RE: New York Times - Red Meat Irradiation Rules

["Weiner, Ruth" <rfweine@sandia.gov>]

To the best of my knowledge the only times this argument has been made,
except the present post, was (as in the case of Ms. Foreman) in connection
with arguments against food irradiation -- I am unaware of any proponent of
food irradiation arguing that it would substitute for sanitary meat handling
conditions (maybe I'm just unaware...).  Moreover, food irradiation serves a
purpose even with absolutely excellent sanitation in packing and handling.
Sanitary handling doesn't kill the bacteria already there -- it prevents
additional contamination.  Irradiation serves a similar purpose to
freeze-drying and pasteurization: it lengthens shelf life without noticeably
changing texture and flavor.    All food (e.g. fresh apples) can't be
pasteurized or freeze dried.  And so on.

Clearly only my own opinion.

Ruth F. Weiner, Ph. D.
Sandia National Laboratories 
MS 0718, POB 5800
Albuquerque, NM 87185-0718
505-844-4791; fax 505-844-0244
rfweine@sandia.gov


-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Flowerday [mailto:Scott.Flowerday@tdh.state.tx.us]
Sent: Friday, February 12, 1999 8:19 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: RE: New York Times - Red Meat Irradiation Rules 


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