×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Is That Sushi Hazardous To Your Health?

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the these-tiny-worms-sure-look-healthy dept.

Earth 554

pdclarry writes "A recent study by scientists at the American Museum of Natural History and Columbia University found that a piece of tuna sushi may not be tuna at all: 'A piece of tuna sushi has the potential to be an endangered species, a fraud or a health hazard,' wrote the authors. 'All three of these cases were uncovered in this study.' The study, published in PLoS ONE examined 68 samples of tuna sushi purchased from 31 restaurants in Manhattan (New York City) and Denver, Colorado. Some of these were from endangered species, others were not as labeled, and some were not tuna at all. Of these last, five samples labeled as 'white tuna' were from a toxic fish, Escolar, which is a gempylid species banned for sale in Italy and Japan due to health concerns. 'It can cause gastrointestinal symptoms ranging from mild and rapid passage of oily yellow or orange droplets, to severe diarrhea with nausea and vomiting. The milder symptoms have been referred to as keriorrhea [i.e. flow of wax in Greek].' Fraud in sushi is not new; Slashdot also reported study on mislabeling in 2008. This new study shows that some sushi can actually make you sick. The study was also covered by Wired."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

554 comments

post (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30197694)

BLAH!

Safer than bukaki (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30197718)

At least the real thing. Simulation involving glue, mayonaise, etc. are of course entirely safe.

Technically... (5, Informative)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197714)

<pedantic>
If we're just talking about the tuna, then it's Sashimi [wikipedia.org].
Sushi is vinegar rice, topped with other ingredients, such as fish.
</pedantic>

Re:Technically... (2, Insightful)

2.7182 (819680) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197776)

Sushi, and other words, are defined by how people use them. And in the US that means rice and raw fish wrapped in seaweed for 99% of the population. Then english language, unlike C, does not have an ansi standard. It's all fluid.

Re:Technically... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30197822)

But the English language does, and it's in Oxford.
Bonus points for those getting the puns.

Re:Technically... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30197848)

Not counting, of course, the veggie roll... whose predominant ingredients include cucumber, carrots, rice, and other non-fish products.

And on a related aside, Fish roe is absolutely disgusting. Every time I eat sushi with fish roe it's like i'm chewing on dozens of tiny eyeballs. It's enough to make me want to gag.

So technically (0, Offtopic)

zoomshorts (137587) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197882)

99% of the US are simply ignorant. Proper use of words co-opted from other languages,
should be the norm. Sadly most people pass on bad information all the time. Others
tend to believe those people. Pity.

Negative points for the topic being seen on Digg 24 hours ago.

Re:So technically (0, Offtopic)

maharb (1534501) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197918)

If everyone in a culture uses a word to describe something and you are the only one who says it is something else then yuo are the ignorant one. Words are made up and have no inherent value... they only have the value that society gives them and in this case society doesn't agree with you.

Re:So technically (1, Offtopic)

Evil Shabazz (937088) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198000)

Just keep telling yourself whatever you need to to feel good about being wrong.

Re:So technically (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30198140)

Just keep telling yourself whatever you need to to feel good about being wrong.

Most people are prideful and would rather be dead than admit they're wrong. They will go through all sorts of mental gymnastics to justify themselves. In this case, the guy you responded to would rather reject the entire concept of meaning than admit that he incorrectly used a word. I don't think he realizes that if everything worked that way, and language had no accepted definitions and rules of grammar, then no one would be able to understand anyone else and at that point we may as well stop using language entirely. The only reason why he was able to spew the tired cliche of "[words] only have the value that society gives them" is because the words composing that sentence have set definitions. Otherwise we could arbitrarily define that sentence to mean that he is saying "I am a jackass". If he disagrees with that and more than one of us agrees with it, that would mean he just called himself a jackass, under his system, because the majority have assigned that "value" to his words.

It's funny how people only bring up relativism when it's convenient for them. They don't reject defined meanings when their paychecks say that they now possess a certain amount of money. They wouldn't like the idea of their paychecks or their love lives meaning only what other people think they should mean. They only feel that way about words, and they only feel that way about words when they use them incorrectly and someone points it out. Ego would be amusing if it weren't so sadly misguided.

