Frequency of consumption of different fish, crustacean and

Overview

This source page is a mechanical bulk-ingest record for a PDF in the research-pulls corpus. It preserves source-level identity, routeable product/analyte scope, and exact extracted numeric lines for later human or fresh-context audit. It does not derive HMTc thresholds, percentiles, or brand-by-brand comparisons.

Key numbers

The worker extracted the full PDF text with layout preservation twice and compared extraction hashes before commit. The following lines are copied from numeric/table-bearing regions of the PDF and retain the source units and wording where legible:

0.3 mg/kg). Respondents were asked about consumption frequency, awareness of
3.1.2. Consumption frequency of fish and other seafood species (mercury ML 1.0 mg/kg)�� 18
3.1.3. Consumption frequency of fish and other seafood species (mercury ML 0.5 mg/kg)�� 20
3.1.4. Consumption frequency of fish and other seafood species (mercury ML 0.3 mg/kg)�� 21
maximum levels (1.0, 0.5 and 0.3 mg/kg) while an Awareness Questionnaire assessed knowledge of contaminants, health
vice was issued. For species with a mercury maximum level of 1.0 mg/kg, high-frequency consumption nearly doubled
(‘TWI’) for inorganic mercury of 4 μg/kg body weight (‘b.w.’) and for methylmercury of 1.3 μg/kg b.w. (both expressed as
a ML for mercury of 1mg/kg as established under Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 were prioritised;
weight (crustaceans and fish species for which the ML is not set to 1.0 or 0.3 mg/kg of wet weight) and 0.3 mg/kg of wet
size of n = 300). Each batch mirrored the overall mobile/landline proportions. Every number was dialled a minimum of five
general population random probability sampling request (N = 240, 18–64 year-olds) and (2) the pre-defined sample quota
50/50 gender distribution) and pregnant women (N = 130). Specifically, the sampling design per country consisted of:
Daily reports were shared with central and local teams. Additionally, supervisors reviewed at least 10% of recorded inter-
three quality criteria (interview was completed in less than half of the mean duration, more than 30% ‘don’t know/refusal’
answers, identical answers were given for multiple consecutive questions), if they had more than 90% of non-response and
The overall response rate for RDD sample during the FPS was 10.8% and the higher response rate was observed in
Belgium reaching the 25.9%. In the SPS, the overall response rate for the RDD sample was equal to 9.9% and the highest
rate was observed in France reaching the 16.6%. The detailed response rates per survey and country for the RDD sample
indicating the cumulative frequency with which any fish from the ML 1 mg/kg of wet weight was consumed.
kg of wet weight, 0.5 mg/kg of wet weight, 0.3 mg/kg of wet weight, a derived variable was computed that indicates how
(N = 500) would have been too small to reliably identify segments at the national level. For the FPS, the analysis was carried
Only the 10+ general population random probability sample and adolescent boost sample from the FPS (N = 11,765) and
SPS (N = 4087) were included in the segmentation analyses. This is due to the specific sampling design needed to meet the
• Each one of the defined segments needed to include at least 10% of the survey respondents;
tion frequency equal to two or more times per week is presented in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. The frequencies presented
that from the ~500 individuals per country participating in both surveys, around 60% of them identified themselves as fish
TA B L E 1 Overview (N. %) of total unweighted sample of the FPS by country, ML category and population subgroup.
TA B L E 2 Overview (N, %) of total unweighted sample of the SPS by country for the 10 + 5 countries, ML category and population subgroup.
(Base: 10+ population both surveys (N=18011)
other seafood, if at all?). (Base: pregnant women both surveys (N=5541)
combined FPS and SPS. (Base: Respondents who reported having increased their consumption of fish in the past year (n = 4.162). Question: Q8.1.3. Do
combined FPS and SPS. (Base: Respondents who reported having decreased their consumption of fish in the past year (n = 2.275). Question: Q8.2.3. Do any of
combined FPS and SPS. (Base: Respondents who reported having increased their consumption of seafood in the past year (n = 2.262). Question: Q8.3.3. Do
among FPS and SPS. (Base: Respondents who reported having decreased their consumption of seafood in the past year (n = 2.405). Question: Q8.4.3. Do any
3.1.2 | Consumption frequency of fish and other seafood species (mercury ML 1.0 mg/kg)
When comparing the consumption of fish and other seafood species with a mercury ML of 1.0 mg/kg of wet weight in countries
per week as shown in Table 3. Conversely, an increase was recorded in higher consumption frequencies, with more individuals
reported consuming fish and other seafood species with a mercury ML of 1.0 mg/kg of wet weight three or more times per week.
10+ population consumers that say they have consumed fish and other seafood species with a mercury ML of 1.0 mg/kg
T A B L E 3 Consumption frequency of fish and other seafood species (mercury ML 1.0 mg/kg) among consumers in 10+ population including
The proportion of consumers with never or less than once per week consumption occasions fell from 41% during FPS to 25%
ML category of fish and other seafood species three or more times a week increased, as seen in Table 4, below.

