Comparative Analysis of State Fish Consumption Advisories Targeting Sensitive Populations

Abstract

ObjectiveFish consumption advisories are issued to warn the public of possible toxicological threats from consuming certain fish species. Although developing fetuses and children are particularly susceptible to toxicants in fish, fish also contain valuable nutrients. Hence, formulating advice for sensitive populations poses challenges. We conducted a comparative analysis of advisory Web sites issued by states to assess health messages that sensitive populations might access.Data sourcesWe evaluated state advisories accessed via the National Listing of Fish Advisories issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.Data extractionWe created criteria to evaluate advisory attributes such as risk and benefit message clarity.Data synthesisAll 48 state advisories issued at the time of this analysis targeted children, 90% (43) targeted pregnant women, and 58% (28) targeted women of childbearing age. Only six advisories addressed single contaminants, while the remainder based advice on 2–12 contaminants. Results revealed that advisories associated a dozen contaminants with specific adverse health effects. Beneficial health effects of any kind were specifically associated only with omega-3 fatty acids found in fish.ConclusionsThese findings highlight the complexity of assessing and communicating information about multiple contaminant exposure from fish consumption. Communication regarding potential health benefits conferred by specific fish nutrients was minimal and focused primarily on omega-3 fatty acids. This overview suggests some lessons learned and highlights a lack of both clarity and consistency in providing the breadth of information that sensitive populations such as pregnant women need to make public health decisions about fish consumption during pregnancy.

To Eat or not to Eat an Endangered Species: Views of Local Residents and Physicians on the Safety of Sea Turtle Consumption in Northwestern Mexico

“…We suggest dissemination of this information via brochures, pamphlets, and personal guidance from physicians. Scherer et al (2008) found that pamphlets and brochures may be especially effective at targeting sensitive populations. In those small towns and villages lacking direct access to healthcare, targeting respected community leaders who believe in and understand the possible risks associated with consuming sea turtles may be an additional means of effectively disseminating this information.…”

Communicating Fish Consumption Advisories in California: What Works, What Doesn’t

“…While all states currently issue sport fish consumption advisories, there is little consensus as to the most effective ratio of risk‐to‐benefit information, level of detail in explaining risks, or a definition of the sensitive population. ( 28 ) Nor has the wide range of advisory formats been systematically evaluated to determine the most effective approach to reach intended audiences. States also use different definitions of portion size (i.e., the amount of fish eaten at one time).…”

Potentially Heterogeneous Cross-Sectional Associations of Seafood Consumption with Diabetes and Glycemia in Urban South Asia

“…Our findings of geographic heterogeneity across South Asian megacities may suggest that meta-analysis of omega-3 supplementation or fish consumption benefits [2], or even regionally stratified meta-analysis [1] may fail to adequately capture the local context of appropriate seafood nutritional guidance. In the U.S. and Canada, when a local fish is known to be heavily contaminated with a toxic chemical, a "fish advisory" is typically issued to discourage local consumption [37,38]. Similar principles of contextually dependent risk-benefit analysis for seafood consumption might be able to inform nutritional epidemiology in other settings.…”