Microplastics in Canned Tuna and Salmon: Double Exposure

MicroPlastics Research DeskEditorial team

July 11, 2025

9 min read

Last reviewed: May 25, 2026 by the MicroPlastics Research Desk. Submit a correction or see our editorial standards.

Quick Answer

Canned tuna and salmon are uniquely problematic: they combine fish-borne microplastics with epoxy/BPA can liner leaching over the full shelf life. Multiple studies have found microplastics in 100% of canned seafood samples tested, with bluefin tuna concentrating the most due to bioaccumulation up the food chain. Pouch tuna isn't safer, the plastic-foil laminate adds polyethylene migration. Cleanest options: glass-jarred wild salmon (Wild Planet glass, Vital Choice glass) or fresh wild-caught fish from a local fishmonger. Choose smaller fish (sardines, anchovies, mackerel) over large predators when canned is unavoidable.

Got a different brand in the cupboard? Scan the label for its polymer, risk score, and a cleaner swap.

Scan my product

Microplastics in canned tuna and salmon, fish + can liner combined

Last updated: May 25, 2026

Key Takeaways

Canned seafood combines fish-borne microplastics (gut, gills, muscle) with can-liner migration.
Larger predator fish (bluefin tuna, swordfish, mackerel) bioaccumulate microplastics + mercury, limit to once/month max.
Smaller fish (sardines, anchovies, small albacore, light skipjack tuna) have lower bioaccumulation.
“BPA-free” liners do not just swap in BPS, but the claim only means BPA wasn't added on purpose.
Cleanest: glass-jarred wild salmon (Wild Planet, Vital Choice), fresh fish from a fishmonger.
Pouch tuna isn't safer, adds PE polyfilm microplastic on top of fish content.

Why canned fish is a double-exposure scenario

Most canned-food microplastic discussions focus on the can liner. For canned fish specifically, you get two compounding sources:

Fish-borne microplastic. Sea fish ingest plastic from ocean water. Particles concentrate in gut, gills, and to a lesser degree muscle tissue. Canning typically uses whole-fillet pieces (tuna, salmon) or whole small fish (sardines, anchovies).
Can liner migration. Steel cans are coated inside with a thin polymer film to prevent corrosion, historically a BPA epoxy, and in most US food cans today a polyester, acrylic or vinyl coating. (Contrary to a claim we used to repeat here, BPA-free cans are not simply lined with BPS: lining-identification studies do not find it. See our canned food guide for the full picture.) Over the 2-3 year shelf life the coating gives up both particles and chemistry into the food, accelerated by the packing oil and any acidity.
Bonus issue: heat sterilisation. The retort sterilisation process (heating sealed cans to ~120°C) accelerates initial migration of can-liner chemicals into the fish.

Bioaccumulation: smaller fish are cleaner

Microplastics and mercury both concentrate up the food chain. Small fish eat plankton (some microplastic); medium fish eat small fish (more); large predators eat medium fish (most). This is why sardines, anchovies, mackerel (smaller varieties), and small light skipjack tuna have lower contamination than bluefin tuna, swordfish, and yellowfin.

Canned fish ranked by combined microplastic + mercury load
Fish	Bioaccumulation	Safe frequency (general adult)
Wild Alaskan salmon (canned)	Low-moderate	2-3x per week OK
Sardines (canned)	Low	2-3x per week OK
Anchovies (canned/jarred)	Low	2-3x per week OK
Light skipjack tuna (canned)	Moderate	1-2x per week max
Albacore "white" tuna (canned)	Higher mercury + microplastic	1x per week max
Yellowfin tuna (canned/fresh)	High mercury + microplastic	1-2x per month
Bluefin tuna (sushi/raw)	Highest bioaccumulation	Rarely; avoid for pregnancy
Swordfish, king mackerel, shark	Highest mercury	Avoid for pregnancy and children

Brands and packaging ranked

Canned/jarred fish brands by microplastic exposure
Brand / Product	Packaging	Relative exposure
Wild Planet Wild Sockeye Salmon (glass jar)	Glass jar with metal lid	Lowest, no can liner at all
Vital Choice Wild Salmon (glass jar)	Glass jar	Lowest
Safe Catch (Mercury Tested) Tuna	Tin-free steel; Safe Catch states an organosol resin lining made without BPA	Moderate, the only brand here that names its resin; also mercury-tested per fish
Wild Planet Skipjack Tuna	Steel can, no intentional addition of BPA; Wild Planet does not disclose the liner chemistry	Moderate, the company dropped its own "BPA-free" label after trace BPA showed up in testing
StarKist Tuna	Steel can, BPA-NI ("non-intent") liner on newer products	Moderate
Bumble Bee, Chicken of the Sea	Standard steel can, liner not disclosed	Moderate
Tuna in foil pouches (StarKist Premium Pouches, etc.)	PE-laminated foil pouch	Higher, adds polyethylene migration
Restaurant raw tuna sushi (especially bluefin)	Often black plastic tray for takeout	Highest (mercury + raw + tray)

Practical guidance

Choose glass-jarred fish when available. Wild Planet and Vital Choice both offer glass-jarred wild salmon. Expensive but lowest exposure.
If buying canned, choose smaller fish. Sardines and anchovies are nutrient-dense, low-mercury, low-microplastic options often packed in glass-style jars.
Avoid pouch tuna. The PE-laminated foil pouch adds plastic exposure. Glass > can > pouch.
Limit albacore and yellowfin tuna to 1x/week max. Bluefin should be rare or avoided.
Skip tuna entirely during pregnancy, see our pregnancy guide for safe seafood recommendations.
Drain liquid before eating if buying canned, the oil/water carries the most concentrated plasticiser migration.
Decant remaining fish to glass if not eating the whole can; storing opened canned fish in the can extends plastic-contact time.

What the MicroPlastics app checks

Packaging material. PET, HDPE, PP, PS, multi-layer, glass, aluminum.
Container condition from the photo, scratches, dents, fade.
Product category, fresh, packaged, canned, frozen, takeout.
Use-context flags you log, microwave, heat, reuse, time stored.
Cited research behind the 0–100 risk score.

Use the App

Use the app as a grocery-store second opinion

Scan the product, check the packaging score, compare alternatives. The app weighs material, condition, brand, and the cited research.

Scan groceries in the app

Frequently Asked Questions

Is canned tuna high in microplastics?

Canned tuna combines fish-borne microplastics (concentrated through bioaccumulation up the food chain) with migration from the can lining. Larger tuna (bluefin, yellowfin, albacore) have higher exposure than smaller light skipjack tuna or sardines.

Are pouch tuna products safer than canned?

No: pouch tuna is generally worse. The PE-laminated foil pouch adds polyethylene microplastic migration on top of the fish-borne particles. Steel cans (especially BPA-free) are slightly cleaner; glass-jarred fish (Wild Planet, Vital Choice) are best.

Which canned fish brand has the lowest microplastics?

Wild Planet and Vital Choice offer glass-jarred wild salmon, zero can-liner exposure. Among canned options, Wild Planet, Safe Catch (mercury-tested), and any brand using BPA-NI (non-intent) can liners are better than standard BPA cans. Sardines and anchovies are lower than tuna regardless of brand.

Is BPA-free canned tuna safe?

Probably better than BPA, and definitely less studied. It is a myth that BPA-free cans just use BPS instead, studies that identify what cans are actually lined with find polyester, acrylic and vinyl, not BPS. But "BPA-free" only means BPA was not added deliberately: trace bisphenols still migrate from non-BPA cans, and the replacement polymers have nothing like the toxicology record BPA has. Glass-jarred fish is the only option with no liner at all.

How often is it safe to eat canned tuna?

For general adults: light skipjack tuna 1-2x per week max, albacore "white" tuna 1x per week max, yellowfin/bluefin tuna 1-2x per month or less. Pregnant women, nursing mothers, and children should avoid high-mercury tuna entirely. Sardines and salmon are safer 2-3x per week.

Can I just eat fresh fish instead?

Yes: fresh wild-caught fish from a fishmonger avoids both can liner exposure and the long shelf-life plastic migration. Smaller fish (sardines, mackerel, herring) and wild salmon are the cleanest fresh options. Avoid farmed salmon, which has separate concerns around feed contamination.

Sources

Smith M, Love DC, Rochman CM, Neff RA (2018). Microplastics in Seafood and the Implications for Human Health. Current Environmental Health Reports.
European Food Safety Authority (2023). Re-evaluation of bisphenol A (BPA). EFSA Journal.
US Food and Drug Administration (2024). Mercury Levels in Commercial Fish and Shellfish (1990-2012). FDA.
Consumer Reports (2022). Canned tuna mercury and BPA testing. Consumer Reports.

Audit your whole pantry, not just the 5 foods in this article

The app keeps a running scan history for every packaged food you own, every brand swap you make, and every reformulation a brand quietly pushes. The article is a snapshot. The app is the trend line.

Download on the App Store

Free on iOS
3 free scans
No sign-up
Result in seconds

“Really cool to scan stuff around the kitchen and see what's actually in it. The swaps it suggests are realistic.” App Store review · 5.0★

Android · early access

Get the launch email the day Android opens.

One email. No spam. We send when the Android app is in the Play Store, and never again unless you opt in.

Related Research

Does Trident Gum Have Microplastics? Yes — It's in the Gum Base (2026)

Yes. Trident’s “gum base” is a synthetic petroleum-based plastic, and a 2025 UCLA study found chewing gum sheds 100–600 microplastic particles per gram of saliva. The honest catch: natural gum shed similar amounts.

Does Orbit Gum Have Microplastics? The Synthetic-Base Verdict (2026)

Yes. Orbit uses a synthetic petroleum-based gum base, and a 2025 UCLA study found chewing gum sheds 100–600 microplastic particles per gram. Sugar-free does not mean plastic-free, here is the honest verdict.

Does Simply Gum Have Microplastics? The Honest Chicle Verdict (2026)

Simply Gum uses a chicle (tree-sap) base with no synthetic plastic, a real ingredient upgrade over Trident or Orbit. But the 2025 UCLA study found natural gums shed microplastics at similar levels. The nuanced verdict.

Do Coffee Filters Have Microplastics? Paper vs Plastic vs Mesh (2026)

Paper coffee filters are mostly cellulose and low-risk, the real plastic contact is the dripper, the machine brew basket, and nylon mesh reusable filters steeping in hot water. The cleanest setup, ranked.

Microplastics in Coffee Creamer: It's the Packaging, Not the Cream (2026)

No study measures microplastics in creamer itself, the exposure is packaging. Single-serve cups (polystyrene) topped with hot coffee are the worst, PET bottles next. The cleaner swaps, ranked.

Do Keurig Coffee Makers Have Microplastics? The Honest Answer (2026)

Yes, but far less than the internet claims. A Keurig heats water through a polypropylene pod and its own plastic reservoir and tubing. The one study that measured capsule-brewed coffee found about ten microplastic particles per mug, not the billions spread online. The honest evidence, the machine vs the pod, and the swaps that actually cut it.