Running Head: THE HAZARDS OF FARM RAISED FISH

The Hazards of Farm-Raised Fish

Steven Solari

Brianna Topchev

Britney Coleman

Rutgers University

Risk, Health, and Safety

11:374:430

07 December 2021
FARM RAISED FISH
2
Nature of the Hazard

It is no secret that incorporating fish into one’s diet has many health benefits and is even

believed to be a way to prolong life expectancy. In many foreign countries where seafood is a

staple food, the citizens are much healthier and live considerably longer than Americans. For

example, Japan consumes approximately 730,783.86 tons of fish annually, and their average life

expectancy is currently 87.74 years for women, 81.64 for men respectively (Countries That Eat

The Most Fish, 2018). This is significantly higher than the current US life expectancy, which is

80.2 years for women and 74.5 for men (Mainichi, 2021). Since it stands to reason that a

person’s daily diet is a major contributing factor in their health and longevity, it is quite apparent

that fish consumption has much to do with the exceptional health and longevity of the people of

foreign countries like Japan. Eating fish reduces the risk of heart disease, and is also very rich in

omega-3 fatty acids, which reduces blood clots, triglycerides, and arrhythmias (irregular

heartbeats). Eating at least 250 mg of these omega 3's per day is enough to provide health

benefits.  Unfortunately, Americans eat less than half of this amount (Picklo, 2020). However,

there has been a big push for quite some time now in the United States to add fish to Americans’

regular diets. However, with this comes the popular farm-raised fish varieties, which are found

in practically every American neighborhood supermarket and grocery store.

The main issue with farm-raised fish is that there are many toxic chemicals and

carcinogens found within them that pose serious health threats. Much of the farm-raised fish that

is distributed and sold in the United States comes from overseas, much from Asia, which does

not have the same safety requirements as does the United States. “Seafood from other countries

is not guaranteed to be as regulated as it is in the United States. High antibiotic use in imported,

farm-raised fish is common. Many international fish farms are not held to the high inspection
FARM RAISED FISH
3
standards that you would see in the United States. Additionally, some overseas seafood

sources—both wild-caught and farm-raised—are known to be higher in contaminants” (Tufts,

2021). Over the years, the US Food & Drug Administration (FDA) conducted inspections of

imported seafood from countries such as China, Korea, the Philippines, and Vietnam, and found

numerous harmful carcinogenic contaminants within it. Most of which are commonly used to

deal with fungal and bacterial problems in aquaculture (INI World Report, 2020).

Consequences

Those who consume farm-raised, especially farm-raised fish produced outside of the

United States, run a risk of contracting major diseases, such as cancer. “The contaminants found

in the fish are the antimicrobials nitrofuran, malachite green, gentian violet, and fluoroquinolone.

Nitrofuran, malachite green, and gentian violet, which are used to treat fungal infections, have

been shown to be carcinogenic with long-term exposure in lab animals” (Foran, 2005). In

addition, other serious health problems were found to be linked to farm-raised fish. For example,

90% of salmon currently sold in the United States is farm-raised, and also contains another

cancer-causing contaminant- polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). This farm-raised salmon has 40

times more PCBs than any other food on the market. Toxaphene and dieldrin are other toxins

found in farm-raised salmon, both of which are abundant in farm-raised salmon, and are found to

be linked to Parkinson’s disease, breast cancer, and reproductive & nervous system damage

(Hites, 2004). In a human risk assessment looking at farm-raised fish produced in Uyo, Nigeria,

researchers found, “...the highest concentrations of trace metals were present in the feeds except

for zinc while the lowest concentrations were observed in all the water samples. From the results,

it was observed that lead, cadmium, and chromium exceeded the maximum permissible limits set

by WHO (World Health Organization) and other international regulatory agencies in water while
FARM RAISED FISH
4
cobalt and chromium was above permissible limits in fish and feed” (Daniel & Matthew 2016).

There is, of course, the possibility that fish from farms such as this one in Nigeria are imported to

the United States for consumption. The United States has little control over the regulations in

which these farms must and, therefore, the conditions in which these fish are raised. For

example, one study looked at farm-raised fish in India that were raised near a source of raw

sewage, something that would not be acceptable in the United States. The study found that fish

near the source of the sewage were under higher levels of psychological stress, were lower in

protein content, and had lower respiratory activity. The study states, “Conspicuous differences in

the SDH activity of fish between the last and first stocking pond or the facultative pond were

clearly due to the result of the differences in water quality. There was a direct relationship

between SDH activity in gill tissue of any of the fish investigated and ammonia-N concentration

of water or water pH. This shows that the respiratory activity of these fishes was strongly

affected by the ammonia and pH of water. In other words, this suggests that as the distance from

the point source increases, there was a substantial improvement of water quality in the ponds

located along the sewage effluent gradient. Evidently, there is a progressive pattern of growth,

survival and physiological health of fish and an abundance of favorable diversity of food

organisms with rich biodiversity” (Mukherjee, 2006). One must also consider pollutants found in

raw sewage, such as traces of pharmaceutical drugs that can contaminate these fish.

