Re: food irradiation

[Schoenhofer <schoenho@via.at>]

At 12:33 12.12.1996 -0600, you wrote:
>I think that the message is clear that Hormel would like lots of positive
>calls to their toll-free number. For those of us who are not food safety
>experts, how about a technical discussion (with references) concerning the
>pro's and con's of food irradiation?
>
>====================================================================

I am very surprised and disappointed to read that quite a few radsafers
react in the question of food irradiation in a way which reminds me on green
activists - supporting with all might an opinion without having paid any
attention to contra arguments. What is the use of a "poll"(?) when a kind of
a lobby asks to call a company to support some way of processing food, which
- as far as I recall - the company did not even confirm that it will use it? 

An organized action to support a company with telephone calls is not the way
scientific experts usually choose. To make it clear: My personal opinion is
that everything has been done to ensure that radiation treatment of food
does not pose any harm. The IAEA and the WHO have published enough arguments
and research to support this view. I have never read any scientific article
to confirm any health problems associated with radiation treatment, I have
always heard about "confirmation of hazards" from several groups, but I have
never obtained any reference to this "scientific work". So my position is
clear,  b u t  I think also that it must be the right of everybody to
decide, not to consume irradiated food!!! Whatever the reasons might be. The
question seems to be the labelling of irradiated food. If it is not
labelled, then the consumer has no choice. If it is labelled, some people
would decide to preferentially buy it, some will refuse. I think that this
is the right of the consumer. As I noticed in US supermarkets, the Jewish
citizens can select kosher food, because it is clearly declared kosher.
Everywhere there has to be a declaration of the content in cans and so the
Muslim citizens can have a look, whether a certain product contains pork! So
why should it not be possible for someone, who does not want to eat
irradiated food to make his/her choice?

The question, which in my opinion is the most crucial in our Western world,
is simply: Do we  n e e d   irradiated food? Is it necessary to extend shelf
life? We have so excellent distribution chains, where food is always kept at
low temperature, we have excellent logistics. I do not believe that
extension of shelf life is an argument which could be used in the Western
world - it might be a striking one in developing countries. Is it advisable
to decontaminate spices from salmonella and similar contamination? Yes it is
- for instance the Finnish government has explicitely allowed application of
food irradiation with regard to spices. Is it advisable to treat poultry
with radiation to kill salmonella? It might be in cases with heavy
infestion, but even in this case it would be advisable to strenghthen
hygiene instead of irradiating.

In developing countries, where up to two third of the harvest is destroyed
by insects, application of ionizing radiation for insect infestion control
might be essential.

I tried to give some examples of pro and tried to express that in my opinion
the cases of application should be carefully considered and justified. 

Please, radsafers, respect other people's opinion, and if you do not share
them, discuss and try patiently to get them to accept your opinion or rather
scientific evidence. Never tell them that they are stupid because they have
another opinion - then you will never get them to accept your scientifically
based arguments!

Franz
Schoenhofer
Habichergasse 31/7
A-1160 WIEN
AUSTRIA/EUROPE
Tel./Fax:	+43-1-4955308
Tel.:		+43-664-3380333
e-mail:		schoenho@via.at