turning point?

[stabin@esper.com (Mike Stabin)]

While we have certainly not reached any turning points as a society on
nuclear power, it seemed to me that we certainly must have on the subject of
food irradiation, as I read a very long article in the New York Times on
Wednesday regarding the FDA's decision.  I expected the article, in this
paper at least, to be split somewhat evenly between advocates of food
irradiation and anti-nukes, giving the usual arguments against the possible
carcinogenicity of irradiated food, which I have found to be quite specious.
But the article was almost completely favorable, AND there was a positive
short on the editorial page as well.  The article contained statements such
as "important to public health" (as per an epidemiologist from the Minnesota
Dept of Public Health), "a watershed event" (from a member of FDA), "all
safety concerns have ben answered" (from a professor of community health in
Boston), and even a consumer advocate worried only that people would think
the foods too safe and would not handle them carefully enough.  The Times'
editorial staff called it "an important and overdue step".

When I got my jaw up off the floor, I found myself smiling a little, for
once in a long while.  Now perhaps it was intentionally for balance, or
perhaps coincidence, but on the same day an article also ran on the front
page fretting about Canadian sales of "troubled" nuclear plants to China.

Mike Stabin
Oak Ridge