Some say that recommending dietary increases in fish and seafood intake is not as straight forward as making dietary recommendations to eat more fruits and vegetables. Given that people still consider potatoes, corn and peas as core vegetables, this statement makes me wonder.
This article in the Washington Post (link below) is a nice discussion of the considerations around eating fish. After weighing the nutritional benefits, current consumption and the potential, theoretical concern for contamination, the conclusion remains the same: “As long as you’re not a pregnant woman, the evidence suggests that the balance is always toward net benefit,” states Dariush Mozaffarian, MD, PhD, of the Harvard School of Public Health and a member of the FAO/WHO panel*.
Pregnant women need to be consuming long-chain omega-3s, as found in fish and seafood, for themselves and for their growing infant. It simply behooves them to pay closer attention to the source. Wild, Alaskan salmon is not restricted, even by the Environmental Defense Fund. The nutritional need during pregnancy is there, of that we are certain. In fact, the developing infant is priority #1 for the long-chain omega-3s.
Article in the Washington Post, dated April 2, 2012 is here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/eat-more-fish-risks-overstated/2012/04/02/gIQARwPNrS_story.html
*The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations working with the World Health Organization (FAO/WHO). In 2010 they convened panels of nutritional, toxicological and epidemiological experts to review this topic.