[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re[2]: New York Times - Red Meat Irradiation Rules
The motives of those who support food irradiation is preventing
deaths that occur every year!!
I am COMPLETELY irritated with people who suggest food irradiation
proponents are just wanting to get away with poorer overall
sanitation.
When food irradiation represents a safe and very effective tool to
improving food quality and preventing deaths, who in their right
mind can suggest not using it?
Why not outlaw pastuerization of milk? Why not tell hospital
operating rooms they can't use antiseptics, because it might
encourage them not to scrub their floors and hands as thoroughly?
Oh, and let's take seatbelts out of cars - people are encouraged to
drive unsafely while wearing them...
RIDICULOUS....UGH !!! I'm afraid I agree with Bernie...we have
gone nuts!
(Thank you, RADSAFERS, for letting me get this off my chest.)
Vincent King
vincent.king@doegjpo.com
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: RE: New York Times - Red Meat Irradiation Rules
Author: "Scott Flowerday" <Scott.Flowerday@tdh.state.tx.us> at Internet
Date: 2/12/99 9:18 AM
I am not in disagreement with food irradiation, but I think you have
missed the point on this. If food irradiation becomes a means to
lower basic sanitary conditions then it should be opposed. If
sanitary conditions are maintained at the current level is food
irradiation cost effective? If sanitary conditions were raised
(heaven forbid we hold an industry to high standards) is food
irradiation warranted at all?
Don't be so quick to condemn Ms.Foreman, maybe we should first examine
the motives of those that support food irradiation.
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html