Are fish fingers actually healthy?

With over a million fish fingers eaten every day in Britain, we assess whether they’re good for you and the best brands to buy

Every single day in Britain, 1.5 million fish fingers are eaten. That’s 18 every second. Three-quarters of us, supposedly, get our first taste of fish through them. We reach for them for weaning, comfort and convenience. When it comes to the nation’s plates and palates, fish fingers reign supreme. 
But should they? According to the amount of processing they undergo, anything with colourings, sweeteners, and preservatives automatically falls into the ultra-processed category. That includes your beloved fish finger supper. Yet, on the other hand, the British Nutrition Foundation pointed out in 2023 that not all processed food is bad. In particular, they said, baked beans and fish fingers can form part of a healthy, balanced diet. And those fake-looking breadcrumbs aren’t as bad as you think – it’s the turmeric that gives them their zingy colour.
And we are, of course, supposed to eat more fish. Diets rich in it are linked with longevity and a reduced risk of heart disease. The NHS advises that a healthy, balanced diet should include two portions a week, including one of oily fish. Do fish fingers count?
See our pick of the healthiest brands below – the results might surprise you. 
When Birds’ Eye produced their first prototypes back in the 1950s, they erred on the side of oily herring. White fish won out in consumer taste tests, however, and the vast majority of today’s fish fingers use white fish such as cod, basa or haddock. 
According to the UN and WHO’s International Food Standard “Codex Alimentarius”, each one should weigh between 20g and 50g, measure at least 10mm thick and be three times as long as it is wide.
Casting a suspicious eye over that bright orange crumb? Actually, it may be pretty innocuous, suggests Becca Meadows, a nutritionist and the founder of nutritional therapy programme She Thrives: “The coating tends to be made from wheat flour, potato starch, salt and some herbs such as paprika and turmeric which also give it a golden colour.”
Yes, on the whole. But some fish are mightier than others. “Oily fish – sardines, salmon, herring, anchovies, trout and mackerel – are a rich source of omega-3 fatty acids,” says Lucy Miller, a clinically trained nutritional therapist. “They’re also a good source of B vitamins, selenium and vitamin D (especially when you eat the tiny bones).”
Recommended
The white fish of the humble fish finger does contain less omega-3 but is still considered a pretty good source. This matters because every cell in our bodies needs these essential fats, and since we cannot make them ourselves, we really do need to eat them. 
Omega-3s, says Miller, are extremely powerful anti-inflammatories, particularly important for heart health, brain health and eye health. Deficiencies are linked to chronic disease, dementia and heart attacks, and the UK and the United States rank among the countries with the lowest levels of omega-3 in their diets. 
It is also higher than its oily counterpart in iodine, an important mineral for childhood growth and brain development. Plus, says Meadows, “white fish is a great complete protein, meaning it contains all nine of the amino acids we need to get from food. As a parent of two small children, I know first-hand that children can be quite picky over protein, so fish fingers can be a really important source.”
There’s more. Cod (your traditional finger fish) is high in selenium (helpful to immune systems and thyroid functioning, as well as your hair and nails) and a decent source of phosphorus (critical for building strong bones and teeth).
Yes. If you really want more health bang for your buck, consider ones made with pollock – this fish has nearly double the amount of omega-3 found in cod. Most of the big brands do a version made from it, and you can identify them easily by the big “omega-3” branding slapped on the box. Still, it is all relative. A piece of salmon will still contain around three times more omega-3.
“Frozen fish is not treated or processed, and is usually frozen soon after it was caught and so retains all its nutrients and moisture,” says Miller. “Freezing does not reduce the nutritional content of fish and so its protein, good fat and vitamins such as D and A are not affected by it and are actually ‘locked in’ through freezing.”
In fact, says Rhiannon Lambert, a nutritionist and the author of The Science of Plant-Based Nutrition: “One study analysed the stability of omega-3 and other lipids in fish when frozen, and found that the majority of the omega-3 in the frozen fish was still nutritionally available three months after freezing.”
There is always a catch. “While fish fingers can still contain nutrients such as protein, iodine, selenium and B12, they are different to a piece of fresh or frozen fish,” explains Miller. Since rectangular, bread-crumbed fish are not commonly spotted swimming in the sea, your fish fingers will have been processed. 
One downside of this, nutritionally, is that it might also be fried in inflammatory oils during the manufacturing process. “When foods are cooked in vegetable oils that are high in polyunsaturated fats (such as sunflower), they are prone to oxidation when exposed to high temperatures. This can lead to cell damage and, when consumed in excess, has been associated with increased risk of long-term health issues,” says Miller. 
This will vary from brand to brand. For example: “Some brands use minced fish and others whole fillet,” explains Miller. “The mince might be made of leftover bits of fish and these might contain more binders and preservatives or emulsifiers to make it taste more like fillet.” 
Used in processed foods, she explains, these may disrupt the gut microbiome, potentially increasing the risk of digestive issues: “This may also have an impact on immunity, metabolism, mood, blood sugar balance and health issues associated with an imbalance in gut bacteria. While not all are harmful, excessive consumption of these additives in processed foods may impact long-term health.”
Check your box for ingredients like diphosphates (chemical compounds used as additives in food, because they act like emulsifiers and binders, explains Miller) or the relatively innocent-sounding “wheat starch” – a white powder that is used as a thickening, gelling or binding agent, she says. It is a highly refined carbohydrate, so it can contribute to blood sugar spikes. Plus, she points out, it is often a sign of a highly processed food that will likely also contain added sugar, fats and other preservatives.
Scared about salt levels? Ultra-processed foods do often contain high levels of salt to enhance flavour and preserve the product, points out Lambert, and high sodium intake is associated with increased blood pressure and a higher risk of heart disease. Fish finger packets, she says, tend to display amber traffic light warnings for salt and fat, which means we should eat them in moderation. 
Before you panic, however, Meadows says “one to three-year-olds can consume up to 1.2g of salt a day. That means a toddler would have to eat eight fish fingers to be over the limit for salt.” Seven to 10-year-olds, says the NHS, should eat less than 5g a day, while older children should stay under the 6g mark. 
“If the ingredients label contains other ingredients that you don’t recognise, or wouldn’t have in the cupboard at home, put it back and check a different brand.” It should ideally just list wheat flour, potato starch, salt and some herbs such as paprika and turmeric.
Feeling especially virtuous? Pick the box marked “wholegrain”. Otherwise, “the breadcrumbs or batter used in fish fingers will often made from refined wheat flour, which can be stripped of its natural nutrients, including fibre, vitamins, and minerals,” says Lambert.
“There’s enough out there for parents and carers to feel guilty about without demonising the humble fish finger,” says Meadows. “We all need variety in our diet but that doesn’t mean there is some arbitrary limit to the number of fish fingers that should be consumed a week. 
“Just make sure you serve them as part of a balanced meal with some complex carbohydrate and lots of tasty, different coloured vegetables – these can be cooked from frozen too!”
Fish fingers should all have the Marine Stewardship Council blue tick, says Meadows. “This means the fish has been third-party tested, is sustainably sourced and wild-caught. 
“After that, you don’t need to always reach for cod. Many fish fingers use pollock which is more sustainable, more affordable and also in some cases contains twice the amount of omega-3.”
Tesco omega-3 fish fingers are a good option, she suggests: “They also contain 64 per cent fish compared to Birds Eye or Iceland which are only 58 per cent fish.”
The following fish fingers have been ranked by nutritionist Rhiannon Lambert.
£1.65 for 10
“With 64 per cent Atlantic cod, the lowest salt content (0.39g/100g) of all supermarket fishfingers and MSC certified, these seem to be the best supermarket fish fingers. They also have less ingredients compared to most of the other options,” says Lambert.
£1.65 for 10
“These contain 64 per cent cod, which is the joint highest fish percentage among the options. The salt content is relatively low at 0.53g per 100g, and they feature only essential ingredients without many unnecessary additives,” says Lambert. “These cost the same as Aldi’s, for the same amount of fish fingers and weight. The fish is also MSC certified.”
£2.75 for 10
“Also containing 64 per cent cod, Waitrose essential fish fingers have a slightly higher salt content of 0.56g per 100g compared to Tesco’s,” says Lambert. “The difference between these and the Tesco fish fingers is actually very minimal and they have an identical ingredient list apart from the addition of curcuin [a colouring]. The fish is MSC certified.”
£1.65 for 10
“Also with a fish content of 64 per cent, which is comparable to the top three, these fish fingers have an ever so slightly higher salt content (0.58g/100g) than the Tesco and Waitrose fish fingers above, therefore placing them into fourth,” says Lambert. “Interestingly, this ingredient list is identical to the Waitrose fish fingers and only contains 0.02g more salt per 100g, yet the Waitrose ones cost substantially more. So, it depends on whether you think the additional £1.10 for 0.02g reduction in salt in the Waitrose fish fingers is worth it.”
£1.12 for 10
“Instead of cod, these fish fingers use MSC-certified Pollock which we know is significantly higher in omega-3,” says Lambert. “These fish fingers also contain the joint highest fish content (64 per cent) making them a great contender. Though slightly higher in salt (0.68g/100g), than the others in this list, the higher omega-3 content could be weighed up against this.”
£4 for 10 
This sits just outside of the top five, when compared to all of the own-brand ingredients, because of the fish content and price. Birds Eye contains 58 per cent cod vs the 64 per cent of all of the others in the top five.
“They cost significantly more than all of the own-brand fish fingers and when they aren’t on offer, cost around £4 for 10. Compared to Tesco fish fingers for example, which cost £1.65, this is considerably higher and you’re technically paying more for a lower quality if the fish percentage is lower,” says Lambert.  The salt quantity is 0.55g/100g which sits bang in the middle of those ranked second, third and fourth.
Recommended