Food Irradiation: Pros and Cons

[Guest guest]

Unless this is absolutely different from microwaving foods, which I tend to doubt, try this link: http://www.all-natural.com/microwa1.html

 

 

In a message dated 12/5/2007 10:54:05 P.M. Central Standard Time, ed4636 writes:

Question, what molecules are changed in the food whenirradiated, and how does that change the nutritional value of thefood? Any published studies on that topic? Check out AOL Money Finance's list of the hottest products and top money wasters of 2007.

[Guest guest]

David, in Europe, irradiated food has been accepted, without reported

negative consequence for at least 15 years. What I've seen says it

kills active, live, bacteria in the food only when it is radiated and

packaged. Once irridated, the radiation does not remain in the food.

The bacteria free food later does not kill the natural bacteria we

need within our digestive system. That was a fear over a decade ago,

but has been proven to be unfounded. You can search " food irradiation

europe " for many articles going way back. There was a recent special

on the History Channel on this also. With the spread of disease from

imported fruit and vegetables from countries to the south which use

human waste in their fields and is handled by poor folks with diseases

like cholera and TB, it makes sense. The chlorine, floride, and lead

in our water supplies is much more harmful than irradiation could

ever be. Question, what molecules are changed in the food when

irradiated, and how does that change the nutritional value of the

food? Any published studies on that topic?

 

oleander soup , ahzoov wrote:

>

> ,

> Your gov't wants to irradiate all our food. They say it will insure

against

> e-coli. However, irradiation changes the molecular structure of the

food, and

> it kills good bacteria our bodies need. The REAL reason they want to

> irradiate our food is to find something to do with the waste from

nuclear energy

> plants. Something profitable. Another decision that helps

corporations while

> injuring the population.

> YOUR COMMENTS ARE NEEDED NOW. TOMORROW THEY CUT OFF THE COMMENT

PERIOD

> HOW TO SUBMIT:

> Go to _www.regulations.gov_ (http://www.regulations.gov/) . In the

middle of

> the screen, you will see “Search Documents.â€

>

> In Step 1, choose “Documents with an open comments periodâ€

> In Step 2, choose “Department of Agricultureâ€

> In Step 3, choose “PROPOSED RULESâ€

> In Step 4, choose “Docket ID†and then type in

“AMS-FV-07-0090â€

>

> Hit “Submit.â€

> Next, you will see a column titled “Comments, add/due by.â€

Click on the

> TINY TAN DIALOGUE ICON (top left part of the page), and you are

now ready to

> submit your information and your comment.

> Next: Write your people in congress and scream!

> _http://www.webslingerz.com/jhoffman/congress-email.html_

> (http://www.webslingerz.com/jhoffman/congress-email.html)

>

>

>

>

> **************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's

hottest

> products.

>

(http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)

>

[Guest guest]

Pro Article:

Statement opposing support to the European civil society statement

against food irradiation (October 2005)

 

Cheshire and Merseyside Public Health Network and Heart of Mersey do

not believe that the European Public Health Alliance should oppose the

use of food irradiation and the sale of irradiated food in the

European Union.

 

There are greater food-related public health priorities which would

benefit the health of citizens of the European Union - for example

reducing the amount of saturated fat in the food chain – which is a

major contributor to major public health problems such as coronary

heart disease and obesity.

 

Irradiation, carried out under conditions of Good Manufacturing

Practice, is commended as a safe and effective food processing method

that can reduce the risk of food poisoning and preserve foods without

detriment to health and with minimum effect on nutritional quality.

 

This view has been endorsed by international bodies such as the World

Health Organisation, the Food and Agricultural Organisation and Codex

Alimentarius. Acute diarrhoeal diseases, which may be attributed

basically to consumption of contaminated food and water, continue to

represent one of the most frequent causes of morbidity and mortality

among children below five years.

 

Food irradiation has been examined thoroughly by joint committees of

the World Health Organization, the United Nations Food and Agriculture

Organisation, the European Community Scientific Committee for Food,

the United States Food and Drug Administration and by a House of Lords

committee (UK). It is a safe and effective way to kill bacteria in

foods and extend its shelf life.

 

From an environmental perspective, irradiation makes possible the

replacement of chemical fumigants such as ethylene oxide, propylene

oxide and methyl bromide. Irradiation can also decrease losses from

storage and pests. Reducing losses is particularly important in the

context of global distribution and storage of food.

