Yellowfin and bigeye tuna steaks and loins sold across the United States – and likely Europe and other markets – are increasingly probable to be tainted with unlisted ingredients, including citric acid, beet extract, and sodium, according to three global seafood executives.
Up to 60 percent of yellowfin tuna steaks exported from Vietnam undergo a process through which they are injected with a saline solution and then bathed in a mixture of beet juice, paprika, and additives like sodium ascorbate and ascorbic acid (vitamin C). After this, they are treated with carbon monoxide or a tasteless, or clear, smoke. The process vastly improves the coloration of lower-grade tuna and gives the product an added water weight that can increase its value by 15 to 20 percent, the executives said.
“More and more, it's becoming common practice, specifically for companies using lower-grade raw material like purse-seine tuna,” Sea Delight President Cesar Bencosme told SeafoodSource. “As far as we’re aware, none of these ingredients are illegal to use; you just need to declare it on the label. That’s not really being done. We strongly recommend end users add sodium, nitrate, and citric acid to their internal testing protocol for tuna items."
Bencosme said Sea Delight, a major importer of frozen and fresh tuna based in Coral Springs, Florida, U.S.A., has raised the issue publicly because the company has an obligation of transparency to uphold.
“I would even say even some of the smaller importers might not even know they're getting tuna treated with citric acid since they don't have the ability to go overseas and get more information or know what their suppliers are doing,” Bencosme said. “It’s about being transparent. If you're going to do something like this, sell it for what it is.”
Miami, Florida, U.S.A.-based importer Seafarers is also speaking out about what it has termed “dishonest methods” that mask low-grade tuna “with a concoction of chemical compounds and gas treatments.”
“It's critical to distinguish between legitimate processes that preserve the authenticity of high-quality tuna and the alarming practice of treating subpar frozen tuna,” the company said in a statement. “Shockingly, our team in Vietnam has witnessed how various suppliers are engaging in a disturbing process involving soaking inferior thawed tuna in a mixture comprising sodium ascorbate, ascorbic acid, sodium tripolyphosphate (STPP), and sodium bicarbonate. These additives play a crucial role in increasing the weight of the tuna while maintaining desired moisture levels, resulting in a substantial net weight increase ranging from 12 percent to 18 percent, varying across different processing facilities.”
Moreover, according to Seafarers – which is one of the largest American importers of tuna – color additives like PROVIV 1200 containing beet juice concentration, salt, and paprika oleoresin, are employed to artificially enhance the appearance of these lower-quality tuna loins, misleading consumers into believing they are purchasing higher-grade products.
“The repercussions of these practices are dire. Despite a 41 percent drop in tuna exports to the U.S. during the first nine months of 2023, these misrepresented products are flooding the market, disrupting prices, and misleading consumers about the actual quality of the tuna they're purchasing," Seafarers said.
Seafarers President Willy Rosell said his biggest concern regarding what has become known as “vitamin tuna” for its use of ascorbic acid, or vitamin C, is that the safety and suitability of these products for human consumption remain in question.
“Consumers aren’t being told what’s in their tuna; even we don’t know what’s in it, and we’ve done lab testing,” Rosell told SeafoodSource. “People with allergies or who don’t want all that extra sodium are not being told that’s what they’re consuming. Besides that, it tastes very strange. I’m worried it’s going to hurt the reputation of tuna in the marketplace.”
Sea Delight said it’s mostly Vietnamese processors who are exporting “vitamin tuna,” estimating more than 25 percent of all yellowfin tuna exported from Vietnam has gone through the process. Because it can “easily equal 15 to 20 percent extra value” on every case due to the added water content, Indonesian, Thai, and Malaysian exporters are also beginning to adopt the practice, Bencosme said.
“If I'm buying something at USD 4.50 [EUR 4.18], my competitors who are buying the ‘vitamin tuna’ might be paying USD 0.50 to USD 0.60 [EUR 0.46 to EUR 0.56] less for that same shave cut,” he said.
Rosell said the tests Seafarers has conducted on “vitamin tuna” samples show 16 to 18 percent of its total weight comprises water and other additives.
“It’s pricing the companies doing the right thing out of the market,” he said. “On top of that, they’re using tuna of very questionable quality. It’s very blackish in color; it looks like it was in a bad cooler on a boat for 20 days.”
Rosell said the vitamin tuna began infiltrating the market around 12 to 14 months ago, and since then, prices for frozen yellowfin tuna loins and steaks from Vietnam have come down to around USD 2.50 [EUR 2.32] per pound. But, Seafarers refuses to accept the vitamin tuna and pays USD 4.00 to USD 5.00 [EUR 3.72 to EUR 4.65] per pound.
“I'm worried for our company because our customers are seeing tuna for a lot cheaper than we offer it; eventually, we’re going to lose business due to this,” he said.
