BS: Irradiation of our food

12 Jun 02 - 08:09 PM (#728795)
Subject: Irradiation of our food
From: the lemonade lady

Does anybody know how much and what gets zapped with radiation? Does it happen in the UK? Do we import anything that's been neuked?

---

12 Jun 02 - 08:15 PM (#728800)
Subject: RE: Irradiation of our food
From: artbrooks

Irradiation isn't necessarily bad, and it certainly doesn't imply being exposed to harmful radioactive isotopes. There is a lot of information on irradiated food in the UK here.

---

12 Jun 02 - 08:20 PM (#728802)
Subject: RE: Irradiation of our food
From: GUEST

Yes,

If you eat any vegetables from the supermarket, you'll die!

Seriously, do a little research. The ideas of 'nucked' foods is ridiculous.

Everything that you eat radiates. There are techniques that keep food fresher for longer by irradiating them. They are not dangerous techniques in any way.

You may as well believe that GM food is 'frankenstien food'

Stuff and nonsense!

---

12 Jun 02 - 08:20 PM (#728803)
Subject: RE: Irradiation of our food
From: Mark Cohen

Not necessarily bad, Art, but not necessarily safe, either. No time now, but I researched this extensively when they tried to build a food irradiation facility here on the Big Island. A lot of good research has been completely ignored by the USFDA, and a lot of crap research has been relied upon, at the behest of the nuclear industry.

Aloha,
Mark

---

12 Jun 02 - 08:29 PM (#728812)
Subject: RE: Irradiation of our food
From: the lemonade lady

The lemons I use come from Africa. I wonder if they have been zapped? I know they are sprayed with unmentionables but I don't use the skins. Maybe I should find out if the chemicals get through the skins to the juice inside.

---

12 Jun 02 - 08:35 PM (#728814)
Subject: RE: Irradiation of our food
From: GUEST

Mrs Lemon,

Your lemons are, by nature, made of chemicals (as are you btw)

Chill out a bit, and remember that everything that has ever exised on this rock that we call 'earth' is by it's very nature 'organic'

---

12 Jun 02 - 08:37 PM (#728817)
Subject: RE: Irradiation of our food
From: Jeri

The radiation passes through the food, none of it stays there. (And the sun irradiates food too, just not with anything like the same intensity.) I believe the concern is over free radicals caused by reactions within the food to the radiation. I haven't seen any information on whether or not the possible dangers of these free radicals, and which foods might be more of a problem, have been studied. (Not that it doesn't exist - sounds like what Mark would have found in his research.)

---

12 Jun 02 - 09:29 PM (#728857)
Subject: RE: Irradiation of our food
From: GUEST,ozmacca

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?

---

12 Jun 02 - 09:35 PM (#728860)
Subject: RE: Irradiation of our food
From: GUEST

Totally understand your frustration, Ozmacca

The public are a pretty stupid bunch..

---

12 Jun 02 - 10:00 PM (#728876)
Subject: RE: Irradiation of our food
From: GUEST

I've just been thinking about something said earlier about fruit imported from Africa. Having heard about the use of untreated "night-soil" as fertiliser in a number of countries, I'd be worried about any kind of foodstuff - from anywhere at all - which couldn't be accompanied by hard evidence that fertiisers, and the water used for irrigation, were not contaminated with e-coli and other bio-hazard greeblies. Also that the processes involved in harvesting, packing and transport didn't include the possibility of contamination.

If irradiation can eliminate the potential for things like cholera and typhoid etc, I'm all for it!

---

13 Jun 02 - 05:51 AM (#729029)
Subject: RE: Irradiation of our food
From: Mark Cohen

Oh, Lord, here we go again. "The isotope in question has about the equivalent strength of a couple of X-ray snapshots." That's just plain untrue. It's also untrue, of course, to say that irradiated food becomes radioactive. The truth is probably somewhere in between. Here are a few points to think about.

1. The planned irradiator for Hawaii was going to use a dose of radiation that would sterilize fruit flies, which is far below the dose that would kill bacteria. The planned dose of approximately 100,000 rad (1 kGy) was equivalent to about 2 million chest x-rays.
2. Ionizing radiation generates so-called "unique radiolytic products" in food. Despite what the FDA and WHO have stated, good scientific studies have not been done to demonstrate that these URPs have no adverse effect on health, and there have been a number of studies in reputable scientific journals (ignored by the FDA) raising serious questions about adverse health effects of eating irradiated food. These effects include an increased rate of chromosomal breakage, increased mortality (in animal studies), and loss of essential nutrients. Here's an article from the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists that reviews some of this data, and here is a list of references to scientific studies on the health hazards of irradiated foods.
3. One of the reasons there is such a big push for irradiation is the skyrocketing incidence of foodborne illness. And the main reason for that is the deplorably unsanitary conditions on many big factory farms and in feedlots, slaughterhouses, and meat packing plants, among others. When cows are given feed that includes feces, when the pace of the killing and processing is so fast the inspectors can't even hope to keep up, and when past-dated meat is routinely relabled in supermarkets as "fresh", it's no surprise that there is increased contamination.
4. If you the consumer buy irradiated meat and you store and prepare it carelessly because it's "safe", the small percentage of bacteria not killed by irradiation (the strongest ones!) will multiply quickly enough to make you just as sick. If you want to avoid getting sick, prepare and cook your food properly. Don't count on the nuclear industry to keep you healthy!
5. The meat industry wants to be taken off the hook (so to speak) by having somebody irradiate their dirty meat, and the nuclear industry wants to build lots of little irradiators to take the place of all the nuclear power plants that are aging dangerously. It's a neat little partnership.
6. Recent studies suggest a need to rethink so-called "safe" levels of radiation. A 1997 study from UCLA showed a higher incidence of cancer among workers exposed to levels of radiation considered by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to be "safe"--including exposures to workers and to the community surrounding a nuclear facility.
7. Irradiation facilities themselves are potentially dangerous. The NRC website (www.nrc.gov) has lots of information about accidents and malfunctions at irradiation facilities, some of which have led to serious injury and death to workers, and numerous instances of sloppy techniques, mechanical breakdowns, crooked inspectors, and failure to follow safety procedures, leading to conditions that were dangerous for workers and the surrounding community.

