The Ex-Lax Fish

There’s a toxic bottom dweller lurking on your sushi menu. And its side effects are, uh, unpleasant, to say the least.

Illustration: Hal Mayforth

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


One day last year, Will Heidel and his wife were craving fish for dinner. They headed to San Francisco’s upscale Ferry Building Marketplace and asked a fishmonger for a recommendation. “He said, ‘Escolar, this is a great fish; you should give it a go,'” recalls Heidel. “So we went home and cooked the fish, and loved every single bite of it.” The fish was rich and silky, with a uniform white smoothness that was almost unreal.

Two days later, Heidel was at his job in real estate development when he suddenly felt that “something was not right” in his gut. Back at home, his wife admitted she’d suffered the same oily unpleasantness the day before. They googled “anal seepage” and found a blog post devoted to escolar and its consequences. “It was exactly what happened to us.”

A bycatch of tuna, escolar is often referred to as “white tuna” on sushi menus, as is the more common albacore. But the buttery fish is actually a kind of snake mackerel, a deep-sea bottom-feeder full of a wax ester that accounts for its dreamy velvety texture. Unfortunately, that oil is not digestible by humans and causes severe gastrointestinal distress in some people. It has earned escolar the nickname “Ex-Lax fish.”

Once a rare catch, escolar came on the scene in the past few decades after fishing vessels began using deeper-water longlines to catch tuna and swordfish. Along with escolar, the new equipment pulled up other deepwater fish rarely seen on the market before—Patagonian toothfish, orange roughy, monkfish, and rattail. As target species began declining due to overfishing in the ’60s and ’70s, the industry turned to the bycatch as potential new product. “From the perspective of the fishing industry, bycatch is not a good thing—it gets in the way, it causes more work, and there’s no market value,” says Geoff Shester, senior science manager of Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch program. “There is incentive in the seafood industry to develop markets for these species.” To wit: Fishermen catch one-tenth as much bluefin tuna today as they did in 1970, and the wholesale price of the coveted sushi fish has increased more than fiftyfold, from 14 cents per pound in 1970 to more than $7 in 2008. Meanwhile, catches and value of Patagonian toothfish—once considered an undesirable tuna bycatch—have skyrocketed since it first hit US plates in the late ’70s, thanks largely to a rebranding campaign by the industry to market the fish as a delicacy. They gave it a new name: Chilean sea bass. It worked so well, Chilean sea bass is now overfished itself.

Escolar has gone through its own rebranding; its current roster of pseudonyms includes “white tuna,” “butterfish,” “rudderfish,” and “Hawaiian walu.” Some government agencies warn consumers about the fish: In 2004, Washington’s health department issued a bulletin on it, and the European Union mandates that escolar and its relatives be sold only in packaged form with health warnings. The fish is banned outright in Japan and Italy.

But a US Food and Drug Administration spokesperson told me that the agency has never considered banning escolar; it merely “requests” that seafood manufacturers and processors inform potential buyers and sellers of the “purgative effect.” Some high-end chefs claim the fish is harmless in appetizer-size portions, and it continues to be sold in tony restaurants from New York (Eric Ripert at Le Bernardin loves it) to San Francisco, with customers receiving no warning. Shester of the Monterey Bay Aquarium says escolar likely won’t be the last rebranded sea creature. “We’re systematically going through what we can,” he says. “But there really aren’t a whole lot of truly unexploited fisheries left.”

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE ON MOTHER JONES' FINANCES

We need to start being more upfront about how hard it is keeping a newsroom like Mother Jones afloat these days.

Because it is, and because we're fresh off finishing a fiscal year, on June 30, that came up a bit short of where we needed to be. And this next one simply has to be a year of growth—particularly for donations from online readers to help counter the brutal economics of journalism right now.

Straight up: We need this pitch, what you're reading right now, to start earning significantly more donations than normal. We need people who care enough about Mother Jones’ journalism to be reading a blurb like this to decide to pitch in and support it if you can right now.

Urgent, for sure. But it's not all doom and gloom!

Because over the challenging last year, and thanks to feedback from readers, we've started to see a better way to go about asking you to support our work: Level-headedly communicating the urgency of hitting our fundraising goals, being transparent about our finances, challenges, and opportunities, and explaining how being funded primarily by donations big and small, from ordinary (and extraordinary!) people like you, is the thing that lets us do the type of journalism you look to Mother Jones for—that is so very much needed right now.

And it's really been resonating with folks! Thankfully. Because corporations, powerful people with deep pockets, and market forces will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. Only people like you will.

There's more about our finances in "News Never Pays," or "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," and we'll have details about the year ahead for you soon. But we already know this: The fundraising for our next deadline, $350,000 by the time September 30 rolls around, has to start now, and it has to be stronger than normal so that we don't fall behind and risk coming up short again.

Please consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

—Monika Bauerlein, CEO, and Brian Hiatt, Online Membership Director

payment methods

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE ON MOTHER JONES' FINANCES

We need to start being more upfront about how hard it is keeping a newsroom like Mother Jones afloat these days.

Because it is, and because we're fresh off finishing a fiscal year, on June 30, that came up a bit short of where we needed to be. And this next one simply has to be a year of growth—particularly for donations from online readers to help counter the brutal economics of journalism right now.

Straight up: We need this pitch, what you're reading right now, to start earning significantly more donations than normal. We need people who care enough about Mother Jones’ journalism to be reading a blurb like this to decide to pitch in and support it if you can right now.

Urgent, for sure. But it's not all doom and gloom!

Because over the challenging last year, and thanks to feedback from readers, we've started to see a better way to go about asking you to support our work: Level-headedly communicating the urgency of hitting our fundraising goals, being transparent about our finances, challenges, and opportunities, and explaining how being funded primarily by donations big and small, from ordinary (and extraordinary!) people like you, is the thing that lets us do the type of journalism you look to Mother Jones for—that is so very much needed right now.

And it's really been resonating with folks! Thankfully. Because corporations, powerful people with deep pockets, and market forces will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. Only people like you will.

There's more about our finances in "News Never Pays," or "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," and we'll have details about the year ahead for you soon. But we already know this: The fundraising for our next deadline, $350,000 by the time September 30 rolls around, has to start now, and it has to be stronger than normal so that we don't fall behind and risk coming up short again.

Please consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

—Monika Bauerlein, CEO, and Brian Hiatt, Online Membership Director

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate