The Seafood Diet: Green light, Red light, Yellow light

I recommend that each of my clients eat 1-2 servings of fish a week. That consists of about 4 to 6 ounces of fish per serving. Of course one of the first responses I get is, “ Can’t fish be dangerous, what about the mercury content?” This is an important question and one that you need to be aware of when making your seafood choices.

I am going to borrow the stoplight model from Dr. Susan Kleiner, a very well respected sports nutritionist, to help explain the benefits and concerns:

Green Light

Fish is a quality source of protein that’s relatively low in fat and cholesterol. It’s also a great source of nicacin, vitamin B12, vitamin D and of course Omega-3 fatty acids – which many of you know about by now. Multiple studies have shown that individuals who consume fish have better control of their weight. When fish is added to a diet designed to promote weight loss, more total fat and more abdominal fat is lost.

Beyond the benefits for fighting arthritis, colities, heart disease, stroke and certain cancers, new research has shown that Omega 3 fats have a strong link between mood and depression. Individuals who had diets high in Omega 3 fats have much lower rates of depression.

Red Light

The pollution we have added to our oceans has contaminated the environment where fish live and eat. There are many toxins, but the main one that is focused on is Mercury and more specifically methylmercury. Methylmercury builds up in some fish more than others, depending on what they eat. Methylmercury is a neurotoxin that causes harm to our nervous system.

Both the EPA and FDA updated their warnings regarding fish consumption in 2004. Although the warnings were primarily for pregant women or women who might become pregnant (Mercury has a major potential effect on a developing fetus) It makes sense for all of us to follow these guidelines:

1.) Don’t eat shark, swordfish, king makerel tilefish. Each of these large fish contain high levels of Mercury

2.) Mix up the types of fish and shellfish you eat since mercury levels vary. You can safely eat up to 12 ounces of ‘approved’ fish.

Another concern is with the PCB levels found in farm raised fish, particularly salmon. Pollutants primarily come from the fish meal that is fed to these industrially raised fish. Some studies have shown extremely high levels of PCBs in farm raised Salmon. When available, the best choice is to go with Pacific Northwest wild caught salmon. This lean and powerful fish is high in protein, vitamins D and E and Omega 3s.

Yellow Light

In my opinion, there are too many benefits with the right types of fish to avoid seafood all together. I think a good starting goal for healthy nutrition is by making fish a dinner choice one night per week. Good choices are wild caught salmon, halibut, cod, sole and polluck. Shellfish is an excellent choice as well, particularly crab, lobster, shrimp, scallop and oysters.

The key things is to get educated. Study the chart below and find the good choices you like from the chart below. Ideally make sure your choice is below 0.25 for mean mercury content. The closer to 0.1 obviously the better.

Table 1. Fish and Shellfish With Highest Levels of Mercury
SPECIES	MERCURY CONCENTRATION (PPM)					NO. OF SAMPLES	SOURCE OF DATA
	MEAN	MEDIAN	STDEV	MIN	MAX
MACKEREL KING	0.730	N/A	N/A	0.230	1.670	213	GULF OF MEXICO REPORT 2000
SHARK	0.988	0.830	0.631	ND	4.540	351	FDA 1990-02
SWORDFISH	0.976	0.860	0.510	ND	3.220	618	FDA 1990-04
TILEFISH (Gulf of Mexico)	1.450	N/A	N/A	0.650	3.730	60	NMFS REPORT 1978

