Is calamari safe to eat during pregnancy?

Yes, by the measure the US agencies use, which is mercury. FDA and EPA list squid among the Best Choices seafood and advise people who are pregnant or breastfeeding to eat 2 to 3 servings a week from that list, one serving being 4 ounces. In FDA monitoring from 2005 to 2009, squid averaged 0.024 ppm of mercury across 36 samples, with a maximum of 0.07 ppm. That advice is built on mercury alone. We found no study that looked at squid on its own in pregnant women with a health outcome.

Unsettled. Calamari itself has never been put to a test in pregnancy. The benefit side of the answer comes from studies of seafood in general, and the signals of harm come from a single cohort and from metal levels measured in the food. None of it is a trial, so none of it settles what squid does.

What the trials found

Seafood and the child's development, in cohorts

Two systematic reviews prepared for the US Dietary Guidelines, covering 44 publications and 106,237 mother and child pairs, found moderate and consistent evidence that eating seafood in pregnancy is linked to better neurocognitive development in the child than eating none. The benefit began at the lowest intakes studied, about 4 ounces a week, and continued above 12 ounces a week. The reviewers found the data insufficient to say anything about specific species, squid was not analyzed separately, and these are observational studies.

A 2025 systematic review of 40 articles linked higher seafood intake in pregnancy with better social-emotional and behavioral development in children, and better aggregate development scores before age 4. Its authors rated the certainty very low to moderate, because randomized trials are almost missing from this field.

Omega-3 supplements, in randomized trials

The strongest evidence near this question is about capsules. A meta-analysis of 59 randomized trials found omega-3 supplements in pregnancy lowered preterm birth before 37 weeks by 14 percent (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.95, 15,510 women) and preeclampsia by 16 percent (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.96). Those were supplements, and the result cannot be carried over to a serving of squid.

Shellfish and molluscs, in a scoping review

A 2025 scoping review of 46 studies on molluscs and crustaceans in pregnancy, breastfeeding and the first two years of life linked shellfish intake with higher levels of environmental contaminants in the body, mercury having the strongest evidence. Preterm birth was not associated with shellfish intake. Results for birth weight were mixed, with several studies reporting lower birth weight at higher intakes. A scoping review maps studies without pooling them or grading their quality, and it did not separate squid from other shellfish.

Who should be careful

In the same 2025 review of 40 articles, 4 studies linked higher seafood intake in pregnancy with worse cognitive scores in the child. Two of them were about canned tuna. One found lower cognitive scores with shellfish and squid, and not with fish. It is one study, and nobody has shown whether contaminants, the way the food was cooked or something else about the mothers explains it.

Mercury is not the only metal. In Italian retail seafood tested in a laboratory, cadmium exceeded the EU maximum level in squid, and squid had the highest lead levels, at 60 percent of the EU maximum. That is one country in 2012, measured in the food rather than in people. The FDA and EPA list is based on mercury and does not weigh cadmium.

Squid is a common cause of mollusc allergy. Among 45 patients with mollusc allergy in northern Spain, 25 (55%) reacted to cephalopods, and the authors name squid as the mollusc that most often triggers symptoms. Those were patients already known to react, so the figure describes a clinic and not the public. Pregnancy does not appear in that study.

Raw squid carries a separate question. A review of field studies from 2000 to 2020 found Anisakis larvae, a parasite behind allergic reactions in people, in edible fish and cephalopods worldwide. Among 28 people allergic to Anisakis, urticaria came back in 33.3 percent of those eating fresh fish and in 11.1 percent of those eating fish frozen for more than 48 hours, in a study where diets were not randomly assigned. We found no agency statement in our trusted sources that speaks to raw squid in pregnancy in one sentence.

Not for everyone. If you have reacted to squid, octopus or other molluscs before, pregnancy is no reason to test it again. If you eat calamari, the agency advice counts it as part of the 2 to 3 weekly servings from the whole Best Choices list.

What expert bodies say

FDA and EPA advise people who might become pregnant, are pregnant or are breastfeeding to eat 2 to 3 servings of 4 ounces a week from their Best Choices list, or 1 serving from the Good Choices list, and they place squid among the Best Choices. That rating rests on mercury levels by species. We found no expert body position on cadmium in squid during pregnancy.

How we searched

What would change this answer

• A cohort that analyses squid or cephalopods separately, with cadmium and mercury measured in the mother and the child's development followed up.
• Guidance from FDA or EFSA on cadmium in cephalopods that addresses pregnancy.
• Opening the single cohort that linked shellfish and squid with lower cognitive scores, to see its size, its adjustments and how much squid the mothers ate.

More on squid itself, including its cholesterol: Squid.

