Author Topic: conventional seafood vs meat, how bad is it really?  (Read 6399 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Sorentus

  • Warrior
  • ****
  • Posts: 200
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
conventional seafood vs meat, how bad is it really?
« on: April 05, 2014, 12:05:19 am »
So i know store bought meat is full of grain and antibiotics and such but what about seafoods like lobster, oysters, shrimps and fish?

Ive been dying to eat lobsters because i'll be able to eat the whole thing, eyes, brain and intestines. But do i have to look for super special ones or can i go ahead and eat raw conventional lobsters? Also wondering for other seafoods and fish.

Offline goodsamaritan

  • Administrator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,798
  • Gender: Male
  • Geek Healer Truth Seeker Pro-Natal Pro-Life
    • View Profile
    • Filipino Services Inc.
Re: conventional seafood vs meat, how bad is it really?
« Reply #1 on: April 05, 2014, 12:56:25 am »
I choose oysters from clean waters.  I get them on a regular basis.

I choose only ocean shrimp... never farmed shrimp.

I'm not into lobsters, too little meat.

I'm into various tiny, small, medium, big fish... all ocean wild.
Linux Geek, Web Developer, Email Provider, Businessman, Engineer, REAL Free Healer, Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Truther, Ripple-XRP Fan

I'm the network administrator.
My business: Website Dev & Hosting and Email Server Provider,
My blogs: Cure Manual, My Health Blog, Eczema Cure & Psoriasis Cure

Offline cherimoya_kid

  • One who bans trolls
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,513
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: conventional seafood vs meat, how bad is it really?
« Reply #2 on: April 08, 2014, 08:34:28 am »
As long as it's not farmed, it's usually OK.

Offline edmon171

  • Boar Hunter
  • ***
  • Posts: 96
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: conventional seafood vs meat, how bad is it really?
« Reply #3 on: April 08, 2014, 07:45:13 pm »
I just read a study that said beef and eggs have twice the mercury of wild salmon. If thats true then this is a game-changer for me. I haven't eaten fish in years to avoid the mercury. Instead I've been taking a distilled fish oil that I just found out has phthalates and synthetic polymers in the enteric coating on the capsule. The numbers were 50ppb or less for the beef and eggs and the wild salmon was 0.022ppm avg. I'm guessing this has something to do with the fertilizer for the grains they are fed, but still, I haven't been avoiding grain-fed products with the same dedication that I would turn down fish. Sashimi this weekend for sure.
My basic health philosophy:

1. If it is advertized on TV, don't touch it.
2. If it is recommended in the news, do the opposite.
3. If it makes most people afraid, it might be good for you.

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: conventional seafood vs meat, how bad is it really?
« Reply #4 on: April 08, 2014, 10:27:37 pm »
I just read a study that said beef and eggs have twice the mercury of wild salmon. If thats true then this is a game-changer for me. I haven't eaten fish in years to avoid the mercury. Instead I've been taking a distilled fish oil that I just found out has phthalates and synthetic polymers in the enteric coating on the capsule. The numbers were 50ppb or less for the beef and eggs and the wild salmon was 0.022ppm avg. I'm guessing this has something to do with the fertilizer for the grains they are fed, but still, I haven't been avoiding grain-fed products with the same dedication that I would turn down fish. Sashimi this weekend for sure.
The mercury in seafood scare is an absolute joke. I am surprised anyone could be gullible enough to believe in it.
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

Offline Projectile Vomit

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,027
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: conventional seafood vs meat, how bad is it really?
« Reply #5 on: April 08, 2014, 10:47:23 pm »
What study are you talking about that claimed higher levels of mercury in beef than in wild fish? I'd like to read it, if you could offer a citation or forward a link.

Offline edmon171

  • Boar Hunter
  • ***
  • Posts: 96
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: conventional seafood vs meat, how bad is it really?
« Reply #6 on: April 08, 2014, 11:13:10 pm »
The fish numbers I just pulled from wikipedia.

