|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | == moved from [[Variable Talk:Domestic fish consumption of the general population]] -- [[User:Jouni|Jouni]] 10:16, 10 February 2008 (EET) ==
| + | #REDIRECT [[:heande:talk:Domestic fish consumption of the general population in Finland]] |
| − | | |
| − | == Imported fish? ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | {{discussion
| |
| − | |Dispute= What is the effect of imported fish
| |
| − | |Outcome= The scope is domestic fish as data for imported fish is much weaker
| |
| − | |Argumentation =
| |
| − | {{comment|#(1): |Is methyl mercury and omega-3 exposure from domestic fish consumption the prevailing one? You should include exposure from imported fish consumption to the model|--[[User:Olli|Olli]] 15:34, 17 September 2007 (EEST)}}
| |
| − | :{{defend|#(1): |You are right. The problem is that concentration data for imported fish is unavailable. With only domestic fish consumption, we attain a better estimate for this risk-benefit comparison|--[[User:Olli|Olli]] 15:34, 17 September 2007 (EEST)}}
| |
| − | }}
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | == Loss of fish during process ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | {{discussion
| |
| − | |Dispute= What is the loss of fish meat while processing fish?
| |
| − | |Outcome= The variable includes this loss of fish during the processing
| |
| − | |Argumentation =
| |
| − | {{attack|#(1): |You should include the fact that a proportion of fishery catch is not used for human consumption, but it goes to waste and for other purposes|--[[User:Olli|Olli]] 15:45, 17 September 2007 (EEST)}}
| |
| − | :{{attack|#(1): |This has been taken into account in this variable|--[[User:Olli|Olli]] 15:45, 17 September 2007 (EEST)}}
| |
| − | }}
| |
