Quantitative Analysis of the Benefits and Risks of Consuming Farmed and Wild Salmon

Abstract

Contaminants in farmed Atlantic and wild Pacific salmon raise important questions about the competing health benefits and risks of fish consumption. A benefit-risk analysis was conducted to compare quantitatively the cancer and noncancer risks of exposure to organic contaminants in salmon with the (n-3) fatty acid-associated health benefits of salmon consumption. Recommended levels of (n-3) fatty acid intake, as eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), may be achieved by consuming farmed or wild salmon while maintaining an acceptable level of noncarcinogenic risk. However, the recommended level of EPA+DHA intake cannot be achieved solely from farmed or wild salmon while maintaining an acceptable level of carcinogenic risk. Although the benefit-risk ratio for carcinogens and noncarcinogens is significantly greater for wild Pacific salmon than for farmed Atlantic salmon as a group, the ratio for some subgroups of farmed salmon is on par with the ratio for wild salmon. This analysis suggests that risk of exposure to contaminants in farmed and wild salmon is partially offset by the fatty acid-associated health benefits. However, young children, women of child-bearing age, pregnant women, and nursing mothers not at significant risk for sudden cardiac death associated with CHD but concerned with health impairments such as reduction in IQ and other cognitive and behavioral effects, can minimize contaminant exposure by choosing the least contaminated wild salmon or by selecting other sources of (n-3) fatty acids.

Benefits and risks of fish consumption for the human health

“…Because contaminants may bring risks to the human health, studies were conducted in order to quantify contaminants and omega-3 contents, and to compare ratios between these substances 45,46 . Foran et al 46 developed a riskbenefit ratio, relating cancer risk and other diseases with the cumulative exposure to organic contaminants and to the omega-3 contents present in fish.…”

“…Foran et al 46 developed a riskbenefit ratio, relating cancer risk and other diseases with the cumulative exposure to organic contaminants and to the omega-3 contents present in fish. In this study, for some fish, the risk of contaminants was apparently compensated by the omega-3 fatty acid benefits to the health.…”

Policy and Science Implications of the Framing and Qualities of Uncertainty in Risks: Toxic and Beneficial Fish from the Baltic Sea

“…At issue are the limits and specifications of this general comparison, especially for fish and consumer sub-populations and, more broadly, for the different decision alternatives, including dietary, fisheries, and other choices. Conflicting assessments (compare e.g., Cohen et al 2005and Leino et al 2005with Foran et al 2005a, 2005b, 2006 suggest differing framings and valuations of risks, benefits, and associated certainties.…”

Contaminants in fish: Risk–benefit considerations

“…As dioxins and dioxinlike PCBs are present in meats and dairy products, substituting fish with these food products would not reduce exposure to these compounds, while negating beneficial effects of fish (2). Consumption of dioxincontaminated fish may increase overall cancer risk, particularly if high levels of these contaminants are present (54,55). However, it has also been estimated that cardiovascular benefits outweigh cancer risks by 10 to 1000 fold, depending on the level of contamination (6).…”