This was the original study I read:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02220741#page-1

This is a similar study that reports much lower numbers in meat:
http://www.jmbfs.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/9_jmbfs_lukacova_2014_fs.pdf

but still they are higher than some shellfish. I miss scallops so much, can't wait to have them again.

I think both of these were done in north dakota and one of them confirmed that the soil was not the source of contamination.
My basic health philosophy:

1. If it is advertized on TV, don't touch it.
2. If it is recommended in the news, do the opposite.
3. If it makes most people afraid, it might be good for you.

Offline eveheart

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,315
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: conventional seafood vs meat, how bad is it really?
« Reply #7 on: April 09, 2014, 12:05:01 am »
So i know store bought meat is full of grain and antibiotics and such but what about seafoods like lobster, oysters, shrimps and fish?

I've been puzzling over your statement about store-bought meat being full of grain and antibiotics. I buy much of my meat from a store that labels grass-fed vs. not, antibiotics vs. none, and the source of all fish and seafood in the seafood section. Maybe it's just my state's labeling laws, but there is nothing inherently wrong about meat that is sold in stores.

It's more important to find out what happens before the meat (or other food) gets to the store, and a few good questions usually sorts out those matters.
"I intend to live forever; so far, so good." -Steven Wright, comedian

Offline Sorentus

  • Warrior
  • ****
  • Posts: 200
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: conventional seafood vs meat, how bad is it really?
« Reply #8 on: April 09, 2014, 01:39:54 am »
I've been puzzling over your statement about store-bought meat being full of grain and antibiotics. I buy much of my meat from a store that labels grass-fed vs. not, antibiotics vs. none, and the source of all fish and seafood in the seafood section. Maybe it's just my state's labeling laws, but there is nothing inherently wrong about meat that is sold in stores.

It's more important to find out what happens before the meat (or other food) gets to the store, and a few good questions usually sorts out those matters.

What i mean by store is the typical grain fed and sick beef, i have 2 source of healthy grass fed beef, both of which i found in a store but it was a organic store not the supermarket.

Offline CatTreats

  • Warrior
  • ****
  • Posts: 237
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: conventional seafood vs meat, how bad is it really?
« Reply #9 on: April 14, 2014, 02:39:33 am »
I just read a study that said beef and eggs have twice the mercury of wild salmon. If thats true then this is a game-changer for me. I haven't eaten fish in years to avoid the mercury. Instead I've been taking a distilled fish oil that I just found out has phthalates and synthetic polymers in the enteric coating on the capsule. The numbers were 50ppb or less for the beef and eggs and the wild salmon was 0.022ppm avg. I'm guessing this has something to do with the fertilizer for the grains they are fed, but still, I haven't been avoiding grain-fed products with the same dedication that I would turn down fish. Sashimi this weekend for sure.

I would go stock up on seafood then. :) I used to think the mercury thing was true, but it's just nonsense that's been overhyped. Not even sure why. I eat pounds of tuna every week, as do many others on this forum. And I used to eat tuna and swordfish regularly as a kid, too.
In its purest, unaltered form, healthy food is delicious.

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: conventional seafood vs meat, how bad is it really?
« Reply #10 on: April 14, 2014, 03:06:25 am »
I would go stock up on seafood then. :) I used to think the mercury thing was true, but it's just nonsense that's been overhyped. Not even sure why. I eat pounds of tuna every week, as do many others on this forum. And I used to eat tuna and swordfish regularly as a kid, too.
  The Seychelles Rochester University  study showed that even when one is eating vast amounts of seafood that one is not affected by any so-called mercury-poisoning.
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

Offline CatTreats

  • Warrior
  • ****
  • Posts: 237
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: conventional seafood vs meat, how bad is it really?
« Reply #11 on: April 14, 2014, 03:11:01 am »
  The Seychelles Rochester University  study showed that even when one is eating vast amounts of seafood that one is not affected by any so-called mercury-poisoning.