 Wild salmon are deep reddish-orange on the inside. What most people don’t realize is

that salmon get their color from what they eat. Wild salmon eat krill, tiny shrimplike crustaceans

that contain carotenoids, which are naturally occurring orange pigments. Farm-raised salmon eat

feed that is made of corn, soy, other fish, poultry litter, and hydrolyzed chicken feathers. Due to

this unnatural diet, farmed salmon meat does not turn its natural orange-to-red color, but rather a
FARM RAISED FISH
5
less-appetizing light gray. Studies from West Creek Aquaculture, based in British Columbia, and

DSM, a company that supplies pigmenting compounds to the salmon feed industry, both have

shown that consumers will not buy gray-colored salmon. Therefore, in order to make these

artificially grown fish look natural, farmers use chemicals called canthaxanthin and astaxanthin

to dye their insides to make for a more pleasing aesthetic (Gajanan, 2017). Unfortunately,

although visually pleasing, canthaxanthin and astaxanthin have been linked to vision damage

(The Catch with Seafood, 2005).

Several major chemical companies produce these “internal paints,” the largest being

Swiss chemical giant, Hoffmann La Roche. This is the same pharmaceutical giant that produces

tranquilizers like Valium and Rohypnol (aka the “date rape” drug). To help the farmer decide

exactly what tint of pink they want to paint the fish’s insides, the salesman will show the farmer

a SalmoFan. This is a color selection fan similar to the one used to find when deciding what

color you want to paint your bathroom walls. Scientists have found a link between a high

canthaxanthin intake and damage to the human retina, prompting the European Union to ban

canthaxanthin for direct human consumption due to its potential for vision damage (Friedman,

2021). Recent studies also linked artificial food colorings used in dying farm-raised fish to

possible hyperactivity in children (Hites, 2004).

Aside from all the dangerous contaminants in farm-raised fish, the overall nutritional

value of farm-raised fish vs. wild-caught fish is also considerably worse. Protein and omega-3

fatty acids, which are beneficial to the human body, are relatively lower in farm-raised fish than

in wild-caught fish (Simon, 2020). “Although all fish accumulate Persistent Organic Pollutants

(POPs) from the environment into their fats, farmed fish do so at a higher rate than wild fish

(Cleveland Clinic, 2020). This is because farmed fish are fed on a diet high in contaminated fish
FARM RAISED FISH
6
oils and fishmeal. Fewer chemicals accumulate in wild fish because their diet contains less of

the contaminated fats and because they get more exercise, reducing their fat levels. Farmed fish

contain lower levels of protein, a lower ratio of omega-3 to omega-6 fatty acids, and higher

levels of total fat (Hites, 2004).

Populations at Risk

Cancer, Parkinson’s disease, and the many other negative consequences resulting from

farm-raised fish consumption are not prejudiced. All races, ethnicities, sexes, ages, etc. are

prone to these diseases. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the FDA

recommend eating two 3.5 oz. servings of fish per week. Pregnant women are advised to limit

their fish consumption due to levels of mercury in certain fish. The same goes for young

children (Picklo, 2020). The advisements and recommendations go on and on, such as broiling

your fish as opposed to frying it, removing the skin and lateral bloodline from the fillets, etc, etc.

However, for the purposes of this paper, the hazardous contaminants in farm-raised fish affect all

people across the board and should be avoided by all. Similar to organic produce sold in local

farm markets or Whole Foods, wild-caught fish is no different. Therefore, the argument can be

made that certain lower-income communities, sometimes found in urban or very rural areas,

would be more at risk of these hazards from farm-raised fish, since the people within these

communities would not be able to afford the more expensive wild-caught option, subsequently

forcing them to consume the cheaper lower grade farm-raised fish.

Prevention

Simply telling people to eat wild-caught fish is nowhere near enough to transition the

population to this safer option. Exposing the hazards of farm-raised fish must be made, through
FARM RAISED FISH
7
advertising as well as in education. Popular apps for smartphones now exist, such as Safe

Seafood and Monterey’s Seafood Watch advising of different types of seafood, their nutritional

value, along with how, when, and where they were caught. People need to be encouraged to ask

questions and educate themselves at their local grocery store or seafood market when they make

their purchases. Federal regulations pertaining to seafood packaging and labeling require that the

country of origin and the method of production be listed on the label. The method of production

would indicate if the seafood was farm-raised or wild-caught. The National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has a website called FishWatch.gov, which has a plethora

of facts and information on different types of fish, sustainable seafood, fisheries management,

videos, and other useful information that one could utilize when trying to decide on a certain fish

option. In addition, citizens should become active in the awareness of government

policymaking, when it pertains to fisheries issues. Much of this problem stems from commercial

fishing industries, whose main goals are profit and not so much the environment or consumers’

health. Supporting local small-scale fishing industries rather than the big corporations is another

way of combating the farm-raised fish problem.

