Analisis Kuantitatif Manfaat dan Risiko Mengkonsumsi dan berternak Salmon Liar (SHALLY MARLI MAULANA)
Quantitative Analysis of the Benefits and Risks of Consuming Farmed and Wild Salmon1
Jeffery A. Foran,2 David H. Good,* David O. Carpenter,† M. Coreen Hamilton,**
Barbara A. Knuth,‡ and Steven J. Schwager††
Introduction
Assessments of contaminants in salmon (1– 4) have raised health risk concerns, which are particularly important given the considerable increasing trend in salmon consumption, especially of farmed salmon (5). Over half the salmon sold globally is now farm-raised, and the annual global production of farmed salmon (predominantly Atlantic salmon) has risen from 2.7 104 to 1.3 106 metric tons during the past 2 decades (6). Contaminant-associated health risks are important because they may detract from the health benefits (prevention of cardiac death) of consuming (n-3) PUFA that occur in tissues of salmon as well as other fatty fish (7–14).
As we reported previously (1– 4), concentrations of dioxins, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB),3 polybrominated diphenyl ethers, and some pesticides are significantly higher in farmraised Atlantic salmon than in wild Pacific salmon, and salmon raised on European farms have significantly higher contaminant concentrations than those raised on North and South American farms. As a result, the health risks of consuming farmed salmon are greater than the risks of consuming the less contaminated wild salmon. It is unclear, however, whether the higher concentrations of (n-3) fatty acids in farmed salmon (15) outweigh or balance contaminant-associated health risks.
As we reported previously (1– 4), concentrations of dioxins, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB),3 polybrominated diphenyl ethers, and some pesticides are significantly higher in farmraised Atlantic salmon than in wild Pacific salmon, and salmon raised on European farms have significantly higher contaminant concentrations than those raised on North and South American farms. As a result, the health risks of consuming farmed salmon are greater than the risks of consuming the less contaminated wild salmon. It is unclear, however, whether the higher concentrations of (n-3) fatty acids in farmed salmon (15) outweigh or balance contaminant-associated health risks.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A benefit-risk ratio was developed that compares cancer and noncancer risks associated with cumulative exposure to organic contaminants in salmon with the quantities of (n-3) fatty acids, measured as eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) that result from salmon consumption. The ratios were derived from 245 composite samples (3 fillets each) collected in 2001 (1). The data included 153 observations from farmed salmon purchased from wholesalers, 48 from fillets of farmed salmon purchased from retail markets in 16 cities, and 44 from wild-caught Pacific salmon.
A benefit-risk ratio was developed that compares cancer and noncancer risks associated with cumulative exposure to organic contaminants in salmon with the quantities of (n-3) fatty acids, measured as eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) that result from salmon consumption. The ratios were derived from 245 composite samples (3 fillets each) collected in 2001 (1). The data included 153 observations from farmed salmon purchased from wholesalers, 48 from fillets of farmed salmon purchased from retail markets in 16 cities, and 44 from wild-caught Pacific salmon.
RESULTS
Both farmed and wild salmon can be consumed at rates that provide at least 1 g/d EPADHA per unit noncarcinogenic risk (Fig. 1). However, there are clear differences in the benefit-risk ratio for noncarcinogens among wholesale farmed salmon, farmed salmon fillets purchased from retail markets, and wild salmon (P 0.0001). Based on the benefit-noncarcinogenic risk ratio, wild salmon can be consumed at rates that approach the higher levels of (n-3) fatty acid intake recommended by the WHO (28) and AHA (7). Salmon from farms in the Faroe Islands and Scotland provide the least amount of EPADHA per unit noncarcinogenic risk, even though these fish contain some of the highest concentrations of fatty acids (15). Similarly, farmed salmon sold in European retail markets provide the least EPADHA per unit noncarcinogenic risk, suggesting that these fish derive from farms in the European north Atlantic. Of the farmed salmon, those from Chile and Washington State, and those sold in retail markets in the United States provide the highest EPADHA intake per unit noncarcinogenic risk.
Both farmed and wild salmon can be consumed at rates that provide at least 1 g/d EPADHA per unit noncarcinogenic risk (Fig. 1). However, there are clear differences in the benefit-risk ratio for noncarcinogens among wholesale farmed salmon, farmed salmon fillets purchased from retail markets, and wild salmon (P 0.0001). Based on the benefit-noncarcinogenic risk ratio, wild salmon can be consumed at rates that approach the higher levels of (n-3) fatty acid intake recommended by the WHO (28) and AHA (7). Salmon from farms in the Faroe Islands and Scotland provide the least amount of EPADHA per unit noncarcinogenic risk, even though these fish contain some of the highest concentrations of fatty acids (15). Similarly, farmed salmon sold in European retail markets provide the least EPADHA per unit noncarcinogenic risk, suggesting that these fish derive from farms in the European north Atlantic. Of the farmed salmon, those from Chile and Washington State, and those sold in retail markets in the United States provide the highest EPADHA intake per unit noncarcinogenic risk.
Untuk membaca artikel lengkapnya bisa DOWNLOAD DISINI
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar