DEAR DR. BLONZ: We had great-tasting grilled frozen swordfish steaks at a friend’s place, prepared according to the package instructions. I would appreciate your comment on whether this is a good fish to have, given concerns about mercury content. My main question comes from my learning that the leftovers had inadvertently been left in a sealed container on the counter overnight, rather than being put in the freezer as planned. My friend told me she put them in the freezer the next morning. I questioned the wisdom of this, and she told me that the original grilling would have killed the existing bacteria on the uncooked fish, and that freezing (even if begun the next morning?) would kill any bacteria that might have grown during the night. Then, when it came time to have the leftovers, reheating would finish the job. I questioned this, and she said it was a common practice, and no one had ever gotten sick. Is this a safe? Does freezing kill bacteria? Not to mention what it might taste like, and the general safety of swordfish.
-- W.N., Portland, Oregon
DEAR W.N.: You certainly are a good friend, and I hope you will pass this reply to your neighbor before they consider having those leftovers. Freezing would not kill bacteria in this situation; all that freezing does is to suspend the growth of microorganisms. It is essential to realize that freezing does not make food fresher than it was before it was frozen. Whenever a food is defrosted, bacterial growth resumes exactly where it left off. Eating foods left out on the counter is an unnecessary roll of the food-safety dice. There could be no guarantee of safety, even after reheating the next day. The idea of them being in a sealed container on the counter provides no reassurance, as cooling foods can draw the bacterial wild card of external air into the container while the food is temperature-sensitive. In my considered opinion, the best course of action would be to discard the items.
As for the healthfulness of eating swordfish, it provides an excellent source of protein, vitamins D and E, most of the B vitamins, along with omega-3 fatty acids. There are, however, real concerns about its mercury content. Fish are the main dietary source of this toxin for humans. As healthful as fish can be, estimates in the scientific literature are that about 90% of the mercury in our bodies comes from fish, typically from varieties high up on the marine food chain. The most commonly consumed higher-mercury fish include swordfish, shark, orange roughy, tilefish and certain types of tuna. (Side note: Salmon is not a fish of concern in this regard.)
Mercury is distributed throughout a fish, so cleaning and the method of preparation can’t solve the problem. It’s best to have no more than one serving per month of any high-mercury fish. Pregnant women and children should be at the lower end of that range, if you get my meaning. For more on mercury in fish, see b.link/pb677p5. Low- or no-mercury fish can be consumed more frequently. Check seafoodwatch.org for fish recommendations.
Send questions to: "On Nutrition," Ed Blonz, c/o Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. Send email inquiries to questions@blonz.com. Due to the volume of mail, personal replies cannot be provided.