Is Lobster A Healthy Or Unhealthy Food?

In our modern day, it seems that nearly everything weclams, crabs, mussels and sea urchins. Lobsters do eat
eat carries the risk of being unhealthy. Eating fish hasdead bait in traps, but humans eat dead fish too! Ask
known health benefits, yet some species of fish mayany lobsterman, and they will tell you: the fresher the
contain unsafe levels of mercury and PCB's. Eatingbait, the better it will "fish." This is trade language which,
fresh fruit is known to be healthy, yet many fruits arewhen translated, means that if you put fresh bait in
sprayed with chemical pesticides the residues of whichyour traps it will attract more lobsters. Old bait does
are of questionable risk. The same can be said ofnot attract many lobsters at all.
vegetables.When fish gets old and borderline saleable at a
Whether the above mentioned food items are healthyseafood market, it begins to emit an ammonia smell. At
or unhealthy is beyond the scope of this article. It doesthat point, which can be about 5 to 7 days after being
point out, though, that the debate continues on whichcaught, it is no longer appealing to humans. It is the
foods contribute to good health, and which foods posesame for lobsters. They prefer live, fresh food, but will
a health risk. This article will present information for theeat dead bait in traps if it is fresh and not old.
reader to determine which camp lobster belongs in:This last argument against lobster as a healthy food is
healthy or unhealthy.the weakest and not based upon fact at all, but rather
Let's start with the few arguments that put forth theon fallacy: lobsters eat primarily live food, not decaying,
case that lobster is unhealthy. There are not many.rotting dead fish.
We've read that one doctor advises against eatingNow we'll look at the factors in favor of lobster being
lobster because it may contain parasites and viruses.a healthy food.
Nothing like pointing out the obvious. Every livingThere are several health reasons that lobster should
creature on Earth may contain parasites and viruses,be eaten. The first comes from the American Heart
which is why any animal-based food product should beAssociations Page on Fish and Omega-3 Fatty Acids
cooked before being eaten. Cooking eliminates this risk.which recommends eating fish at least 2 times per
One risk that cooking will not eliminate is excess levelsweek. A quote from the American Heart Association
of mercury. No matter how much you cook any fishis worth sharing here, "Fish is a good source of protein
or seafood item, it will not remove mercury.and doesn't have the high saturated fat that fatty
How much mercury does lobster have? Before wemeat products do."
answer that question, we need to look a little atLobster is indeed an excellent source of lean protein.
mercury and the reasons it is in seafood to begin with.100 grams of lobster meat contains 98 calories, 21
The FDA states in their report "What you need tograms of protein, and only 0.6 grams of fat. Contrast
know about mercury in fish and shellfish" that "nearly allthat to 100 grams of white, skinless chicken meat
fish and shellfish contain traces of mercury" and thatwhich has 168 calories, 31 grams of protein, and 3.6
"Mercury occurs naturally in the environment and cangrams of fat. Gram for gram, even skinless chicken
also be released into the air through industrial pollution.contains in excess of 500% more fat than lobster.
Mercury falls from the air and can accumulate inLean beef contains more than 10 times as much fat
streams and oceans."as lobster. Obviously, lobster is an excellent source of
What can be gleaned from this report are two facts.lean protein.
One, that all fish and shellfish contain traces ofLobster is more than just a lean source of protein.
mercury. Two, Mercury occurs naturally as well. IfLobster also contains Omega-3 fatty acids, which are
mercury occurs naturally, it is probably safe to assumeassociated with good heart health. There are several
that all fish and shellfish have always contained tracesvaluable benefits from a diet which regularly contains
of mercury. Which begs the question: are mercuryOmega-3 fatty acids. Again quoting from the
levels in fish and shellfish any higher now than theyAmerican Heart Association, "The ways that omega-3
were 50 or 100 years ago? The answer is thatfatty acids reduce CVD (cardio-vascular disease) risk
scientists do no know for sure, as tests for mercury inare still being studied. However, research has shown
fish were not done back then. Regardless, the FDAthat they decrease risk of arrhythmias, which can lead
lists four fish varieties that have higher level ofto sudden cardiac death, decrease triglyceride levels,
mercury than all others: shark, swordfish, king mackerel,decrease growth rate of atherosclerotic plaque, and
and tilefish. They also list five that are very low inlower blood pressure (slightly)." The report further
mercury: shrimp, canned light tuna, salmon, pollock andstates, "Large-scale epidemiologic studies suggest that
catfish. Lobster is closer to the 5 on the low end thanpeople at risk for coronary heart disease benefit from
the 4 on the high end.consuming omega-3 fatty acids from plants and
Even the 4 fish varieties that have higher levels ofmarine sources."
mercury are safe to eat in moderation for all peopleLobster does not contain as much Omega-3 fatty
other than pregnant mothers, and mothers nursingacids as salmon, which has the highest content, but is a
infant children. It is only these 4 varieties that should begood source nonetheless.
avoided in the two circumstances just mentioned.In summary, lobster is high in protein, extremely low in
Lobster is not included in the list of fish to avoid whenfat, is a beneficial source of Omega-3 fatty acids
pregnant.which are healthy for the heart and reduce the growth
The final argument against lobster that we have heardrate of plaque. Lobsters feed primarily on live food: fish,
is not based on science at all. The argument is thatcrabs, clams and mussels. Lobster have a very
lobsters are bottom feeders and eat decaying andhealthy diet which would be beneficial to humans, not
rotting fish that sink to the bottom. The logic of theharmful to them.
argument is that since lobsters are eating these thingsThere you have the arguments for and against lobster
that aren't healthy for people, people shouldn't beas a healthy food source. The evidence suggests
eating lobsters. The problem with this argument is thatlobster is a very healthy food choice. Not only is it very
it is not based on facts. The fact is that lobsters eathealthy, it tastes absolutely extravagant. Enjoy your
mainly live food. Their primary diet consists of live fish,lobster!