Sources

1. ev-calpg-01 · Position of an expert body · joint federal consumer advice built on mercury levels by species · n = —
   Pregnancy and breastfeeding: 1 serving is 4 ounces Eat 2 to 3 servings a week from the "Best Choices" list (OR 1 serving from the "Good Choices" list)...Squid Best Choice
   
   Who: people who might become pregnant, are pregnant or are breastfeeding, and children aged 1 to 11 years
   Effect: squid on the Best Choices list; 2 to 3 servings of 4 ounces a week from that list, or 1 serving from the Good Choices list
   Certainty: Position of authorities, not a study; based on mercury and does not account for cadmium, a raw product, or allergy; the number of servings is for the whole Best Choices list.
   FDA and EPA, Advice about Eating Fish, content current as of 2024-03-05 · checked 2026-10-07 · we read the section
2. ev-calpg-02 · Position of an expert body · agency contaminant monitoring table · n = 36
   SQUID 0.024 0.017 0.023 ND 0.07 36 FDA 2005-2009
   
   Who: commercial squid sampled by FDA, 2005 to 2009
   Effect: squid mercury mean 0.024 ppm, median 0.017, SD 0.023, range ND to 0.07 ppm
   Certainty: Total mercury, not methylmercury separately; US market 2005-2009; cadmium and lead were not measured in this table.
   FDA, Mercury Levels in Commercial Fish and Shellfish (1990-2012), page dated 2022-02-25 · checked 2026-10-07 · we read the section
3. ev-calpg-03 · Observational data · systematic review of observational studies (DGAC methodology) · n = 106237
   After reviewing 44 publications on 106,237 mother-offspring pairs and 25,960 children, our technical expert committee developed two conclusion statements that included the following: "Moderate and consistent evidence indicates that consumption of a wide range of amounts and types of commercially available seafood during pregnancy is associated with improved neurocognitive development of offspring as compared to eating no seafood. Overall, benefits to neurocognitive development began at the lowest amounts of seafood consumed (∼4 oz/wk) and continued through the highest amounts, above 12 oz/wk, some range up to >100 oz/wk...No net adverse neurocognitive outcomes were reported among offspring at the highest ranges of seafood intakes despite associated increases in mercury exposures. Data are insufficient for conclusive statements regarding lactation, optimal amounts, categories or specific species characterized by mercury content and neurocognitive development
   
   Who: healthy pregnant women and their offspring; 44 publications, 106,237 mother-offspring pairs and 25,960 children
   Effect: benefit associated from about 4 oz a week upward; no net adverse neurocognitive outcome at the highest intakes; data insufficient by species
   Certainty: Observational data; squid was not analyzed separately, conclusion is about seafood overall; no RCTs.
   Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids, 2019 · checked 2026-10-07 · we read the abstract
4. ev-calpg-04 · Observational data · systematic review with GRADE, narrative synthesis · n = 40 articles
   Forty articles [1 randomized controlled trial (RCT), 24 prospective cohorts, and 1 retrospective cohort] during pregnancy were identified; none for lactation. Evidence suggested relationships between higher seafood consumption and better social-emotional and behavioral development in children and adolescents aged 0-18 y as well as better aggregate scores of development for those <4 y. The certainty of the evidence was very low to moderate due to the lack of RCTs. Evidence for overall cognitive development was inconsistent but higher seafood may be related to better attention, reasoning and problem-solving, and verbal intelligence.
   
   Who: pregnant women and their children aged 0 to 18 years; 1 RCT, 24 prospective cohorts and 1 retrospective cohort
   Effect: better social-emotional, behavioral and aggregate scores (<4 y); certainty very low to moderate; cognitive results inconsistent
   Certainty: Not a meta-analysis; squid is not a separate exposure; certainty limited by the lack of RCTs.
   Adv Nutr, 2025 · checked 2026-10-07 · we read the abstract
5. ev-calpg-05 · Observational data · systematic review, results section · n = 4 studies
   Additionally, there were 4 studies that suggested a potential relationship between higher seafood intake and worse cognitive development outcomes. Two of these 4 assessed canned tuna [44,53] which is high in mercury, and 1 reported that shellfish and squid (but not fish) was associated with lower cognitive scores [55].
   
   Who: prospective cohorts of pregnant women in the 2025 seafood and child neurocognition review
   Effect: 2 of 4 involved canned tuna; 1 reported lower cognitive scores with shellfish and squid intake, not with fish
   Certainty: A single study, the cause (contaminants, cooking method, confounding) is not established; a signal, not evidence of harm.
   Adv Nutr, 2025 · checked 2026-10-07 · we read the fulltext
6. ev-calpg-06 · Observational data · scoping review (PROSPERO CRD42022320454) · n = 46 studies
   Overall, shellfish consumption was associated with higher biomarkers of environmental contaminants, with mercury being the most studied and having the strongest evidence base. The limited research on nutritional biomarker status shows an association between shellfish consumption and iodine status. Preterm birth was not associated with shellfish consumption, but newborn anthropometry showed mixed results, with several studies reporting lower birth weight with higher shellfish consumption.
   
