Comments on: Irradiation-another scary word

By: Sara

Sara — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 13:45:49 +0000

I totally agree that food safety problems need to be addressed at the source. Irradiation (or pasteurization or any other processing measure) cannot replace safety at the production level. I don’t see it as an either/or issue.

For me, the issue came down to relative risk: We know that irradiation can reduce foodborne illness immediately. I spent many hours tracking down research, and my conclusion was that I think the reduction in pathogens was of sufficient benefit to outweigh the potential downside.

By: Rebecca T. of HonestMeat

Rebecca T. of HonestMeat — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:32:25 +0000

I’m surprised to see this blog advocating such a ridiculous band aid approach to food safety, and one that is not well studied. We have no idea the cumulative affects of eating irradiated foods on the human body. We also can’t afford to loose more nutrients- we are talking about fresh produce here, not canned or frozen stuff. In some cases, our produce contains 80% less nutrients than it had 50 years ago. Should we eat food without nutrition just as filler and then pop multi-vitamins to round us out?
Food safety problems have increased with the rise of CAFO animal production, the feeding of distillers grains to ruminants, and the rapid consolidation of the meat packing industry. Let’s start at the source before we start advocating deleterious technologies that do nothing to solve the problem (and only add to it).

By: Suzanne

Suzanne — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 11:50:29 +0000

Irradiation would have spared us the scary tomato/jalapeno mess earlier this summer. And prevented the collapse of the tomato industry in Florida. So there, anti-irradiation folks. Give up on hating a word, and understand what it means.

By: Bill Harshaw

Bill Harshaw — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 18:56:52 +0000

There’s always the newness factor. With some reason, the new is a little scary. We know our bodies and our society have evolved with/lived with a set of hazards over the years, so we (think we) know the limits of the hazards. Not so with the new.

Having said that, I’m reminded of the observation that after 9/11 more people drove, fewer people flew, with the net result more people died in additional traffic accidents than on 9/11.

By: A Pretty Mess » Blog Archive » Irradiation–another scary word

A Pretty Mess » Blog Archive » Irradiation–another scary word — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 02:10:42 +0000

[…] the rest of the original post on down to earth […]