California woman loses limbs after battling bacterial infection from tilapia(kron4.com)
kron4.com
California woman loses limbs after battling bacterial infection from tilapia
https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/san-jose-woman-loses-limbs-battling-bacterial-infection-from-tilapia/
105 comments
What is it with geolocking content?
Here’s a link through 12ft for anyone getting the “not available in your region” message: https://12ft.io/proxy?&q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.kron4.com%2Fnews%...
News sites in the USA are terrified of the GDPR for unknown reasons.
The EU wants to claim worldwide jurisdiction so it just isn't worth the hassle for many companies.
I tried signing in to CoveredCA.com from an EU IP and was met with a plain-HTML "too much traffic or configuration error" page. Makes me wonder what kind of tracking they're doing (and what data they're selling)...
Honestly the most distressing part about this is that in the world's most advanced economy, this freak accident which has already cost her all four limbs is probably also going to bankrupt her, and if her kids' educations aren't already paid for probably impact those too.
It's like a literal game of Russian roulette. Completely baffling.
It's like a literal game of Russian roulette. Completely baffling.
If she lived in Europe, the impact on her kids would be much lower. I.e. she wouldn't go bankrupt and her kids would still have access to free higher education.
That's true for the commonwealth countries also.
In many ways the US is the least developed of developed countries.
In many ways the US is the least developed of developed countries.
But Russia isn't about to take the U.S. over, so there's that...
Russia isn't about to take anything over.
Increasing seasonal ocean temperatures and low-salt marine environments like estuaries favor a greater concentration of Vibrio within filter-feeding shellfish; V. vulnificus infections in the Eastern United States have increased eightfold from 1988–2018.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vibrio_vulnificus
So this (likely) is another consequence of climate change.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vibrio_vulnificus
So this (likely) is another consequence of climate change.
Vibrio worries me, probably more than it should.
There's also Amnesic shellfish poisoning from Domoic acid that can cause amnesia, brain damage and death.
And Ciguatera poisoning.
There's also Amnesic shellfish poisoning from Domoic acid that can cause amnesia, brain damage and death.
And Ciguatera poisoning.
Ciguatera:
These are eaten by herbivorous fish which in turn are eaten by larger carnivorous fish. The toxins become more concentrated as they move up the food chain.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciguatera_fish_poisoning
In a toxic world, it's generally safer to eat lower on the food chain and handle stuff higher up the food chain with more care than you do other foods.
It's not a guarantee of being safe, but it helps lower my blood pressure about such things.
These are eaten by herbivorous fish which in turn are eaten by larger carnivorous fish. The toxins become more concentrated as they move up the food chain.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciguatera_fish_poisoning
In a toxic world, it's generally safer to eat lower on the food chain and handle stuff higher up the food chain with more care than you do other foods.
It's not a guarantee of being safe, but it helps lower my blood pressure about such things.
[deleted]
Seasonal temperature changes != global warming
Increased ocean temps have been in the news a lot in recent weeks, so I don't grok this reply.
Edit:
Later in the Wikipedia page:
Increasing seasonal temperatures and decreasing salinity levels seem to favor a greater concentration of Vibrio within filter-feeding shellfish of the U.S. Atlantic seaboard and the Gulf of Mexico...
According to the CDC, V. vulnificus infections in the Eastern United States increased eightfold from 1988–2018 and the border of where these infections occur has migrated 48 km Northward each year.
Edit:
Later in the Wikipedia page:
Increasing seasonal temperatures and decreasing salinity levels seem to favor a greater concentration of Vibrio within filter-feeding shellfish of the U.S. Atlantic seaboard and the Gulf of Mexico...
According to the CDC, V. vulnificus infections in the Eastern United States increased eightfold from 1988–2018 and the border of where these infections occur has migrated 48 km Northward each year.
I wouldn't trust "the news" all that much these days, given how much scaremongering brings in the views and ad $$$.
As for the trend, what about the years before 1988?
As for the trend, what about the years before 1988?
I think what that phrase means is that the temperature in one or more of the seasons has been increasing over the years.
The article quotes an infectious disease expert saying, "If you are someone immunocompromised keeping an eye on these things and avoiding those high-risk activities and foods."
It would be interesting to know whether the patient involved was immunocompromised.
It would be interesting to know whether the patient involved was immunocompromised.
Wikipedia says men are more often seriously impacted because estrogen is protective against the infectionthry think she had, so I would bet she's probably immunocompromised or has one of the other medical issues which increase the risk.
This sounds like one of the worst things that can happen to you. It is the worst nightmare. And it can also destroy your face, like your nose, lips, ears... How can you preserve the will to live under these conditions?
She has children. For some people, that will keep them going.
In her case, as a quadruple amputee, it would be difficult to arrange an unassisted suicide. So she may keep going simply because checking out is not really an option, especially during the immediate aftermath when people are more likely to feel incapable of living with this.
In her case, as a quadruple amputee, it would be difficult to arrange an unassisted suicide. So she may keep going simply because checking out is not really an option, especially during the immediate aftermath when people are more likely to feel incapable of living with this.
> How can you preserve the will to live under these conditions?
You probably don't. I cannnot speculate about someone else and I don't know what's in her head but if it happened to me, I would hope I quickly die and my family can move on with their lives rather than watch me suffer for God knows how long.
You probably don't. I cannnot speculate about someone else and I don't know what's in her head but if it happened to me, I would hope I quickly die and my family can move on with their lives rather than watch me suffer for God knows how long.
Unfortunately the will to death has also become quite difficult.
Look on the bright side, you could become an IRC celebrity (with speech input or other means) and no one ever has to know what you look like.
I had no idea Talapia posed the risk of carrying infections this severe. Me and my dad used to catch a lot of Tilapia in a nearby pond because they were dumb as rocks. Put in the same atta/wheat dough bait and they would come to the exact same place their fish friends got hooked. The fish tastes like absolute ass though, I dont understand why its so popular in the US.
It's like tofu, it tastes like what you season it with (though maybe there was gross-tasting algae in the pond which they were snacking on?).
Tilapia will survive in water that's nearly mud, at high population densities. Their natural habitat is lakes that recede dramatically, concentrating them and making the water quality poor. That makes them very easy to farm. If you manage the pH and nitrate/nitrite concentrations to ensure the water isn't toxic, they'll put up with very high densities and abysmal water quality (read: recirculating water that a thousand fish are pooping in, with an aerobic digester and perhaps brine shrimp to break it down but not a filter that needs replacing). They also grow very quickly.
Tl;Dr they're cheap and can be flavored any way you please.
(To be clear, I've looked into that chocolate milk water, and I ate a fillet of tilapia earlier today; personally I'm comfortable with it, if we're going to farm animals, we should probably do so efficiently. My feelings on whether that's humane are much more mixed. I'm 99% a vegetarian, this was a bit of a cheat day.)
Tilapia will survive in water that's nearly mud, at high population densities. Their natural habitat is lakes that recede dramatically, concentrating them and making the water quality poor. That makes them very easy to farm. If you manage the pH and nitrate/nitrite concentrations to ensure the water isn't toxic, they'll put up with very high densities and abysmal water quality (read: recirculating water that a thousand fish are pooping in, with an aerobic digester and perhaps brine shrimp to break it down but not a filter that needs replacing). They also grow very quickly.
Tl;Dr they're cheap and can be flavored any way you please.
(To be clear, I've looked into that chocolate milk water, and I ate a fillet of tilapia earlier today; personally I'm comfortable with it, if we're going to farm animals, we should probably do so efficiently. My feelings on whether that's humane are much more mixed. I'm 99% a vegetarian, this was a bit of a cheat day.)
> “The ways you can get infected with this bacteria are one-you can eat something that’s contaminated with it the other way is by having a cut or tattoo exposed to water in which this bug lives,” said UCSF Infectious Disease Expert Dr. Natasha Spottiswoode.
I understand exposing a cut presents a potential risk, but why does a tattoo? Is this person am expert or not?
I understand exposing a cut presents a potential risk, but why does a tattoo? Is this person am expert or not?
Guessing they meant a fresh tattoo? Which basically is a cut.
Why mention tattoos at all? Someone who has had one knows they are a cut. It's just wierd thing for the expert to say.
Perhaps there are many who think "it's just a painting on my skin".
She miss spoke. It is only for new tattoo and the skin is healing. A case like this happened to a man in Texas.