   Who: pregnant women, lactating women and children aged 0 to 2 years; articles from January 2000 to March 2022
   Effect: higher contaminant biomarkers (mercury strongest); preterm birth not associated; several studies reported lower birth weight with higher shellfish intake
   Certainty: Scoping review without pooling and without quality assessment; mollusks and crustaceans together, squid not separated.
   Nutr Res Rev, 2025 · checked 2026-10-07 · we read the abstract
7. ev-calpg-07 · Laboratory or animal data · laboratory analysis of food samples with exposure estimate · n = —
   The found metal concentrations were largely below the maximum levels (MLs) established at the European Union level with the exception of Cd. This metal exceeded the MLs in squid, red mullet, European hake and Atlantic cod. Squid and blue mussel showed the highest Pb concentrations which accounted for 60% and 10% of the MLs, respectively.
   
   Who: retail fish and seafood in Italy, including European squid and veined squid
   Effect: cadmium above EU maximum levels in squid; lead in squid at 60% of the maximum level; mercury highest in predatory fish
   Certainty: One country, 2012; measurement in the product, not in people; the result is about a pilot sample.
   Food Addit Contam Part A Chem Anal Control Expo Risk Assess, 2012 · checked 2026-10-07 · we read the abstract
8. ev-calpg-08 · Meta-analysis or systematic review · systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs · n = 15510
   In 24 comparisons (21,919 women) n-3 fatty acids played a protective role against the risk of preeclampsia (RR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.74-0.96 p = 0.008; I2 = 24%)...27 comparisons (15,510 women) was accompanied by a significant decrease in pre-term birth less than 37 weeks (RR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.77-0.95, p = 0.005; I2 = 0%).
   
   Who: pregnant women in RCTs of DHA, EPA or ALA supplementation versus placebo or no supplement, 1990 to 2020
   Effect: preterm birth <37 wk RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.95, 27 comparisons, 15,510 women); preeclampsia RR 0.84 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.96, 21,919 women)
   Certainty: About omega-3 supplements, not squid; it cannot be transferred to a serving of squid, it is only a mechanism of the benefit of seafood.
   Arch Gynecol Obstet, 2023 · checked 2026-10-07 · we read the abstract
9. cala-r3-04 · Observational data · prospective multicentre clinical and immunological study · n = 45
   We found that 25 patients (55%) were allergic to cephalopods, 14 (31%) to bivalves, and 11 (24%) to gastropods...Cephalopods, especially squid, are the mollusks that most frequently trigger allergic symptoms.
   
   Who: 45 patients with mollusc allergy diagnosed by history and skin testing, northern Spain
   Effect: 55% allergic to cephalopods, 31% to bivalves, 24% to gastropods; systemic reactions in 69%
   Certainty: Patients already known to react to molluscs, so the percentages describe that clinic population and not the general public.
   J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol, 2024 · checked 2026-09-24 · we read the abstract
10. cala-r3-05 · Observational data · non-randomized dietary follow-up study · n = 28
    Urticaria symptoms were present in 5.8 %, 11.1 % (n.s) and 33.3 % (p = 0.016) of patients following diets 1, 2 and 3, respectively...Patients allergic to A. simplex can eat fish that has been frozen at -20 C for 48 hours without risk of a severe allergic reaction.
    
    Who: 28 adults who had an allergic episode caused by A. simplex, mean follow-up 13.16 months
    Effect: urticaria in 5.8% on a fish-free diet, 11.1% on frozen fish, 33.3% on fresh fish (P = 0.016)
    Certainty: Diets were not randomly assigned and the groups overlap, so the comparison is weaker than the p value looks.
    Allergol Immunopathol (Madr), 2002 · checked 2026-09-24 · we read the abstract
11. cala-r3-06 · Observational data · systematic review of observational prevalence studies · n = 264 studies
    The infective stage of Anisakidae nematodes responsible for allergic reactions in humans is found in a variety of edible fish and cephalopods...The highest rate of allergic anisakiasis was in Portugal and Norway with the prevalence rate of 18.45-22.50%.
    
    Who: 264 articles on anisakid infection in fish and 37 on human allergic anisakiasis, 152 fish host species
    Effect: most infected families Lophiidae 86.9%, Trichiuridae 77.05%, Zeidae 70.9%; allergic anisakiasis 18.45% to 22.50% in Portugal and Norway
    Certainty: Prevalence in fish and cases in people come from separate literatures mapped side by side, so the link between them is geographic and not causal.
    Parasitol Res, 2020 · checked 2026-09-24 · we read the abstract