Re: AW: Food Irradiation Alert - Sierra Club of Canada

[RuthWeiner@AOL.COM]

In a message dated 11/30/02 8:45:47 AM Mountain Standard Time, franz.schoenhofer@chello.at writes:


> > What I do not support is the clearly uttered interest of some companies in the U'SA to maximize their profits by marketing food, which otherwise would not be possible to be marketized, because it is infested by salmonella and other - deadly - bacteria. Yes, I write "deadly bacteria".



It is almost impossible to prevent ALL salmonella contamination in chicken.  I buy FDA-inspected chicken at a supermarket and, having once worked in a supermarket, I know that it is stored and wrapped properly.  When I cook chicken (and this is the advice given to everyone) I wash all utensils and my hands immediately with a detergent and water to get rid of any lurking salmonella.  


Irradiation is not a way to get around cleanliness in food processing, though this is an argument commonly used by anti-nukes in the U.S. (and apparently in Europe also).  We don't sell dirty or contaminated chicken in the U. S., and having compared our markets with Austria's, albeit superficially, U.S. food cleanliness is as good or better that Austria's.  If the chicken I buy had been irradiated, I would not have to take the extra precaution of washing immediately after handling and before touching anything else, and could just wash the utensils used as I do other utensils.



> > I clearly oppose  it, when it comes to "extended shelf live". This is an argument, which is in sharp contrast with the world wide opinion that food should be as fresh as possible. If Americans accept that foods shelf life is extended by radiation - please do it. Nobody in Europe will accept it - simply because there is no need for it. We have excellent ways to ship oysters, fish, crabs, etc.  to any destination within Europe. The price is accordingly. If you do not want to pay the price for fresh oysters



We get fresh seafood in New Mexico also, flown in by air, and I am not talking about middle-class people like me (and you) -- I am talking about extending shelf life of food in countries where many people have no refrigeration and can't get enough food of any sort because it spoils before it can be distributed.  How do you keep pasteurized milk without refrigeration?  Fresh fruit?   Fresh meat and seafood?  Certainly Europeans eat preserved food (e.g., sausages and other smoked meat) and irradiation has less chemical effect than smoking (and incidentally, I have had better smoked salmon in the U. S. than any I have had in Europe)

 - leave it and eat a McDonalds hamburger instead - in Europe this would be a 

> > kind of insunuaion. 



No need to get uppity about McDonald's: (a) the meat is fresh (and refrigerated) and (b) Europeans seem to like them pretty well (better than I do, actually).


> > Food irradiation is ok, if it helps peoples to escape famine. 
It is a crime, if it is intended to maximise profits of world wide acting companies.


Is refrigeration a crime because it preserves fresh fruit that comes to the U. S. and Europe from South America and the Near East, and the marketing companies make a profit?  Is pasteurization a crime because dairies make a profit?  Is cooking a crime because restaurants make a profit?


In my opinion, the anti-irradiation campaign, even if all European nations have bought into it, and no matter what excuses can be dreamed up for it, is a kind of mindless hysteria, and is hugely counterproductive.  


The slams at American eating and food marketing habits are gratuitous and off the mark.  What has been observed for generations among immigrants to the U.S. is that their children are better nourished than they were in the countries they came from (and that includes immigrants from Europe).  


Ruth


Ruth Weiner, Ph. D.

ruthweiner@aol.com