Sushi Otaku

Making sushi at home is fun, easy, and actually less expensive than going out to a restaurant. Aside from the intimidation factor, the big issue that many people seem to have, and ask me all the time, is where do you get sushi grade fish to make sushi at home… While I have a few links up on SushiFAQ, I though to write a short piece about what to look for and how to find it for those of you who want to take the plunge and start making your own sushi.

What is Sushi Grade Fish?
Firstly, you should keep in mind that there really is no such food grade as sushi grade fish. For a detailed treatise on what really makes a piece of fish sushi grade, I recommend reading the section of SushiFAQ which answers this question, What is sushi grade fish? However, what this term really means is that the fish is fresh and handled properly enough that one can be reasonably sure that it is clean and parasite free. In most cases it has been frozen to a low enough temperature for long enough that any parasites that the fish may have had have been destroyed. Most fish that you will find in any grocery store or fish market is not sushi grade fish, so ask questions and know what you are buying if you intend to eat any seafood raw.

Sourcing your fish
When choosing your fish, make sure it looks clean, not slimy, and smells subtly of the ocean, and not overly fishy. If it looks or smells funny, avoid it (but some fish, such as tuna, may have a slight rainbow hue on the surface of the flesh which is normal and natural, not a sign of poor quality or processing). Remember, the nose knows. There are a few places that one might find fish of high enough quality that it can safely be made into sushi at home:

Japanese Markets – If you are fortunate enough to have a Japanese market near you, they may very well sell fish that is considered sushi grade. If you are in or near a city, chances are, you may find a Japanese grocery store somewhere local. While you will generally find a variety of fish there, you can ask or look for the area where they will probably sell fish that has already been cleaned and cut into pieces that are ready for sushi. Often, they are cut into a rectangle, ready to be sliced against the grain for perfect sushi neta. Just make sure that the fish you but is specifically meant to be eaten raw, as it may not be in the same area as the fish sold which is intended to be cooked. I buy a lot of fish from my local Japanese grocer.

Grocery Store/Fishmonger – Don’t even think about it. While it couldn’t hurt to ask you local fishmonger if they do in fact sell sushi grade fish, most do not, and never assume that a fish you buy from a grocery store or fishmonger is safe to eat raw.

Online – In my experience, the best online purveyor of sushi grade fish is Catalina Offshore Products (Bias Alert! In the interest of full disclosure, this is an affiliate link, but everything I say here is true, and in my opinion, this quality of COP seafood is unparalleled). They have an incredible assortment of different seafood, a great deal of which is sushi grade and sold for making sushi at home. They even have items that can be hard to find, such as abalone and multiple grades of uni (sea urchin), and even have one of my all time favorite seasonal items, ankimo (monkfish liver), which can be very difficult to find. Most items are shipped frozen, so you can defrost and use at your leisure, and, if you are totally new to making sushi at home, they even sell sushi kits and all the ingredients you will need to get started. There are a few other places online that I have used, but they all seem to come and go, and I am now at a point where I personally only buy online from Catalina.

The Ocean – Yes, believe it or not, you can eat salt water fish you catch yourself as sushi. I mention this with big red blinking words of caution, however, as most people cannot necessarily be certain a fish a fish is parasite free and clean enough to eat raw without proper training, but if you know what to look for, you can tell a good fish from a bad one. I have eaten tuna right out of the water and can say that is a vastly different food than tuna that has been frozen, thawed, and shipped around the world for a few days. It is truly an amazing food.

There you have it. Thanks to the internet and the globalization of culinary interests, one can probably expect to be able to get high quality fish for sushi without too much effort. The Internet has opened up that option for a lot of folks, and with more and more people eating sushi, whether for the perceived health benefits, or simply because it’s just so darned good, our ability to find great ingredients increases. I have introduced a lot of friends to making sushi at home, and when they see how easy it can be, they often continue the practice. You don’t need a book, just the desire, and the right fish can make your evening sushiful and fun. Perfect sushi rice isn’t hard to make and sushi kits are easily acquired, so once you have what you need, get down to business. And if you want to let me know how your sushi making went, please comment below, I’d love to hear.

