reLAKSation 358. Callander McDowell
Bitter pill: Seafoodintelligence.com report that half of adults eat less then the recommended two portions of seafood a week according to new research commissioned by SeaFish. This should come as no surprise to SeaFish since previous surveys have been no more encouraging despite efforts to promote increased consumption.
SeaFish have now found that a ‘staggering’ 81% of adults revealed that they would try to eat two portions of seafood a week if their doctor recommended it. They also say that ‘alarmingly’ 90% said that their doctor had never advised eating seafood to improve heart-health or omega-3 levels.
We, at Callander McDowell, are not sure why it should be alarming that doctors have never advised eating seafood since as yet, Britain’s National Health System (NHS) is mainly focused on treatment and not on preventive medicine. Unless these adults already suffered a health problem, it would be extremely unlikely that they would receive advice about healthy eating. In an ideal world, the doctor’s surgery would monitor patients and provide advice on a regular basis but the pressure on the NHS to provide an efficient treatment service means that preventive medicine is not a priority. The NHS is trying to move towards new polyclinics where more services are provided under one roof and it is hoped that patients might benefit from a better all round care package as a result.
The news that 81% of adults would try to eat two portions of seafood a week is, we believe, not particularly unexpected but whether they would actually do it is another question. After all the NHS regularly promotes the health benefits to be gained from giving up smoking and drinking, but the public appears reluctant to take such advice on board. We all know that it is healthier not to smoked and drink and to eat less fatty foods, but do we do it? The answer is generally no, although in the case of smoking, anti-smoking legislation has encourage many to give up.
Jon Harman of SeaFish is concerned that health practitioners are not recommending seafood consumption as a route to better health and intends to extend the SeaFish campaign to health centres by sending out posters and leaflets which advocate the consumption of at least two portions of seafood a week.
The accusation that doctors do not do enough to promote seafood consumption seems to be nothing more than an abdication of responsibility for seafood promotion, the main thrust of which has been National Seafood Week. We, at Callander McDowell, have never been convinced that this week long promotion (now two weeks) does much to encourage seafood consumption amongst members of the public that never eat seafood (or just eat fish and chips from the fish and chip shop). Instead, it seems that SeaFish expect the NHS to do the work for them.
By coincidence, this week we were sent an article from US News written by Bernadine Healy MD which looks further into the question of omega-3 for the prevention of heart disease. Dr Healy confirms our view that the recommendation to eat two portions of seafood a week is not on the radar screens of many doctor’s offices (and equally not on that of most homes). What should be of more concern to SeaFish is if the UK follows the solution now been offered in the US. Dr Healy’s view is that not everyone responds in the same way to a meal of omega-3 rich seafood meaning that the benefit is not always guaranteed. Instead, Dr Healy believes that the solution is a refined fish oil supplement with a specified dose of EPA and DHA which she says offers a more certain prescription. Now Dr Healy can offer patients this option as the US FDA have approved an omega-3 pill as a medicine called Lovaza (www.lovaza.com). The question is why would a busy doctor bother to spend time advising on healthy diets when he can now simply prescribe a pill?
Our view is that SeaFish has become distracted by the health issue. Most people eat fish and seafood because they like to eat it. It makes a tasty meal option and the fact that it has healthy properties is simply an added benefit. Rather than force people to treat fish like a medicine, we need to find more ways to encourage consumers that fish makes a good and tasty meal choice.
Basa had its chips?: The Sunday Telegraph informed their readers that traditional fish and chips is now turning into basa and chips as more consumers opt to buy sustainable fish. They say that new figures show that sales of the fish are increasing at a faster rate than for any other species. This is because shoppers are turning away from traditional species in favour of those which are more responsibly sourced.
Whilst percentage figures may support this claim, the reality is a little different. The paper reports that over the last year, Britons have eaten more than 555 tonnes of basa, 42 times as much as the previous year. This rate of change is because there was very little basa available last year, whilst availability has improved more recently. However, the volume consumed is still tiny (another report in fishupdate.com put the figure as just 450 tonnes), when compared against the 48,000 tonnes of cod and 22,000 tonnes of haddock we still consume in the UK. Less then 600 tonnes is not really making much of an impact, especially when compared with consumption in some other countries. Seafood International lists the top ten export market for basa in the first five months of 2008 (approximate figures).
Russia 35,000 t
Spain 19,000 t
Ukraine 17,000 t
Holland 14,000 t
Germany 14,000 t
USA 9,000 t
Poland 8,000 t
Eygpt 7,000 t
Italy 6,000 t
Mexico 6000 t
These figures make the UK’s 555 tonnes for the whole year look rather insignificant. It is possible that basa may yet take off in the UK but if it is to do so, then it needs to be much more widely available. Currently, only one retailer offers basa on the fresh fish counter and a couple more sell frozen fillets. The Telegraph also points out that Young’s, who were the first to offer basa, now produce a range of added value products but none of these seem to be available on a regular basis. The problem for basa is that Alaskan Pollock has been selected as the main alternative to cod and haddock so if basa is to make any impact it needs to displace an already sustainable species. We don’t hold out much hope for this happening, not at least in the short term because pollock is able to offer a sustainable badge, even if it impresses the retailers more than the consumers.
Taste the difference?: The Scottish Minister for Aquaculture, Michael Russell MSP announced this week that Scotland’s aquaculture industry has been given a fresh start with the launch of a renewed Strategic Framework. According to fishupdate.com he said much has changed in the five years since the original framework was published and Scotland needs a framework that is relevant and flexible to meet the challenges ahead.
We have not yet had time to really look through the new framework, which at this stage is just for consultation, so we will postpone any comments for a future occasion but we can see that there are issues which do merit discussion. However before consideration of the new strategic framework, it is worth remembering that the original framework still requires closure.
The last published (and maybe final) update of the various actions took place on April 15th this year. This reported that 53 actions had been completed, 19 were still ongoing and on target and one was behind target. This outstanding action is the study of regulatory costs in Scottish aquaculture. This originally was intended to be a comparative study which included competitor nations. Whether this is still part of the plan is unclear. According to the update, the results were expected in April followed by the final report.
This study has been subject to repeated delays. It is supposed to answer the question whether Scottish aquaculture, and especially salmon farming, is competitive or not. We suspect that we shall never know the answer and the report will be buried quietly along with the original framework as interest in the new framework takes hold.
Yet we suspect that there will be a number of issues in the new framework that will require the results of this cost analysis. If this study has now reported we hope that it is published as soon as possible. Otherwise, we will never get a true flavour of the new framework or see how different it really is.