The senior executive of a Vietnamese tuna exporter is also worried about the future of her business. Yen Nguyen, an overseas manager for Hong Ngoc Seafood, said the process was pioneered around five years ago.
“We noticed a difference in the tuna; we could taste and smell something different. The color was pretty good, but the taste and texture was not there,” she said. “It was clear that something bad was going on, but we didn’t want to say anything until we did tests to prove [it].”
The company ran extensive tests over three years and posed as a European buyer, making inquiries to other Vietnamese tuna exporters about their processes. Over three years, Hong Ngoc was able to identify most of the additives, and through experimentation, it found the combination of citric acid, beet juice, and CO treatment – which is legal in the U.S. if labeled but illegal to sell in Europe – gives even bad-quality tuna a vibrant red coloration.
Nguyen estimates 60 percent of tuna exported from Vietnam and other countries now undergoes the vitamin treatment.
“Most importers just don't know about it,” she said. “But now, a lot of importers ignore the problem. They must know about it because it is so widespread, and word is out [about it].”
Nearly all tuna exporters have adopted the process, some reluctantly, because it’s what they need to do to remain competitive, Nguyen said.
“Of course on the business side, they want and need to have a profit, so they do what the customer wants,” she said. “We choose the harder way [of not doing it], and I sleep better at night, but it is making it really difficult for our company. I am afraid the whole tuna industry is turning in this bad direction.”
Nguyen said she has contacted the U.S. Food and Drug Administration but has not received confirmation an investigation has been initiated. She especially worries about the higher sodium levels in the vitamin tuna being a danger to people with high blood pressure or at risk of heart problems, as well as to those with food allergies.
“It’s a safety issue. Nobody wants a bad reputation, and if something happened to harm customers’ health because you’ve been selling products that are not legal, that is not good for anyone,” she said. “We just want a fair market. If you want to do this, just put it on your label. Tell the consumer what you’re doing and what they’re consuming.”
Rosell said Seafarers received a call from the FDA several months ago and was told the federal agency was looking into the issue. But, he hasn’t heard anything since.
“We call upon the FDA to launch a thorough investigation into tuna imports from Vietnam, identifying companies engaged in these deceptive practices and swiftly removing their products from shelves,” he said. “At Seafarers, we believe that the integrity of the tuna industry and the safety of consumers must not be compromised for the sake of deceptive practices.”
An FDA spokesperson said the agency “does not comment on possible or ongoing investigations.”
“Packaged food-labeling regulations generally require a statement of identity (or name of the product), a net quantity of contents statement, the name and place of business information, list of ingredients, declaration of major food allergens (if applicable), and nutrition labeling (unless exempt). Specifically, ingredients required to be declared on the label or labeling of a food (unless exempt) must be listed by common or usual name in descending order of predominance by weight if the product has two or more ingredients. There are some exemptions for fish received in bulk containers at a retail establishment and displayed to the purchaser; for example, some of the required information may be presented on a counter card, sign, or other appropriate device,” the spokesperson said.
The Food Drug and Cosmetic Act requires all food, including seafood, to be labeled in a manner that is truthful and not misleading, the spokesperson said.
“The FDA considers food to be adulterated when a valuable part of a food is taken out or substituted, inferiority of a food is concealed, or any substance is added to increase the weight of a food or to make it appear better or of greater value. Such activities are often referred to as economically motivated adulteration or food fraud. The FDA monitors foods on the market for economically motivated adulteration. The FDA uses enforcement tools such as recalls, seizures, injunctions, and import refusals to prevent fraudulent products from entering the market. The FDA issues import alerts to prevent products from companies with a history of food fraud from entering the U.S.,” the spokesperson said. ”The FDA may also work with the Department of Justice on possible criminal and civil penalties against the fraudsters.”
The National Fisheries Institute (NFI), the leading trade group representing the U.S. seafood industry, condemned any use of ingredients that require labeling under U.S. law.
“Any product that might be treated with beet juice or CO would need to label those elements as ingredients. Failure to properly label is misbranding and could be fraud,” NFI Chief Strategy Officer Gavin Gibbons told SeafoodSource.
Adriana Sanchez, the founder and president of Seafood Ninja, a seafood sustainability consultancy, said the issue is also of significant concern to her and the rest of the sector and should be addressed by U.S. seafood importers.
“As someone who entered the industry through a family-owned tuna importing business, I've seen firsthand the importance of trust and transparency in our long-term partnerships with tuna suppliers,” Sanchez said. “Consumers deserve to know exactly what they are eating, especially when it comes to potential allergens and additives that could impact their health. Proper labeling is not just a regulatory requirement; it's a matter of trust. Addressing this issue is essential to protecting the integrity of the seafood industry and maintaining the trust we've built with our partners and customers over the years.”