Meshi agare!
Warren
The sushi guy

1 Comment »

The fish hit the fan the other day with the publication the New York Times article regarding the risk of mercury in tuna, which I covered in my entry Some More Mercury With Your Tuna? But was it junk science? Or was it something that needed to be said? Rebuttals came swiftly, and among them, two stand out particularly in the melee. The Center for Consumer Freedom and the National Fisheries Institute both released the hounds and took the author to task over the research methodology as well as the conclusions, countering that the story may not have been as accurate as the author would like us to believe. I am not so sure that I agree, but I reprint their comments for your perusal, and I encourage all my readers to scroll down to the conclusion of this entry for my perspective on the whole matter, which frankly, has become a beast that needs to be addressed.

The Center for Consumer Freedom took issue with the article and made the following points in asking for a full retraction of the story which they felt was factually erroneous:

• The Times neglected to inform readers that the Food and
  Drug Administration’s methylmercury “Action Level” (1.0 part per million)
  includes a generous ten-fold safety cushion. FDA has written that the Action
  Level “was established to limit consumers’ methyl mercury exposure to levels
  10 times lower than the lowest levels associated with adverse effects.” In
  reality, the highest-mercury sample reported by the Times (1.4 ppm) contains
  less than one-seventh the amount of mercury that might be a cause for health
  concern.

• The Times mistakenly claimed that consumers eating a
  fixed number of pieces of sushi tuna will “reach what the Environmental
  Protection Agency calls its weekly reference dose.” In fact, EPA writes that
  “reference doses” are meant to identify levels that are “likely to be
  without an appreciable risk of deleterious effects during a lifetime.” By
  definition, it’s not possible for anyone to exceed a reference dose with a
  single week’s worth of exposure.

• The Times also omitted information about safety margins
  built into the EPA’s mercury reference dose. Like the FDA’s Action Level,
  that reference dose incorporates a ten-fold safety factor. In the example of
  the highest-mercury sample identified by the Times, a consumer would
  actually have to eat 26 pieces per week—over an entire lifetime—before
  accumulating the lowest level of mercury in his or her body associated with
  adverse health effects in scientific studies.

• The Times wrote that “mercury enters the environment as
  an industrial pollutant.” In fact, virtually all the mercury in tuna (an
  ocean fish) enters the environment naturally through undersea volcanic
  activity.

• The Times wrote that “methylmercury [is] the form of
  mercury found in fish tied to health problems.” In reality, the medical
  literature contains no documented cases of mercury toxicity from eating fish in
  the United States; the only cases recorded anywhere occurred more than 40 years
  ago in Japan as the result of an industrial spill.

The National Fisheries Institute has also taken notice of the work and has requested a formal retraction as well, their concerns being:

• There is little if any acknowledgment or explanation of the widely
  accepted benefits associated with eating seafood. Well researched
  science-based articles that deal with the mercury issue deserve to include a
  discussion of the benefits of Omega 3 fatty acids. An article that presents
  a risk-only analysis ignores widely tested and reported health benefits that
  offset many of the concerns raised.
• The sourcing found throughout the report is almost completely one-sided.
  Aside from the Environmental Protection Agency and restaurants whose sushi
  was tested by the Times, the only sources consulted are experts with clear
  self-interests and or activist groups engaged in both lobbying and
  fundraising against coal fired power plants, a source of mercury. Examples
  include:
  • Despite the availability of well regarded, independent, objective
    laboratories Burros chose to have her Sushi samples tested by Dr.
    Michael Gochfeld. As part of his own work Gochfeld treats patients for
    issues related to mercury. Because Gochfeld’s research and practice
    stands to benefit from alarmist stories about mercury he should not be
    considered an objective clinician in this case.
  • Kate Mahaffey from the EPA tells readers that a rise in blood
    mercury levels in this country “appears” to be related to Americans
    eating fish that are higher in mercury. This is pure speculation and is
    in fact refuted by the latest consumption data that shows lower mercury
    seafood like shrimp, salmon and tilapia are some of the most popular.
  • Environmental Defense is a political activist group with scant
    expertise in the medical science of food consumption. Burros omits
    mention of their fundraising agenda, instead describing them
    disingenuously as “work[ing]…to improve human health.” Yet, the “advice”
    they offer is at odds with what every major medical, health and
    government agency has publicly recommended.
• Throughout the article there is a sensational mischaracterization of the
  RfD (reference dose). Burros suggests that people who eat a certain number
  of pieces of sushi are at risk of exceeding EPA’s reference dose level. It
  does not mention that those guidelines are based on consumption over one’s
  entire lifetime and not merely a certain number of days or weeks. Nor does
  it mention the built in ten-fold safety factor.
• In mentioning the levels of mercury found in the samples tested Burros
  fails to explain that the FDA’s “Action Level” is a calculated estimate that
  also includes a ten-fold safety factor.