 

As food irradiation extends the shelf-life of food, this makes it more

likely that shops will stock perishable items, for example fresh fruit

and vegetables. This is advantageous in areas of deprivation where

individuals are likely to shop less frequently and beneficial to

families on low-incomes who rely on taxis/buses to do their ' " big

shop " . It is a relatively cheap way of extending shelf-life (keeps

costs lower for those on low incomes; supports producers in developing

countries).

 

Please note that our opposition to the campaign in favour of food

irradiation is based on information and evidence currently available

 

Prepared for Cheshire and Merseyside Public Health Network (ChaMPs)

and Heart of Mersey ( HoM) by Helen Casstles, Environmental Public

Health Specialist, Centre for Public Health, Liverpool John Moores

University and Modi Mwatsama, food and health programme at HoM.

 

 

 

 

 

 

oleander soup , " ed4soup " <ed4636 wrote:

>

> David, in Europe, irradiated food has been accepted, without reported

> negative consequence for at least 15 years. What I've seen says it

> kills active, live, bacteria in the food only when it is radiated and

> packaged. Once irridated, the radiation does not remain in the food.

> The bacteria free food later does not kill the natural bacteria we

> need within our digestive system. That was a fear over a decade ago,

> but has been proven to be unfounded. You can search " food irradiation

> europe " for many articles going way back. There was a recent special

> on the History Channel on this also. With the spread of disease from

> imported fruit and vegetables from countries to the south which use

> human waste in their fields and is handled by poor folks with diseases

> like cholera and TB, it makes sense. The chlorine, floride, and lead

> in our water supplies is much more harmful than irradiation could

> ever be. Question, what molecules are changed in the food when

> irradiated, and how does that change the nutritional value of the

> food? Any published studies on that topic?

>

> oleander soup , ahzoov@ wrote:

> >

> > ,

> > Your gov't wants to irradiate all our food. They say it will insure

> against

> > e-coli. However, irradiation changes the molecular structure of the

> food, and

> > it kills good bacteria our bodies need. The REAL reason they want to

> > irradiate our food is to find something to do with the waste from

> nuclear energy

> > plants. Something profitable. Another decision that helps

> corporations while

> > injuring the population.

> > YOUR COMMENTS ARE NEEDED NOW. TOMORROW THEY CUT OFF THE COMMENT

> PERIOD

> > HOW TO SUBMIT:

> > Go to _www.regulations.gov_ (http://www.regulations.gov/) . In the

> middle of

> > the screen, you will see “Search Documents.â€

> >

> > In Step 1, choose “Documents with an open comments periodâ€

> > In Step 2, choose “Department of Agricultureâ€

> > In Step 3, choose “PROPOSED RULESâ€

> > In Step 4, choose “Docket ID†and then type in

> “AMS-FV-07-0090â€

> >

> > Hit “Submit.â€

> > Next, you will see a column titled “Comments, add/due by.â€

> Click on the

> > TINY TAN DIALOGUE ICON (top left part of the page), and you are

> now ready to

> > submit your information and your comment.

> > Next: Write your people in congress and scream!

> > _http://www.webslingerz.com/jhoffman/congress-email.html_

> > (http://www.webslingerz.com/jhoffman/congress-email.html)

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > **************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's

> hottest

> > products.

> >

>

(http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Personally, if I want my food irradiated I will move to Chernobyl and

plant a garden there - otherwise, the only radiation I want to touch

my food is what comes from the rays of the sun.

 

" Food irradiation has been examined thoroughly by joint committees of

the World Health Organization, the United Nations Food and Agriculture

Organisation, the European Community Scientific Committee for Food,

the United States Food and Drug Administration and by a House of Lords

committee (UK). It is a safe and effective way to kill bacteria in

foods and extend its shelf life. "

 

That is a frightening list of organizations, given who really controls

them and what they have vouched for as being safe in the past. The

last sentence in the paragraph may speak volumes. Our grocers shelves

are full of food that has had the nutrition processed out and

additives processed in to extend shelf life. Not to mention additives

to improve taste, texture and color.

 

I would rather see more efforts to test food for safety - one way

might be to divert all the money and manpower spent on suppressing and

harassing natural supplements to where it would actually do some good

for the public instead of serving to eliminate competition for the

world pharma empire.

