Re: Food Irradiation propaganda help

["Thatcher, Drew" <dht0303@hub.doh.wa.gov>]

Included below is the article that Ruth Weiner mentioned.  The Seattle PI 
has no electronic version.  I believe the FDA, in their approval of the 
irradiation of poultry in May of 1990, listed the number of individuals 
illnesses caused by E. coli as 200,000 per year with the number of deaths 
at 250/yr.  Assuming that irradiation were used for the entire ground 
beef supply, it could conceivable eliminate most if not all of the 
illnesses and deaths.
 -------- ---------
The following article appeared in the Seattle Post Intelligencer On 
January 6, 1998 as an Op-Ed.

Science, common sense agree:  Food irradiation is inexpensive and safe
 
By Drew Thatcher and Ruth Weiner

A recent letter to the editor questioned the safety of food irradiation 
and offered a potential alternative.

The alternative consisted of replacing the harmful 0157 E. coli strain 
with a benign strain in cattle.  Such an alternative has shown initial 
promise in the initial feedlot studies performed at the University of 
Georgia.  Such research certainly bears further investigation.

The remainder of the letter focused the common myths about food 
irradiation.  We would like to counter statements in the letter and 
provide some simple truths regarding food irradiation.
     
     Myth #1:  Using irradiation will increase the possibility of 
     environmental accidents and worker exposure.  Truth:  There are 
     approximately 40 medical product irradiation plants in operation in 
     the U.S. (medical sterilization plants are very similar to food 
     irradiation plants), none have been shown to endanger the 
environment. 
      Due to safety and design considerations, workers are not exposed 
     during the irradiation process. The regulation and occupational 
     protection of radiation workers is considerably better than most 
     occupational safety regulation . Irradiation of food does not 
involve 
     the transport of .radioactive materials as these facilities are in 
     fixed locations. 
     
     Myth #2:  Steam pasteurization is different than irradiation.  
Truth:  
     Not substantially, both processes are designed to destroy bacteria 
and 
     both affect the nutritive value of the food in a similar manner.
     
     Myth #3:  There is plenty of evidence that irradiation alters the 
     chemistry of foods...   Truth:  Forty years of testing have shown 
that 
     the chemical substances that are formed as a result of irradiation 
are 
     the same as those produced by conventional processes such as 
cooking.  
     No substances unique to irradiation have ever been identified.  All 
     types of cooking (steaming, broiling, baking, etc.) freezing, 
     freeze-drying, refrigeration, cold storage, sun-drying, and 
     fermentation  all alter the chemical structure of food much more 
than 
     the irradiation used to sterilize the food.  Boiling denatures egg 
     protein, and then you have a hard-boiled egg.  Allowing yeast to 
     ferment in a mixture of flour, fat, and warm water, and then baking 
     the product at high temperature produces the stable emulsion we know 

     as bread, whose chemistry bears very little resemblance to the 
     materials you started with.  Simply allowing fruit juice to ferment 
     chemically converts sugar into alcohol - a common chemical reaction. 
 
     Any chemical alteration from sterilizing irradiation is 
imperceptible 
     by comparison (and absolutely imperceptible anyway).
     
     Myth #4:  Irradiation makes food radioactive.  Truth:  No, it does 
     not.  Do you become radioactive when you have a dental x-ray?
     
     U.S. consumers can look forward to a greater variety of 
high-quality, 
     and safer food products when food irradiation comes into more 
     widespread use. Food irradiation is not touted as a cure-all, or a 
     complete substitute for other forms of food preservation.  
Irradiation 
     can substitute for the use of arsenic as a seed grain preservative 
and 
     the use of sulfur dioxide  and nitrites as fruit and meat 
     preservatives, for example.   It is a  cheap, safe  way to lengthen 
     the shelf-life of food.  As such, it aids in providing adequate 
     nutrition both in the United States and in the rest of the world.  
  
     The facts supporting this letter were supplied by the American 
Council 
     on Science and Health, New York, NY and by common sense..
     
ú Drew Thatcher is a certified health physicist in Tacoma.  Ruth Weiner, 
former dean of environmental studies at Western Washington University, is 
on the faculty at the University of New Mexico
 ------  ----------

Sincerely,
Andrew H. Thatcher, MSHP, CHP
Washington Department of Health
360-586-8715 voice
360-753-1496 fax
dht0303@hub.doh.wa.gov