CRETE, GREECE, Aug. 2 (World Daily Times) — Greece is using two approaches to deal with the spread of the silver-cheeked toadfish: floating barriers to keep the fish away from swimmers and payments to fishermen who remove it from the sea.
The measures follow public-health warnings about the fish’s toxin and a 2024 peer-reviewed study that recorded human-health incidents linked to invasive pufferfish in the eastern Mediterranean. But the available evidence does not establish the fish’s total population, prove that warming caused its spread, or show how effective Greece’s new measures will be.
What is the fish?
The silver-cheeked toadfish, also called the silver-cheeked pufferfish, harefish or lagokefalos, is identified in the supplied coverage as Lagocephalus sceleratus. It is native to the Indian Ocean or Red Sea and entered the Mediterranean through the Suez Canal, according to reports citing regional records and scientific descriptions.
The species has been reported across the eastern Mediterranean and as far west as Italy and Spain. The sources supplied for this report do not provide a current estimate of its population or a map based on a single official survey.
The fish carries tetrodotoxin, a powerful neurotoxin, in its flesh, organs or both. In a June public-health advisory, the Hellenic Red Cross warned that the fish should not be eaten because the toxin’s distribution can vary and no part is considered safe. The advisory also urged people to seek emergency medical care after a bite.
Tetrodotoxin can cause serious poisoning, and the supplied coverage says there is no known antidote. The fish also has strong, beak-like jaws. The Hellenic Red Cross warned about injuries from bites, while fishermen told news organizations that the fish can damage nets and other equipment.
What does the health evidence show?
A 2024 study in the peer-reviewed journal Toxics reportedly documented 198 human-health incidents involving invasive pufferfish in the eastern Mediterranean between 2004 and 2023. The reported cases included 28 physical attacks, at least 144 nonfatal poisoning episodes and 27 deaths associated with consumption.
Those figures indicate that exposure has caused documented harm in the region. They do not measure the risk to every swimmer, fisherman or seafood consumer, however. The supplied material does not include the study’s title, authors, data sources, case-selection method, statistical analysis or confidence intervals.
There is also a numerical issue that requires checking against the original paper: the three reported categories add up to 199, not 198. The discrepancy could reflect overlapping categories or a reporting error, but the available information does not resolve it.
The study is described as peer-reviewed, meaning its manuscript underwent review before publication. The supplied material does not identify any newer study that tests the effectiveness of Greece’s barriers or payment program.
Why are barriers being installed?
Local authorities began installing floating barriers or protective nets in the Gulf of Euboea, including near Chalkida on the island of Evia. Reports describe plans for about 2.5 kilometers of netting in bays around the gulf.
The stated purpose is to protect swimmers by limiting the fish’s access to designated bathing areas. Reports differ on the exact number of beaches covered, how much netting has already been installed and whether additional sections are planned. The available material does not include a municipal contract, project map or official completion report.
The barriers are a local safety measure. They do not remove fish from the wider gulf or prevent the species from spreading through the Mediterranean.
How does the fishing program work?
Greece announced a payment of €5.33 per kilogram for pufferfish surrendered to authorities. The program was initially described as covering Crete and the southern Aegean. Greek fishermen are also expected to receive fuel subsidies under an action plan identified in reports as being funded by the European Union.
The goal is to give fishermen a financial reason to catch and remove the invasive fish while helping offset the fuel costs of doing so. Spiros Protopsaltis, identified as secretary general at Greece’s Ministry of Rural Development and Food, said in June that the ministry had been working on a plan submitted to the European Commission.
The available information does not establish whether the program was fully operating, how many fish had been collected or how the fish would be destroyed. It also does not show whether the removal rate is large enough to reduce the species’ population.
Does warming explain the spread?
Several reports connect the fish’s expansion in the Mediterranean with warmer waters and the broader climate crisis. Warmer conditions may be relevant to the species’ ability to survive or reproduce, but the supplied evidence does not include a climate dataset, an attribution study or a measured relationship between temperature and the fish’s spread.
That means warming is a possible contributing factor in the reports, not a conclusion established by the evidence provided here. Other factors could also affect where the fish is found, including currents, food supply, fishing pressure and the species’ movement through connected seas.
What should swimmers and fishermen know?
The Hellenic Red Cross advises people not to eat the fish and to obtain emergency medical care after a bite. The warning applies even if the fish appears prepared or handled safely, because the toxin may be present in different parts of the animal.
The reported Greek response addresses two separate risks: barriers are intended to reduce contact with swimmers in specific areas, while payments are intended to encourage removal by fishermen. Neither measure, based on the available evidence, can yet be judged as a regionwide solution.
For science and public health, the key unanswered questions are how common the fish is, how often it causes injuries or poisoning in Greece, how much is being removed and whether the interventions measurably reduce exposure.