 

JMHO,

 

Tony

[Guest guest]

OTHER RESEARCHRaises concerns This is just one study of many: Following are a few findings from a study "On the Nutritive Value of the Major nutrients and Appraisal of the Toxicity of Irradiated Foods" by the Division of Animal Nutrition, University of Illinois contracted by the Department of the Army, Office of the Surgeon General. [link to www.nal.usda.gov] II. Effect of irradiation on amino acids of protein-containing foods In both peas and beans, lysine and arginine

were extensively destroyed by irradiation, the amount of destruction increasing with irradiation dosages. The effect of irradiation at 2.8 million, 5.6 million and 9.3 million rad levels on the amino acid composition of milk and beef was studied. It was found that glutamic acid, aspartic acid, serine and glycine were most seriously reduced by irradiation in both milk and beef." [link to www.nal.usda.gov] VII. Irradiation-sterilized beef and vitamin K deficiency "Consumption of diets containing 7-ray irradiated (2.79 or 5.58 x 10 8 rad) beef resulted in internal hemorrhages and prolonged prothrombin times in growing male rats. Generally, the female rat did not show this syndrome. The lesion was induced by freshly irradiated beef as well as irradiated beef which has been stored for over 6 months at room

temperature." [link to www.nal.usda.gov] "Pork and beef are poor sources of vitamin K, and irradiation further lowers the available vitamin K level, thus resulting in severe vitamin K deficiency when fed as the sole source of vitamin K in the ration of the male rat. This situation is entirely analogous to that of many other vitamins which are destroyed or decreased in level by processing methods, and it can be readily counteracted by providing a mixed diet containing other sources of the vitamin in question, or by supplementing the diet." "Irradiation of beef, although not producing detectable vitamin K antagonists, reduces the vitamin K activity sufficiently to render deficient those diets that rely solely on irradiated beef for vitamin K. This produces the hemorrhagic condition." Note: A high food source of Vitamin K is green leafy vegetables. Green Leafy vegetables are the foods currently proposed for irradiating in the original post. This study shows: "As in the case of carbohydrates, the effects of radiation on fats include polymerization, decomposition, and oxidation." [link to www.nal.usda.gov] ed4soup <ed4636 wrote: Pro Article: Statement opposing support to the European civil society statement against food irradiation (October 2005) Cheshire and Merseyside Public Health Network and Heart of Mersey do not believe that the European Public Health Alliance should oppose the use of food irradiation and the sale of irradiated food in the European Union. There are greater food-related public health priorities which would benefit the

health of citizens of the European Union - for example reducing the amount of saturated fat in the food chain – which is a major contributor to major public health problems such as coronary heart disease and obesity. Irradiation, carried out under conditions of Good Manufacturing Practice, is commended as a safe and effective food processing method that can reduce the risk of food poisoning and preserve foods without detriment to health and with minimum effect on nutritional quality. This view has been endorsed by international bodies such as the World Health Organisation, the Food and Agricultural Organisation and Codex Alimentarius. Acute diarrhoeal diseases, which may be attributed basically to consumption of contaminated food and water, continue to represent one of the most frequent causes of morbidity and mortality among children below five years. Food irradiation has been examined thoroughly by

joint committees of the World Health Organization, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation, the European Community Scientific Committee for Food, the United States Food and Drug Administration and by a House of Lords committee (UK). It is a safe and effective way to kill bacteria in foods and extend its shelf life. From an environmental perspective, irradiation makes possible the replacement of chemical fumigants such as ethylene oxide, propylene oxide and methyl bromide. Irradiation can also decrease losses from storage and pests. Reducing losses is particularly important in the context of global distribution and storage of food. As food irradiation extends the shelf-life of food, this makes it more likely that shops will stock perishable items, for example fresh fruit and vegetables. This is advantageous in areas of deprivation where individuals are likely to shop less frequently and

beneficial to families on low-incomes who rely on taxis/buses to do their '"big shop". It is a relatively cheap way of extending shelf-life (keeps costs lower for those on low incomes; supports producers in developing countries). Please note that our opposition to the campaign in favour of food irradiation is based on information and evidence currently available Prepared for Cheshire and Merseyside Public Health Network (ChaMPs) and Heart of Mersey ( HoM) by Helen Casstles, Environmental Public Health Specialist, Centre for Public Health, Liverpool John Moores University and Modi Mwatsama, food and health programme at HoM. oleander soup , "ed4soup" <ed4636 wrote: > > David, in Europe, irradiated food has been accepted, without reported > negative consequence for at least 15 years. What I've seen says