Damn, I live in San Jose and eat a lot of tilapia cooked various ways since I had Covid and can't stand the taste of animal meat anymore. I think I'll try salmon.
This is a very interesting sentence, because fish are animals.
Yes and is not meat animal flesh? So it is double interesting.
Technically speaking, tomatoes and chilis are fruits, while strawberries are not fruits (they are fruit clusters - each "seed" is an individual fruit). This is such a point of contention (apparently) that there's a whole "culinary" vs. "botanical" fruit distinction made.
Logically, eggs are meat. It's a giant animal cell. Culinarily speaking, meat refers to the tissue of mammals, particularly muscle tissue from pigs and cows and other ungulates. Fish usually excluded, poultry is often excluded, and offal may be excluded as well.
It's for the same reason why we call blackberries and strawberries both fruits (even though they are not). Culinarily speaking, they're similar. Used in a similar way. Deer, beef, and pork are interchangeable in many recipes. Beef, chicken, and salmon, are not.
Logically, eggs are meat. It's a giant animal cell. Culinarily speaking, meat refers to the tissue of mammals, particularly muscle tissue from pigs and cows and other ungulates. Fish usually excluded, poultry is often excluded, and offal may be excluded as well.
It's for the same reason why we call blackberries and strawberries both fruits (even though they are not). Culinarily speaking, they're similar. Used in a similar way. Deer, beef, and pork are interchangeable in many recipes. Beef, chicken, and salmon, are not.
You're dead on about there being different botanical and culinary definitions, but I have never heard fish or poultry being excused as being meat. They are just different types of meat.
I agree it's a weird distinction, but it's by no means an uncommon one. Christians in the US, for example, often consider fish not to be meat.
https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/good-question-why-isn...
https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/good-question-why-isn...
In a religious context, that doesn't surprise me, but that's about the only context I think it would hold true for.
Most product taxonomies will categorize them separately. Here's two examples trying to categorize tilapia.
Google Product Taxonomy:
Food, Beverages, & Tobacco > Food Items > Meat, Seafood & Eggs
Note the distinction between meat and seafood.
GPC:
Food/Beverage/Tobacco > Fish - Prepared/Processed (Frozen) > Attribute: Type of Fish = Tilapia
Whereas meat in the GPC is defined separately:
Food/Beverage/Tobacco > Meat/Poultry/Other animals - Prepared/processed> ...
Your local grocery store probably is organized the same way. Many people think of fish flesh and meat as being different things. Words are made up and all categories are artificial, whatcha gunnuh do.
Google Product Taxonomy:
Food, Beverages, & Tobacco > Food Items > Meat, Seafood & Eggs
Note the distinction between meat and seafood.
GPC:
Food/Beverage/Tobacco > Fish - Prepared/Processed (Frozen) > Attribute: Type of Fish = Tilapia
Whereas meat in the GPC is defined separately:
Food/Beverage/Tobacco > Meat/Poultry/Other animals - Prepared/processed> ...
Your local grocery store probably is organized the same way. Many people think of fish flesh and meat as being different things. Words are made up and all categories are artificial, whatcha gunnuh do.
And “San Jose” translates into English as “Saint Joseph”, a title associated with Catholicism. So was the practice of not eating meat Fridays for much of the 20th century. In this practice, fish was not counted as a meat, just as it wasn’t in the comment you’re referring to!
The more closely you examine it, the more interesting you can make this sentence become :)
The more closely you examine it, the more interesting you can make this sentence become :)
Is it though?
I have to imagine that the way this person describes fish is the least interesting thing about them, I don't know why we are subjecting them to such microscopic scrutiny.
It doesn't seem kind or curious to me, it seems like we're mocking them for having a slightly different conception of what category fish go into.
I have to imagine that the way this person describes fish is the least interesting thing about them, I don't know why we are subjecting them to such microscopic scrutiny.
It doesn't seem kind or curious to me, it seems like we're mocking them for having a slightly different conception of what category fish go into.
You can speak for yourself, but I certainly didn’t mock anyone.
I’ve had a multi-decade interest in languages, though. IMO, it’s very natural to find patterns and associations like this and finding different ways of organizing taxonomies is fun.
