Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0212.035 1996-1998 ^^4 Is food irradiation a financially sound investment for Hawaii? Is it a safe process? Is this site geologically suited? Will Hawaii still be competitive if lower wage countries also irradiate their fruits? Will consumers, mainland and Japanese, buy irradiated fruits? How many growers really need it? Will it help the small farmer? Why should we invest two million dollars in a private enterprise? What will the facility ead~-~isgesal cost Hawaiians? How will the companies dispose of the wastes? How will the plant's presence affect tourism and property values? Could your fire and emergency units handle a nuclear accident? What aze the alternatives? 1) Use this money to research other ways to kill the fiuit flies, 2) expand coffee and flower industries, 3) forestry (especially pest resistant high timber bamboos an~a m A 4) organize an interisland fiuit and vegetable co-op supporting truck farming. Consider even industrial hemp, under strict controls, before you invest in an unaccepted, unproven, and financially unsound technology such as food irradiation. Twelve years after FDA approval, chief FDA food irradiation reviewer, Marcia Van Gernert still states, "Food irradiation has not been proven to be safe." Discredited Army studies from the sixties and studies from the fraudulent Industrial Bio Test Corporation, as well as, biased Chinese nutrition studies, are still used as "scientific" basis for its safety. I'm reminded of the military A-Bomb, Agent Orange survivors, fifties covert civilian nuclear tasting, and Desert Storm... Studies of Indian children who developed high chromosome abnormalities (precursors to cancer) after being fed irradiated wheat, weren't considered, nor were documented tests on rats showing possible kidney and testiculaz damage and tumors when the FDA approved food irradiation Eighty to ninety percent of cancers Aar environmentally induced, according to the WHO (World Health Organization), with one out of every two point five people expected to contract cancer. The National Academy of Sciences has warned us that the FDA, USDA, and EPA have failed to protect our health. The NRC has recorded fifty-four accidents at one hundred and thirty-two irradiation facilities worldwide since 1974. There is no information concerning accidents in approximately thirty other states, as each monitors its own facilities. Worker and product safety, at the irradiation plants, aze at risk from contamination in the irradiation process. The NRC (Nucleaz Regulatory Commission) while developing licensing for lazgevradiators cited numerous examples of product contamina~on om exposure to radioactive coolant splash and found this unacceptable. This has occu ed 7 - - r Co alt 60, used in Isomedix irradiators, (See Isomedix Accident 1974), has contai ers whic~eak, possibly causing this contamination Cobalt residues remain when cannisters are replaced and if disposed of, these cannisters aze down graded to low level waste which can become the responsibility of the state. There is often many yeazs of radioactivity left in these cannisters, creating a safety and environmental hazard, plus a heavy cost burden for the state. If the monitoring devices to check products leaving the irradiation chamber fail to function properly, products and workers could be unknowingly contaminated. It is true that the DOE (Department of Energy) is promoting a technology it cannot control. Too many environmental and human health risks are involved. It is not accepted by the consumer, is financially unsound, and should be opposed by the committee. !j~K Sa""d`1 Qda"-" l%omnP, isi4 . V~./ St -529 kcrv. ~4w~ File no. D C IP ~Cc~a,,,o.- N-, Rb~3o r^ Ref. 70; Prosenta. ~l So 4 . 23'T ~ z 5 APR ~ ttef. I~te_ Sources: American Cancer Society, World Health Organization, Federal Register 1990, Nucleaz Information and Resource, Nate Academy of Sciences, University of Hawaii Agriculture, Food and Water. F O O b & W A T E 2 5 thrombus, and fibroplasia. In reviewing most consumers are not willing ro Raltech's findings ut 1984, a USDA re- take the unnecessary risk. searcher, Donald Thayer, asserted, "A collective assessment of study results ar- Environm@rital anQ WoYlc- gues against a de&nitive conclusion that place $a7tards The highgt concen- the gamma-irradiated test material was Workers in irradiattion plants risk ex- of irradiation free of toxAc properties." posure xo large doses of radiation facilities is w New Studies on rats fed irradiated food also due to equipment failure and leaks. Jersey, and virtually indicate possible kidney damage, testicu- Risks of exposure come wick produc- awry Naw Jamey lac damage, and a statistically significant tion, transportation, storage, and in- plant has a recoM of incmase in testicular rumors. One Sand- stallation and replacement of environmental con- mark test on children in India who were radiation sources. lamination, worker fed irnd;atcd what resulted in four out Aeei de70.ta Happen overoxpowre, or of five children developing polyploidy, a chromosomal abnormaliry that is a The Nuclear Regulatory Commission regttlatory failures. good indication of the future develop- (NRC) has recorded 54 accidents at meat of cancer. 