Re:So technically (1)

amRadioHed (463061) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198208)

We are not the only ones who say sashimi is raw fish. Go to any Japanese restaurant or ask anyone who actually eats the stuff and you'll see. The sushi eating culture unanimously agrees that you're wrong.

Re:Technically... (2, Insightful)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197904)

Sushi, and other words, are defined by how people use them. And in the US that means rice and raw fish wrapped in seaweed for 99% of the population.

Sure, thank you for bolstering my point. The title asks if the sushi is hazardous, but the story is only about the fish, not the rice or seaweed (etc)... (I'm tired and feeling a bit picky.)

Slack language is a cause and/or result of slack thinking. For example, single TV episodes advertised as "all new" or the Dodge Ram commercial that states the truck is "all brawn, all brain" - sigh.

Re:Technically... (1)

2.7182 (819680) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197958)

But this means that "fish" allows, for example, the extinct species of giant armored fish, which includes the deadly Xiphactinus, as featured in the BBC's "Sea Monsters", as well as "National Geographic's Sea Monsters: A Prehistoric Adventure". Now was that on your list? NOO it was not. But it's allowable for putting in sushi and calling it sushi in the good old US of A. Touche'!!!

Re:Technically... (2, Informative)

Garridan (597129) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198040)

If we're being completely pedantic, then you should read the title again.

Is That Sushi Hazardous To Your Health?

Here "that" refers to a particular piece of sushi. Reading the summary and then the article, one finds that "that sushi" refers to "sushi containing 'tuna'". Raw fish on its own is sashimi. Raw fish on rice is sushi. If the raw fish in either case is poisonous, then the entire thing will be hazardous to your health.

Or, do you somehow think that the rice is going to save you?

Re:Technically... (1)

newcastlejon (1483695) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198218)

Actually in this case 'that' is a journalistic device, which refers to the piece of sushi the reader may happen to be eating at the time. If the writer is too specific too early (say by specifying the exact ingredients) then a lot of readers might just skip over the whole thing after seeing the resulting clumsy headline and no writer wants that.

Re:Technically... (4, Funny)

Kelzar (1642061) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197966)

Why can't we all just get along? It doesn't have to be this way! Can't it be both? Just like a whale is a fish and a mammal?

Re:Technically... (4, Insightful)

tjstork (137384) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198094)

Most good Japanese restaraunts have the difference between Sushi and Sashimi on page 1 of their menu, and more Americans than you think know the difference.

Re:Technically... (2, Funny)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198128)

Ah, but this is where you're wrong..

There's this thing called ANSI standard SUSHI [niso.org] (ANSI/NISO Z39.93-2007), also referred to as the sushi standard.

And as demontrated at the above URL, it has absolutely nothing to do with fish, or at least it's not supposed to be. If I ask for SUSHI, and I get some type of fish instead, and they call that sushi, clearly some sort of fraud has occured.....

And perhaps using SUSHI can be hazardous to your health, but only really to the extent that all programming is hazardous to your health.

I was unable to apprehend the article's concept that you would order or ask someone to give you SUSHI and they'd give you a toxic fish instead of the specification.

Nor did I realize it was so easy for people to be confused into thinking that specifications such as Sushi are edible, or that people would actually be so oblivious as to confuse a piece of fish for a copy of a national standard...

Re:Technically... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30198144)

And I'm free to think you are an idiot, judging by how you define the word through your usage.

Re:Technically... (4, Insightful)

ArundelCastle (1581543) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198152)

Sushi, and other words, are defined by how people use them. And in the US that means rice and raw fish wrapped in seaweed for 99% of the population. Then english language, unlike C, does not have an ansi standard. It's all fluid.

You flurbing pizzats and your fempy ticrans. Can't even warrup a mekci bommits.

Re:Technically... (0, Troll)

MrNaz (730548) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198228)

The problem is, of course, that sushi is not an English word.

Also, the phrase "language evolves" is not the same thing as "I come from a country where 99% of the population does not have basic literacy skills".

