrated when consumed by children or accumulated in a foetus. Mercury is suspected to be a leading cause of autism, Down’s syndrome and other intellectual impairments.
Lead affects the nervous system, brain, kidneys and reproductive system. In children it has been associated with low IQ, slow growth and hearing defects. In laboratory tests on animals, no minimum quantity of lead has been considered a safe dose; even the smallest quantities have had a harmful effect.
The chemical dispersant, Corexit 9500, used by BP to try to break up the oil from the surface of the water is known to be both more toxic and also less effective than other chemical disbursants, requiring a stronger application. I feel that we have a case of misaligned corporate ethics coming into this situation as Corexit 9500 was reputedly banned in Britain over a decade ago due to its highly toxic affects on both the environment and people. How ‘British’ Petroleum ended up with such a large supply then I do not know.
The use of this chemical in such quantities and at such oceanic depths is unknown in human history, and the exact contents of the mixture are a trade secret. Expected health effects are respiratory, nervous system, liver, kidney and blood disorders, again grossly affecting children due to their smaller size. At this time over 600,000 gallons of Corexit 9500 have been utilised in an attempt to clean up the oil spill. To make things even worse, the toxicity of Corexit 9500 in a solution of water increases with water temperature, and oil in the water is resulting in higher water temperatures.
Clearly the sea-creatures living in and around the Gulf of Mexico are going to be off the menu for some time. The government won’t willingly allow the people to eat contaminated fish right?
Well unfortunately the Gulf Coast is responsible for about half of the total US harvest in its high season. Fishing in the Gulf of Mexico is an estimated $2.4 billion industry. Not only is fishing a good source of income for the government (via taxation) but people are currently eating those fish and so assuming the demand remains, the supply of fish for food will have to come from someplace else.
There is also no guarantee that any fish has not come from the Gulf of Mexico and accumulated many of the poisons already. Many fish, especially deep-sea dwelling fish, will travel up to 200 miles for feeding and reproduction. They could have become caught in passages of oil and chemical disbursant while migrating through the area.
In addition to the issue of caught fish containing human-toxic substances, there is also the significant issue of overfishing to contend with. Overfishing occurs when the commercial fishing operation in an area catches the fish faster than the fish can replenish their population. This is happening globally already and will only be made worse if the same number of fish are required from fewer and less-dense fishing areas. According to overfishing.org, almost 80% of the world’s fisheries are fully to over-exploited, depleted or in a state of collapse, and over 90% of the stocks of large predatory fish stocks are already gone. Who can tell what the full impact will be when the ocean ecology is already under stress, and we increase the stress by overfishing from the surrounding areas.
It is not only the fish that are affected by overfishing, sea birds and mammals both eat fish, and as the number of edible fish become harder to find, these animals are being increasingly caught in fishing hauls, killed and discarded.
So while those of us who are not yet affected by the disaster in the USA can sit back and watch everything unfold, it will be our fish stock that will be increasingly removed from the oceans to make up for the shortfall in US fishing.
In my opinion, the only way we can feel confident that the pollution will not reach our own bodies via the consumption of fish is to no longer consume fish. Likewise, by saying no to eating fish, we can take an active stance against the overfishing of the waters in our backyards. We need to look into getting our EFAs from other sources such as flaxseeds, spirulina, chlorella and phytoplankton. Fortunately, fish do not create their own EFAs, but instead break down the EFAs in the microalgae food that they consume. Humans are able to do the same, and so we can replace fish in the diet with supplemental sources of EFA. There are already a number of supplements being manufactored for vegans who want to increase the number of EFAs in their diet; your local health food shop should have them available. Personality I only consume fish as the occasional fish oil supplement, but I have already switched over to a marine phytoplankton supplement.
Want to find out more about health, then visit Petra Smirnoff’s site on how to choose the healthiest diet for your needs.
Recent Comments