Who knew that the simple act of eating could teach one so much about life?
Tuna and salmon are two of the most popular types of sustainable fish. They’re both healthy, provide protein, and taste good. So which fish is cheaper, better for the environment, tastier, or more sustainable?
To find out, I did a little taste test with my wife. We each bought a can of tuna and a can of salmon at our local grocery store. Then I cooked up some rice to serve with it.
Now you probably want to know what happened next! Well, let’s just say that there was some disappointment on both sides.
The Taste Test
The taste test was a complete in-house experiment. I wanted to know if my wife and I had different opinions, so she did the same taste test.
As it turns out, we both thought that salmon tasted better than tuna. The difference is that she liked salmon more than I liked tuna. Also, I didn’t think the product from the grocery store was fresh enough for any of us to enjoy it. So we went back and got some new cans of tuna and salmon!
In terms of price, salmon was more expensive by a little bit. And when it came to sustainability, we found out that neither fish was sustainable–at least not based on our one-person taste test! Neither of us knew which type of fish would be healthier for you, but at this point there’s no way to know without doing some research on your own!
In conclusion: if you have an opinion about which fish tastes better or is cheaper or more sustainable–you’re probably wrong!
Tuna Vs. Salmon
: Which Fish Is Cheaper?
As you can imagine, I had to ask my wife which fish she thought was cheaper. She said that the salmon seemed like it would be more expensive because tuna has become so inexpensive thanks to its popularity. But I told her that price is not always the best indicator of quality.
My first concern was whether or not the fish was healthy for me. The nutritional information on both cans had about the same amount of protein (27 grams) and similar amounts of sodium, but the sodium in the salmon was significantly lower than the tuna. So if you’re watching your salt intake, then salmon is probably better for you than tuna.
The cost of one pound of canned salmon is $2.00, while one can of tuna will set you back about $0.50-$0.75, depending on where you buy it from and who manufactures it (there are many different companies). So on a per-ounce basis, canned salmon comes out to around $1-$1.25 per ounce while canned tuna runs about $0.60-$0.90 per ounce – so yes, on a per-ounce basis, canned tuna is cheaper than canned salmon; but when you compare them based on their weight (6 ounces for fish, 1 pound for each), then salmon doesn’t seem like such a bad deal after all!
What Did We Think?
We tried both fish and found that there were some differences in flavor. The salmon was a little sweeter while the tuna had a stronger taste.
The tuna was a little cheaper per ounce than the salmon, but not by much. It also seemed like it would be better for the environment, but it’s hard to say with only one can of each type of fish.
In order to decide which one we preferred more, we decided to do a final taste test. We each tasted the salmon and then tuna and asked our spouse which one they liked better.
After tasting both again, we felt like the tuna had a better flavor and texture than the salmon. Now I’m not saying that you should go out and start buying cans of tuna instead of cans of salmon, but if you’re in between deciding between the two kinds of fish this might help you make your decision!