Morbidity and Mortality

Cancer was the second leading cause of death, after heart disease, in the United States in

2019. In 2019, there were 599,601 cancer deaths; 283,725 were among females and 315,876

among males (An Update on Cancer Deaths in the United States, 2021).

From 1999 to 2017, age-adjusted death rates for Parkinson’s disease among adults aged

≥65 years increased from 41.7 to 65.3 per 100,000 population. Among men, the age-adjusted

death rate increased from 65.2 per 100,000 in 1999 to 97.9 in 2017. Among women, the rate

increased from 28.4 per 100,000 in 1999 to 43.0 in 2017. Throughout 1999–2017, the death rates
FARM RAISED FISH
8
for Parkinson’s disease for men were higher than those for women (QuickStats: Age-Adjusted

Death Rates* for Parkinson's Disease, 2021). Some contaminants that were found in farm-raised

fish, such as malachite green, which is used as a fungicide, were found to be carcinogenic with

long-term exposure in lab animals. “We conclude that tumors of the thyroid gland, liver, or

mammary gland in female rats might have been caused by malachite green chloride” (National

Toxicology Program, 2021). Another carcinogen Nitrofuran, which has also been found in

imported farm-raised fish, has been banned in the United States for quite some time now for use

in all food-producing animals. “The Food and Drug Administration has prohibited all uses of

nitrofuran drugs in food-producing animals because they pose a public health risk...the rule went

into effect on May 7, 2002, and is the result of evidence that the drugs may induce carcinogenic

residues in animal tissues. Since 1991, nitrofurans have been banned for systemic use in poultry

and swine because the drugs can cause cancer. Nitrofurans have been added to the Animal

Medicinal Drug Use Clarification Act list of drugs prohibited for extralabel use in

food-producing animals” (American Veterinary Medical Association, 2002). In addition,

antibiotic-resistant bacteria, created as a result of antibiotic overuse in farm-raised salmon, are

responsible for the deaths of 23,000 Americans each year (National Consumers League, 2014).

Controversy

There is an argument that farm-raised fish have a smaller carbon footprint than

wild-caught fish. The greenhouse gasses from transportation are claimed to be

non-environmentally friendly. “In order to source wild fish, one must send a fishing boat out

into the ocean, have it run while the fish are caught, send the fish back to shore, then drive the

fish to the packaging facility before they’re driven or flown to your local grocery store. This

results in a large carbon footprint that’s really not environmentally friendly. Meanwhile, fish
FARM RAISED FISH
9
farms are able to catch, clean, and package the fish all in one facility, which results in a much

smaller carbon footprint” (Lutz, 2021). However, what is typically not mentioned is the carbon

emissions that are generated by transporting farm-raised fish from foreign countries to the United

States. This argument might be somewhat plausible for fish farms within the United States, but

transportation and subsequent greenhouse gasses are still generated in this scenario as well.

Another argument that is made by proponents of farm-raised fish is that wild-caught fish

production causes overfishing and it destroys marine ecosystems. “The world’s oceans, lakes,

and rivers are currently being depleted faster than they can be naturally replenished, but the

demand for fish keeps growing. That’s why responsible fish farms are so important for the

environment. They provide a constant source of fish for hungry consumers without taking away

from the wild fish population, ensuring that fish will remain plentiful for generations to come.

Another cause for concern when it comes to wild fish is the destruction of marine habitat. In

Alaskan waters alone, a fishing method known as bottom trawling removed over one million

pounds of deep water corals and sponges annually between 1997 and 1999. These corals and

sponges are important habitats that provide food and shelter for marine species…it’s common for

“bycatch” to occur when fishers drop their nets and trawls. That means unwanted fish, rare

corals, and endangered fish are caught up in a fisherman’s haul. This collateral damage can

amount to up to 90% of a fisherman’s total catch” (Oceana, 2010). As far as the overfishing

argument, what many people do not know is that farm-raised fish are also fed fish, which are

wild-caught from the oceans, and in the same way with trawlers as described. While the

argument of destroying marine habitats is valid and is a major issue that needs addressing, the

statements that farm-raised fishing methods are not causing this problem are simply false. The

negative environmental impacts aquaculture has had are nuanced. Nutrient buildup happens
FARM RAISED FISH
10
when there is a high density of fish in one area. Fish produce waste, and their waste has the

potential to build up in the surrounding area. This can deplete the water of oxygen, creating algal

blooms and dead zones (Global Seafood Alliance, 2019).