Methods (brief)

women. Data were collected through computer-assisted telephone interviews by
2.6. Implementation of the survey and achieved sample�� 10
2.8. Overview of total sample�� 12
Uncertainties were identified related to the sampling design, sampling frame and representativeness of the sample.
The food consumption data present in the Comprehensive Database were collected using single or repeated 24- or 48-h
The collected data were managed and analysed to assess:
Data were collected at two time points, which are subsequently referred to as the first point survey (FPS) and the second
In all countries covered in both surveys, the data were collected by means of a telephone survey (computer-assisted
Samples were centrally released by the contractor in batches using a 24:1 ratio (e.g. 7200 numbers to achieve a sample
Even if telephone samples are expected to be representative, bias could be introduced due to differences in response
Targeted boost sample recruitment was conducted for adolescent and pregnant women via social media advertisement
Social sampling/recruitment involves a degree of self-selection. Therefore, efforts to sample a representative sample
interviews for specific quota (e.g. region, gender). For the adolescents boost sample, soft quotas were set for gender and
geographical region. For the pregnant women boost sample, soft quotas were set for geographical region. Any imbalance
general population random probability sampling request (N = 240, 18–64 year-olds) and (2) the pre-defined sample quota
frames to sample 300 European consumers (10–64 years old), of which it was expected to include 30 pregnant women
and 30 adolescents due to natural fall out of the random general population sample
• An additional boost sample of +/− 100 pregnant women

Implications

This page makes the source discoverable for category-level evidence routing. Values remain source-native and should be used only with the stated matrix, species, basis, geography, and censoring context from the paper. The page does not convert total mercury to methylmercury or use total arsenic as inorganic arsenic.

Wiki pages this source may touch

Verification notes

Identity check: DOI, raw handle, candidate cite-key, and SHA-256 were compared against existing wiki/sources/ pages before creation.
Full-PDF read: pdftotext -layout was run on the full PDF twice; extracted text hashes matched before the page was written.
Numeric verification: numeric/table-bearing lines were selected mechanically from the verified extraction and preserved without unit conversion or rounding.
Brand firewall: the worker skips PDFs when extracted numeric lines appear brand/manufacturer-sensitive; this page contains category-level or species-level evidence only.
HMTc firewall: no threshold, percentile, pass/fail, clean/dirty, or certification math is stated.

Update history

The five most recent substantive edits to this page, classified major (evidence or structure moved), correction (a published value or statement was wrong and has been fixed), or minor (narrative rewritten without changing the underlying evidence). Each description is derived from what the edit did to this page; the linked commit is the authoritative record, routine regeneration passes are excluded, and the full version history lives in git. When DOI minting comes online (see schema docs), each entry below will also link to a version-pinned DataCite DOI.

Commit	Date	Change	Description
b01ec52c	2026-08-04	major	2 sections added
d49e450f	2026-08-03	major	5 sections added; narrative text revised