I am a skeptical person by nature. I normally dig deeply into things that interest me (sushi obsession anyone?) and have a fairly analytical mind. I like to think that I won’t be swayed either way by articles and press releases of this nature, however it is sometimes easy to get caught up in things. A day before the NYT article came out I had made plans to dine with six of my co-workers next week, taking them to one of my favorite sushi restaurants (which was one of those on the list). When the Times article was published, I was still game, but morale was low so we made reservations at a different type of restaurant. Oh well.

But I have two goals with this missive, to encourage people to understand the context of these articles as well as raise awareness regarding what might be a safety issue in our favorite food. The New York Times has a vested interest in publishing articles that get everyone all fired up. Sensationalism sells papers (and subsequently advertising space), while keeping the reader engaged and discussing the fear du jour. On the other hand, the National Fisheries Institute and the Center for Consumer Freedom are both organizations with deep ties to the restaurant and seafood industry, and themselves have a vested interest in keeping people eating fish. It would seem, on the surface, that not much has really changed. We always knew that there was mercury in fish, and more in the larger predatory fish than the smaller fish down the food chain. Pregnant women and children have always been asked to avoid these fish, and others to consume them in moderation. So what is the real story?

A recently published blog/article in Newsweek refuted a number of these counter arguments, which I will paraphrase for you. I admit to a degree of bias myself, as I love sushi and would like to believe that my favorite food is entirely safe, however an objective perspective drives me to raise awareness over protecting my own interests. The points made countering the CCF were:

The claim is that the “action level” set by the FDA for methylmercury “was established to limit consumers’ methyl mercury exposure to levels 10 times lower than the lowest levels associated with adverse effects.” The “action level” was set in the 1970’s and does not define any safe level of methylmercury consumption. The “action level” is merely a legal term which defines the contamination (greater than 1 part per million in this case) at which a food item can be said to be contaminated enough to be removed from the market. Apparently, the action level was originally intended to be 0.5 parts per million, however a lawsuit was filed by the U.S. fishing industry claiming that the economic impact of setting the level at 0.5 would be devastating for the fishing industry, and as it happened, it seems that profits have trumped safety as a Judge ruled in favor of the fishing industry and the level was raised. The FDA has not declared and safe dosage of methylmercury as, in fact, the consumption of any methylmercury is actually unsafe, however due to it’s prevalence in our environment, it cannot be entirely avoided. The Environmental Protection Agency does list a reference dose which measures an amount consumed (rather than contained in a food), which is 0.1 micrograms per kilogram of body weight per day. If one were to use this measure, a person who weighs 130 pounds (60 kilos) could consume 42 micrograms of mercury per week (0.1 ug/kg/day x 60 kg x 7 days) and stay within the EPA’s “presumed safe” limit. By consuming 4 oz of the tuna the NY Times had analyzed, one would exceed that ‘safe’ level and consume 48 ug of mercury in that week. And it’s not just tuna, 16 ounces of swordfish would contain 480 ug of mercury, which is greater than 11 times the EPA’s presumed safe level.

The CCF claims that “By definition, it’s not possible for anyone to exceed a reference dose with a single week’s worth of exposure.” Not true, as indicated above, and even a single can or tuna fish has approximately 65 ug of mercury, which is more than the weekly reference dose suggested by the EPA.

The DDF states “Like the FDA’s Action Level, that reference dose incorporates a ten-fold safety factor. In the example of the highest-mercury sample identified by the Times, a consumer would actually have to eat 26 pieces per week—over an entire lifetime.” Again, there really is no safe dose of methylmercury, and the levels also have to be put in perspective. While a few micrograms of mercury may not be as harmful to a fully grown adult, the risk to the fetus of a pregnant woman, for example, is much greater. Methylercury causes brain damage, and a developing fetus is particularly at risk from any environmental contamination.

From my perspective, I feel the same way about sushi (and tuna) that I did three days ago, and I am not going to be the veritable headless chicken and run for the hills based on an article. But what this article has done is bring more attention to the danger of mercury in our food supply, and that is very real. Seafood has been touted for its health benefits, and this is still the case. The Omega-3 fatty acids contained in seafood are considered the good fats, and are heart-friendly. One does not need to eat tuna, however to achieve these benefits, there are plenty of fish in the sea (sorry about that) and a paper by the ocean conservation group Oceana, “Hold The Mercury: How Consumers Can Avoid Mercury When Buying Fish“, outlines the diverse ways to reap the benefits of seafood varieties while avoiding fish with higher mercury content.