132 irradiation facilities worldwide Irradiation proponents often claim that since 1974. '['his number is very prob- decades of research demonstrate the ably low because the NRC has no in- safety of food irradiation, but the scud- formation on the irradiation facilities ies they use to prove their poirtt are rn approximately 30 states. The NRC questionable. Some were undertaken Brv~ dtese "agreement states" the by the U.S. Army w obtain approval authority to monitor facilities in their fmm the FDA Cor can-packed bacon in states' 1963• The FAA withdrew approval five The highest concentration of irradia• years later. Irradiation proponents' Lion facilities is in New Jersey, where scare of research also includes studies plant safety records are not encourag- completed by Industrial Bio-Test (1B'1), ing. Virtually every New Jersey plant a firm convicted in 1983 of performing has a record of environmental con- fraudulent research for govemment and lamination, worker overexposure, or industry. A5 a result of IBT's violations, regulacorv failures. the government lost about $4 million Accidents can be nearly fatal to work- and six years of animal feeding study ors and extremely dangerous to the data on food irradiation. Some of this communities surrounding irradiation discredited work is sill( used today as facilities: part of the "scientific" basis for assur- ances of the safety of food irradiation. • On Aecember 11, 1991, a The truth is, no one can real]y be sure worker at a Maryland irradiation about the safety of irradiated foods, and facility suffered curies( injuries 8Y".%a of Cons'amers Are Concerned 84% oZ Consumers Consider Food about Food Irradiation Zrxadiation a Haaard II 28%~,~~' ~ ~ 3096n ~o~~ ~ la% ~ 14% Ne t. S% op„„n, y 4~J L 'jS Nv tYG Y M II, r~,,,a,,,a, 30% ~a Il"k rm~m.a 34% sw I Sowce HealthFocus. 1494 Source: Food Mark~ung Insaruce, 1995 ~0'd IGiT~l.9~~RFl£jT Ol. ~I11 d91VP1 2 ~]pi;i~ t.lOr~~ Wdz~:2l L66T-T~-bO r©'d ~Nloi 2 6 M E n T M O N O P O L I E S when he was exposed to ionizing hand and most of four fingers radiation from en electron-beam ac- on his left had w be amputated. celeraror. The worker assumed it a In 2988, Radiation Sterilizers, was sak to enter the radiation Inc. (RSI) in Decatur, Georgia, chamber because the voltage reported a leak of cesium 137 source was off, but the beam cur- capsules into the waur storage rent was still prrsent. Two weeks af- pool. The leak endangered work- ter exposure, the victim had last all ers and caused extensive mm function in both hands, had sorts nmination throughout the and blisters on his feet, 8ce, and facility. Workers brought radioac- scalp, and had to be hospiwlized tivity into their homes and cars. for severe pain. Three months later, Clean-up costs exceeded S30 mil- four fingers on the victim's right lion. Taxpayers fooud the bill. • In 1986, the NRC revoked the li- cense of a Radiation Technol- ogy, Inc. (RTI) facility in New -1s^`f Jersey for 32 worker-safetyviola- ~ ~ ~ • , _ Lions, including throwing radio- _ ' active garbage our with the ~ - ~ ~ regular trash and bypassing a safety device in plare to prevent _ -;~'ri •r- - workers from entering the ima• ' , ' ~ a diacion chamber during opera- . ~ ~ pon. As a result of this negligence, one worker received a near lethal dose of radiation. • •In 1982, InurnaGOnal Nutronics in Dover, New Jersey, a com- pany that used radiation baths to purify gems, chemipls, food, and medical supplies, had an ac- cident that compleuiy contami- nated the plant and farCed its closure. A pump malfunctioned D,t~.,t}tOn_F~~ and siphoned waur from the ~~wW~AUUtaauu 'L~n'jN~`v~ baths onto the floor. The com- It's Wflat's Not For Dinner pony, located in a heavily popu- la[ed area, dumped the liK laze tlnng tomumers neM i mwMr r,ason w h vomed aywi mar l4n du,k axn„f,,,mrm,ar„md~,wnoeennr,~,d„'rruretaerlaaaaenonioeynwm, contaminated water into the rcw,oonerar~smm~em,at~a.von<,m~sa+~d~.m^~abnd Dover sewer system and Coiled ~xi,aemom,conm.re~Q~~~+ to report the accident to the .uiddwina.ll.rlvuonawrmW+ya repwud ma, r<aduig mamfil mdunn~ NRC. samYU, ~ utr4tmon mmnmt ro bll,he bedtei~produm'oUOa~ors' and wpuo ~'6nrm-Iwr uue=epetrYymlttl"ME,~Rer packet. red mealmm5l~nmm.li<no carder coocwnen •In 1974, an Isomedix Facility in ~ w~,tdo.m door 1«,.duaoni'rpotrd Neap Jersey flushed radioactive w~r<toodam,ar,m~..u,~~a•rerna+v~vPo~rea~m~..ennl water down toilets and congmi- AmennifoodwpplyvetanrpwndurpolittaaaaniurMnfovaurrtumntgopporertrWnoon Hated pipes leading to sewers. Eue m drc mnronmalW zed bWm tikes of me iermnalogy. In the same year, a worker re- a'uhourArJp,dKpoolnYNdtraLtNM1rndveteablemdunnnhs.cllrbdydeodedw ceivedadoseoftadiationconsid- rgetl imdtumn Th<mm umueuy sMuld sn"'N~" u up11 Bred lethal for 70 percent of the Brrtusc ,nsOiYed baf n cam s nm rM Mnnzr population. Prompt hospital treatment saved ins life. Food at< Water placed this advertisement in the July 1996 issues Of Meat Marketing & Technology and The Notional Arovizioner, two leading meat industry publications. bEl'd I~t[~9'~,'ti'.06T L.1 ~JNI id31rJP1 a ~UO~ L10tl~ Wd~~:,'I LSni-T~-b0