Slashdot Mirror
Is That Sushi Hazardous To Your Health?
pdclarry writes "A recent study by scientists at the American Museum of Natural History and Columbia University found that a piece of tuna sushi may not be tuna at all: 'A piece of tuna sushi has the potential to be an endangered species, a fraud or a health hazard,' wrote the authors. 'All three of these cases were uncovered in this study.' The study, published in PLoS ONE examined 68 samples of tuna sushi purchased from 31 restaurants in Manhattan (New York City) and Denver, Colorado. Some of these were from endangered species, others were not as labeled, and some were not tuna at all. Of these last, five samples labeled as 'white tuna' were from a toxic fish, Escolar, which is a gempylid species banned for sale in Italy and Japan due to health concerns. 'It can cause gastrointestinal symptoms ranging from mild and rapid passage of oily yellow or orange droplets, to severe diarrhea with nausea and vomiting. The milder symptoms have been referred to as keriorrhea [i.e. flow of wax in Greek].' Fraud in sushi is not new; Slashdot also reported study on mislabeling in 2008. This new study shows that some sushi can actually make you sick. The study was also covered by Wired."
I can finally be a lot more accurate about my bowel movements whenever I call in sick or I'm late for something.
Sushi, and other words, are defined by how people use them. And in the US that means rice and raw fish wrapped in seaweed for 99% of the population. Then english language, unlike C, does not have an ansi standard. It's all fluid.
But the English language does, and it's in Oxford.
Bonus points for those getting the puns.
I currently live in an inland city, hundreds of kilometers from the the nearest ocean. This is why I refuse to eat sushi at the restaurants here since the fish will not be very fresh. I am a microbiologist, so I don't even eat that much sushi anyway since I know what sort and how many bacteria will grow on uncooked fish. Regarding fake or poisonous fish, ask around first before you eat at any restaurant (not only for sushi). I am sure that bad reputation will spread very quickly. There are many websites and blogs that do restaurant reviews. Alternatively, you can make your own sushi as it is not very hard to do. If you can make a sandwich, you can definitely make sushi.
American Sushi is mostly about appearance, though the recent "fusion" sushi brands have brought more variety and flavors. Japanese sushi is an entirely different animal and the taste is 90% from the higher quality and fresher fish that is available. There are also a number of local herbs and vegetables that are traditional in Japan and compliment fish flavors much better than American "equivalents". You are also forgetting Udon, the traditional large noodle stew that is very flavorful.
Thanks for pointing that out. Maybe you can submit a story about them? It's certainly News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters.
It's bad enough that too many university students are limited to pay-walled articles that their uni has bought a license to. Papers that were freely available online a decade ago have now disappeared except for abstracts and "you can get the rest of this article for $34.95".
Good thing we still have the Wayback Machine, but it doesn't cover nearly enough.
Considering that Colorado is surrounded by land on all sides and New York is about as far away as possible from the pacific ocean (while staying in the US) i'm not surprised the tuna sushi you get there is a bit off.
[FUCK BETA 2.6.2014]
Sure, thank you for bolstering my point. The title asks if the sushi is hazardous, but the story is only about the fish, not the rice or seaweed (etc)... (I'm tired and feeling a bit picky.)
Slack language is a cause and/or result of slack thinking. For example, single TV episodes advertised as "all new" or the Dodge Ram commercial that states the truck is "all brawn, all brain" - sigh.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Aquaculture still doesn't solve it. You still have to catch all the fish you need to feed the Tuna.
Humans should stop eating meat altogether, but if people can't manage that then at least stop eating top level carnivores.
Back to good old American Hamburgers. At least nobody ever got sick or died eating those, right?
Or in other words: People do stuff with food that might be harmful. There is no reason to take out Sushi in particular.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
...then at least stop eating top level carnivores.
Not to worry, I don't eat humans on Atkins.
-- I have a private email server in my basement.
Or perhaps we should go for IVM (in-vitro meat)?
I bet that the first commercial use for IVM will be feeding tuna, and other carnivorous livestock. That will fund the technology until it's ready for actually eating. As a bonus, we could clone rare (or maybe even extinct) species, and eat them too!
Actually, the idea is to breed the fish and then release millions upon millions of fingerlings into the various oceans. The real problem is how we got here and what will change. Basically, countries need to change. For example, the Atlantic tuna is about collapse. The reason is that overfishing is being done. By who? Well, America and Canada have STRICT limits on Canadian/American fleets which are checked pretty thoroughly. We also have foreign ships here that are under restrictions. Most are Chinese and Japanese. The japanese ships will dock at our ports, be checked, and then take the whole load back to Japan. OTH, The Chinese ships come in, drop off their max allowed load, and then show up back in China with a full load. IOW, they are taking another load on their way back (illegal, but easy enough to pull off from what I have heard). But that is not the full issue. EU has been horrible about putting restraints on their taking of the Tuna. And those nations that do, simply look the other way when the ship is over.
What needs to happen is that ALL OF THE NATIONS that have fisheries need to protect these. It can not be so half ass anymore.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Most good Japanese restaraunts have the difference between Sushi and Sashimi on page 1 of their menu, and more Americans than you think know the difference.
This is my sig.
Sushi, and other words, are defined by how people use them. And in the US that means rice and raw fish wrapped in seaweed for 99% of the population. Then english language, unlike C, does not have an ansi standard. It's all fluid.
You flurbing pizzats and your fempy ticrans. Can't even warrup a mekci bommits.
So why don't you eat actual Sushi instead of Sashimi, with something like chicken if you don't like raw fish? The more you know...... the less food you'll hate over pure ignorance.
"we've got trenchcoats and bad attitudes" - John Constantine, HellBlazer
Raw fish hazardous to your health? Go figure!
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
Yuck, can can you possibly compare tuna sashimi with canned tuna? I hate that canned crap but tuna sashimi is heaven. Especially a piece of nicely marbled toro.
We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
Well according to Wikipedia the Japanese government banned escolar from consumption in 1977 as they consider it to be toxic. Since article is this is about sushi and sashimi I'd say the Japanese government ought to be a good authority on the matter.
For myself I'd consider a foodstuff that might very well cause an oily discharge from my anus, along with the possibility of other unpleasant side effects such as "stomach cramps, loose bowel movements, diarrhea, headaches, nausea, and vomiting" to be something I am absolutely not going to eat.
The article is also about mislabelling, or passing off escolar as white tuna. If someone told me I was getting "white tuna" and gave me "oily liquid anal leakage fish" instead I'd be pretty incensed.
Butchering words is how languages grow and develop.
If that is the case, then why are they giving me this ultra expensive SEDF instead of the cheaper regular tuna that I paid for?
"linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
It's all fluid.
That's true, but
1) adding a meaning to a word may make someone confused in the future.
2) mixing sushi and sashimi sounds like mixing hot dog and sausage here
3) slashdot is not only for Americans, if my understanding is correct
4) you will have less chance to get sashimi when you ordered and meant sushi in a Japanese restaurant
and
5) using a word in the original meaning is a good way to show your respect to a different culture, unless the new meaning is major at your place.
Bullshit. Take your absurd position and extrapolate it to its logical conclusion: No one knows what any word means, and communication comes to a screeching halt. Try again.
As it happens, saltwater aquaculture is widely practiced from Norway to Chile. It basically involves putting a cage out in the sea and growing fish in it.
Of course, there are lots of reasons not to encourage most fish-farming like the fact that it requires huge amounts of wild fish to be caught, mulched and processed to be fed back to the "desirable" fish species that is being farmed. That is, fish farming uses more fish than it creates, thereby exacerbating the chronic overfishing problems that plague the seas.
And if you go into any restaurant and ask for sushi, you will be getting rice. This entire argument is stupid because its a japanese word used in japanese restaurants, and it follows the proper japanese meaning. However much american consumers may wish the meaning to change, theyre simply going to get the incorrect dish if they use the incorrect word.
The English language, sadly, is not standardised, which is why we have differences like “kerb” and “curb”, “lorry” and “truck”, “lift” and “elevator”, and so on, and so forth.
French, on the other hand, has L’Académie française, an institute that actually does define a standard French language. Québec also has their own OQLF (who will have none of that bastard English in their French, merci beaucoups) and they’re both happily ignored by the Acadians and northern Québécois, who speak their own dialects and who are almost completely incomprehensible by people who speak real French (Joual in particular is nasty; it’s barely considered French).
Okay, so having a standardised version of French hasn’t exactly helped matters, but there is a Defined French Language, unlike English. That’s what happens when there are two major world powers, both speaking the same language, neither of whom will bow to other in such affairs!
Matthew G P Coe
http://mgpcoe.blogspot.com/
Why exactly do you think that, if you've studied language, you must necessarily give up on linguistic prescriptivism? This is the same problem I have with the more glib moral relativists - I accept that there is no "objective" standard, but that doesn't mean that I can't make prescriptive statements, it just means they're backed up by me, as opposed to nature or God. While the GP's views on the primacy of certain dictionaries may or may not be reflecting a less-thought-out view of language, it's far from "simply false". And nobody who has actually studied philosophy could make this mistake. :-)
Bobb9000 - raised by the wolves,
Oxford education as phrased by the wolves.
It's a self correcting problem.
Once we really do have too many humans for the food supply those humans will go to war over food and kill large numbers of each other. And then we don't have too many humans anymore.
But fell free to kill yourself for the good of humanity if you really think you and your offspring (and their offspring) are going to petri dish the earth.
So why don't you eat actual Sushi instead of Sashimi, with something like chicken if you don't like raw fish?
The more you know...... the less food you'll hate over pure ignorance.
Don't you think the GP knows the difference given that he specifically claims that sushi isn't as disgusting as raw fish, thereby putting them clearly into different categories?
The better your reading comprehension...... the more able you'll be to hear that whoosh sound.
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
Slack language is a cause and/or result of slack thinking.
Language is communication. If someone says "tuna sushi" and the listener understands what they said, then it is accurate communication and language. It doesn't matter if you have a personal opinion about whether that usage is "correct" they used the language to communicate, so it is part of the language.
For example, single TV episodes advertised as "all new" or the Dodge Ram commercial that states the truck is "all brawn, all brain" - sigh.
And you understood that they intended to give the impression that it is "all brawn" like it has always been, but now the truck is brainer. Sure it's silly. It's supposed to get you to remember it, and you did. Not only did they get their idea across, but they got you to remember it well and repeat it to others. That means they are smarter than you. Not that they used "slack language" but that they purposefully abused language to convey an idea in a memorable way. You understood them and remembered it, so it was a win on all possible fronts. And you complain? That just means you don't understand, not that others are wrong.
Learn to love Alaska
Think of all the native English speakers who cannot correctly use words like "loose"/"lose" or "they're"/"there"/"their". It shows that they still struggle with basic usage of their native language, the sorts of issues that they should have worked out back in elementary school. It's noteworthy that foreigners who learn English as a second (or third) langauge tend not to make these mistakes.
You are correct, at least as far as written language. If you were to talk to someone who just confused "lose" with "loose" though, I'm sure they would know the difference. Ditto with "there", "their", "they're." This is more a case of lack of experience with written language, than actual stupidity or laziness. We often forget that /. caters to a demographic that is much more literate than the general population. Even so, if you recall the poll here a few weeks back, there are some among us who refuse to read books, and probably don't write much either (no, code doesn't count). Also, most forms of electronic communications generally foster bad habits and promote general laziness. Something about electronic communications spawns a "throw away" mind set. When I sit down to write something on paper, or even plan on writing a serious document in word, I write much better than any /. reply I've ever written.
This type of forum is more like a rambling discussion, than a well-structured debate. How often do you actually use completely proper grammar in a colloquial setting? How often does even the most mindlessly pedantic of us slip and say "ATM machine?"
In the end though, it really doesn't matter. Language exists for communications, and is generally tailored to the audience and intention of the speaker. I see no need to spend the time writing a doctoral dissertation level reply to you.
On topic, how many readers here actually didn't understand what the summary was talking about? If you were genuinely confused you might have a legitimate case to complain, if not your just being a mildly sophisticated troll (but a troll nonetheless).
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
No true Scotsman would agree with that.
So not liking sushi because of raw fish is like saying you don't like cake because it's chocolate.
In the US, it's more like saying "I don't like cake because of frosting."
I don't know how it is in the US, but in the rest of the world, including actual Asian countries sushi comes in many different varieties.
What percentage of sushi-type-products sold world-wide contain seafood? There seem to be lots of people saying "sushi implies fish" and a lot of people saying "nuh uh" but nothing indicating what people eating as sushi contains. I'm curious now. I've never heard of a sushi place that didn't serve raw fish of some sort. And everywhere I've been, including places outside the US, the menu was always over half seafood (in the US, it's often all seafood except for California rolls).
Learn to love Alaska
I think the point of the story isn't that eating mislabelled raw fish might cause disease but that a lot of raw fish is mislabelled.
Language is communication. If someone says "tuna sushi" and the listener understands what they said, then it is accurate communication and language.
If someone says "tuna sushi", meaning tuna sashimi, and the listener understands it as tuna sushi, then it is inaccurate communication and language.
In this case it might result in someone getting served a meal they hadn't expected. But there are other cases where vagueness in the definition of terms can lead to much more serious and expensive problems.
Also, most forms of electronic communications generally foster bad habits and promote general laziness.
Hogwash. E-mail no more promotes lazy writing than the Pony Express did in the 19th century.
The problem, once again, lies not in our stars but in ourselves. We have become more permissive in our acceptance of a butchered language. If you want people to write better, you need to openly ridicule their efforts when they demonstrate their abject ignorance.
Our society is far too kind to the moron, and it is to our detriment.
I think this falls into the TMI catagory.
Yes, and one completely disconnected from the actual practice of the thing.
No, there are more differences here. In your comparison here, language falls somewhere in between art/music and morality. People are far, far more likely to assume a gustibus non disputandum attitude about art and music than about language. If you don't like a certain form of music, you might get called tasteless or a philistine at worse. If you speak a non-standard dialect, on the other hand, you will have people say that you are illogical and mentally deficient, or even worse. Especially if dialect in question is AAVE; inner-city black children have been matter-of-factly said to not have language at all in some academic circles.
You can prefer all you want. The problem starts when you bully other, less educated people than yourself into bowing to your preferences as superior for spurious reasons--which is what actually happens in practice.
But you see, "cuz I say so" is a pretty bad reason to demand that other people talk and write in the way you say they should. It's one virtue is that it is at least honest--a typical prescriptivist will cover it up with piles and piles of bullshit about "logic" and "aesthetics" and "clarity" and "avoidance of ambiguity" and on and on and on.
Are you adequate?