Re: Food Irradiation

[Tim <kemps89@YAHOO.COM>]

--- Franz Schoenhofer <franz.schoenhofer@CHELLO.AT>

wrote:

> up at RADSAFE frequently. I support any activities

> to save food in the

> developing countries by irradiating it and saving it

> from being destroyed by

> pests. 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".



I really would like to know why one would oppose

something just because someone can make a profit on

it.  Why would it be wrong to irradiate chickens and

kill most, if not all, of the salmonella bacteria to

help cut down on the number of food poisoning cases? 

It should not make a difference if a company can

increase their profits by irradiating food.  That

should not even be a topic of discussion.



If you want to use profits as a talking point then you

are in effect saying that money is more important to

you than peoples' health is. 



>     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



Unfresh food is not fresh because bacteria has had

time to destory parts of the food.  By killing the

bacteria, you keep it fresher longer.  Besides, I'm

sure starving people in Africa would love to have food

that you would thumb your nose at because it was not

harvested/killed earlier that morning.



> that foods shelf life is

> extended by radiation - please do it. Nobody in

> Europe will accept it -



"Nobody?"  That is a mighty tall accusation there.



> 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



Do you think that Europe is the only place where

trucks move produce from farm to store?



> accordingly. If you do not want to pay the price for

> fresh oysters - leave

> it and eat a McDonalds hamburger instead - in Europe

> this would be a kind of

> insunuaion.



Are you opposed to something that can make fresh

oysters more affordable?  Why?



>     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.



What do you have against companies making money?  Why

is it wrong for a company to make money?  What law

would it violate if a company makes more money from

food irradiation because there is less spoilage thus

resulting in more sales?



Food irradiation will not harm anyone, will prevent

many cases of food poisonings, can help reduce world

hunger, and might actually increase profits for some

companies.  Everyone wins.  Yet, the fact that someone

might actually make some money, God forbid anyone make

money - that would be the end of the world!, seems to

strike a nerve in you and I don't know why.



It's frankly NONE of your business how much money

companies make.



Tim



__________________________________________________

Do you Yahoo!?

Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.

http://mailplus.yahoo.com

************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/