So we (the rest of the world) don't give two shits what sushi means "in the US". We would prefer to use words correctly so that there's common grounds upon which to communicate effectively. You can keep the dog's breakfast of a language that is "American English" thank you very fucking much.

Re:Technically...Christmas gifts. (-1, Troll)

coolforsale1212 (1684108) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198030)

http://www.coolforsale.com/ [coolforsale.com] Dear ladies and gentlemen Hello, In order to meet Christmas, Site launched Christmas spree, welcome new and old customers come to participate in the there are unexpected surprises, look forward to your arrival. Only this site have this treatmentOur goal is "Best quality, Best reputation , Best services". Your satisfaction is our main pursue. You can find the best products from us, meeting your different needs. Ladies and Gentlemen weicome to my coolforsale.com.Here,there are the most fashion products . Pass by but don't miss it.Select your favorite clothing! Welcome to come next time ! Thank you! http://www.coolforsale.com/productlist.asp?id=s76 [coolforsale.com] (Tracksuit w) ugg boot,POLO hoody,Jacket, Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33 Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35 Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&g) $35 Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16 free shipping Thanks!!! Advance wish you a merry Christmas.

Re:Technically... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30198068)

Though originally correct your definition no longer really holds, at least in the west. Probably due to the fact that sushi is a term that encompasses many sub-types (e.g. nigiri, maki), it is now used in the west as an all encompassing term fro various dishes including traditional sushi dishes and sashimi dishes. Welcome to living languages, meanings are how people use the words not what you want them to be or how they were originally used but good job being pedantic, tags and all. ;)

Keriorrhea (4, Insightful)

pinkj (521155) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197732)

I can finally be a lot more accurate about my bowel movements whenever I call in sick or I'm late for something.

Re:Keriorrhea (1)

RobVB (1566105) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197760)

Because that's just what any employer wants to hear, more details about their employees' bowel movements!

Though I have to wonder, you do know about the existence of camera's, don't you? A picture says more than a thousand Greek words...

Re:Keriorrhea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30198014)

And if you decide to record the movements and one or more women playing in them, then you too can be the next internet shock sensation!

Yuck! Sushi! (3, Funny)

Cornwallis (1188489) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197736)

Eating sushi is almost as disgusting as eating raw fish!

Re:Yuck! Sushi! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30197984)

Cavemen discovered that cooking meat was a good idea some millennia ago and we've been doing it since then, but some people never got the memo because they were on an island or something.

Fire goooooood. (1)

NoYob (1630681) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198178)

Cavemen discovered that cooking meat was a good idea some millennia ago and we've been doing it since then, but some people never got the memo because they were on an island or something.

Do a search on parasites and sushi.

I don't eat animal flash raw. I prefer most of vegetables cooked, too.

Re:Yuck! Sushi! (1, Insightful)

Mystery00 (1100379) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198174)

So why don't you eat actual Sushi instead of Sashimi, with something like chicken if you don't like raw fish? The more you know...... the less food you'll hate over pure ignorance.

Oh, so that's what happened. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30197738)

"It can cause gastrointestinal symptoms range from mild and rapid passage of oily yellow or orange droplets"

Oh really :-( I don't think I'll go to that restaurant anymore... That would also be why most of the Toro or plain old Maguro (tuna) in US doesn't taste like the Maguro in Japan.

Re:Oh, so that's what happened. (5, Funny)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197836)

"It can cause gastrointestinal symptoms range from mild and rapid passage of oily yellow or orange droplets"

"Tubgirl Tuna", they call it.

META comment: PLoS ONE (3, Informative)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197746)

PLoS ONE, if you didn't know, is a public-access scientific journal publishing enterprise. No more use/abuse of scientists as creator of content AND reviewers of content (who both do this for free) and then only releasing the articles for profit, for the next 100 years. I am thoroughly disgusted by this business model which takes the work of us scientists, gives nothing back and then profits from it. Fuck that.

PLoS ONE, I wish you luck. Please do crush the Natures, Sciences and Elseviers of this world. Pretty please.

