|
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /> (Countering Tactics and Claims continued)
<br />
<br /> exists the problem of hunger and the public-not just byy stopping Diehl (1990) estimated tl.
<br /> malnutrition, particularly in Third harmful practices, but also by pro- ! portion of irradiated foods u
<br /> World countries where the popu la- moting those which increase U.S. will probably not exceed 1
<br /> tion is expected to double in a single safety.... In the light of this, it is the end of the century and no
<br /> generation. These problems can right to add the weapon of irradia• 1 than 5% in the long-range ft
<br /> never be solved if we maintain that tion to the armoury of measures to According to Hall (1989), ther
<br /> the world is good enough as it is, that secure the safety of food" (Gummer, be no mass conversion. Irradi
<br /> we no longer have a need for im- 1989). ! will only find a few small niche
<br /> provi food preservation. • 'Irradiation Facilities Pose medutely. Giddings (1989)
<br /> Irradiation has the potential to Safety Hazards that threaten ; scribed the commercialization
<br /> solve certain problems that other communities, workers, and the on- gradual, selective, niche-findin
<br /> methods cannot sufficiently address. vironnaent." Such a claim tries to ems"
<br /> These include the following: i link irradiation with the nuclear in- It is quite unlikely, therefore.
<br /> 1. By reducing or eliminating dustry. Historically, however, food irradiation facilities will prolife
<br /> pathogen contamination in meats irradiation development to~g pre (But wen if they did, they woule
<br /> and poultry, irradiation can lessen dated the nuclear age (God Pose any health or safety probl
<br /> the incidence of foodbwme illnesses. 1989). Furthermore, it was mostly as already iadicatsd is thu anti
<br /> About 40% of the chicken produced . food scientists, not members of the • "Irradiation Makes Spo
<br /> in the U.S. is contaminated with I nuclear industry that developed and Foods Marketable and deco
<br /> salmonella or other bacteria (Jo- promoted the method (Disebhtt,1990). the consumer." Irradiation cax
<br /> ssphson, 1990). Archer (1986) esti- Although this link is a false one, ac- reverse spoilage or deterioration
<br /> mated 24-81 million cases of food- tivists make it because it conjures up am only arrest or slow it down.
<br /> borne diarrbeal disease per year in I in the mind of the consumer spoiled food Lutes and smells be
<br /> the United States. Medical care and thoughts of nuclear accidents and will still taste and smell bad afte
<br /> lost productivity may amount to waste disposal, and blurs the dls- radiation, and will be rejected bI
<br /> W17 billion. tinction between irradiated foods consumer (Diehl, 1990; Eves, I
<br /> & Irradiation may serve as an al- and radioactive foods. However an Kileast and Eves, 1990).
<br /> tsnmtive to chemical fumigants. irradiation facility is totally drier- s "Irradiation Sills SnolI
<br /> This is o~cularly important be- ant from a nuclear plant. There are Organisms and lets ba n
<br /> cause ethylene dibromida has been no materials present which can gen- velopp undetected." Green. j e
<br /> banned by tAh~e~Un.S. Environmental erate an explosion or contaminate (INS) showed that fresh beef
<br /> Protection TSis ry as a suspected the surrounding environment; an- pork, sterilized by Irradiation
<br /> carcinogen. fumigant has been ergy levels in processing food are low inoculated with C botulinum,
<br /> used to control insects on fruits, and produce little hsat and strict velop obvious signs of spoilage
<br /> vegetables, cereals, and nuts. Other safety precautions are taken for pro- fore becoming toxic. The claim t
<br /> fumi ants are also under investiga- tatting employees UPT, 1987). irradiation will eliminate the sp
<br /> tion Diehl, 1990). Moreover, most facilities us Co- age orgadlsms and allow C. bot.
<br /> 8. Some countries lose better , bait-t)0 which is not a nuclear waste nun to develop unchecked its inc
<br /> than 60% of their harvest to bugs material; other facilities use elec- rect. Waco control of botulism
<br /> and spoilage. Irradiation can de- tron accelerators (Dishl,1990). It is panda not on the existence
<br /> stroy insects in grains, fruits and . ironic that even as activists chap competing bacteria, but on mair
<br /> vegetables after harvest, anJ can safety concerns, for the put 20 years nonce of hygienic conditions and
<br /> delay the ri pening of certain fruit. radiation sources ban sterilised tention to temperature control (:o
<br /> Comwauenytl , irndiattot? has the radical products without problem clean, 1990; Gummer, 1990).
<br /> potential to help eau world bungs: and traoaportatioa of radioactive a "Consumers Can Be Harm
<br /> providing that stomp conditions of material or these purposes have by foods that have been overdo!
<br /> the~~~(~ted [coda are adequate been carefully safed sad can due to a malfunction in the irrad
<br /> (Bedsaul, 1980). ducted without incident ties facility." If a food is exposed
<br /> 4. Irradiation can auks available, a "Prollteration of Irradiation doses that are too high, changes
<br /> a larger quantity and a wider variety Facilities will follow if inedia food will occur that will be ob
<br /> of foods to consumers. For instance, is allowed." Ir»disdon, lib , odor, texture, tas
<br /> it makes possible imported fruit other processing method, is not suit- add col wiII , seriously a8ecu
<br /> and vegetables of a quality that is able for all foods--e.g., in and the product will be reject
<br /> supenor than thou processed by products off-flavors an develop add (Diehl, 1980).
<br /> Other methods. in other products texture and cdor
<br /> r" above advantayss demon- can be affected. Rather, irradiation How to Respond
<br /> strata that food irradiation may help can only be used for epee app Realistically, if food irradiation
<br /> secure the idety of the world food cations end for s"dft benetitC It is to achieve it full potentis xu
<br /> =p i . In his explanation of why nut some kind o "mist le procw" her of hurdles have to be arc
<br /> United Kingdom lifted it ban designg to rep all otlnr pro. Misnelativepublicity generated
<br /> on irradiation. the Minister of Agri- assio methods~ceCousequently, if- opponent of the process has to
<br /> culture, Fiaheriss, and Food said, radiated foods willonly mob up • countered. Consumers have to
<br /> "Government has a duty to protect emallpercentageoftbemarkstplam made aware of the benefits ?
<br />
|