Interestingly, Japan has entirely refused to take any action because of the NYT article as “The newspaper is exaggerating the risk,” according to Teruo Tagaki, the chief of the Fisheries Agency’s products safety office. Japan has always had closer cultural ties to the sea, and seafood is a significant influence in the traditional Japanese diet. Personally, I don’t think I’d like to eat any amount of mercury, but then again, every time I go swimming in the ocean I drink it down, so what’s a piece of fish? I also avoid tuna as the species is in danger from serious over fishing. But, what I’m trying to say it to use your own judgment, if you feel you should avoid the risk entirely, by all means, do so. Sensationalism sells papers, even if it’s true. But for me, a great sushi meal is sensational, and I’ll still be going out for sushi as much as I can manage.

Meshi agare!
Warren
The sushi guy

1 Comment »

You are what you eat. While I always questioned this in a literal sense as a child, it is pretty much the case. But I don’t want to be made of heavy metals, and my body agrees. It is no news to anyone that we are poisoning our oceans, and unfortunately that means our food supplies. There has been much talk over the years about the amount of mercury in seafood, and while the studies have thus far been inconclusive as to the extent of the contamination, certain individuals, especially children and pregnant women, have always been steered away from the deep, cold water predatory fish out of fear of mercury contamination. We know that there is mercury in fish, but unless certain species made a bulk of your diet, it was never an issue if you ate of them sparingly. That may be no longer the case. Media fear mongering being what it is, making a gross generalization about contamination is sushi is ridiculous, but it is prudent to be aware of the potential health issues with eating certain sushi items, and it seems that tuna may be worse for us than we realize.

Mercury is naturally present in seawater, but modern industry has increased those levels exponentially, and as it is absorbed by plankton and other creatures that encompass the base level of the food chain. Heavy metals also concentrate as they work their way up the chain to the larger fish. Now, according to a recent study, mercury concentrations have reached potentially unsafe levels in bluefin tuna. With some of the tuna tested, it was found that by eating six pieces per week (or even two or three pieces per week of some samples), which is not unheard of, a person would exceed the mercury levels determined by the FDA as being safe. That’s no fun. Contamination has become a very real problem, and I definitely think that children and pregnant women would do best to completely avoid bluefin tuna (and even ahi, yellowfin tuna, just to be safe) until we can be assured of the safety of the food supply. This is not something that can be fixed overnight, either, especially as no single nation seems to be willing to step up to the plate to reduce pollution in any form.

Frankly, there is another reason to not eat bluefin tuna, as I have pointed out in numerous entries in the past (Trouble for Tuna I, II III, and IV), the fish are in very real danger of being wiped out due to over fishing. Perhaps the silver lining of the mercury issue will be that people will eat less, and the fish may be offered some time to recover from their predicament. There are still many sushi items available for you to enjoy, even for those whose preference was maguro (tuna). The toro lovers may have more to be sad about, but with the variety of seafood available, hopefully even they might be placated by minimizing their intake of toro and expanding to other buttery selections such as buri toro and ‘white tuna,’ which is usually not any form of tuna anyway.

Tuna has been out of my rotation for some time, and with these new data it seems that we should all take a hard look at what is on our plate. Be moderate with the predatory fish such as tuna, tilefish, swordfish, shark, and even salmon, and treat yourself to some new sushi items that you may have been eyeballing, but haven’t tried because you were happy with your spicy tuna roll. There is a lot out there and now is your chance to expand your repertoire. It is too bad that we have ruined what is a staple for many sushi fans, but at least I still have my spicy scallop roll.

Meshi agare!
Warren
The Sushi Guy

No Comments »

(N.B. This is a follow on article from Troubles for Tuna III)

At the ICCAT (International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna) meeting last week, a critical decision was to be made regarding the 2008 bluefin tuna quotas, a decision that could be one of the most important in saving the species. While the head of the ICCAT’s scientific committee pled that new restrictions were necessary to preserve the species (he in fact stated that the species’ “collapse at this point is probable”), the committee instead effectively raised quotas for 2008. Interestingly, no statement was issued at the conclusion of the meeting, leading me to conclude that they know that they may have signed the death warrant for the bluefin tuna by kowtowing to certain member nations who simply wanted more at the expense of the bluefin tuna.