I’ve also thought about why watermelons, pumpkins, cucumbers and bitter gourds all have the character 瓜 in them in Chinese. Not to mock speakers of language, but because I was nerdsniped. Have a nice day.
I’ve had a multi-decade interest in languages, though. IMO, it’s very natural to find patterns and associations like this and finding different ways of organizing taxonomies is fun.
I’ve also thought about why watermelons, pumpkins, cucumbers and bitter gourds all have the character 瓜 in them in Chinese. Not to mock speakers of language, but because I was nerdsniped. Have a nice day.
I understand being nerdsniped dissecting language, but doing it in front of them and amid jeers is kinda different imho. While I understand you weren't jeering, the context of this subthread makes it pretty weird to me.
Have a good one.
Have a good one.
I don't feel mocked. I feel people are being pedantic. The Hacker News comment section isn't biology class.
"I went to the San Francisco zoo and aquarium and enjoyed the animals and the fish" is a perfectly acceptable sentence is it not?
"I went to the San Francisco zoo and aquarium and enjoyed the animals and the fish" is a perfectly acceptable sentence is it not?
I've never heard anyone speak like this, but I'm Canadian, so maybe things are different in the Bay.
It's a redundant sentence. Fish are animals.
It's like saying "I went to the San Francisco zoo and aquarium and enjoyed the animals and the big cats"
It's like saying "I went to the San Francisco zoo and aquarium and enjoyed the animals and the big cats"
It's not like saying "enjoyed the animals and the big cats". If English is your second language then perhaps this will help you speak colloquial English.
English is my first language, which is why I understand the analogy I gave is accurate, both in colloquial and technical forms of English.
Fish are animals, and only the extremely uneducated would think otherwise. Now that this has been pointed out to you, perhaps you will start to speak correctly from this point on, and educate your friends and family to do the same.
Knowledge and education in the US is bad enough. The last thing we need are people advocating to use incorrect language and spreading misinformation.
Fish are animals, and only the extremely uneducated would think otherwise. Now that this has been pointed out to you, perhaps you will start to speak correctly from this point on, and educate your friends and family to do the same.
Knowledge and education in the US is bad enough. The last thing we need are people advocating to use incorrect language and spreading misinformation.
People using language differently isn't misinformation.
I think maybe it's time to let this disagreement go. The stakes are so small, their immediate response to someone pointing out that were animals was "you're right," it's been 18 hours, and it's been a difference of opinion this entire time.
I think maybe it's time to let this disagreement go. The stakes are so small, their immediate response to someone pointing out that were animals was "you're right," it's been 18 hours, and it's been a difference of opinion this entire time.
Saying fish are not animals is 100% misinformation.
I'm happy to let it go, but if I get a reply that I feel warrants a reply, I will.
I'm happy to let it go, but if I get a reply that I feel warrants a reply, I will.
Functionally it is the same. Fish are animals, big cats are animals.
I would also find that sentence weird, for what it's worth. I don't think it's pedantic to point out that fish are animals.
I made the initial comment and I was not mocking anyone, I just think it's different how so many people think of fish as separate from "animal meat".
Even just "meat" by itself wouldn't have been interesting to me as that often is short for "red meat", but "animal meat" is.
Even just "meat" by itself wouldn't have been interesting to me as that often is short for "red meat", but "animal meat" is.
Some religions use a different system for naming different kinds of edible muscle.
It's idiomatic American and International English, and a perfectly reasonable distinction in conversation. :-)
GPT-4 agrees with you and I:
Q: Is common for English speakers using colloquial English to refer to fish as animals? They technically are animals, but people don't often refer to fish as animals in every day speech. Is this correct?
A: In colloquial English, people often categorize living organisms in ways that may not align perfectly with scientific classifications. For example, many people might refer to "animals" as creatures that are mammals, birds, or reptiles, but might not immediately include fish in that category during casual conversation. This is despite the fact that, scientifically speaking, fish are indeed animals.
In everyday speech, people might say things like "I saw some animals and fish on my hike," separating fish from what they casually refer to as "animals." This is similar to how people might separate "birds" or "insects" from "animals" in casual conversation, even though both birds and insects are technically animals as well.
