Re[2]: Irradiated milk to be available in Feb 2000 -Reply

[Michael S Ford <MFORD@pantex.com>]

I'm definitely in agreement with Steve.

There's not a whole lot of difference between using an e-beam or
slapping a couple of electrodes on the beef patty to arrive at the
same effect.... The e-beam provides a more uniform electron density,
but you're still essentially running a current through the meat.

So if we emphasize that we're using *zapping* the meat with
*radioactive electrons* that somehow makes the public more
accepting of the technology?  I think not.

This is not a *nuclear* technology.  You're stripping electrons off of
atoms.  So it could be considered an *atomic* technology?

Also, although they're the same in just about every regard, betas are
not electrons (strictly speaking).  Let's make sure we get our facts
straight before we start talking about the hair-splitting of others.

My own personal/non-corporate thoughts,
v/r
Michael
mford@pantex.com
TX Radiation Advisory Board

>>> Steven Rima wrote on Tue 9 Nov 99  14:11 >>>
     I guess I don't see this the same way as some RADSAFERS.
While the  term "cold pasteurization" sounds better than "irradiated"
and will certainly help with public acceptance, I don't see it as a way
to "trick the public" any more than lots of other similar examples. ...

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