Re: Food Irradiation

[tristan@blackhat.net]

I think it is hilarious that this posting starts by stating some aspect

"should not even be a topic of discussion" and then spends over two thirds

of the same note ranting and raving about it.

ahhh, the fun never ends....



>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/







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

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/