The proposed “recovery plan” is rapidly turning out to be an extinction plan. The bluefin tuna is the most valuable fish in the sea, bringing in large streams of revenue to the fisheries (and nations) that harvest this creature. It is the most popular sushi item on the menu, and toro, the fatty belly meat, is considered a delicacy by sushi fans the world around. The ICCAT is doing their best to keep this item on the menu for the time being, but in a few years, good luck finding it anywhere as, at this rate, there will be no more bluefin tuna in our oceans to catch. I have stopped eating maguro and toro for now, and while I am just one person, each of you will need to make a decision as to whether you want to help save the species and make your opinion known, or act as if none of this matters. A world without toro is not a life-threatening issue, but to cause the extinction of another of Earth’s great species because of our greed, in my opinion, is. Feel free to contact the ICCAT by clicking the “contact us” link on their website to voice your concern, if you wish. I will be.

Meshi agare!
Warren
The sushi guy

1 Comment »

One of the most popular sushi items, bluefin tuna, from which we get maguro, and toro, is almost gone. I have made a few posts about declining tuna stocks in Troubles for Tuna and Troubles for Tuna II, and am quite happy to be able to write that there may be some good news for toro lovers. In light of the recent severe decline in bluefin tuna stock, the United States is proposing to the ICCAT (International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas) a three to five year ban on bluefin tuna fishing in the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea. Bill Hogarth, the US delegate and ICCAT chairman, has the backing of the US Senate, and as well as the World Wildlife Fund, which itself has been pushing for a ban. If the tuna is lucky, this support will push the ICCAT into action.

The European Commission has closed many fisheries this year when it was aware that quotas had been exceeded. While this is a commendable action, it is still too little, too late. In 2006, ICCAT scientists recommended that total catches of eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean bluefin stock should not exceed 15,000 tonnes, however the “recovery plan” for 2007 actually set the new quota at 29,500 metric tonnes, almost twice the recommended level by its own scientists. Sound like a recovery plan to you? Nor does it to me. The results from the vote on the 2008 plan will be in tomorrow, Sunday, and we can only hope that the pressure from the US will have some influence. There are many different proposals from many of the ICCAT’s 45 member nations, ranging from a reduction in quotas, to establishing a group of traders and farmers to better manage the existing stocks, but conservation efforts must start with a drastic reduction in quotas. However with poachers catching almost the same amount of tuna as the existing quota, it will take more than just management to keep the tuna from becoming commercially extinct. A few year moratorium may be drastic, but nevertheless, in the best interest of the tuna, the fishermen, and sushi lovers the world around.

Meshi agare!
Warren
The sushi guy.

No Comments »

Declining bluefin tuna stocks have been in the news with growing frequency, and have also been the subject of a number of my blog entries over the past year (see Troubles for Tuna). When any species faces potential extinction it becomes a grave issue, but the popularity of this fish makes any news pertinent to sushi lovers around the world.

Today there is an update on the situation. The news is good and bad. The European Union today banned bluefin tuna fishing in the Mediterranean and eastern Atlantic ocean for the remainder of the year. EU fisherman have already caught the 2007 quota (16,779 tonnes) and the world will now have to rely on the remaining stock of frozen and stored bluefin tuna to satisfy our sushi and sashimi requirements. “Clearly there are problems both of overfishing a stock already threatened with collapse and of equity between the member states concerned,” EU Fisheries Commissioner Joe Borg was quoted as saying.

While this is not gong to be the magic bullet that will allow bluefin tuna stocks to come back from being over fished, it is certainly a step in the right direction as the worldwide population of the fish that gives us maguro, toro, and akamai continues to dwindle. Your toro may be a little more expensive over the next six months, but at least you will still have some for years to come as long as we responsibly harvest these fish.

Bluefin tuna are one of the most popular fish on the menu, and so far we are unable to raise them in ‘fish farms,’ as we do with some other species. Aquaculture has become big business for many countries, but unlike our domesticated terrestrial species, fish do not necessarily adapt well to dormitory life. Yellowtail (hamachi) is one fish that has become an aquaculture success story, but bluefin tuna are still free range for the foreseeable future. While attempts are being made to create the necessary environment to farm bluefin tuna, there are no commercial ventures that have met with any success. While this move by the European Union is good news, only by raising awareness to the plight of the tuna will we be able to ensure the survival of the species, and keep us in toro heaven.