Re:META comment: PLoS ONE (2, Insightful)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197896)

PLoS ONE, if you didn't know, is a public-access scientific journal publishing enterprise. No more use/abuse of scientists as creator of content AND reviewers of content (who both do this for free) and then only releasing the articles for profit, for the next 100 years. I am thoroughly disgusted by this business model which takes the work of us scientists, gives nothing back and then profits from it. Fuck that.

Thanks for pointing that out. Maybe you can submit a story about them [plosone.org]? It's certainly News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters.

It's bad enough that too many university students are limited to pay-walled articles that their uni has bought a license to. Papers that were freely available online a decade ago have now disappeared except for abstracts and "you can get the rest of this article for $34.95".

Good thing we still have the Wayback Machine, but it doesn't cover nearly enough.

Off-topic (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30197752)

Feel free to mod this off-topic - but I just learned about the AGPL - so
here's the conclusion everyone has been waiting for:

It's fucking emo faggot license. You know what it revolves around - the
tool I provided you is helpful to you - Waaaaaaah. Bullshit the AGPL is
not even a license. It's a EULA.

The GPL has never ever tried to restrict use. You can use GPL software

to help you with your math homework
to make more GPL software
to make closed source software
to manage bank records
to fly a plane
to watch porn
to cure cancer
to make more cancer

The AGPL is an Emo-Faggot License. Actually Emo-Faggot EULA.

It concerns itself with usage. Here - we'll have 3 people.

The GPL Developer
The Emo-Faggot
The End User

The GPL developer allows the end user to USE his software in any way the
user feels like.

End User | Hey, I'm gonna take your bc calculator - break RSA with it - and make money, bitch.
The GPL | Meh, knock yourself out.
Emo Fagoot | But I'm a fucking emo. Waaaaah.

Sushi: Appearance versus Flavor (-1)

reporter (666905) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197812)

Being nearly devoid of natural resources, Japan has traditional cuisine that tends to focus on appearance instead of flavor. The classic example is sushi. It is the sliced flesh of raw fish. Plates of sushi are adorned with other colorful edibles: sea weed, fish eggs, etc.

Making sushi is efficient in terms of energy and resources. Sushi does not require fuel to be expended for cooking.

Plates of sushi are colorful and pretty. The aim is to create a delightful appearance. The aim is appearance, not taste.

Hence, we can understand the news article that is the focus of this thread of discussion. Most customers who eat sushi cannot "taste" the fish in the sushi. "Taste" is not the point of sushi. "Appearance" is. So, a restaurant could deliberately or accidentally substitute non-tuna flesh for tuna flesh in tuna-based sushi. A customer would never perceive the difference. Fish just tastes like fish: it tastes fishy.

Contrast Chinese cuisine to Japanese cuisine. Preparing Chinese cuisine requires expending a lot of resources: e. g., fuel. Before the advent of Westernization (enabling Japan to import all that it needs) in Japan in the late 1800s, China had a huge advantage in an abundance of natural resources. China was a rich nation. It created cuisine that placed equal emphasis on appearance and flavor. Think of roasted pork (that was prepared by marinating the skin for hours) served on a plate adorned with pineapple slices. It is the food of the gods.

Re:Sushi: Appearance versus Flavor (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30197876)

American Sushi is mostly about appearance, though the recent "fusion" sushi brands have brought more variety and flavors. Japanese sushi is an entirely different animal and the taste is 90% from the higher quality and fresher fish that is available. There are also a number of local herbs and vegetables that are traditional in Japan and compliment fish flavors much better than American "equivalents". You are also forgetting Udon, the traditional large noodle stew that is very flavorful.

Re:Sushi: Appearance versus Flavor (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30197880)

the different kinds of fish taste different when they're fresh

Re:Sushi: Appearance versus Flavor (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30197934)

You quite clearly know squat about fish, even at 0 your rambling is overrated.

Tuna sushi (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197816)

Maybe it's just me but I don't eat the tuna anyway.. if I want tuna I'll go buy some John West.

Salmon on the other hand....

