Seafood has been touted as good for one’s health in a variety of ways for decades, from lean protein to omega-3 fatty acids that are beneficial for the heart and brain. But recently released studies have raised an alarm for those who regularly eat shrimp, lobster, and canned tuna. A new study, released April 12 in the journal Exposure and Health, reports elevated levels of PFAS “forever chemicals” in some of the seafood staples. As news of these results breaks, it brings to mind important questions of whether consumers can safely eat seafood without jeopardizing their health.
1. Understanding PFAS: What They Are and Why They Matter
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, are a large group of man-made chemicals developed for their heat, water, oil, and stain resistance. Such attributes made PFAS the ideal candidate for applications in a wide range of consumer products, including non-stick cookware, water-repellent fabric, firefighting foams, food packaging, and more. The problem is that they last. Natural chemicals break down, but PFAS are maintained in the environment and human body, typically for years.
Multiple studies have associated PFAS exposure with negative health effects. These include increased cholesterol, suppressed immune systems, thyroid disease, and reproductive problems. More severe are associations with certain types of cancer, such as kidney and testicular cancer. Since the chemicals build up in the body over time, repeated low-dose exposures can really add up when they are ingested as food and water.
Seafood can also be a food source of PFAS through bioaccumulation. Fish and shellfish absorb the chemicals from polluted water or bottom sediments, and concentration increases as one goes up the food chain. It is thus essential for health-conscious consumers to know more about the source and type of seafood eaten.
2. New Study Reveals Alarming PFAS Levels in Common Seafood
The research, released recently in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, a area rich in seafood heritage, contains some bad tidings. Researchers equated what people in the local population were eating with chemical testing of seafood bought at local supermarkets. They wanted to know whether exposure to PFAS could be happening by ingesting food.
Survey research indicated that 95% of the study participants had consumed seafood within the previous year, and the most frequent types of seafood consumed were shrimp, haddock, salmon, and canned tuna. Chemically analyzing these samples of seafood revealed 26 varieties of PFAS, highest in shrimp and lobster. These results are further corroborated by earlier research indicating that shellfish, by virtue of their filter-feeding behavior and presence along the coastal water, are more likely to accumulate PFAS.
The study’s results are especially applicable because they represent actual diet and exposure habits in the world. Instead of using pure chemicals in a controlled laboratory environment, researchers looked at what individuals really consume and how these foods are a source of chemical exposure. This focus indicates the necessity of implementing seafood safety guidelines based on having persistent pollutants such as PFAS.
3. Finding the Health Threats Without Giving Up Seafood
Although the occurrence of PFAS in fish is something of concern, it does not imply that humans should completely avoid fish in their diets. In fact, nutritionists continue to be interested in keeping us informed of the nutritional value derived from fish, especially fatty fish that contain high omega-3 fatty acids like salmon and mackerel. These nutrients improve cardiovascular function, lower inflammation, and may play a part in brain processes.
Megan Romano, PhD, and lead author of the study, is calling for an equitable strategy. Her group does not suggest an exclusion of seafood but more research and improved risk communication. The issue is complex since PFAS not only bioaccumulate in seafood but also in drinking water, house dust, household cleaning products, and food packaging. Unavoidable elimination of all pathways of PFAS exposure is not possible, but informed food choices can limit overall exposure.
Difficulty number one is knowing how various PFAS chemicals work inside the body. Some are immediately flushed, others for many years. Some are maybe more poisonous than others, and little is understood about what extended exposure to mixtures of PFAS does to us. With such unknowns, it is prudent to proceed with caution and knowledge about seafood consumption particularly in kids, pregnant women, and those with compromised conditions.
4. Public Health Recommendations Must Consider New Evidence
Existing recommendations require limiting seafood consumption to about 12 ounces a week, especially for vulnerable individuals with risk of mercury exposure. Increasingly, however, it is recognized that recommendations must change to consider concern about PFAS contamination, as well.
The Portsmouth study puts a lot of things into perspective, and it emphasizes the need to update public health regulations with attention not only to mercury and other heavy metals but also to so-called persistent organic pollutants like PFAS. The reality that shrimp and lobster – seafood traditionally considered to be healthy – would be among the most contaminated is a very strong suggestion that present regulations might not be sufficient to protect consumers.
Enhanced traceability of seafood on sale in markets, together with open labeling of degrees of contamination, can better enable consumers to make safer decisions. Environmental policy targeting the origin of PFAS contamination, including industrial outfall and landfill leachate, is also demanded in increasing degree. Unless source contamination is reduced, limiting exposure via food becomes a losing game.
Second, schools and governments can be more of public service by having their research determine which fish species are most likely to contain the highest and lowest concentrations of PFAS. This would give more accurate dietary advice that optimizes nutrition benefit with minimal chemical risk.
5. Informed Seafood Choices to Reduce Risk
Though PFAS exposure is complex, there are practical measures people can take to still eat seafood safely. A useful guide is the FDA’s listing of fish into “best choices,” “good choices,” and those to “avoid” based on mercury content. Some of the “best choice” fish, including cod, crab, scallops, and light canned tuna, also tend to have lower PFAS concentrations, though contamination varies geographically.
When selecting tuna, it’s better to utilize chunk light over albacore or yellowfin because it generally is lower in mercury and PFAS. Wild-caught fish from cleaner waters may also be safer than farmed fish, depending on location and aquaculture practices used. These factors don’t necessarily come out during a purchase, however, illustrating a demand for better seafood traceability and consumer education.
It also varies a person’s sources of protein. Adding plant foods, such as legumes, tofu, and nuts, to the fish eaten every day decreases dependency on possibly contaminated seafood. Cutting back on the consumption rate of high-PFAS seafood items like shrimp and lobster can decrease chemical exposure considerably without completely eliminating the health benefits of seafood.
Food preparation methods may also help in some way decrease chemical exposure. Although PFAS chemicals are typically stable at food-cooking temperatures, grease removal and food preparation in clean, uncoated cookware can minimize overall contact with human-made chemicals during food preparation.
Seafood continues to be a culturally important and healthy component of the majority of diets, but increasing concern over PFAS contamination cannot be ignored. The Portsmouth, NH, study provides insightful information about how these “forever chemicals” travel from the environment to the plate. Improved regulation, consumer awareness, and scientific inquiry enable enjoyment of the health advantages of seafood while avoiding enhanced health risks. Following a healthy diet, staying educated about the fish we eat, and promoting cleaner food systems are all the solution. As we become more educated about PFAS’s long-term health impact, our best line of defense is action and knowledge, not fear. Healthy choices today can contribute to long-term health without preventing us from being able to still consume one of the most nutrient-dense food sources on earth.