Table 2. Fish and Shellfish With Lower Levels of Mercury†
SPECIES	MERCURY CONCENTRATION (PPM)					NO. OF SAMPLES	SOURCE OF DATA
	MEAN	MEDIAN	STDEV	MIN	MAX
ANCHOVIES	0.043	N/A	N/A	ND	0.340	40	NMFS REPORT 1978
BUTTERFISH	0.058	N/A	N/A	ND	0.360	89	NMFS REPORT 1978
CATFISH	0.049	ND	0.084	ND	0.314	23	FDA 1990-04
CLAM *	ND	ND	ND	ND	ND	6	FDA 1990-02
COD	0.095	0.087	0.080	ND	0.420	39	FDA 1990-04
CRAB 1	0.060	0.030	0.112	ND	0.610	63	FDA 1990-04
CRAWFISH	0.033	0.035	0.012	ND	0.051	44	FDA 2002-04
CROAKER ATLANTIC (Atlantic)	0.072	0.073	0.036	0.013	0.148	35	FDA 1990-03
FLATFISH 2*	0.045	0.035	0.049	ND	0.180	23	FDA 1990-04
HADDOCK (Atlantic)	0.031	0.041	0.021	ND	0.041	4	FDA 1990-02
HAKE	0.014	ND	0.021	ND	0.048	9	FDA 1990-02
HERRING	0.044	N/A	N/A	ND	0.135	38	NMFS REPORT 1978
JACKSMELT	0.108	0.060	0.115	0.040	0.500	16	FDA 1990-02
LOBSTER (Spiny)	0.09	0.14	‡	ND	0.27	9	FDA SURVEY 1990-02
MACKEREL ATLANTIC (N.Atlantic)	0.050	N/A	N/A	0.020	0.160	80	NMFS REPORT 1978
MACKEREL CHUB (Pacific)	0.088	N/A	N/A	0.030	0.190	30	NMFS REPORT 1978
MULLET	0.046	N/A	N/A	ND	0.130	191	NMFS REPORT 1978
OYSTER	0.013	ND	0.042	ND	0.250	38	FDA 1990-04
PERCH OCEAN *	ND	ND	ND	ND	0.030	6	FDA 1990-02
POLLOCK	0.041	ND	0.106	ND	0.780	62	FDA 1990-04
SALMON (CANNED) *	ND	ND	ND	ND	ND	23	FDA 1990-02
SALMON (FRESH/FROZEN) *	0.014	ND	0.041	ND	0.190	34	FDA 1990-02
SARDINE	0.016	0.013	0.007	0.004	0.035	29	FDA 2002-04
SCALLOP	0.050	N/A	N/A	ND	0.220	66	NMFS REPORT 1978
SHAD AMERICAN	0.065	N/A	N/A	ND	0.220	59	NMFS REPORT 1978
SHRIMP *	ND	ND	ND	ND	0.050	24	FDA 1990-02
SQUID	0.070	N/A	N/A	ND	0.400	200	NMFS REPORT 1978
TILAPIA *	0.010	ND	0.023	ND	0.070	9	FDA 1990-02
TROUT (FRESHWATER)	0.072	0.025	0.143	ND	0.678	34	FDA 2002-04
TUNA (CANNED, LIGHT)	0.118	0.075	0.119	ND	0.852	347	FDA 2002-04
WHITEFISH	0.069	0.054	0.067	ND	0.310	28	FDA 2002-04
WHITING	ND	ND	‡	ND	ND	2	FDA SURVEY 1990-02