Re:Tuna sushi (1)

TempeTerra (83076) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197954)

Raw tuna's pretty fab actually and definitely worth a sample, but I wouldn't be surprised if you're not getting it in your local sushi. Raw tuna, raw or smoked salmon and eel are where I jump to on a sushi menu. It should be a deep red colour like red wine, not can brown.

Re:Tuna sushi (1)

Nethead (1563) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198006)

Salmon for me too. But the tuna I get at sushi houses around here (US Pacific Northwest) is real tuna. I think I would catch it if they swapped it on me, unless it's a badly made spicy tuna roll, only taste the burn then.

I live in a native fishing village, I doubt that they could swap the salmon on me with any success. The biggest day of the year here is the First Salmon Ceremony.

Re:Tuna sushi (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198080)

I sometimes order sushi from a shopping mall outlet.. I never expect much.. in fact, I expect the worst sushi I've ever tasted and I'm sometimes surprised. One day a clerk asked me how the sushi was.. and I was actually dumbstruck. I said something like "well I didn't expect it to be good, and this isn't the worst I've ever had, but it's not good." and she was surprised. After a little more conversation I figured out that she never eats sushi, has never tried her own sushi and has no idea where her supplier gets the ingredients from. I told her that I wasn't really surprised by that. I was talking to a friend a few days later and she said I should have said "would you feed your father this?" Apparently that's how Japanese say food is terrible.

On the other end of the scale, I used to often go to a sushi place in Sydney where I'd spend $80 on a meal and still be hungry, but it was fantastic sushi. It took a long time to forget and go back to more affordable sushi.

Possible none issue soon (3, Interesting)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197838)

Just recently, Tuna was able to be bred. Prior to that, Tuna pretty much had to be caught in the wild. It would be nice to see DECENT aquaculture come to fruition.

Re:Possible none issue soon (3, Insightful)

drizek (1481461) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197946)

Aquaculture still doesn't solve it. You still have to catch all the fish you need to feed the Tuna.

Humans should stop eating meat altogether, but if people can't manage that then at least stop eating top level carnivores.

Re:Possible none issue soon (5, Insightful)

Nethead (1563) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198050)

...then at least stop eating top level carnivores.

Not to worry, I don't eat humans on Atkins.

Re:Possible none issue soon (4, Insightful)

wisty (1335733) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198058)

Or perhaps we should go for IVM (in-vitro meat)?

I bet that the first commercial use for IVM will be feeding tuna, and other carnivorous livestock. That will fund the technology until it's ready for actually eating. As a bonus, we could clone rare (or maybe even extinct) species, and eat them too!

Re:Possible none issue soon (5, Insightful)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198074)

Actually, the idea is to breed the fish and then release millions upon millions of fingerlings into the various oceans. [scienceline.org] The real problem is how we got here and what will change. Basically, countries need to change. For example, the Atlantic tuna is about collapse. The reason is that overfishing is being done. By who? Well, America and Canada have STRICT limits on Canadian/American fleets which are checked pretty thoroughly. We also have foreign ships here that are under restrictions. Most are Chinese and Japanese. The japanese ships will dock at our ports, be checked, and then take the whole load back to Japan. OTH, The Chinese ships come in, drop off their max allowed load, and then show up back in China with a full load. IOW, they are taking another load on their way back (illegal, but easy enough to pull off from what I have heard). But that is not the full issue. EU has been horrible about putting restraints on their taking of the Tuna. And those nations that do, simply look the other way when the ship is over.

What needs to happen is that ALL OF THE NATIONS that have fisheries need to protect these. It can not be so half ass anymore.

Re:Possible none issue soon (1)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198206)

Actually, the idea is to breed the fish and then release millions upon millions of fingerlings into the various oceans.

      What could possibly go wrong. I mean, after you've fed all those fingerlings to the other fish in the ocean I mean...

Re:Possible none issue soon (4, Informative)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198184)

It would be nice to see DECENT aquaculture come to fruition.

      Yikes, aquaculture is hard enough to do with fresh water fish. You want to do it with salt water fish? Good luck...

