[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Editorial in Washington Post re:Food Irradiation



I am not interested in getting this thread started again,
as I think that most of us are in pretty clear agreement.
BUT...I saw the below editorial in the Washington Post,
and I feel that some of our more knowlegable folks should
respond to it, if they want to prevent serious mis-information
from going unchallenged...particularly in our nation's capital
(US Radsafers...my apologies to our international peers, this
has gotten to be a "local issue" amongst our legislators and
regulators).

There are two ways that you can reply to this...one is in
an online reply to reader discussion groups at
http://washingtonpost.com:80/wp-srv/talk/front.htm
or by a letter to the editor at

                                         Letters to the Editor
                                        The Washington Post
                                        1150 15th Street, NW
                                        Washington, DC 20071 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Danger: Food Irradiation

Friday, September 12, 1997; Page A24 The Washington Post

In the aftermath of the recent recall of 25 million pounds of Hudson Foods
hamburger, the nuclear industry is promoting food irradiation as a
so-called solution to the food contamination problem ["Big Hamburger Recall
Revives Interest in Proposal to Irradiate Red Meat," news story, Sept. 1].
But exposing food to radiation would only cause more problems than it could
ever solve.

Irradiation causes the formation of new chemicals in food called radiolytic
products. Some of these are known carcinogens, and others are unique to the
irradiation process, unidentified and untested for safety. Irradiation also
causes essential vitamin and nutrient depletion. No studies have been done
to prove that a long-term diet of irradiated foods is safe.

In addition, irradiation poses severe environmental risks. Past accidents
at irradiation facilities -- including radioactive leaks and worker
exposure to radiation sources -- have already endangered both workers and
surrounding communities.

Because of the health and safety risks posed by irradiation, the public is
strongly opposed to the technology. Though many foods are approved for
irradiation by the Food and Drug Administration, no major food processing
or retail company uses the technology.

Contamination of the U.S. meat supply is a serious problem that must be
solved, but safer alternatives exist, such as steam and vapor heat
technologies, cleaning up processing facilities and slowing down
slaughterhouse line speeds. The public deserves a safe and healthy food
supply, not contaminated food that has been exposed to nuclear radiation.

JENNIFER FERRARA

Walden, Vt.