Both tuna and chicken can be part of a healthy diet. But which one is truly healthier? There are a few key factors to consider when comparing tuna and chicken: nutritional content, mercury levels, sustainability, and cost. This article will break down the pros and cons of each to help you decide which is the healthier option for you.
Nutritional Content
When looking at nutritional content, both tuna and chicken have their merits. Here is a breakdown of some of the key nutrients in a 3 ounce serving of each:
Tuna Nutrition
Nutrient | Amount in 3oz serving |
---|---|
Calories | 93 |
Protein | 21g |
Fat | 1g |
Omega-3 fatty acids | 0.5-1.8g |
Selenium | 92.6mcg |
Vitamin D | 228IU |
Niacin | 12.5mg |
Vitamin B12 | 5.4mcg |
Chicken Nutrition
Nutrient | Amount in 3oz serving |
---|---|
Calories | 124 |
Protein | 26g |
Fat | 3g |
Omega-3 fatty acids | Minimal |
Zinc | 1.3mg |
Vitamin B3 | 6.8mg |
Vitamin B6 | 0.5mg |
Selenium | 13.3mcg |
As you can see, both tuna and chicken are high in protein. Tuna has slightly fewer calories and fat. It also provides more omega-3s, vitamin D, selenium, and B vitamins. Chicken contains more zinc.
So in terms of nutritional content alone, tuna has a slight edge thanks to the omega-3s, vitamin D, and B vitamins. But both are nutritious options.
Mercury Levels
When it comes to tuna, mercury content is a concern. Tuna contains methylmercury, which can build up in the body over time and cause neurological damage.
Here are the mercury levels in different types of tuna, according to the FDA:
Type of Tuna | Mercury Level (parts per million) |
---|---|
Canned light tuna | 0.12 ppm |
Canned albacore tuna | 0.35 ppm |
Fresh/frozen tuna | 0.38 ppm |
The FDA recommends eating no more than one can (3-6 oz) of light tuna or 12 ounces of albacore tuna per week to keep mercury consumption at safe levels.
Chicken contains no mercury. So when it comes to mercury content, chicken is clearly the safer choice. If you eat tuna frequently, it’s important to choose lower mercury options like light tuna and limit your intake.
Sustainability
There are also some sustainability considerations when choosing between tuna and chicken:
Tuna Sustainability
– Many tuna species are overfished or fished unsustainably. Atlantic bluefin tuna is dangerously depleted.
– Choosing pole and line caught skipjack tuna is a more sustainable option. Albacore and yellowfin tuna can also be reasonable choices when U.S. or Canadian caught.
– Canned tuna labeled “pole and line caught” is best for sustainability.
– Avoid tuna labeled only as “white tuna” as it is often albacore that is unsustainably caught.
Chicken Sustainability
– Chicken is one of the most energy efficient animal proteins to produce.
– Choosing chicken raised without routine antibiotics is better for avoiding antibiotic resistance.
– Pasture-raised and organic chicken production is typically more sustainable than conventional methods.
– Chicken labeled “organic” or “pasture-raised” is the most environmentally friendly option.
So for sustainability, pole and line caught skipjack tuna or U.S./Canadian albacore can be reasonable choices. But organic, pasture-raised chicken is likely the most sustainable option overall.
Cost
Cost is another consideration when comparing tuna and chicken:
Food | Average Cost |
---|---|
Canned tuna | $1.50 per 5oz can |
Fresh tuna steak | $15 per lb |
Boneless, skinless chicken breast | $3.99 per lb |
Canned tuna is relatively affordable. Fresh tuna steaks can be quite expensive. Chicken breast is a mid-range option for cost.
So if your budget is tight, canned tuna provides an inexpensive source of protein and nutrition. But chicken breast is also fairly affordable and sustainable.
Summary
So is tuna or chicken healthier? Here’s a quick summary:
Tuna pros:
– Higher in heart-healthy omega-3s
– More vitamin D, selenium, B vitamins
– Lower in calories than chicken
– Canned tuna is relatively inexpensive
Tuna cons:
– Mercury content is a concern
– Overfishing makes sustainability challenging
– Fresh tuna is expensive
Chicken pros:
– Contains no mercury
– Versatile and easy to cook with
– Fairly affordable, especially breast meat
– More sustainable than most fish
Chicken cons:
– Less omega-3s than tuna
– Conventional chicken may use routine antibiotics
Conclusion
Overall, chicken breast is likely the healthier choice for most people. It provides a versatile, affordable source of protein without the mercury concerns.
Organic, pasture-raised chicken is the most sustainable option. Chicken also contains less heart-healthy omega-3s than tuna, but this can be supplemented through other foods like walnuts, chia seeds, and fatty fish like salmon.
Light tuna in moderation can still be part of a healthy diet. It provides more omega-3s and vitamin D. But albacore and fresh tuna should be eaten sparingly due to mercury and sustainability concerns.
When choosing between tuna vs chicken, consider your budget, taste preferences, and nutritional needs. Both can be included as part of an overall balanced diet. Focus on getting a variety of lean proteins from fish, poultry, beans, eggs, and other plant-based foods.