RE: New York Times - Red Meat Irradiation Rules

["J. Andrew Tompkins" <jatalbq@mindspring.com>]

I don't believe Ruth Weiner missed the point at all.  Food irradiation is a
cost effective method for limiting bacterial growth in the food supply.
Playing "what if" with food irradiation is an excuse.  This technology has
been around almost 30 years.  It is way past time to introduce this
technology, and improve the safety of the US food supply.

If you had played "what if" with the introduction of penicillin, and
correctly decided that bacteria might one day grow resistant to the drug,
then we could have missed out on the 50 years of benefits that drug has
provided.

Mine own opinion.

Andrew Tompkins
Woodstock, GA

jatalbq@mindspring.com

At 09:18 AM 2/12/99 -0600, you wrote:
>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.
>
>This is clearly my opinion.
>
 

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html