I have just eaten half a tin of salmon - wild red salmon. Where I am in the UK it seems to be getting harder and harder to buy fresh wild salmon (and if I can find it, hard to afford it!). Then I noticed that the tins of salmon in the local supermarket state that they are wild salmon.
Obviously the ratio of omega 3 / 6 will be better in wild salmon - but does it survive the canning process OK or do nasty things happen to it? I noticed that the bones had gone crumbly and were easy to eat which presumably is a good source of calcium?
Also, 110 grams of tinned salmon - how does that rate towards the days intake of protein and omega 3?
asked byandrew (5005)
Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!
on June 04, 2010
at 02:34 PM
There is a fairly lengthy discussion in this thread - http://paleohacks.com/questions/2232/how-about-canned-fish - on canned fish in general, not specifically salmon but I'm sure a lot of it carries from Tuna to Herring to Salmon. The general consensus was it's good just be sure to check the ingredients list for hidden items.
I personally have taken a liking to canned fish. It's delicious, convenient, cheap, and portable! I can't imagine it being any better =]
on June 04, 2010
at 04:18 PM
Dr. Cordain wrote an article about canned fish. In summary, he advised against it. Thought the canning process destroyed most of the nutrients. Personally, I eat a large amount of canned fish and have not noticed any ill effects in my blood work or my athletic performance. I stick to wild salmon and "sardines".
on October 27, 2011
at 05:08 PM
I've recently started to eat the canned wild red salmon (not the pink which is too salty) from Whole Foods and am very pleased with it. At $2.50 for a 7 ounce can it's a good deal and it still has the skin. It's delicious, better than the fresh to me.