Originally Posted By: the_chemist
Good link Dogfish. Thanks!

I'm a little confused by your comment. Do you think Pacific farmed Atlantics are significantly worse than to eat than wild salmon?

"Atlantic salmon contained higher PCB concentrations (means, 28-38 ng/g) than farmed coho or chinook salmon, and levels in these latter species were similar to those in wild counterparts (means, 2.8-13.7 ng/g)"

It seems odd you'd leave out the very next sentence

"PCB levels in Atlantic salmon flesh were, nevertheless, 53-71-fold less than the level of concern for human consumption of fish, i.e., 2000 ng/g as established by Health Canada and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (US−FDA)"

Here's the full version for those not in the ivory tower of academia.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sim...mbia-salmon.pdf


I left that part out because it is a B.C. study from cleaner waters where all the fish were deemed safe. It's a another apples and oranges comparison.
"The overall ranking for average wet weight PCB contaminate levels found within all of the preceding sources of salmon was: F-Atlantic >Wild Chinook >F-Chinook >F-Coho> Wild Sockeye >Wild Coho>Wild Pink>Wild Chum.
The ranking found for PCDD/F contaminate levels was: F-Atlantic> F-Chinook> F- Coho >Wild Sockeye >Wild Chinook >Wild Chum>Wild Coho>Wild Pink."

All evidence so far points to farmed Atlantics being more contaminated then any other wild or farmed fish.
Still waiting for any evidence that Puget Sound Atlantic Salmon have ever been tested.

It doesn't bother anyone that Wdfw is saying that these fish are "safe to eat" without testing and without mentioning consumption advisories? beathead