In conclusion, the costs of wild-caught fish are slightly higher for the economy and to the

individual consumer, due to fishing industry expenses, transportation, etc. However the value on

human health and safety, along with the environment as a whole, far outweigh the lower price tag

and the dangers associated with farm-raised fish, specifically unregulated imported varieties

from overseas that are contributing to growing cancer rates, diseases, and other health problems

in our country. While certain aquaculture practices can be safe to both humans and the

environment to a limited extent, if properly performed and regulated, the evidence in this paper

shows that the consumption of wild-caught fish is overall the much more responsible, safer, and

beneficial choice for both human health reasons as well as for the environment.

Audience

It has been concluded that farm-raised fish pose hazards that put human health and the

environment at risk. These hazards include high levels of antibiotic use amongst farm-raised

fish, leading to resistant bacteria that can cause hard-to-treat diseases in humans. As well as the

use of carcinogenic chemical dyes, and poor standards at farms in foreign countries exposing fish

to pollutants, amongst other hazards. These hazards are relevant to all who consume seafood as

the risks associated, such as the potential development of a disease, are not biased to any one

group of people. Therefore, no specific demographic group such as gender, age, or location will

be targeted. However, we would want to target those currently buying farm-raised fish products.

For example, we would not want to place our materials in a fresh-local seafood market, where

people are already buying wild-caught fish, and may already understand many of the hazards
FARM RAISED FISH
11
associated with farm-raised fish. Instead, it would be beneficial to place our materials in a

grocery store or supermarket where farm-raised fish are sold, as well as wild-caught options.

This way, once people are educated, they can then switch to a healthier alternative.

Those who eat seafood typically have a basic understanding of the two methods of

production, farm-raised and wild-caught. Unfortunately, very few are aware of the hazards

associated with farm-raised fish (Glaser, Seggerman, & Zisser). This is largely due to the fact

that big seafood corporations attempt to limit information about environmental accidents,

potentially harmful chemicals in their products, and more in order to prioritize profit, and not

lose any sales or customers. Also, because many foreign countries do not have to reveal this

information there is often a lack of transparency with these foreign companies (Hardt, Howell, &

Flett, 2017). Therefore, finding information on these hazards is very difficult. Furthermore, those

who have a basic understanding of farm-raised fish most likely have a positive view of it.

Farm-raised fish is heavily advertised as being just as healthy and safe as wild-caught fish, if not

the better, more sustainable option. This is largely because research shows that, overall,

farm-raised fishing does have a smaller carbon footprint than wild-caught fishing, and

regulations of farms in the United States are held to very high standards (Centner). However,

what this information widely advertised to the public fails to relate is that farm-raised fish,

regardless of origin, are not immune to very damaging environmental effects. It is essentially

impossible to regulate farm-raised fish in other countries, leading to pollutants in the fish and

environmental damage.

Key Messages

The key messages we want to get across to our audience in this campaign are the risks,

and dangers associated with farm-raised fish, why farm-raised fish is not necessarily a better
FARM RAISED FISH
12
alternative than wild-caught fish, and how to make the best, informed decision when purchasing

seafood. First, we not only want to present the risks associated with farm-raised fish, but also

give our audience an understanding of them. It is one thing to simply state the information that

antibiotic use is rampant in farm-raised fishing, but it is far more effective to explain to the

audience that rampant antibiotic use in aquaculture can lead to resistant bacteria that can spread

or transmit resistance genes to non-resistant bacteria that infect humans, causing diseases that are

difficult to treat (Lockwood, 2017). It is crucial to not simply present the risks, but have our

audience understand why they are harmful to themselves and their environment. Secondly, our

campaign must combat competing claims that the consumption of farm-raised fish is overall

better than the consumption of wild-caught fish. This is the main myth we have to combat. We

have to present our information in a way that, as simply as we can, weighs the costs and benefits

of farm-raised fish and convey that those costs significantly outweigh the benefits. It must be

clear to the audience that between wild-caught and farm-raised fish, wild-caught fish is, overall,

the better alternative. Finally, we not only want to educate our audience on how to make the

best-informed decision when purchasing seafood but also provide them with resources to do so.

Providing the audience with quality sources such as seafood watch.org, run by the Monterey Bay

Aquarium, avoids the possibility of misinformation being spread by big seafood corporations,

foreign countries, or other interests inaccurately presenting the risks.

