We have a lovely controversy raging locally over plans by an irradiation company to build a small plant near a neighbouring town. This firm has other plants elsewhere in Australia and the operation is apparently well established and reliable.

The entertainment value comes from panicky letters to the local rag based on half-baked and wholly misunderstood ideas about nuclear bombs, fall-out, power plants and food irradiation. (The Simpsons have a lot to answer for)Here, some types of foodstuffs will be exposed to low power isotopes in heavily shielded chambers, but the comments have ranged from wild statements about the radiation and blast effect "if something goes wrong" to "I don't want my kids to glow in the dark." As the isotope in question has about the equivalent strength of a couple of X-ray snapshots, neither of these situations is exactly highly probable.

Trouble is, it doesn't seem to matter how the company responds, they can't win. If they describe the process in terms half-way technical to make an accurate statement they're accused of hiding the "truth" in jargon nobody understands, and if they try to describe it simple language, they're "ignoring the real evidence and treating the public like children".

It seems the majority of the people around here support the plans for the plant, and the employment opportunities. The local press are keeping editorials neutral and the local authorities and state government have given permission, and are avoiding stirring the possum, but the loud minority are still active, talking about the democratic process being suppressed. How do you educate people who don't want to be educated?