Meshi agare!
Warren
The sushi guy

No Comments »

I just wanted to pass along a little information I received recently. Apparently six people became ill with Vibrio parahaemolytics from raw oyster consumption in the source state, Washington. The raw oysters were distributed to 11 other states and five countries (Canada, Indonesia, Hong Kong, Singapore and Thailand). No other illnesses have been reported. Guidance for safe consumer consumption of fully cooked oysters is included.

FDA Expands Warning on Eating Raw Oysters
Media Inquiries: Michael Herndon, 301-827-6242
Consumer Inquiries: 888-INFO-FDA

Additional Growing Area Linked to Illness Outbreaks

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is warning consumers not to eat raw oysters harvested from an additional part (growing area 5) of the southern tip of Hood Canal in Washington state due to a foodborne illness outbreak caused by Vibrio parahaemolyticus bacteria. This follows an earlier outbreak and August 10 warning about oysters harvested from growing area 6 of Hood Canal.

Symptoms of the illness, vibriosis, include watery diarrhea, often with abdominal cramping, nausea, vomiting, fever, and chills. Usually these symptoms occur within 24 hours of ingestion and last no more than three days. Severe disease is rare and occurs most commonly in people with weakened immune systems. Those who believe they have experienced these symptoms after consuming raw oysters should consult their health care provider and contact their local health department.

Raw oysters harvested from growing area 5 in Hood Canal from July 31 through August 20, 2007 have caused at least six people to become ill in Washington state. To date, records indicate that raw oysters from the area were distributed to Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Utah, Washington state, British Columbia (Canada), Bali (Indonesia), Hong Kong, Singapore, and Thailand.

The Washington State Department of Health has closed the growing area associated with the illness and has asked commercial oyster harvesters and dealers who obtained oysters from this area to recall them.

Consumers who have recently purchased oysters should check with the place of purchase and ask if they were harvested from the affected growing areas. The recall involves both shucked oysters and oyster in the shell (shell stock oysters).

Those with weakened immune systems, including people affected by HIV/AIDS, chronic alcohol abuse, liver, stomach, or blood disorders, cancer, diabetes, or kidney disease, should avoid eating raw oysters, regardless of where they are harvested.

FDA advises that consumers can continue to enjoy oysters in many cooked preparations by doing the following:

At Restaurants and other Foodservice Establishments:

· Order oysters fully cooked.

In the Shell:

· Purchase oysters with the shells closed

· Throw away any oysters with shells already opened.

· Never allow raw seafood to come into contact with cooked food.

· Boil or steam the oysters:

· Boil oysters until the shells open. Once shells open, boil for an additional three to five minutes.

· To steam—add oysters to water that is already steaming and cook live oysters until the shells open, once open steam for another four to nine minutes.

· Use smaller pots to boil or steam oysters. Using larger pots, or cooking too many oysters at one time,

· Discard any oysters that do not open during cooking.

Shucked Oysters:

· Never allow raw seafood to come into contact with cooked food.

· Cook the oysters in one of the following ways:

· Boil or simmer shucked oysters for at least three minutes or until the edges curl.

· Fry at 375° F for at least three minutes.

· Broil three inches from heat for three minutes.

· Bake at 450° F for 10 minutes.

For more information:
Hood canal oyster area closed — second closure due to illness outbreak – a news release from the Washington State Department of Health
http://www.doh.wa.gov/Publicat/2007_news/07-143.htm

FDA’s discussion on V. parahaemolyticus is in the “Bad Bug Book.”

http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~mow/chap9.html

A description about V. parahaemolytics from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC)

http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dbmd/diseaseinfo/vibrioparahaemolyticus_g.htm

CDC/MMWR gives a list of Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reports at CDC relating to V. parahaemolyticus.. The date shown is the date the item was posted on the Web, not the date of the MMWR. The summary statement shown are the initial words of the overall document. The specific article of interest may be just one article or item within the overall report.

http://www.cdc.gov/search.do?action=search&direction=desc&queryText=vibrio+cholerae&sort=date&subset=mmwr

NIH/PubMed (a service of the US National Library of Medicine and National Institutes of Health) provides a list of research abstracts contained in the National Library of Medicine’s MEDLINE database for V. parahaemolyticus..

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed&dispmax=50&term=O139%5BWORD%5D%20AND%20Food%20Microbiology%5BMeSH%5D

AGRICOLA will provide a list of research abstracts contained in the National Agricultural Library database on V. parahaemolyticus.

http://agricola.nal.usda.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?DB=local&CNT=25&Search_Arg=Vibrio+cholerae+non-o1&Search_Code=GKEY&STARTDB=AGRIDB

The Seafood HACCP Alliance Compendium and the FDA’s Hazards Guide provide information on how to develop HACCP plans to control for this biological hazard.

http://seafood.ucdavis.edu/haccp/compendium/chapt20.htm - HACCP Alliance Compendium

http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~comm/haccp4d.html - FDA’s Hazards Guide (note the FDA is expecting to release a new version possibly by the end of this year)

US FDA Food Code recommendations for cooking fish (includes molluscan shellfish as defined by the FDA seafood HACCP regulation 21 CFR 123 part 123.3(d) http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/searule3.html ) is 145F/63C for 15 sec.; 155F/68C for 15 sec for comminuted fish; and 165F/74C or above for 15 sec for stuffed fish.

http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~acrobat/fc05-3.pdf - see 3-401.11 Raw Animal Foods (starts on p. 72)

A list of resources on V. parahaemolyticus are listed at the bottom of this announcement.

No Comments »

Firstly a warning to my readers, the following entry contains graphic descriptions of what may be considered animal cruelty by some, and may be a bit extreme for some readers. If you do not want to hear stories of the preparation of living sea animals for food, please do not read this entry. Caveat lector.

Many of you may have heard stories of sushi so fresh that it was still alive when it was served. I’ve seen live octopus, lobster sashimi and fish still moving, filleted on the plate. While some of these stories are true, I’m here to clarify some of these tales, debunk some, and provide some insight into some of the more unusual items found around the world on the menu.

The Living and the Dead

The first issue I’d like to address, and actually debunk, is the story of the living fish, served sashimi style or even partially cooked, yet still live, served for your pleasure (obviously not the fish’s). What brought this to mind is the following news story on the living deep fried fish, where the body has been deep fried and the head still trying to breathe on the platter when served. I have also seen fish propped up on the plate while its body has been filleted and served alongside it, the gills moving and the head seemingly still alive. But while those who serve these fish may want you to believe that the animal is still living, displaying its freshness, the truth is that while the remaining muscle may be still twitching, it is far from alive. Muscles continue to contract after death, longer in some animals than others. But a brain needs oxygen to be conscious (and alive) and without blood flowing through its veins, no animal remains alive. Deep frying half a fish, or filleting it while it is still alive fortunately kills the animal fairly quickly, contrary to the claims of the server.

Some crustaceans and mollusks on the other hand, are most certainly eaten live. Anyone who has eaten an oyster or clam on the half shell is eating a living animal. In fact, if it is dead, you wouldn’t want to eat it raw, there is too much risk of bacterial infection. But those are not the exciting stories you came for. It is not easy to find live food in North America. If you can find it, it’s usually not on the menu. But nevertheless, it can be found. But again, I use the term ‘live’ lightly

Lobster sashimi is often claimed to be served live. If you can find it, the tail is removed from the animal and quickly prepared sashimi style while the head is placed on ice and garnished… waving its antennae or claws at you in possible revenge? That’s the theory, at least. What really happens is that the lobster dies pretty quickly after having its tail severed from its thorax, and any movement you may see is just random neuronal firing from muscles being starved of oxygen. The creature’s brain (ganglia actually) has ceased to respond. You see, Lobsters have an open circulatory system, unlike the veins and arteries of non-crustaceans, and the pressure difference when the tail is removed is enough to stop any blood from washing headwards. That critter, as they say, is, by the time it gets to you, an ex-lobster.

One of the few non-mollusks that is actually served and eaten live is the shrimp. But it is not the shrimp that you are used to eating in a restaurant. ‘Drunken shrimp’ as it is called, is a special, smaller shrimp native to Southeast Asia and served in a bowl in some type of alcoholic beverage, be it sake, or the local equivalent. The shrimp become listless after sitting in the alcohol for a few minutes and they are taken out , pulled apart, and sucked out of their shell (not always an easy task, mind you). They are pretty close to dead at the point of consumption, but for those of you who want the excitement of live food, there you go. Every once in a while you may get a bowl that was prepared moments before, and you may have some ‘jumpers.’ I’m sure you can imagine what kind of a scene that is…

Another mollusk sometimes served live is the octopus. I have seen (but never eaten) a bowl of live octopodes being consumed, tentacles desperately clinging to the chewing orifice of the diner. It is not a pretty sight, and while I pride myself on eating anything, I can only imagine the suffering of the animal so I chose not to partake of that particular meal. It is more popular in Korea, however, than elsewhere, so good luck finding it in North America.