Yeah, I read that one. I always figured it was overhyped, just like any other food scares that the media puts out there. I wouldn't give up my tuna for the world.
In its purest, unaltered form, healthy food is delicious.

Offline edmon171

  • Boar Hunter
  • ***
  • Posts: 96
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: conventional seafood vs meat, how bad is it really?
« Reply #12 on: April 14, 2014, 03:35:57 am »
I enjoyed a nice pound of raw salmon this weekend, it was great. I still felt compelled to take the skin off, just because its all silvery and shiny like mercury and I suspect that's where it would be hiding. Sashimi is skinned anyway, the dogs were happy with the scraps.

How's this for a food scare, someone in texas found so much mercury in their ground beef it could be seen rolling around in the ziploc bag:

http://www.caller.com/news/2010/aug/17/police-family-says-hamburger-meat-contained/

forgive me for linking to alex jones, but the footage to this story is somewhere in this clip:

Mercury in Beef, It's What's for Dinner? - Alex Jones Tv

This is just so outrageous, I suspect this person had a gripe with the supermarket and just emptied out a couple thermometers to get them bad press in the news.

My basic health philosophy:

1. If it is advertized on TV, don't touch it.
2. If it is recommended in the news, do the opposite.
3. If it makes most people afraid, it might be good for you.

Offline CatTreats

  • Warrior
  • ****
  • Posts: 237
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: conventional seafood vs meat, how bad is it really?
« Reply #13 on: April 14, 2014, 03:51:55 am »
I enjoyed a nice pound of raw salmon this weekend, it was great. I still felt compelled to take the skin off, just because its all silvery and shiny like mercury and I suspect that's where it would be hiding. Sashimi is skinned anyway, the dogs were happy with the scraps.

How's this for a food scare, someone in texas found so much mercury in their ground beef it could be seen rolling around in the ziploc bag:

http://www.caller.com/news/2010/aug/17/police-family-says-hamburger-meat-contained/

forgive me for linking to alex jones, but the footage to this story is somewhere in this clip:

Mercury in Beef, It's What's for Dinner? - Alex Jones Tv

This is just so outrageous, I suspect this person had a gripe with the supermarket and just emptied out a couple thermometers to get them bad press in the news.

It's going to take a lot more than mercury to make me stop eating anything. As it's been debunked many, many times over that it's not even something we should be thinking about. Also, if I remember correctly, this mercury thing was all started by PETA - that alone is enough for me to laugh and ignore it.

The skin generally has fats lining it, so it's nutritious. If it weren't so bloody hard to chew, I'd eat it more.
In its purest, unaltered form, healthy food is delicious.

Offline edmon171

  • Boar Hunter
  • ***
  • Posts: 96
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: conventional seafood vs meat, how bad is it really?
« Reply #14 on: April 14, 2014, 04:33:47 am »
My issue with the mercury is that I see it as something we are exposed to on purpose to harm us because it is added to vaccines (which appear to me to be a tool of population control and manipulation). A wise old dog breeder once told me, "If you never take your puppy to get his shots and deworming, he will never need to see the vet." This seems to be the case, my pup was healthy before he got his shots, but 3 weeks later he was covered in mange with hair falling out and he has had skin problems and allergies his whole life. Its not nice to think of the world as so evil, but medicine is basically a tool of the pharmaceutical drug cartels and I see the pushing of vaccines as no different than a drug dealer giving out free samples in the hope of hooking a lifetime customer.

Also I saw this video of a growing brain cell under a microscope exposed to mercury and it just disintegrated leaving some kind of skeleton behind. I don't think I'll ever get that image out of my mind.

Brain Neuron Degeneration via Mercury
My basic health philosophy:

1. If it is advertized on TV, don't touch it.
2. If it is recommended in the news, do the opposite.
3. If it makes most people afraid, it might be good for you.

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk