Seaspiracy: Don’t let fish become the new scapegoat

Seaspiracy certainly has one takeaway we can all agree upon: our current methods of mass-farming and overconsumption of animal products are harmful to both ourselves and the environment. We can also all agree that commercial fishing, as shown in the documentary, is damaging our oceans and our health. However, each person’s food choices are individual and based on a variety of factors and the sourcing of fish (from coastal fisheries can still serve as a environmentally friendly fish source.  So rather than deciding to completely avoid whole groups of food based on a documentary, it is important to research and support the best sector within each industry. As with all documentaries, the emotionally charged message of Seaspiracy should be viewed critically. We should be looking at the greater picture and asking ourselves: Where does Seaspiracy lack nuance? 

We can’t get enough omega 3s by eating algae 

The documentary claims that we can get enough omega 3 by eating algae. While microalgae is the original producer of the omega-3 DHA, fatty fish that consume algae contain much higher amounts than seaweed or kelp. Saying we can get enough omega 3 by eating algae is like saying we can get enough nutrients (resveratrol) by drinking wine. Not realistic. The best source of omega-3 fatty acids for humans comes from fish such as SMASH (salmon, mackerel, anchovies, sardines, or herring). One three ounce serving of salmon contains about 600 mg DHA while a serving of seaweed, of which one typically does not consume very much, contains very little. Algae oil DHA supplements can provide needed DHA for vegetarians or vegans, but it’s always best to get omega 3s from whole foods, as supplements are unstable and can easily go rancid.

Slave labor practices around shrimp fishing 

This is a highly concerning and important point; knowing how our food is produced, and ensuring fair treatment of all workers, is critical. Both the coffee and chocolate industries have also come under scrutiny for use of slave labor for quite some time. Some consumers seek out Fair Trade coffee and chocolate, which is certified as having been produced according to fair trade standards including supporting farmers through fair pricing, labor conditions, and community development. Yet if fair labor of shrimp farmers is truly important to us, how can we justify drinking regular non-Fair Trade coffee? Rather than completely removing these foods, perhaps we can decide to make better choices. Seaspiracy tears down the credibility of MSC, but I’m sure if we were to look into the Fair Trade Label we would also find many faults. Some change is certainly better than none, and we can each play our part to reduce harm in the world. Yet if a cause such as slave labor is truly important, why aren’t we discussing cutting out chocolate and coffee? 

Soy and other monoculture crops also lead to environmental damage 

The documentary also suggests trading in fish for questionable swaps. One suggestion is soy based products. While soy products can be a healthy addition, especially for those who do not consume fish or meat, incorporating them on a daily or weekly basis may not be the best option. Large-scale farming often uses the herbicide glyphosate on soybeans, which has been declared a possible carcinogen by WHO. In addition to harming humans, glyphosate has been detected in waterways near agricultural sites, causing damage to wildlife resulting in wider environmental harm. 

Fake (factory produced) seafood is not a healthy alternative – for us or the environment. The documentary also suggests fake meat products be eaten in place of fish. These products are highly processed with many harmful chemicals (to us and the environment) and do not contain the same nutrients as fish.  As the documentary showed, these fake meat products need to be fried and oiled in order to taste decent – so these clearly aren’t the solution. Seaspiracy fails to bring up suitable alternatives from both a health standpoint AND an environmental standpoint.  

We need to reduce, not remove 

While this documentary’s message of the importance of reducing our overall fish and meat intake rings true, we need to consider whether completely cutting out whole food groups is the answer. For those who eat meat or fish two to three times a day, reducing intake to once a day or even a few times per week may be beneficial. The benefits of a plant-forward diet, in which plant foods make up the majority of our meals and we consume smaller portions of animal products are clear. Yet for those who already consume an 80-90% plant based diet, completely cutting out fish, a rich source of protein, omega-3 fats, vitamins, and minerals, may not be necessary. This is a personal choice. 

Bottom Line? 

The health of our oceans and our soil is undoubtedly connected with our health as humans. We might be better served by taking a critical look at our agricultural systems. Agribusiness and large seafood companies make decisions about farming with corporate strategies, focusing on profit while ignoring sustainability. As consumers, the power is in our hands. We can vote with our dollars and our forks, consuming less animal products overall while still incorporating them in a balanced way by supporting truly sustainable choices when possible. If we all reduce our meat and fish consumption then sustainability WILL be possible. Perhaps we can strive to make informed choices about our products, rather than completely cutting out coffee, chocolate, and fish from our lives.