I don't claim to have all the answers. It's true that there is a lot of hysteria, and much misinformation on both sides. It's clear to me that the real risk is still unknown, and much of the known risk is being ignored or downplayed by the people who are pushing irradiation, who stand to make a great deal of money if they sell the public on it. But that, of course, is just my opinion.

Aloha,
Mark

---

13 Jun 02 - 06:46 AM (#729046)
Subject: RE: Irradiation of our food
From: GUEST

Nice one Mark. I think you covered all the basses there. Guest (spokesman for the nuclear industry) insulting the intelligence of people rightly or rongly concerned with this issue is counterproductive to the cause of truth. Your attitude makes you sound like an arrogant prick.

---

13 Jun 02 - 11:23 AM (#729189)
Subject: RE: Irradiation of our food
From: the lemonade lady

Survey reveals illegal irradiation of foods Friday, 07 June 2002 A wide range of dietary supplements sold in the UK have been irradiated in breach of food regulations, a Food Standards Agency survey has found. Companies with affected products have been told to remove them from sale.

The only foodstuffs allowed to be irradiated and sold in the UK are herbs and spices – and only if they are labelled to say they have been irradiated. But in a survey of dietary supplements, prawns and shrimps, and herbs and spices, 42% of dietary supplements (58 out of 138 samples) tested were irradiated. Five out of 202 prawn and shrimp samples were also irradiated. One of the 203 herb and spice samples tested was irradiated but not labelled to say so. Dr Jon Bell, Director of Food Safety Policy at the FSA, said: 'These results for dietary supplements are not acceptable. There is no food safety concern, but they are being sold illegally. Consumers should not be misled in this way and the Food Standards Agency has made it clear that the industry must take action to remove affected products.'

Food irradiation is a processing technique that helps to reduce the number of food spoiling or disease causing organisms in foods such as herbs and spices.

There will be a further joint FSA/local authority survey to check that the companies concerned have taken appropriate action.

---

13 Jun 02 - 12:46 PM (#729255)
Subject: RE: Irradiation of our food
From: mousethief

I recently saw or heard a study that showed that organic fruits and vegetables have a recall rate 200% higher than non-organic.

People forget the REASON we developed such things as food irradiation, pesticides, etc., is that there are little micro-gizmos out there that would just LOVE to infest our digestive tracts and make us very sick or kill us.

(Okay so I anthropomorphize a smidge. Deal with it.)

When some kids died from drinking unpasteurized Odwalla juice about 3 years ago, all of a sudden we remembered why pasteurization is a good thing, not some evil plot foisted on us by nasty makers of food service equipment.

Alex

---

13 Jun 02 - 03:38 PM (#729410)
Subject: RE: BS: Irradiation of our food
From: Mrrzy

Guest, where you say "everything that has ever exised on this rock that we call 'earth' is by it's very nature 'organic' " - you're wrong. Only organic molecules are organic, which they aren't all. Salt (NaCL) isn't, for example. Organic means containing carbon.

---

15 Jun 02 - 07:38 AM (#730440)
Subject: RE: BS: Irradiation of our food
From: Pied Piper

Mrrzy I think your point about the Organic as used in the Chemistry sense is correct. The question is a bit more complex. Many sedimentery rocks are of biological origen (chalk, limestone, coal and oil bearing strata) and contain large amounts of organicaly derived Carbon. All the best PP.

---

15 Jun 02 - 01:35 PM (#730556)
Subject: RE: BS: Irradiation of our food
From: Mark Cohen

Talk about thread creep....

---

15 Jun 02 - 08:09 PM (#730685)
Subject: RE: BS: Irradiation of our food
From: Bill D

"The public are a pretty stupid bunch.."

it is well to distinguish between 'stupid' and 'ignorant'....there is MUCH ignorance about, but it can be helped with education. The problem is that many folks seem to want to believe scary stories, urban myths, old wives tales and half-baked rumors, while ignoring genuine problems......

I suspect it is mostly (I erased 'simply') an issue of personalities whether 'irradiation', 'commie plots', floridated water, Trilateral commissions, and alligators in sewers worry you.

Read Jeri's post back up there..'irradiated' does NOT imply 'being made radioactive', and it is IMPORTANT to see the difference. And if one is worried about whether pesticides can get through the skin of a lemon, (they really can't...you can wash a lemon and be perfectly safe), ask in the RIGHT place!

---

15 Jun 02 - 08:13 PM (#730687)
Subject: RE: BS: Irradiation of our food
From: Stephen L. Rich

What they really need to irradiate is hot dogs!! That would make the rodent hairs glow in the dark!! That would be mondo cool!! *G*

---

15 Jun 02 - 11:30 PM (#730760)
Subject: RE: BS: Irradiation of our food
From: Bill D

pooh...

---