So the stories of live sushi are basically based on a few examples, more assumptions and a lot of stories. With the exception of the aforementioned mollusks and shrimp, pretty much anything served ‘live’ is not really living, just showing the vestiges of random nerve twitching found in any recently deceased animal. While certainly a testament to its freshness, the presentation of the body or the whole of the animal is certainly a sight to behold. Some stories are true, but many are just for show, entertainment for our eyes as well as our taste buds. Meshi agare.

Warren
The sushi guy

5 Comments »

I received this email a few moments ago and wanted to pass the information along to readers of this blog. While this is a generic competition in the sense that it is not specific to sushi, I can think of a ton of ways to serve tuna in it’s raw form (and perhaps I’ll be submitting a few of these myself).

“I would like to bring to your attention our 1st Albacore Tuna Recipe Competition which will be launched to the public on September 1, 2007. This, worldwide, competition is designed to bring attention and profile to the Albacore Tuna Fishery- especially the BC-Canadian Albacore Tuna Fishery which takes place off our Pacific Coast.

The Competition includes a number of categories including: Best Appetizer, Entree, International Recipe, Sandwich, and a special category for school children (Best Sandwich). In addition we have a category for Chef’s in training which carries a $1,000 scholarship prize. One other special category is a HEALTH CHECK Recipe- BC Albacore is a recognized product in the Health Check Program of the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada.

We invite everyone to develop and submit your favorite Albacore Tuna Recipe. There is no cost to enter the competition. Judges will consist of professional chefs of the BC Chef’s Association. And all categories carry cash prizes.

Currently our Website http://www.canadianalbacoretuna.com includes details for Sponsor/Sponsorship Opportunities but soon will have additional information for the greater public including rules and links for recipe submission. ”

In light of the overfishing of bluefin tuna stocks, it’s not a bad thing to highlight those fish that are not at risk. If you have any ideas, it certainly can’t hurt to send them off….

Meshi agare!
Warren
The sushi guy

No Comments »

Japan is a fascinating country. Steeped in tradition, yet quick to adopt new technologies and trends, Japanese culture is an interesting melange of the old and the new. That said, while they took the transistor from its western inventors and changed the world, some things I’m hearing don’t sound like progress to me. If you read my previous entry about declining Bluefin tuna stocks threatening the future of sushi dining, you would know that the tuna situation is close to dire. Not willing to give up without a fight, inventive Japanese sushi chefs have come up with a new item… get ready…Venison sushi. Yes, you heard right, Deer sushi. If you don’t believe me, check out this article in the New York Times (free subscription required to view).

I’m a foodie and always eager to try new things. I eat insects, jellyfish, and I happen to love venison (mmmmm… jerky). I love steak tartar. But I have to say that I have no interest in trying this. It’s like Tofurky, one food should not be trying to masquerade as another, it should be appreciated for its own merits. Maguro, toro, o-toro, all these tuna sushi items are prized for the innate qualities that make them unique. This cannot be duplicated with a four legged critter, it is an entirely different kind of food. Personally, the last thing I want is to be eating my tai, suzuki, sake, and then but a piece of raw deer in my mouth. It just doesn’t fit. Without getting into the difference between fast-twitch and slow-twitch muscle tissue, suffice it to say that fish cannot be any further from deer, biologically speaking. While many don’t like to view their food as once thinking, I am just trying to point out that deer is not a pelagic beast and it can never replace one. It will have a different taste, and a different texture. I admire risk taking and adaptability, but some things just shouldn’t be. Maguro is not a rich, meaty food, and just because a piece of venison may somewhat, ever so slightly resemble a piece of maguro, it is not maguro and I think shouldn’t be used in its place.

There are many fish in the sea, if I may, and it is certainly a tragedy that our species feels the need to decimate other species for our own gain, but a simple hiatus on tuna fishing would help the situation greatly. We wouldn’t need to eat red meat to replace our tuna if we just took a break. A little while without toro won’t kill any of us.

The New York Times article concludes with a statement I never thought I would hear from a Japanese chef; “We can learn from American sushi chefs,” Mr. Yamagata said. Without Japanese culture being the way it is, sushi would never have achieved the artful grace unique to the dish. The last thing I want to see is a Big Mac Maki, and I’m sticking to my guns on this one.

Meshi Agare!
Warren
The Sushi Guy

1 Comment »