What canned fish has more omega-3?

Preserved fish such as canned tuna and salmon are large pantry foods. Not only are they Practical and budgetaryBut they are also a rich source of essential nutrients such as omega-3 fatty acids. These fatty acids are essential to maintain brain health, reduce inflammation and potentially reduce the risk of heart disease.

But if you choose between the two, which offers more of these healthy fats? Continue to read to find out more about omega-3 content of tuna and canned salmon and Compare factors such as mercury levels, proteins, sodium and cost.

The canned tuna is one of the most popular seafood options around the world, and this is not a surprise why. It is versatile, affordable and a good source of omega-3.

The tuna contains two key types of omega-3 fatty acids: DHA (docosahexaenoic acid) and EPA (eicosapentaenoic acid), which are linked to improved heart health and reduced inflammation.

However, omega-3 levels in tuna can vary depending on the type of tuna. For example:

• Light tuna (often made from Skipjack tuna) contains approximately 0.2 to 0.3 grams of omega-3 per portion of 3 ounces.
• Albacore tuna (commonly labeled as “white tuna”) has a slightly higher omega-3 content of approximately 0.8 to 1.0 gram per portion of 3 ounces.
• Fire tuna (also known as the tuna in Quinclond) provides approximately 0.3 to 0.5 gram from omega-3 per portion of 3 ounces.

The albacore tuna generally contains more omega-3 but can also have higher mercury levels.

Canned salmon is usually made from red or pink salmon, which are rich in heart health and have a high DHA and EPA content.

On average, a portion of 3 ounces of canned salmon contains:

• Red salmon: About 1.0 to 1.2 grams of omega-3
• Pink salmon: About 0.7 to 1.0 grams of omega-3

What gives the salmon the edge is its Content omega-3 constantly higher compared to most types of canned tuna. In addition, canned salmon often comes a more natural form of whole food (skin and bone included in some cases), which can contribute traces of nutrients such as calcium.

In addition to omega-3, there are other nutritional factors to weigh when comparing tuna and canned salmon:

• Mercury contents: Mercury is a concern in fish because it can accumulate in the body of fish over time, especially in the greater predatory species. The consumption of mercury fish could damage your nervous system and alter brain development in young children and unborn babies. Tuna tends to have higher mercury levels, especially albacore tuna. Light tuna is a safer bet for those who limit the consumption of mercury. Salmon generally has very low levels of mercury.
• Protein: Fish is an excellent source of complete protein, as it contains all the essential amino acids your body needs. Tuna has around 22 to 24 grams of protein per portion. The salmon is slightly lower, providing about 17 to 20 grams per portion.
• Sodium: Excessive sodium intake is a concern because it can cause high blood pressure, increasing the risk of heart disease and stroke. If you look at your sodium intake, opt for low sodium versions of one or the other of the fish.
• Price: The tuna is often more affordable, with a light tuna box costing about $ 1 to 2, while canned salmon generally varies from $ 3 to 5.
• Antioxidants: Salmon is rich in astaxanthine, a powerful antioxidant that supports the health and immunity of the skin, and can even reduce inflammation. Astaxanthine gives fish its distinctive pink shade and offers many health benefits.
• Vitamin D: “The salmon is an excellent source of vitamin D. While 3 light ounces provide 231 IU, 3 ounces of wild fisheries salmon have almost double at 447 IU. Vitamin D is in very few food sources and is essential for bone health and immune support,” said Patricia Kolesa, MS, RDN, Dietian Dish LLC, Tell Health.

Choose between canned tuna and salmon It largely depends on your specific needs and preferences.

If the contents of omega-3 is your main objective, canned salmon (in particular Sabkeye) takes the lead. It also tends to be a better choice if you are concerned about mercury.

However, canned tuna is an excellent alternative for those with a tighter budget or the search for a slightly higher protein content. The light tuna can offer a more affordable option with reasonable omega-3 levels while keeping the consumption of moderate mercury.

“I usually suggest mixing it. Throw the tuna canned in a quick salad or sandwich, and try frozen or canned salmon in pancakes or grain bowls, “said Samantha Devito, MS, RD, RD, Health. The two have their place in a balanced diet, and rotating them helps keep the meals interesting while lowering the exposure to the mercury of the tuna.

“If you are looking to stimulate your omega-3 and vitamin D intake, salmon is a better choice, but if you want weaker proteins in global calories, tuna is a better choice,” said Carrie Gabriel, MS, RDN, dietitized and content creator, Health.

“Salmon and tuna are both accessible sources of healthy proteins and fats, and super easy to use in meals,” said Devito. “Salmon tends to be higher in omega-3, which are perfect for the health of the heart and brain, while the tuna is leaner and behaves in a little more protein per ounce.”

When you decide between the two, Consider not only their omega-3 content, but also factors such as mercury levels, sodium and cost.

Whatever you choose, including canned fish in your diet is a simple and effective way to enjoy the many advantages of omega-3 while creating delicious versatile meals.