Comparison of Recreational Fish Consumption Advisories Across the USA

Abstract

Purpose of Review Our comparative analysis sought to understand the factors which drive differences in fish consumption advisories across the USA — including exposure scenarios (acute and chronic health risk, non-cancer and cancer health endpoints), toxicity values (reference dose, cancer slope factor, acute tolerance level), and meal size and bodyweight assumptions. Recent Findings Fish consumption provides essential nutrients but also results in exposure to contaminants such as PCBs and methylmercury. To protect consumers from the risks of fish contaminants, fish consumption advisories are established, most often by state jurisdictions, to estimate the amount of a certain fish species a person could consume throughout their lifetime without harm. However, inconsistencies in advisories across the USA confuse consumers and undermine the public health goals of fish advisory programs. To date, no rigorous comparison of state and national fish consumption advisories has been reported. Summary Our work identifies discrepancies in key assumptions used to derive risk-based advisories between US states, reflecting differences in the interpretation of toxicity science. We also address the implications for these differences by reviewing advisories issued by contiguous states bordering two waterbodies: Lake Michigan and the Lower Mississippi River. Our findings highlight the importance of regional collaboration when issuing advisories, so that consumers of self-caught fish are equipped with clear knowledge to make decisions to protect their health.

Linking coastal environmental and health observations for human wellbeing

“…Seafood advisories (#13) are assessments of the likely healthful or harmful status of specific seafood in terms of nutritional quality (e.g., promoting cardiovascular health and safe pregnancies) and/or contaminant burden (heavy metals, HAB toxins and chemical pollutants, Vibrios and other infectious microbes) that carry increased risks for a variety of adverse health outcomes, including cancer and birth defects. These notices are often promulgated by health agencies with notices in public media and may cover species harvested in recreational, subsistence, and commercial fisheries and distributed via informal networks or commercial markets ( 109 , 110 ).…”

Fisheries Volume 49 Number 6 June 2024

“…A primary factor affecting off-taste in Common Carp is geosmin, which is a compound that is produced by algae and soil microbes in nutrient-rich waters (Varble and Secchi 2013 ;Varga et al 2015 ) and, incidentally, also responsible for the smell of fresh rain. Common Carp, like many popular recreational and commercial freshwater and marine fi shes, often have high contaminant burdens and are included in many fi sh consumption advisories (Cleary et al 2021 ), which may give consumers pause. Whether the poor sentiment about modern Common Carp relative to its 19th century predecessors and other popular species is truly deserved is unknown.…”

Introducing Copi as a Positive Path Toward Combatting Invasive Carps in North America

“…A primary factor affecting off-taste in Common Carp is geosmin, which is a compound that is produced by algae and soil microbes in nutrient-rich waters (Varble and Secchi 2013;Varga et al 2015) and, incidentally, also responsible for the smell of fresh rain. Common Carp, like many popular recreational and commercial freshwater and marine fishes, often have high contaminant burdens and are included in many fish consumption advisories (Cleary et al 2021), which may give consumers pause. Whether the poor sentiment about modern Common Carp relative to its 19th century predecessors and other popular species is truly deserved is unknown.…”

“…Common Carp, like many popular recreational and commercial freshwater and marine fishes, often have high contaminant burdens and are included in many fish consumption advisories (Cleary et al. 2021), which may give consumers pause. Whether the poor sentiment about modern Common Carp relative to its 19th century predecessors and other popular species is truly deserved is unknown.…”