Table 3. Mercury Levels of Other Fish and Shellfish†
SPECIES	MERCURY CONCENTRATION (PPM)					NO. OF SAMPLES	SOURCE OF DATA
	MEAN	MEDIAN	STDEV	MIN	MAX
BASS (SALTWATER, BLACK, STRIPED)3	0.219	0.130	0.227	ND	0.960	47	FDA 1990-04
BASS CHILEAN	0.386	0.303	0.364	0.085	2.180	40	FDA 1990-04
BLUEFISH	0.337	0.303	0.127	0.139	0.634	52	FDA 2002-04
BUFFALOFISH	0.19	0.14	‡	0.05	0.43	4	FDA SURVEY 1990-02
CARP	0.14	0.14	‡	0.01	0.27	2	FDA SURVEY 1990-02
CROAKER WHITE (Pacific)	0.287	0.280	0.069	0.180	0.410	15	FDA 1990-03
GROUPER (ALL SPECIES)	0.465	0.410	0.293	0.053	1.205	43	FDA 2002-04
HALIBUT	0.252	0.200	0.233	ND	1.520	46	FDA 1990-04
LOBSTER (NORTHERN/AMERICAN)	0.310	N/A	N/A	0.050	1.310	88	NMFS REPORT 1978
LOBSTER (Species Unknown)	0.169	0.182	0.089	ND	0.309	16	FDA 1991-2004
MACKEREL SPANISH (Gulf of Mexico)	0.454	N/A	N/A	0.070	1.560	66	NMFS REPORT 1978
MACKEREL SPANISH (S. Atlantic)	0.182	N/A	N/A	0.050	0.730	43	NMFS REPORT 1978
MARLIN *	0.485	0.390	0.237	0.100	0.920	16	FDA 1990-02
MONKFISH	0.180	N/A	N/A	0.020	1.020	81	NMFS REPORT 1978
ORANGE ROUGHY	0.554	0.563	0.148	0.296	0.855	49	FDA 1990-04
PERCH (Freshwater)	0.14	0.15	‡	ND	0.31	5	FDA SURVEY 1990-02
SABLEFISH	0.220	N/A	N/A	ND	0.700	102	NMFS REPORT 1978
SCORPIONFISH	0.286	N/A	N/A	0.020	1.345	78	NMFS REPORT 1978
SHEEPSHEAD	0.128	N/A	N/A	0.020	0.625	59	NMFS REPORT 1978
SKATE	0.137	N/A	N/A	0.040	0.360	56	NMFS REPORT 1978
SNAPPER	0.189	0.114	0.274	ND	1.366	43	FDA 2002-04
TILEFISH (Atlantic)	0.144	0.099	0.122	0.042	0.533	32	FDA 2002-04
TUNA (CANNED, ALBACORE)	0.353	0.339	0.126	ND	0.853	399	FDA 2002-04
TUNA(FRESH/FROZEN, ALL)	0.383	0.322	0.269	ND	1.300	228	FDA 2002-04
TUNA (FRESH/FROZEN, ALBACORE)	0.357	0.355	0.152	ND	0.820	26	FDA 2002-04
TUNA (FRESH/FROZEN, BIGEYE)	0.639	0.560	0.184	0.410	1.040	13	FDA 2002-04
TUNA (FRESH/FROZEN, SKIPJACK)	0.205	N/A	0.078	0.205	0.260	2	FDA 1993
TUNA (FRESH/FROZEN, YELLOWFIN)	0.325	0.270	0.220	ND	1.079	87	FDA 2002-04
TUNA (FRESH/FROZEN, Species Unknown)	0.414	0.339	0.316	ND	1.300	100	FDA 1991-2004

Source of data: FDA 1990-2004, "National Marine Fisheries Service Survey of Trace Elements in the Fishery Resource" Report 1978,

2010 DEREK HEINTZ EDGE FITNESS CONSULTING www.yourfitnessedge.com 619-920-5452

Should your Run?

Over the past 3 decades running has increased in popularity. Since 2005 Marathon running has increased by 83,000 'finishers' (IDEA Fitness Journal, Feb 2010). The topic of running as a way to get exercise has really been on my mind over the past few months. Many people feel that running is the only way to go. I have many clients that run, try to add running as part of their fitness regimen or are interested in training for a running event, such as a Marathon. Why is it that people feel they have to run consistently or over a certain distance? It is not that this is bad or not effective, I am just always curious why it is an all or none approach when it comes to running or jogging.