So, while it's scientifically accurate to refer to fish as animals, colloquial usage often makes distinctions that aren't scientifically rigorous. This is a feature of everyday language, which is shaped more by cultural norms and common understanding than by scientific taxonomy.
Q: Is common for English speakers using colloquial English to refer to fish as animals? They technically are animals, but people don't often refer to fish as animals in every day speech. Is this correct?
A: In colloquial English, people often categorize living organisms in ways that may not align perfectly with scientific classifications. For example, many people might refer to "animals" as creatures that are mammals, birds, or reptiles, but might not immediately include fish in that category during casual conversation. This is despite the fact that, scientifically speaking, fish are indeed animals.
In everyday speech, people might say things like "I saw some animals and fish on my hike," separating fish from what they casually refer to as "animals." This is similar to how people might separate "birds" or "insects" from "animals" in casual conversation, even though both birds and insects are technically animals as well.
So, while it's scientifically accurate to refer to fish as animals, colloquial usage often makes distinctions that aren't scientifically rigorous. This is a feature of everyday language, which is shaped more by cultural norms and common understanding than by scientific taxonomy.
It's not the first time I've seen people claim to be vegetarians while eating fish.
What's even weirder is the amount of people that don't know insects are animals.
Some people have a really limited idea of what animal means.
What's even weirder is the amount of people that don't know insects are animals.
Some people have a really limited idea of what animal means.
I agree fish are animals, but it's perfectly ordinary to use lay definitions rather than scientific definitions. Most people don't call fish animals, and that's fine.
Uh, citation needed. I don't know anyone that doesn't call fish animals.
You sure? Have you asked?
Most of the people in my life have a strong interest in biology, my friends are nerds who are liable to use binomial names they picked up in Seek. But I doubt we're reflective of the broader culture. I think a lot of people couldn't tell you the difference between a kingdom from a phylum, and again, that's fine, it doesn't make them stupid or something.
See also this comment for some citations about how they are categorized in the context of commerce: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37542165
Most of the people in my life have a strong interest in biology, my friends are nerds who are liable to use binomial names they picked up in Seek. But I doubt we're reflective of the broader culture. I think a lot of people couldn't tell you the difference between a kingdom from a phylum, and again, that's fine, it doesn't make them stupid or something.
See also this comment for some citations about how they are categorized in the context of commerce: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37542165
The differentiation you've linked is about meat vs seafood, which I would go along with. This is about using the term "animal" for fish, no?
Here's an experiment I performed, you can try it if you care to. I just went to my preferred search engine and did an image search for "animal".
I had to scroll down about thirty images to find something that wasn't a mammal. It was a lizard. Most of the animals were fuzzy. (I may have missed some marsupials, to be fair.) I believe these search results are reflective of what people are looking for when they search "animal," and it isn't fish.
Are fish animals? I would agree. Is it normal to feel differently? I believe so.
I had to scroll down about thirty images to find something that wasn't a mammal. It was a lizard. Most of the animals were fuzzy. (I may have missed some marsupials, to be fair.) I believe these search results are reflective of what people are looking for when they search "animal," and it isn't fish.
Are fish animals? I would agree. Is it normal to feel differently? I believe so.
You have to go down pages and pages to even find a hedgehog, and you find very few birds. I think you find very, very few people who wouldn't call an ostrich or a hedgehog an animal, so I don't know how much that experiment says really.
Why would you need to know anything about taxonomy in order to know fish are animals? Sorry, but no one I've ever known has made any distinction between the two.
I think maybe there is some overlap with op and the idea that "fish" is different from "meat." That's something that basically everyone said at some point.
I think maybe there is some overlap with op and the idea that "fish" is different from "meat." That's something that basically everyone said at some point.
Fish and animals are taxonomic categories (as are meat and fish, the food).
If fish aren't meat but are animals, it should tell you how arbitrary these distinctions are.
If fish aren't meat but are animals, it should tell you how arbitrary these distinctions are.
Fish is meat. It's just that people are used to associating "meat" with "red meat". But if you press people, they are not going to say that in no way is fish flesh considered meat. They just don't generally use the same word to describe both things.
You don't need to know any details of taxonomy as a discipline to know that fish are animals.
For the record, the original meaning of "meat," was just food, in general. So we have sweetmeats, mincemeat, etc.