Competing/Complementary Campaigns

Thankfully, there have been many campaigns similar to seafood watch.org, that actively

promote the most sustainable products, and have a plethora of information on advising of

different types of seafood, their nutritional value, along with how, when, and where they were

caught. These campaigns are easily accessible to the public as they come in the form of popular
FARM RAISED FISH
13
smartphone apps and websites. Furthermore, the federal government passed the Country of

Origin Labeling (COOL) law in 2005 which required retailers to put the country of origin and

method of production on all seafood products to combat foreign products on U.S. shelves

(Country of Origin Labeling (COOL), 2021). Promoting trusted, unbiased sources such as these

is a critical linkage to our campaign. However, a large hurdle we must overcome is competing

campaigns that claim farm-raised fish are, overall, just as healthy for yourself and the

environment as wild-caught fish, if not better. The linkage we must make to the competing

campaigns spreading this message is pointing out to our audience the weaknesses in these

opposing claims. Much of the information promoting farm-raised fish explains that the carbon

footprint of farm-raised fish is lower than that of wild-caught fish. Yet, these campaigns leave

out the significant information of the fact that farm-raised fish can have detrimental effects on

the environment, such as farm fish escaping into local ecosystems (Andrews). Pointing out the

information these competing campaigns leave out of their message is another critical linkage to

successfully communicating the risks associated with farm-raised fish.

Contexts

Fish is an extremely nutritious and healthy food. In fact, marine fish provide 15 percent

of all animal protein consumed by humans. It is recommended by nutritionists, doctors, and

scientists as an essential part of one’s diet. This leads to much of the population attempting to

incorporate or at least better incorporate it into their diet. As environmental awareness has

increased over the last few decades, there has been much pressure put on the fishing industry to

stop overfishing, reduce fishing waste, and protect endangered marine life to preserve our

oceans. Another environmental concern many have is the population of the world growing at an

exponentially fast rate. As the population increases, so will the demand for fish, making
FARM RAISED FISH
14
sustainable fish practices even more necessary in the future (Feldstein, n.d.). The high nutritional

value of fish, the environmental damage of the fishing industry, and population increase are all

key contextual factors associated with our campaign.

Additionally, diet is the leading contributing factor to cancer. Cancer was the second

leading cause of death, after heart disease, in the United States in 2019. In 2019, there

were 599,601 cancer deaths; 283,725 were among females and 315,876 among males.

Additionally, from 1999 to 2017, age-adjusted death rates for Parkinson’s disease among adults

aged ≥65 years increased from 41.7 to 65.3 per 100,000 population. (An Update on Cancer

Deaths in the United States, 2021). Not only is this context important to our campaign, as fish

may be seen as a way to reduce the risk of cancer by incorporating healthier foods into one’s

diet, but also because there are toxic chemicals and carcinogens found in farm-raised fish which

cause cancer.

Barriers

Certain obstacles present themselves when attempting to educate the public on the risks

associated with farm-raised fish, and when promoting locally sourced, wild-caught options.

Large-scale corporations and foreign companies are one barrier. These large enterprises are

usually backed by the support of politicians and other public officials. This can make laws that

ensure stricter regulatory standards and better quality products extremely difficult to pass

through the federal government. These large corporations also have the money and power to

promote campaigns in support of farm-raised fish, and ones demonizing wild-caught options.

This can make it very difficult for smaller-scale organizations, such as non-profits, to reach their

audience and have a stronger campaign with fewer funds and resources (Carter, 2018). Our

campaign will attempt to work around this barrier by educating our audience and correcting the
FARM RAISED FISH
15
misinformation or lack of information provided by these corporations. Once our campaign is

established, we could accept donations from those who are also passionate about our message in

order to gain more money and resources to better match the quality of the materials provided by

these companies.

Additionally, even though our campaign does not look to target any specific

socio-economic group, income level is definitely a barrier to consider when presenting this

information. Certain low-income communities may not have the ability to purchase seafood that

is wild-caught as it is the more expensive option. Despite being presented with the information

from our campaign, they still may choose to purchase farm-raised fish as they do not have the

ability to afford and incorporate wild-caught seafood into their diet regularly. This leaves certain

lower-income communities, sometimes found in urban or very rural areas, at a higher risk of the

dangers associated with farm-raised fish. Location can also inhibit one’s ability to purchase

wild-caught seafood, especially locally sourced seafood. It would be very difficult for people

who live in regions like the midwest, away from coastlines to eat wild-caught options where

there is not any locally sourced, wild-caught seafood available. This may push those living in

these areas, who still want to incorporate fish into their diets, to choose more processed seafood,

with added preservatives, that keep fish fresh while being transported away from the coasts.

These processed seafood products are often of foreign origin and farm-raised (Taoukis, Tsironi,

2019). To work around these barriers of limited access to wild-caught fish, our campaign has

provided resources that are free and accessible to all. These resources provide information on the

quality of a plethora of seafood products, including both farm-raised and wild-caught fish.

Utilizing these resources, those who may not be able to purchase wild-caught options or do not

have access to them can at least avoid foreign products and low-quality products if they must still
FARM RAISED FISH
16
consume farm-raised fish. The majority of the risks our campaign identifies are found more so in

these foreign products so even a subtle transition away from these products would benefit our

audience.

Then, there is the barrier of combating environmental-related fears regarding wild-caught

fish. As previously discussed, the wild-caught fishing industry has come under intense scrutiny

in recent decades over its contributions to environmental damage within our oceans. Many of

those viewing our campaign may already have pre-established fears of contributing to

environmental harm by consuming wild-caught products. To overcome these fears, our campaign

warns of the environmental damage possible of consuming farm-raised fish and promotes locally

sourced, sustainable, wild-caught seafood options.

Other Key Considerations

It is very important that when we present our message and our materials that we do not

overcomplicate the information. Since we have established that we are not attempting to target

any specific demographic, but rather the general public purchasing farm-raised fish, this would

mean our audience would have varying levels of education and comprehension skills. Therefore,

it is critical we present our information in the simplest and most easy-to-understand way

possible. We must use simple, plain wording and avoid technical jargon regarding fishing

practices and toxicology. We must also consider the way our materials are presented. As

previously stated, our materials would be more beneficial if presented in a place where

farm-raised fish are sold, such as a supermarket, rather than a place where people are most likely

buying primarily wild-caught seafood like a local market. Our materials that would be suited for

a supermarket would be our brochure and our poster, but our recording and our newspaper article
FARM RAISED FISH
17
would have to be presented elsewhere. When presenting the news article we would want it to be

run in a newspaper that reaches a broad audience, as our target audience is broad and could have

many different characteristics. We would not want to run into it in a newspaper read by only one

demographic, say, men, women, conservatives, liberals, young people, older people, etc. The

same is true for the recording, whether it be a radio spot, video, or podcast, we would need to

make sure the medium it is presented in is not dominated by one specific audience. For the

recording and the newspaper article, we would also want to ensure that they are not placed in an

inappropriate medium. For example, we would not want our news article printed in a magazine

for fishermen, who already know much of this information, or our recording playing on a

podcast for vegetarians who already do not consume any fish.

Campaign Strategy

Based on our analysis, the overall strategy for successfully presenting our campaign's

messages is education and making the campaign memorable by drawing on our audience’s

emotions. In order to educate the public on this issue, our campaign will widely distribute

materials such as brochures, posters, media articles, etc. to the public, advising of the health

hazards pertaining to farm-raised seafood. Educating our audience on the risks associated with

farm-raised fish and attempting to make our audience understand these risks is crucial to the

success of our campaign. Most are completely unaware of these risks and pay little attention to

the origin of their seafood products or the method of production. Since this will likely be the first

time most of our audience is exposed to this information, it is important our campaign makes a

lasting impact. Therefore, once again, we must ensure that our audience has a clear

understanding of the information that we are presenting. Successful public service

announcement campaigns are those that can grab the audience's attention, and be summarized by
FARM RAISED FISH
18
the audience in a single sentence (Goodwill, 2019). Our campaign will present our information in

a very simple manner, easy for almost anyone to grasp while also remaining short and to the

point to keep our audience's attention. For example, our recording is only one minute long, any

longer and an audience may start to lose interest.

Furthermore, another aspect that makes public service campaigns successful is their

ability to elicit an emotional response from their audience, which makes the information more

memorable (Dillard, 2000). The emotions that our campaign is attempting to evoke in our

audience are fear and disgust. We are attempting to draw out these emotions with jarring images

on our materials, alarming statistics, and negative word choices describing farm-raised fish. For

example, an image that is shown on our brochure and in our newspaper article is one of a foreign

fish farm, where the water is clearly polluted and the fish are overcrowded. People are less likely

to accept risk when they feel it is out of their control and when they are unnatural (Philley, 1991).

Both concepts are presented in this image example, fish are not supposed to be swimming in

polluted water, overcrowded, but freely swimming in the vast open ocean, naturally. When

buying farm-raised fish, the consumer is not in control of the origin and is not in control of the

standards that these fish were produced in.

Pretest/Final Strategy

To pretest our materials we presented a group of 13 people with physical copies of our

brochure, newspaper article, and poster and played our recording for them. The ages of the group

ranged from 20 years old to 59 years old, they were all from various different parts of New

Jersey, made different incomes, and were overall generally diverse in other demographic areas.

We asked the group to provide feedback on the material by answering the following questions,

“Can you summarize the main message of our campaign?”, “How did these campaign materials
FARM RAISED FISH
19
make you feel?”, “Do you feel our materials were effective?”, and “How would you improve our

campaign materials?”.

The feedback to our materials was overwhelmingly positive and our group's responses

were mostly on par with what we wanted to hear back. However, there were some important

notes made by the group that gave us insight on what small adjustments needed to be made to

our campaign to make it more effective. The entire group was able to provide a summary in

about a sentence, and they were all accurate to what we feel our main message is. This first led

us to believe the materials were presented in a way that was simple enough to understand yet, a

few comments we got from the group led us to realize there was still simplifying that could be

done. A few of the group members expressed that certain technical names of both carcinogens

and chemicals in the newspaper article and poster were confusing to them. Therefore, we went

back into those materials and edited the technical terms to simply say phrases like “toxic

chemicals”, “pollutants”, and “cancer-causing”. Additionally, we initially tried to elicit anger

directed at big corporations and foreign countries as an emotional response to our campaign.

However, upon examining our group's responses regarding how the campaign made them feel,

only one response mentioned anger. The responses overwhelmingly described feelings of fear

and disgust. We originally were trying to draw out disgust from our audience, which we were

pleased to see translated through our group’s responses, yet we realized that fear was the emotion

we should expand on and not anger. We edited our materials to have less content directing blame

towards foreign countries and big corporations and elaborate more on the consequences of these

hazards. The entire group provided feedback that they felt our campaign was effective; most of

the group noted that they had not heard the majority of the information prior to viewing our

materials. The consensus of the group was that they would try their best to avoid farm-raised fish
FARM RAISED FISH
20
products in the future, especially those of foreign origin. This left our group satisfied with the

effectiveness of our message.

The only other notable comment we received with a suggestion for an improvement, was

a group member who suggested instead of recommending simply “wild-caught options”, but

specifically locally sourced sustainable wild-caught options throughout our materials. This group

member made the point that some may find it easy to argue with our campaign that many

wild-caught options have a detrimental environmental impact. The group member explained that

recommending locally sourced, sustainable wild-caught options would receive less criticism

from proponents of farm-raised fish, and would make our message more sound. We completely

agreed with this group member and decided to change the wording multiple times throughout the

materials and even added a paragraph about shopping locally to our newspaper article.
FARM RAISED FISH
21

References

Andrews, S. (2019, August). The Great (Farmed Fish) Escape. EcoMagazine, 37–44.

AVMA.org. (2002). Nitrofuran Ban In Effect. American Veterinary Medical Association.

Retrieved: 17 October 2021.

https://www.avma.org/javma-news/2002-09-15/nitrofuran-ban-effect

Carter, C. (2020). Politics of aquaculture: Sustainability interdependence, territory and

regulation in ... fish farming. Routledge.

CDC.Gov. (2021). An Update on Cancer Deaths in the United States. Centers For Disease

Control and Prevention. Retrieved: 29 September 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/

dcpc/research/update-on-cancer-deaths/index.htm

CDC.Gov. (2021). QuickStats: Age-Adjusted Death Rates* for Parkinson Disease† Among

Adults Aged ≥65 Years — National Vital Statistics System, United States, 1999–2017.

Centers For Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved: 29 September 2021.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/68/wr/mm6835a6.htm

CFS. (2005). Human Health Report, The Catch With Seafood. Center For Food Safety.

Retrieved: 26 September 2021.

FARM RAISED FISH
22
https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/files/aquaculture-reportfinal672005_35761.pdf

Cleveland Clinic. (2020). Fish Faceoff: Wild Salmon vs. Farmed Salmon. Cleveland Clinic.

Retrieved: 26 September 2021. https://health.clevelandclinic.org/fish-faceoff-wild-

salmon-vs-farmed-salmon/.

Dillard, J. P., & Peck, E. (2000). Affect and persuasion. Communication Research, 27(4),

461–495. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365000027004003

E. Daniel, I., & U. Matthew, N. (2016). Human Risk Assessment of Consuming Farm Raised

Fish in Uyo, Nigeria. Journal of Applied Life Sciences International, 9(2), 1-10.

Retrieved: 15 November 2021. https://doi.org/10.9734/JALSI/2016/29795

Feldstein, S. (n.d.). HUMAN POPULATION GROWTH AND OCEANS. Human Population

Growth and Oceans. Retrieved December 7, 2021, from

https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/population_and_sustainability/oceans/inde

x.html.

Foran, J. A., and D. O. Carpenter. 2005. “Risk-Based Consumption Advice for Farmed Atlantic

and Wild Pacific Salmon Contaminated with Dioxins and Dioxin-Like Compounds.”

Environmental Health Perspectives 113 (5): 552–6. Retrieved: 15 November 2021.

https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/ehp.7626

Friedman, David. (2021). Farmed and Dangerous! Dr. Friedman’s Health Blog. Retrieved: 26

September 2021. https://doctordavidfriedman.com/blog/farmed-and-dangerous.

FARM RAISED FISH
23
Gajanan, Mahita. (2017). How Farmers Turn Their Salmon Pink. Time Magazine. Retrieved: 26

September 2021. https://time.com/4790794/farmed-salmon-pink/.

Global Seafood Alliance. (2019). What Is the Environmental Impact of Aquaculture?

GlobalSeafood.org. Retrieved: 21 November 2021.

https://www.globalseafood.org/blog/what-is-the-environmental-impact-of-aquaculture/

Goodwill, B. (2020, January 11). What factors make great PSAS - what to avoid. PSA Research

Center. Retrieved December 7, 2021, from

https://www.psaresearch.com/what-factors-make-great-psas-what-to-avoid/.

Hardt, M. J., Flett, K., & Howell, C. J. (2017). Current barriers to large-scale interoperability of

traceability technology in the seafood sector. Journal of Food Science, 82(S1).

https://doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.13796

Hites, Ronald A. et al. Global Assessment of Organic Contaminants in Farmed Salmon.

Science, vol. 303, January 2004. Retrieved: 05 March 2020.

https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/issues/312/aquaculture/human-health-risks.

INI World Report. (2020). FOOD FROM CHINA (wow) PLEASE READ THIS! Retrieved: 26

September 2021. https://www.ini-world-report.org/2020/04/04/food-from-china-wow-

please-read-this/.

Lockwood, D. (2019, September 29). Antibiotic resistance could spread through feed at fish

farms. Cen.acs.org. Retrieved December 7, 2021, from

FARM RAISED FISH
24
https://cen.acs.org/articles/95/web/2017/09/Antibiotic-resistance-spread-through-feed.ht

ml.

Lutz, Greg C. (2021). Assessing the carbon footprint of aquaculture. The Fish Site. Retrieved: 21

November 2021.

https://thefishsite.com/articles/assessing-the-carbon-footprint-of-aquaculture

Mukherjee, B.B. Jana. (2006). Water quality affects SDH activity, protein content and

RNA:DNA ratios in fish (Catla catla, Labeo rohita and Oreochromis mossambicus) raised

in ponds of a sewage-fed fish farm, Aquaculture, Volume 262, Issue 1,2007,Pages

105-119,ISSN 0044-8486. Retrieved: 15 November 2021.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0044848606008702

National Consumers League. (2014). Fish Farms: Good, Bad, or Downright Ugly? National

Consumers League. Retrieved: 26 September 2021. https://nclnet.org/fish_farms/.

Picklo, Matthew. (2020). Eat fish! Which Fish? That Fish! Go Fish! US Department of

Agriculture. Retrieved: 26 September 2021. https://www.ars.usda.gov/plains-

area/gfnd/gfhnrc/docs/news-2013/eat-fish-which-fish-that-fish-go-fish/.

PubMed.gov. (2021). National Toxicology Program. Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of

malachite green chloride and leucomalachite green. (CAS NOS. 569-64-2 and 129-73-7)

in F344/N rats and B6C3F1 mice (feed studies). Natl Toxicol Program Tech Rep Ser.

2005 Feb;(527):1-312. PMID: 15891780. Retrieved: 17 October 2021.

FARM RAISED FISH
25
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15891780/.

Simon, David. (2020). 7 Things Everyone Should Know About Farmed Fish. Mind Body Green.

Retrieved: 26 September 2021. https://www.mindbodygreen.com/0-11561/9-things-

everyone-should-know-about-farmed-fish.html.

The Mainichi. (2021). Japan's average longevity hits record high. The Mainichi. Retrieved: 28

September 2021. https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20210802/p2a/00m/0na/003000c.

Tsironi, T. N., & Taoukis, P. S. (2019). Advances in conventional and nonthermal processing of

fish for quality improvement and shelf life extension. Reference Module in Food Science.

https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-100596-5.22618-8

Tufts. (2021). Fish: Farm-Raised versus Wild Caught. (2020). Tufts University Health &

Nutrition Letter, 38(4), 3. Retrieved: 15 November 2021.

https://www.nutritionletter.tufts.edu/healthy-eating/fish-farm-raised-versus-wild-caught/

U.S. Department of Agriculture . (n.d.). Country of origin labeling (cool). Country of Origin

Labeling (COOL) | Agricultural Marketing Service. Retrieved December 7, 2021, from

https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/cool.

World Atlas. (2018). Countries That Eat The Most Fish. World Atlas. Retrieved: 28 September

2021. https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-that-eat-the-most-fish.html.

Zisser, B., Glaser, D., & Seggerman, I. (2012). (rep.). Do You Know Where Your Seafood Comes

From? How Seafood Traceability Stacks Up Against Beef and Produce . Oceana.
FARM RAISED FISH
26
Retrieved December 6, 2021, from

https://oceana.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/18/Seafood_Traceability_Report_FINAL.pdf.