I would presume that most individuals work towards a certain time or distance goal or feel they have to run consistently because of traditional scheduled running events such as 5Ks, 10Ks, Half Marathons and Marathons. Often because of the persons competitive drive, ego or simply because of peer pressure needing to have a 'good' event time becomes a major goal. Therefore, you better run consistently (increase your mileage) and at a good pace. So basically consistently running without stopping or changing to another activity, in my opinion, developed because of the running events that are out there, and not necessarily because it was the 'best' way to get physical activity. Yet when I really get down to the nitty gritty of why most of my clients run or want to run it is because they feel it is one of the best ways to be physically active, stay fit and burn calories. I would completely agree that it is awesome to get outdoors, especially in San Diego, and that with running you don't need a gym or any equipment. Yet even though the need to run without slowing down your pace, walking , stopping or changing to another form of physical activity is necessary when training for a running event - it is absolutely not necessary or even ideal for most of your goals.

Not only is it not necessary to always run consistently over a certain time or distance it can be better for your body and mind to change your pace significantly or change to a different movement pattern at some point during the workout. For instance, one workout that I do weekly is a running based circuit through Balboa Park. The longest I may consistently run is for 10 minutes, but more often it is around 5 minutes. I might start by walking from my gym for about 5 minutes, then pick up the pace to a light jog for another 5 minutes. At this point I might stop at a park bench and do a set of Step Ups for a couple of minutes followed by Push Ups on the bench and then Jumping Jacks. Then back to walking for about 2-3 minutes followed by a faster jog this time until I find something new to do. Often this might be a flight of stairs that I will sprint up and down for a few minutes and then return to walking and jogging again.

The point of the explanation of my Balboa Park workout is to show you that yes you should be moving and elevating your heart rate, but you do not have to force yourself to run the entire time. If you are starting to fatigue then go ahead and walk. You have my permission, it's ok! Even better, and if you are in good running shape, at some point do something more intense than your typical walk or jog, such as increasing to a light sprint for 30-60 seconds or running stairs. This will force you to walk for a few minutes after the increase in activity. The best part about changing things up is that it changes the movement pattern of the body. This is excellent for maintaining functional/Multi-directional fitness and good joint range of motion. It also allows you to better avoid exercise related injuries from joint position overuse due to doing the same movement pattern (running over and over). Finally your body will not become accustomed to the same workout. When you do this you will always require an increased level of post exercise oxygen consumption. More simply put, there is a chance you will burn more total calories.

Many of you feel you can't run at all. "It is bad for my knees", you might say. And often yes you are correct, especially if you are still working through some movement and postural dysfunction. But remember it is not running that is necessarily the problem, it is your own movement dysfunctions, muscle imbalances and postural issues that make the impact of running 'not good' for you. For many, you might be surprised that picking up your feet a little bit and moving your walk into a 'trot' is totally fine. Especially for short bursts such as 1 to 2 minutes. Again, switch it up, do something different and don't let your mind and body get accustomed to the same thing over and over. Especially if you want to get better health, musculo-skeletal and calorie burning results.

Get outside, move your body and have fun. Always know which muscles on your body are consistently tight and stretch them first. Also activate any muscles that do not fire readily before you start the outdoor workout. If you are unsure of which muscles are tight on you and which muscles are not firing (activating) correctly then make sure to ask me.

So there, I said it. "You don't have to run!" You can use it or incorporate it with many other outdoor motions. And you are not a wimp if you don't want to run straight for 3 miles.

Finally, if you do enjoy your weekly runs you don't need to stop doing them - especially if you enjoy them. But remember, switch things up once in a while, you will avoid overuse injuries and often get better results.

Here is a more specific example of a good outdoor workout that is based around walking and jogging:

• Walk for 5 minutes
• Jog at an easy pace for 5 minutes
• Walk for 2 minutes
• Run or Walk stairs for 2 to 5 minutes if available
• Do Jumping Jacks for 60 seconds
• Walk for 2 to 4 minutes
• Jog at an easy pace for 5 minutes
• Accelerate your jog to a faster pace for 2 minutes
• Walk for 2 minutes
• Jog at an easy pace for 5 minutes
• Accelerate your jog to a faster pace for 2 minutes
• Walk and Cool Down for 5 minutes

Total Workout time: 40 minutes