Re[2]: food irradiation

[BRZGV@ccmail.ceco.com]

     I believe that food irradiation would be a good start in the "Western 
     World" in poultry, pork, and beef sloughter houses or processing 
     centers.  We all know people DIE each year needless.  Even if there 
     was a slight risk of some problem related to some sort of postulated 
     mutation, I would certainly believe it to be lesser than the current 
     risk we take eating these foods.
     
     As far as actually consuming contamination, I can't think of the last 
     time I saw someone die from ingesting a few nCI of Co-60.
     
     We must once again realize that this problem, like most problems 
     relating to radiation are mostly controlled by fear and not technical 
     reality.
     
     Glen Vickers


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: food irradiation
Author:  radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu at INTERNET
Date:    12/12/96 5:03 PM


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