      It's one thing to have a salt water aquarium, at a zoo or for a hobby (read: slavery). But aquaculture involves raising fish at incredibly high densities in order to be profitable. These high densities mean that the slightest little change - in dissolved O2, pH, temperature, nitrites, ammonia, etc will kill your fish. Now you want to add salinity which not only has to be kept within limits but corrodes your pumps, pipes and valves, increasing the chances of breakdowns?

      No thanks! Have fun!

      PS: Fish die really really quietly, and they love to do it in large quantities. I know whereof I speak, I promise...

Sushi in Denver? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30197850)

I live in Denver and I'd never eat sushi here... A good steak, or rocky mountain oysters (something I've never tried) are one thing for this part of the country, but sushi? C'mon, this should be common sense.

Buyer Beware! (4, Insightful)

Chicken_Kickers (1062164) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197856)

I currently live in an inland city, hundreds of kilometers from the the nearest ocean. This is why I refuse to eat sushi at the restaurants here since the fish will not be very fresh. I am a microbiologist, so I don't even eat that much sushi anyway since I know what sort and how many bacteria will grow on uncooked fish. Regarding fake or poisonous fish, ask around first before you eat at any restaurant (not only for sushi). I am sure that bad reputation will spread very quickly. There are many websites and blogs that do restaurant reviews. Alternatively, you can make your own sushi as it is not very hard to do. If you can make a sandwich, you can definitely make sushi.

Re:Buyer Beware! (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197930)

Wouldn't it make more sense to either not eat sushi at all or choose to eat it based on the 'chain of custody', rather than 'not even eating that much of it'? I mean, if you trust the chef, does the amount even matter?

Re:Buyer Beware! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30197968)

Sushi has to be frozen for safe consumption. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sushi#Health_risks

If you're eating "fresh" raw fish, you're taking a bigger risk than you thought.

Re:Buyer Beware! (4, Informative)

jrumney (197329) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198150)

In many Western countries, the health authorities specify that fish served raw must be frozen first to kill certain types of parasite, so what you get in the middle of the country probably doesn't differ much from what you get on the coast. If you go to Japan, they rely on the chefs being trained to recognize and remove the parasites, so you get much better tasting fish and much higher chance of contracting food poisoning due to an untrained chef.

Is that "x" hazardous to your health? (1)

Psaakyrn (838406) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197868)

Seriously, if someone lied about what something is, of cause it can turn up to be harmful. What we need is sushi regulation, not this useless information. And for that note, why label only some of these examples as a fraud? Aren't they ALL frauds?

Re:Is that "x" hazardous to your health? (0)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198134)

What we need is sushi regulation, not this useless information.

      Oh yes, why not. Appoint a sushi Tzar. And a whole department of the FDA devoted to sushi. And eventually when the cost of doing business in the sushi trade threatens to break the larger sushi bar trades, why not a tax-payer funded government bail out?

Kill the toxins... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30197874)

...by drinking lots of sake.

It is a Plos one paper, (0, Flamebait)

Palpatine_li (1547707) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197892)

so who believes? And who cares?

Re:It is a Plos one paper, (1)

tsm_sf (545316) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197962)

Division of Vertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, New York, New York
Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology, Columbia University, New York, New York
Sackler Institute for Comparative Genomics, American Museum of Natural History, New York, New York

They do.

Colorado and New York (3, Insightful)

ninjackn (1424235) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197900)

Considering that Colorado is surrounded by land on all sides and New York is about as far away as possible from the pacific ocean (while staying in the US) i'm not surprised the tuna sushi you get there is a bit off.

Re:Colorado and New York (1)

user4574 (1645049) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198038)

Well, they have this amazing new gizmo called a "freezer" now. Apparently it lets you transport perishable food items over long distances without spoilage.

And actually, whether you eat tuna sashimi in Tokyo, or Toledo Ohio, that fish was frozen on the boat that caught it. Some companies in Japan actually stockpile their tuna catch, and sit on it for up to seven years or so, for sale in more advantageous market conditions. Quality tuna is an extremely high-value commodity in Japan.