You don't need to know any details of taxonomy as a discipline to know that fish are animals.
For the record, the original meaning of "meat," was just food, in general. So we have sweetmeats, mincemeat, etc.
The exercise you're talking about, is an exercise in taxonomy. (Though I agree it doesn't require special expertise to engage in taxonomy.)
It only requires a working brain to look at two similar things and categorize them similarly. You don't need to have any familiarity with any kind of scientific field or terminology. You just need to be familiar with fish, and other types of organic life.
Not necessarily scientific fact, but religion has historically differentiated between fish and other forms of animal meat (e.g. land meet).
During lent, Catholics don't eat meat on Fridays but can still eat fish. In fact, some people practice it all year long.
During lent, Catholics don't eat meat on Fridays but can still eat fish. In fact, some people practice it all year long.
Oh, I wouldn't think of fish when I hear "meat", but that's separate from thinking of fish as something separate from "animals".
Denis Leary - Animal Auditions, Cute vs. Food
https://youtu.be/gq0tHt3qf-s
https://youtu.be/gq0tHt3qf-s
You are right. I first wrote mammal but change it to animal, because I've never thought of fish as animals. I've never heard anyone refer to them as animals. I have never read anything that refered to them as animals.
Edit: The Surprising Answer: Are Fish Truly Animals? Exploring the Debate Around Fish as Animals
https://jerrysfishingblog.com/the-surprising-answer-are-fish...
Edit: The Surprising Answer: Are Fish Truly Animals? Exploring the Debate Around Fish as Animals
https://jerrysfishingblog.com/the-surprising-answer-are-fish...
For reference, here's the scientific definition of "animal" - which is broad enough to include insects and various microorganisms as well as humans and other mammals:
> Animals are multicellular, eukaryotic organisms in the biological kingdom Animalia. With few exceptions, animals consume organic material, breathe oxygen, have myocytes and are able to move, can reproduce sexually, and grow from a hollow sphere of cells, the blastula, during embryonic development. As of 2022, 2.16 million living animal species have been described — of which around 1.05 million are insects, over 85,000 are molluscs, and around 65,000 are vertebrates. It has been estimated there are around 7.77 million animal species. Animals range in length from 8.5 micrometres (0.00033 in) to 33.6 metres (110 ft).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal
(Fish are in the category of vertebrates.)
> Animals are multicellular, eukaryotic organisms in the biological kingdom Animalia. With few exceptions, animals consume organic material, breathe oxygen, have myocytes and are able to move, can reproduce sexually, and grow from a hollow sphere of cells, the blastula, during embryonic development. As of 2022, 2.16 million living animal species have been described — of which around 1.05 million are insects, over 85,000 are molluscs, and around 65,000 are vertebrates. It has been estimated there are around 7.77 million animal species. Animals range in length from 8.5 micrometres (0.00033 in) to 33.6 metres (110 ft).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal
(Fish are in the category of vertebrates.)
That “Jerry’s Fishing Blog” just demonstrates the problem with using google to try to support a point. It way overstates the “debate” on the subject. At least since Linnæus developed his biological taxonomy in the 1700s, fish have been considered animals.
Here’s what Linnaeus wrote around 1758 (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pisces_in_the_10th_edition_of_... ):
> Always inhabiting the waters; are swift in their motion and voracious in their appetites. They breathe by means of gills, which are generally united by a bony arch; swim by means of radiate fins, and are mostly covered over with cartilaginous scales. Besides the parts they have in common with other animals, they are furnished with a nictitant membrane, and most of them with a swim-bladder, by the contraction or dilatation of which, they can raise or sink themselves in their element at pleasure.
And here’s a modern take, from https://manoa.hawaii.edu/exploringourfluidearth/biological/f... :
> Fish are aquatic vertebrate animals that have gills but lack limbs with digits, like fingers or toes. Recall that vertebrates are animals with internal backbones.
Here’s what Linnaeus wrote around 1758 (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pisces_in_the_10th_edition_of_... ):
> Always inhabiting the waters; are swift in their motion and voracious in their appetites. They breathe by means of gills, which are generally united by a bony arch; swim by means of radiate fins, and are mostly covered over with cartilaginous scales. Besides the parts they have in common with other animals, they are furnished with a nictitant membrane, and most of them with a swim-bladder, by the contraction or dilatation of which, they can raise or sink themselves in their element at pleasure.
And here’s a modern take, from https://manoa.hawaii.edu/exploringourfluidearth/biological/f... :
> Fish are aquatic vertebrate animals that have gills but lack limbs with digits, like fingers or toes. Recall that vertebrates are animals with internal backbones.
You probably rarely hear them referred to as animals because people use the word "fish" to talk about them. But they are certainly animals.
Out of curiosity, are you a Christian who observes Lent? Many of my Christian friends do not consider fish to be “meat” as that is not allowed during Lent, but fish is allowed, therefore fish != meat.
No but my Irish ancestors were Catholic
There's no debate about fish being part of the animal Kingdom.
If you've never heard anyone refer to fish as animals, you probably never took biology in grade school. I mean no offense, but literal children with single-digit ages know that fish are animals.
If you've never heard anyone refer to fish as animals, you probably never took biology in grade school. I mean no offense, but literal children with single-digit ages know that fish are animals.
You have never heard of or read about fish being referred to as animals? Not even in your biology classes at school? That you haven't is extremely strange to me, I understand what people mean when they say fish aren't animals, in terms of the colloquial usage when referring to meat, but I didn't think that most people thought that fish literally weren't animals at all.
drt5b7j(1)
The issues are manyfold.
Farmed fish, including salmon, and other seafood can contain nematodes that aren't killed by freezing in residential freezers. Your best bet is to source seafood from a reputable market, know where it comes from, and that it's sustainable. Wild caught is usually best, with lower parasite levels.
https://www.cdc.gov/parasites/anisakiasis
https://scdhec.gov/food-safety-freezing-parasite-destruction
https://www.seafoodwatch.org
Farmed fish, including salmon, and other seafood can contain nematodes that aren't killed by freezing in residential freezers. Your best bet is to source seafood from a reputable market, know where it comes from, and that it's sustainable. Wild caught is usually best, with lower parasite levels.
https://www.cdc.gov/parasites/anisakiasis
https://scdhec.gov/food-safety-freezing-parasite-destruction
https://www.seafoodwatch.org
Got a source for the wild has less parasites claim? I have heard the opposite a lot and have seen studies backing it. Curious to know if thats changed.
My understanding is that wild-caught fish have more parasites, but they're required to be frozen for sufficiently long to kill the parasites, whereas farmed fish are exempt from this requirement:
From the 2022 FDA Food Code (https://www.fda.gov/media/164194/download):
From the 2022 FDA Food Code (https://www.fda.gov/media/164194/download):
3-402.11 Parasite Destruction.
(A) Except as specified in ¶ (B) of this section, before service or sale in READY-TO-EAT form, raw, raw-marinated, partially cooked, or marinated-partially cooked FISH shall be:
(1) Frozen and stored at a temperature of -20°C (-4°F) or below for a minimum of 168 hours (7 days) in a freezer;
[other temperatures/durations elided]
(B) Paragraph (A) of this section does not apply to:
[...]
(4) Aquacultured fish, such as salmon, that:
(a) If raised in open water, are raised in net-pens, or
(b) Are raised in land-based operations such as ponds or tanks, and
(c) Are fed formulated feed, such as pellets, that contains no live parasites infective to the aquacultured FISH.I get mine frozen from Trader Joe's, Costco or Walmart
Is this specific to tilapia or is the species of fish incidental in this particular case?
According to the Wikipedia link to the bacteria posted in another comment:
"Vibrio vulnificus is the most common cause of death due to seafood in the United States, causing over 95% of deaths that are known to have occurred due to ingested seafood."
No, this seems to affect raw or undercooked seafood in general.
"Vibrio vulnificus is the most common cause of death due to seafood in the United States, causing over 95% of deaths that are known to have occurred due to ingested seafood."
No, this seems to affect raw or undercooked seafood in general.
My first memory of tilapia was a tour guide pointing to a fish farm at the confluence of 2 extraordinarily polluted rivers.
To the best of my recollection, I've never eaten it.
I have the same picture in my head for most farm raised fish.
To the best of my recollection, I've never eaten it.
I have the same picture in my head for most farm raised fish.