it > kills active, live, bacteria in the food only when it is radiated and > packaged. Once irridated, the radiation does not remain in the food. > The bacteria free food later does not kill the natural bacteria we > need within our digestive system. That was a fear over a decade ago, > but has been proven to be unfounded. You can search "food irradiation > europe" for many articles going way back. There was a recent special > on the History Channel on this also. With the spread of disease from > imported fruit and vegetables from countries to the south which use > human waste in their fields and is handled by poor folks with diseases > like cholera and TB, it makes sense. The chlorine, floride, and lead > in our water supplies is much more harmful than irradiation could > ever be. Question, what molecules are changed in the food when > irradiated, and how does that change the

nutritional value of the > food? Any published studies on that topic? > > oleander soup , ahzoov@ wrote: > > > > , > > Your gov't wants to irradiate all our food. They say it will insure > against > > e-coli. However, irradiation changes the molecular structure of the > food, and > > it kills good bacteria our bodies need. The REAL reason they want to > > irradiate our food is to find something to do with the waste from > nuclear energy > > plants. Something profitable. Another decision that helps > corporations while > > injuring the population. > > YOUR COMMENTS ARE NEEDED NOW. TOMORROW THEY CUT OFF THE COMMENT > PERIOD > > HOW TO SUBMIT: > > Go to _www.regulations.gov_ (http://www.regulations.gov/) . In the > middle of > > the screen, you will see “Search Documents.†> > > > In Step 1, choose “Documents with an open comments period†> > In Step 2, choose “Department of Agriculture†> > In Step 3, choose “PROPOSED RULES†> > In Step 4, choose “Docket ID†and then type in > “AMS-FV-07-0090†> > > > Hit “Submit.†> > Next, you will see a column titled “Comments, add/due by.†> Click on the > > TINY TAN DIALOGUE ICON (top left part of the page), and you are > now ready to > > submit your information and your comment. > > Next: Write your people in congress and scream! > > _http://www.webslingerz.com/jhoffman/congress-email.html_ > > (http://www.webslingerz.com/jhoffman/congress-email.html) > > > > > > > > > > **************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's > hottest > > products. > > > (http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001) > > >

Never miss a thing. Make your homepage.

[Guest guest]

Concerns raised by experts:Yes, gamma rays can kill harmful bacteria in food, but one big problem is that they kill the helpful microflora, too. Bacteria are not just agents of disease.... One need not be a Luddite to recognize the cult of nuclear idolatry. Geoffrey Sea, Director Atomic Reclamation and Conversion Project ---------------------- There are potentially serious concerns about the issues of waste disposal, engineering safety, transport of radioactive material, production of new isotopes, handling by poorly trained personnel, and others we haven't even thought of yet. Sheldon Margen, M.D. Professor Emeritus University of California, Berkeley ---------------------- I am opposed to food irradiation because it is clear that this process increases the levels of mutagens and carcinogens in the food. The inevitable consequence of this is that in two to five decades in the future, the incidence of

cancer will increase from what we see now, in direct proportion to the amounts of irradiated food consumed. Thus, food irradiation becomes very expensive both in terms of human lives, as well as health care costs. George L. Tritsch, Ph.D. Roswell Park Cancer Institute Buffalo, NY ---------------------- It is distressing to me that despite all the studies, many favorable and many unfavorable, the FDA utilized only five safety studies. I looked in detail at two of those studies. Each raises considerable question. In one, the irradiated food was obtained from some other group and we are never actually given any data to show that the food was irradiated properly or even irradiated at all. Additionally, the authors note an increase in abnormalities in dogs at autopsy and then seem to feel that the abnormalities they found were meaningless and should be ignored. In the other study from England, in the group receiving the food

irradiated most, there were increased deaths in the offspring and this is completely ignored even though the authors say there is no explanation for it. To me, it is somewhat amazing that these are listed as two of the five studies that are considered impeccable enough to be evaluated for safety. Those studies have considerable imperfections. For the FDA to selectively choose the five is, I believe, improper for deciding safety. Donald B. Louria, MD University of Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey ---------------------- I am not against food irradiation. I am opposed to the hype, some of which is voiced by people who should know better and therefore appear to be deliberate falsehoods.... I and others worked very hard trying to find a useful place for irradiation during the Atoms for Peace program. Unfortunately, we were not able to find it. Noel F. Sommer, Ph.D., Emeritus Postharvest Pathologist University of

