As I noted in my last video on the subject,

if people choose to get their long chain omega-3s from fish,

the majority of consumers would exceed the safety limits for dioxins and dioxin-like compounds like PCBs.

But is there evidence that exposure to industrial pollutants actually has any adverse effects on us?

It does appear to be the case that the general population is exposed to sufficient,

persistent organic pollutants, both in terms of concentration and diversity,

to induce metabolic disorders, raising a potential public health concern.

This assumption is based on population studies, which have found higher rates of type 2 diabetes

among those with elevated body burdens of chemicals, along with interventional studies in rodents,

that established a cause and effect relationship between exposure to these chemicals

and the development of metabolic disorders, including obesity and insulin resistance.

If rats are fed a diet high in farmed salmon fat, for example, they gain significantly

more weight compared to a diet high in plant fat or a diet with largely decontaminated salmon fat, showing it was the contaminants

and the salmon to blame for not just increasing body fat, but the worst kind of body fat,

deep abdominal visceral fat, they also had an increase in triglycerides, despite the omega-3s,

and an increase in cholesterol, along with a significant rise in insulin levels, because

of a drop in insulin sensitivity, meaning they had insulin resistance, the cause of type

2 diabetes and pre-diabetes.

The researchers conclude that exposure to POPs, these persistent organic pollutants, commonly present

in foods like farmed salmon, can lead to insulin resistance and associated

metabolic disorders.

Okay, but what if you eat fish so infrequently you don't exceed the U.S. environmental

...