Non-pink / brown part of salmon; ok to eat?

About (not) consuming fresh raw fish and fresh raw egg yolks
User avatar
RRM
Administrator
Posts: 8142
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005 00:01
Contact:

Postby RRM » Fri 05 Mar 2010 20:04

A) I think you can't find them anywhere.
Knowing its taste, I think it will contain antinutrients.

B) I doubt its really harmful, and that if it doesnt give you a sick feeling,
nothing will happen.
I dont think we can digest them.

C) They will leave the body undigested.

D) That may be the case. Did you check the smell?
Kookaburra
Posts: 293
Joined: Mon 18 Jan 2010 14:28

Postby Kookaburra » Sat 06 Mar 2010 14:31

D) That may be the case. Did you check the smell?
The smell was okay, just that they were slippery. Taste-wise, I think they were alright, neither the best nor the worst I have eaten.
Novidez
Posts: 377
Joined: Thu 25 Feb 2016 23:34

Re: Non-pink / brown part of salmon; ok to eat?

Postby Novidez » Thu 07 Jul 2016 14:48

The other day, I bought some Wild Salmon that has a good amount of this brown thingy. And I wondered: "Isn't this the fatty tissue of the fish and where could possible be more Omega-3 fatty acids?"

So, I did a brief research and:

"Q: Is it better to eat the darker meat of fish like salmon that’s found near the skin because it’s higher in omega-3s, or to avoid it because this part of the fish also contains more toxins? What about eating salmon skin itself?

Answer : For most people, according to a 2006 study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, the benefits of eating fish like salmon rich in omega-3 fatty acids outweigh any risks from contaminants. Alice H. Lichtenstein, DSc, director of Tufts’ HNRCA Cardiovascular Nutrition Laboratory, notes that the American Heart Association advises eating two fish meals a week.

It’s true, however, that the dark, fatty areas near the skin—highest in healthy omega-3 fats—are also likely to be highest in any potential toxins. To reduce consumption of pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in fish at risk of such contaminants, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recommends removing the skin, belly, top of the back, dark meat, head, tail and all internal organs before cooking. Note that this will not reduce the mercury in fish (not a chief concern with salmon, in any case), which is stored throughout the tissues."

from http://www.nutritionletter.tufts.edu/is ... 199-1.html

--

" "It's the insulating fat for the fish, so it's just the fat," said Dr. John Swarztberg, head of the editorial board at the UC Berkeley Wellness Letter. "Often times for cosmetic reasons, vendors remove it, but you can eat it. It's perfectly safe to eat."

Dr. Swarztberg says if that salmon was farm-raised, that gray fatty layer may contain elevated levels of industrial pollutants, depending on where the fish came from and what it was fed.

"It could have fairly high levels of PCBs, for example. On the other hand, like all the fat in the fish, it's very rich in the heart-healthy omega-3 fatty acids," he said. "

from http://komonews.com/news/consumer/what- ... 11-20-2015


So, probably, the bad taste could be the potential toxins plus the defenses (anti-nutrients / enzyme inhibitors?) the fish create to protect from them?

It's interesting, however, how the taste of this brown part varies on each fish that I buy. This is, in some fish this part tastes really bad and on others it doesn't. For instance, this last salmon I bought, the brown flesh, doesn't taste bad at all.
Perhaps, this could probably tell how polluted or not the environment where they lived was.

And, apparently, it's where the Omega-3 are in larger amounts.
Still, I don't know if I am going to start eating it more on purpose now that I know this or not...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests