Title: Exposure of South Carolinians to commercial meats and fish within their meat and fish diet.

Authors: Burger, J; Boring, S; Dixon, C; Lord, C; McMahon, M; Ramos, R; Shukla, S; Jeitner, C; Gochfeld, M

Published In Sci Total Environ, (2002 Mar 15)

Abstract: There has been considerable interest in the public's exposure to a variety of contaminants through the consumption of wild fish and game, yet there is little information on consumption of commercial meats and fish, or the relationship between commercial and self-caught fish. We conducted a dietary survey in 1999 to estimate exposure levels of 464 individuals from people attending the Palmetto Sportsmen's Classic. Mean consumption was similar for beef, chicken/turkey, and wild-caught fish, and much lower for pork and store-bought fish, and still lower for restaurant fish. There were no ethnic differences in the consumption of most commercial fish and meats, although the differences for chicken approached significance. There were significant ethnic differences in consumption of wild-caught fish. Women ate significantly less of all meat types, except store-bought fish. People over 45 ate less beef than younger people, and people younger than 32 ate significantly more chicken than others. There were no significant differences in consumption patterns as a function of income, except for chicken and wild-caught fish; people with higher incomes ate more chicken than others, and people with lower incomes ate more wild-caught fish than others. When all wild-caught and commercial fish and meats are considered, there are significant differences only for ethnicity and gender. Blacks consume significantly more fish than Whites, and men consume significantly more than women.

PubMed ID: 11883761

MeSH Terms: No MeSH terms associated with this publication