RE: Good Morning America 11/2 fresh seafood report

From: Ralph Boragine (ralph@seafoodweb.net)
Date: Mon Nov 06 2000 - 11:46:43 PST

  • Next message: Ann.L.Shriver@orst.edu: "N.American Fisheries Economists to meet"

    Angela,
    You are right, I hope I didn't imply otherwise. When asked we have always
    said fish smells like a fresh ocean breeze if it doesn't its not fresh. I
    know semantics is semantics but until we stopped defending the bad guys we
    can change the consumer the fishy is something else than "fish to me"
    Ralph

    -----Original Message-----
    From: owner-seafood@ucdavis.edu [mailto:owner-seafood@ucdavis.edu]On
    Behalf Of Angela Correa
    Sent: Monday, November 06, 2000 2:26 PM
    Cc: seafood@ucdavis.edu
    Subject: Re: Good Morning America 11/2 fresh seafood report

    This is semantics, I know -- but unless our industry can stop using the word
    "fishy" to connote a spoiled smell, how can we expect consumers not to
    associate fish with fishiness? Is there another descriptive that could be
    adopted?

    --Angela Correa

    > From: Ralph Boragine <ralph@seafoodweb.net>
    > Reply-To: ralph@seafoodweb.net
    > Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 14:05:17 -0500
    > To: jls@ra.msstate.edu
    > Cc: jperalta@iloilo.net, seafood@ucdavis.edu
    > Subject: RE: Good Morning America 11/2 fresh seafood report
    >
    > Juan,
    > You are almost right, through my years of experience answering consumer
    > questions you learn that some people think fish is supposed to smell and
    > taste like "fish". Sloppy retailers and restaurateurs continue to give
    fish
    > a bad name. I firmly believe we (the industry) owe it to say "Yep that
    store
    > had bad fish don't go there until they prove they have changed".
    > :-) Ralph
    >
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: owner-seafood@ucdavis.edu [mailto:owner-seafood@ucdavis.edu]On
    > Behalf Of Juan L. Silva
    > Sent: Monday, November 06, 2000 12:36 AM
    > To: ralph@seafoodweb.net
    > Cc: jperalta@iloilo.net; seafood@ucdavis.edu
    > Subject: Re: Good Morning America 11/2 fresh seafood report
    >
    >
    > Ralph and all,
    >
    > Just two cents worth of my opinion. If you see the levels of APC
    (sometimes
    > not
    > the best indication of fish spoilage) for the ones that "did not pass",
    they
    > were at or near 7-8 logs. This says that these products were just spoiled
    > (maybe). Moreover, the consumer will not buy (or will return) spoiled fish
    > (or
    > won't him/her?). Give consumers some credit, if the newsperson can smell
    > it,
    > then fish buyers can certainly smell it!!!!!!
    >
    > Juan L. Silva
    >
    >
    > Ralph Boragine wrote:
    >
    >> Jose, Ken, David
    >>
    >> I think a continuing problems here is that both the National Fisheries
    >> Institute and the Food Marketing Institute should have answered the
    > question
    >> simply "some retailers are good, others are not - did you check the
    >> chicken?"
    >> Ralph
    >> Ralph Boragine
    >> Rhode Island Seafood Council
    >> 212 Main Street, Suite 3
    >> Wakefield, RI 02879 USA
    >> P: 401-783-4200
    >> F: 401-789-9727
    >>
    >> -----Original Message-----
    >> From: owner-seafood@ucdavis.edu [mailto:owner-seafood@ucdavis.edu]On
    >> Behalf Of Dr. Jose P. Peralta
    >> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 8:55 PM
    >> To: seafood@ucdavis.edu
    >> Subject: Re: Good Morning America 11/2 fresh seafood report
    >>
    >> Dear folks,
    >>
    >> The news article failed to report, as in a scientific article; the
    >> methods and procedures used in the assessment of the fresh fish. Ergo,
    >> he could have collected all his samples, dump them in the ice box with
    >> ice, and waited until he collected his last samples, before giving it to
    >> the lab for analysis; which could take days. The results to the first
    >> samples are already bias in this regard. Well, as I have said, could
    >> have
    >>
    >> Is 10 million bacteria per gram or more the unacceptable quality
    >> limit for fish? Is this a US Standard?
    >>
    >> " .... The Food and Drug Administration oversees seafood quality at
    >> the wholesale level, where inspectors judge fish quality by the way it
    >> looks, feels and most of all, smells. For beef and poultry,
    >> the government requires microbiological testing, but there is no such
    >> requirement for fish."
    >>
    >> Is the statement correct that FDA does not require bug counts for fresh
    >> fish??
    >>
    >> Jose
    >> --
    >> -----------------------
    >> Jose P. Peralta, Ph. D.
    >> Professor/Food Engineer
    >> Inst. of Fish Processing Technology
    >> College of Fisheries, Univ of the Phil Visayas
    >> 5023 Miag-ao, Iloilo, Philippines
    >> Tel (63 33) 315 8289
    >> FX (63 33) 315 8289, 315 8353
    >> Cell (0917) 302 1282
    >> EMail jperalta@iloilo.net
    >> ------------------------
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Nov 06 2000 - 11:55:09 PST