Re:Colorado and New York (1)

Greyfox (87712) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198072)

The better places here in Colorado aren't too off good places in Seattle. The Seattle sushi is better but not so much so that I'd be willing to go out there every couple of months for lunch unless the company's paying for the trip anyway.

Re:Colorado and New York (5, Informative)

LordKronos (470910) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198214)

If only there were an ocean closer to New York. It would be even better if that ocean had tuna of its own. Best of all would be if the tuna there was one of the most delicious [nationalgeographic.com] varieties around, such that it was the most used tuna [wikipedia.org] for sushi/sashimi. Wow...one can dream.

Severely misleading (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30197908)

Escolar makes admirable sushi. It is not "a nasty fish". It is legal for sale in the US and is openly served in many sushi restaurants here. I had some the other night. Most people will not suffer any ill effects from escolar, as long as they don't eat too much of it at once.

Health hazard? In the long run, eating real tuna is probably a bigger health hazard, due to the mercury content. Wired sensationalized a reasonable scientific paper.

Ass-plode (2, Interesting)

BlueBoxSW.com (745855) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197922)

I'm more interested in hearing what kinds of places serve the bad sushi, so I can avoid those.

I will not be avoiding sushi.

I've already bought into the fact I'm eating raw fish.

Too late (2, Funny)

LeeBarnes (473092) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197944)

NOW they tell me. I just ate some tuna sushi for lunch today. ::sigh::

I, for one, welcome my new parasitic overlords.

Re:Too late (2, Interesting)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198100)

I, for one, welcome my new parasitic overlords.

      Although in your case, "innerlords" may be more accurate. Or in a few hours, "underlords".

Endangered species? No (3, Informative)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 4 years ago | (#30197982)

The chances that the fish you eat in sushi is an endangered species in a sushi bar is roughly the same as if you go to any other seafood restaurant. There are a lot of fish in the sea (no shit sherlock) - assume that 0.01% of fish are endangered. Now imagine dragging a net behind your boat. In theory at most 0.01% of all fish in your net will be endangered. Let's look at this more closely: Endangered fish are likely to exist in much smaller quantities, so while there might be 500 tuna per square mile of ocean, there might only be 1 of super-endangered-deliciousfish. Secondly, super-endangered-deliciousfish (SEDF) may only exist in the Bahamas, while the fisherman may be trawling off the coast of Georgia for Tuna, where Tuna are known to be abundant. Your likelyhood of catching a SEDF is highly unlikely.
 
In any case the fish is dumped in the boat's hold on ice, and then sorted out when they get back to port. Fish are already partially ready for consumption at this point. It's not like fisherman go out in the forest and hunt individual endangered fish with rifles where they can see them. Making most any argument about endangered fish in a commercial fishing situation is completely retarded. The only argument for this is situations where opportunistic overfishing occurs in specific areas like when salmon swim upriver to lay their eggs, and this is already highly regulated.
 
Also this article came out almost a year ago in the NYT this is old news(!)

Re:Endangered species? No (1)

pdclarry (175918) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198092)

Also this article came out almost a year ago in the NYT this is old news(!)

It was a different study reported in the NYT a year ago. This new study was published in August. There is a link in the original post above to the year old story.

Re:Endangered species? No (1)

ichthyoboy (1167379) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198118)

Unless the SEDF is the focus of a targeted fishery and is extremely profitable, such as...one of the species of bluefin tuna (southern bluefin tuna - Thunnus maccoyi)

Better take the alternative (3, Insightful)

houghi (78078) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198004)

Back to good old American Hamburgers. At least nobody ever got sick or died eating those, right?

Or in other words: People do stuff with food that might be harmful. There is no reason to take out Sushi in particular.

Re:Better take the alternative (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30198142)

Ground beef = hamburger. Heard of ecoli?

Re:Better take the alternative (1)

Renraku (518261) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198168)

Hamburgers are much different. With hamburgers, it's much cheaper for them to provide what they advertise as to what they don't. Like McDonalds wouldn't profit off of using dog or rat over beef cattle in their hamburgers, assuming of course that their hamburgers are actually advertised as being beef. A lot of people can tell if the taste of a hamburger is off, since beef has a distinct flavor. Most of all, I can't think of any beef cattle in the world that have a natural toxin or are typically unfavorably digested.

Sushi is different. A lot of fish have very similar flavors, and look similar as well. Even a sushi chef if they aren't a veteran might have trouble telling true tuna from fake tuna. Personally, as long as they aren't using endangered or toxic fish, I'm fine with them offering tuna-like fish, as long as they don't offer it for tuna-specific prices.

Study finds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30198016)

I wish there were more pedantic people to point out the abuse of the word study finstead of polls and surveys, so I wouldn't feel the urge to...

great timing (4, Funny)

Eil (82413) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198020)

I just sat down at the computer for dinner with my spicy tuna roll and this is the top story on the Front page. Thank you Slashdot, for ruining my appetite yet again.

Escolar (1)

WiiVault (1039946) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198026)

Interesting that the Japanese won't/can't eat this, but consume many other poisonous fish. Perhaps we should warn them of the dangers of contact with whales...

Toxic is a strong word (1)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198056)

For Escolar [wikipedia.org]'s effects.

Which are inconvenient but not toxic. The fish hasn't been shown to kill or cause long-term harm. But has unpleasant digestive system side effects in some people. If you experience any of those effects ever, stop eating the fish, but it's your problem not the fish's, and not a problem everyone has :)

I wouldn't suggest eating it, but it sounds as if the effects are short-term, not all people are necessarily effected, and primarily occur if the portion size is too large and not prepared in a way to reduce oils.

More like an unwanted effect than something truly toxic that would be likely to kill you or have a long-term health effect.

So limit the amount of sushi you eat, to a sane amount. No more than a 5 oz piece aday, for sure. Definitely don't eat Sushi multiple times a day, or multiple times in the same week.

Re:Toxic is a strong word (1)

Nethead (1563) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198110)

Definitely don't eat Sushi multiple times a day, or multiple times in the same week.

The HELL you say! If I have three vendors that want to take me to lunch in a week, I'm fucking having three sushi lunches that week, understand?

I'm very disappointed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30198082)

63 comments already, and not one bad car analogy.

Escolar = White Tuna (1)

galvanash (631838) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198172)

Not everywhere of course, but in many regions the common name for Escolar is White Tuna... The fact that Albacore is ALSO referred to as White Tuna does not make this fraudulent naming. In fact in most Sushi restaurants I have frequented, Escolar is MUCH more expensive and is intentionally distinguished from other Tuna varieties. I usually see it labeled as "White Tuna (Escolar)". This is definitely not meant to fool the customer into thinking it is Tuna, it is because that is what they themselves have learned to identify it as. Anyone who enjoys Albacore would _immediately_ know the difference as Escolar is VERY different...

here's the real health hazard (0, Troll)

ILuvRamen (1026668) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198188)

Apparently the stupid people who make and eat sushi haven't realized what humans have known for thousands of years. If you cook your meat, you don't die from deadly bacteria in it. Seriously, how many cases of dangerous bacterial infections have there been from eating completely raw fish. Especially those caught and prepared in the just WONDERFUL sanitation in the Asian fish farms and places where the sushi is prepared.

Never again in the US (1, Informative)

oheso (898435) | more than 4 years ago | (#30198198)

Last time I had sushi in the US (and it wasn't my idea, definitely) I got very seriously ill. That's never happened to me in Japan. I'm not saying I've never had one thing served me and called another in Japan (frankly, I'd hardly know apart from the varieties of tuna), but at least the chefs are trained well enough (and the people inculturated enough to know what's up and down) not to make me sick.

Had this happen to me once (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30198200)

This occurred to me once. I had noticed that the tuna was a little bit different, still ate it. A few hours later, I was running to the toilet. Felt fine, just couldn't stray further than about 10 metres from the toilet. Lasted about 36 hours. It's called oilfish in this part of the world.

Awful experience - if you ever think it is not tuna - complain, preferably to the restaurant and the local health authority.

OK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30198246)

So fraud and shit happens in the US. We knew that.
What about the rest of the world where we actually have food standards?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...