California, Davis ---------------------- The large scale irradiation of food, as proposed by the industry and administration, represents the largest prospective toxicological experiment in human populations in the history of public health. Samuel S. Epstein, MD Professor of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, The University of Illinois at Chicago ---------------------- What we do know with certainty is that irradiation causes a host of unnatural and sometimes unidentifiable chemicals to be formed within the irradiated foods, and that the number, kind, and permanence of these foreign chemical compounds depend on the food itself and the dose of radiation. Our ignorance about these foreign compounds makes it simply a fraud to tell the public that we know irradiated foods would be safe to eat; it is dishonorable to trick people into buying irradiated foods, because such behavior is a violation of the basic

human right. John W. Gofman, MD, Ph.D. University of California, Berkeley ---------------------- It has been shown repeatedly that mutagenic doses of formaldehyde are formed during irradiation of carbohydrate. Meat, although protein, also contains carbohydrates. Anyone can choose not to eat saturated fats and cholesterol, but once the food supply is supplemented with mutagens, it will take massive efforts to dislodge a well entrenched and financed industry which will deny to the end that it is responsible for the inevitable increase in neoplasia which in effect it has caused. Furthermore, the organisms remaining in the irradiated food are by definition radiation resistant, and no work whatever has been done on what these new organisms populating the gastrointestinal tract and their progeny will do to man and the environment. George L. Tritsch, Ph.D. Roswell Park Cancer Institute Buffalo, NY

---------------------- First, since we do not know what we are seeking in the experiments, though they are designed with the best toxicological techniques available, they can not prove the safety of the irradiated food in question, but merely give us a measure of confidence that it is safe. The ultimate test will be in the human after lifetimes or generations of consumption. Dr. Jacqueline Verrett former FDA toxicologist ---------------------- These studies reviewed in the 1982 memo from the FDA were not adequate by 1982 standards, and are even less adequate by 1993 standards to evaluate the safety of any product, especially a food product such as irradiated foods. Marcia van Gemert, Ph.D. Toxicologist and former chair of an FDA irradiation committee ---------------------- Radiation is a carcinogen, mutagen, and teratogen. At doses of 100,000 rads to fruits and vegetables, the cells of the fruits

and vegetables will be destroyed, but fungi, bacteria, and viruses growing on the fruits and vegetables will not all be killed or inactivated at these doses. They will be mutated, possibly leading to more virulent contaminants. Has anyone addressed this problem? Geraldine Dettman, Ph.D. Radiation Safety Officer, Biosafety Officer, Brown University ahzoov wrote: Unless this is absolutely different from microwaving foods, which I tend to doubt,

try this link: http://www.all-natural.com/microwa1.html In a message dated 12/5/2007 10:54:05 P.M. Central Standard Time, ed4636 writes: Question, what molecules are changed in the food whenirradiated, and how does that change the nutritional value of thefood? Any published studies on that topic? Check out AOL Money Finance's list of the hottest products and top money wasters of 2007.

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Search.

[Guest guest]

Microwave radiation is non-ionizing, meaning that the chemical structure of food is largely left intact. [link to en.wikipedia.org] The radiation used to irradiate food is ionizing, meaning that it drastically changes the chemical composition of food (see above). Cobalt-60 and caesium-137, both used in food irradiation, are radionuclides. [link to en.wikipedia.org] Cobalt 60 MSDS from the manufacturer, stuarthunt [link to www.stuarthunt.com] Fact sheet from AU [link to www.health.qld.gov.au] Just Google cobalt

60 and food irradiation. There is a massive amount of info. Oh, irradiation of all food is part of the WTO's trade regulations called CODEX. ahzoov wrote: Unless this is absolutely different from microwaving foods, which I tend to doubt, try this link: http://www.all-natural.com/microwa1.html In a message dated 12/5/2007 10:54:05

P.M. Central Standard Time, ed4636 writes: Question, what molecules are changed in the food whenirradiated, and how does that change the nutritional value of thefood? Any published studies on that topic? Check out AOL Money Finance's list of the hottest products and top money wasters of 2007.

Never miss a thing. Make your homepage.