RE: Is "Escolar" poisonous?

From: John C Wekell (John.C.Wekell@noaa.gov)
Date: Wed Apr 06 2005 - 10:01:19 PDT

  • Next message: Solorzano, Luis A: "RE: Is "Escolar" poisonous?"

    Two points need to be made in this discussion:

    First, as this discussion has progressed, I noticed that there seems to be a variety of fish species that are going under the guise of "escolar". Wayne Cullinan has sent out a PDF file produced by the Queensland government which pretty much explains the variety of species:

    "Rudderfish Centrolophus, Schedophilus and Tubbia are also marketed as butterfish. Escolar Lepidocybium flavobrunneum and Ruvettus pretiosus (escolar) are also known as oilfish and black oilfish. All of these species are often marketed as rudderfish, because it is a more familiar name."
    So this debate is going to raise a great deal of confusion until we can be very specific about exactly which species or fish we are talking about. Clearly, the name of "escolar " is covering a number of "sins".

    Secondly, what exactly do we mean by "poisonous" in this discussion. If we use the broad definition of "poisonous" to include any "untoward" effect produced by eating some item, then escolar could be considered poisonous, e.g., a laxative effect is not intended when eating fish.     As I noted in an earlier message, Halstead in his voluminous work, does list these fish as "gempylotoxic" fish.  On the other hand, poisonous in most discussions has come to mean responses that yield serious, life threatening symptoms, e.g., paralysis, histaminic responses (scombrotoxin), etc. 

    While it is true that, depending on health condition, even a relatively mild purgative effect could be a serious medical condition, if not fatal, in some individuals. But on the whole, should the escolar be branded as "poisonous"? Keeping to our seafood theme in this list server, doing so puts this fish in the same category as ciguatoxic fish, poisonous shellfish (i.e., PSP), etc. Very serious syndromes and well recognized by risk managers. However, these particular intoxications arise due to toxins obtained from the environment, usually from the consumption of toxic phytoplankton. These toxins are introduced into a normally safe to eat fish. Escolar, on the other hand, seems to have its "toxicity" due to the presence of wax esters, produced by its own metabolism. The problem with this dialectic, is that we can end up broadening the definition of "poisonous" to the point where it soon becomes meaningless (e.g., water is toxic!). It is clear we need something besides "poisonous" and "non-poisonous".


    --
    Formal Signature
    John C. Wekell, Ph.D.
    U.S. Department of Commerce
    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
    National Marine Fisheries Service
    Northwest Fisheries Science Center
    Environmental Conservation Division
    2725 Montlake Blvd. East
    Seattle, WA 98112
     
    ph. (206) 860-3388
    fax (206) 860-3335
    http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/hab/

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 06 2005 - 10:07:16 PDT