Irradiate or not???

by Latte 24 Replies latest social family

  • drwtsn32
    drwtsn32

    I'm sorry, but I have to agree with Stephanus. Irradiated food is not dangerous. It is not radioactive. It was merely exposed to some radioactivity to kill microorganisms. If you think irradiated food is radioactive, prove it by taking out your Geiger counter and seeing if the radioactivity is higher than background.

    Microwaves also do not make food dangerous. Microwaves subject food to a certain frequency of electromagnetic radiation. This frequency excites water molecules and causes them to produce heat. One you turn off the microwave energy, your food is not suddenly radiating microwaves.

    It also seems unreasonable to assume that your body will have trouble digesting microwaved/irradiated food. Just because irradiated food does not decompose on its own does not mean your body will have trouble decomposing it! Your digestive system breaks down food by the acid in your stomach and the natural bacteria in your intestinal tract.

  • drwtsn32
    drwtsn32
    It is safe to say that the current laws of physics do not always apply in all situations as there are NEW laws and discoveries yet to be taught to the average physics major

    Of course, but you could use that excuse about ANYTHING. I can claim ANYTHING is dagerous just by saying the above. I want PROOF that something is dangerous. Take your Geiger counter and test irradiated food and compare it to food that's not been irradiated. There's your proof.

  • Francois
    Francois

    Yes, irradiate.

    The food doesn't rot because the little bugs that make it rot have been killed by the radiation. However, irradiation has nothing at all to do with the food's chemical characteristics and reactions therewith. Not a problem.

    Just have to realize that certain words conjure up reactions of fear in whole segments of society. "Demons" send JWs fleeing in all directions screaming "Jehovah" at the top of their lungs. Scream "coolant failure" in a nuclear power plant and panic ensues. And really, anything related to nuclear reactions or power and the uneducated or unaware is immediately fearful. "Radiation" is one of those power words. The general public can be mightily aroused by that word, as we have seen. And now, were talking about "irradiation" of grandpa's tomatoes !!! "Them gall durn thangs gonna glow in tha' dark, Ethyl? I doan want no 'maters what glows in tha' dark." See what I mean?

  • Latte
    Latte

    but what else does it do............??........

    FDA Ignoring Evidence that New Chemicals Created in Irradiated Food Could Be Harmful

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has ignored growing evidence that a new class of chemicals formed when food is irradiated could be harmful, according to a report released today by Public Citizen and the Center for Food Safety.

    The groups are urging the FDA to refrain from legalizing irradiation for any additional types of food until the new chemicals are tested for safety.

    The chemicals, called cyclobutanones,

    do not occur naturally anywhere on Earth. They recently were found to cause genetic damage in rats, and genetic and cellular damage in human and rat cells.

    The groups' report, Hidden Harm, details how the FDA has ignored this unique class of chemicals, which are created in many irradiated foods that the agency has legalized for sale in this country -- including beef, pork, chicken, lamb, eggs, mangoes and papayas. It is expected that cyclobutanones also would be formed in many other foods the FDA is currently considering to legalize for irradiation.

    The organizations today also released a sworn affidavit of toxicologist William Au, who was retained by the groups to independently review the risks posed by cyclobutanones and other chemicals formed by irradiation that could cause genetic damage.

    Along with a letter outlining numerous health concerns caused by food irradiation, the groups filed Hidden Harm and Au's affidavit with the FDA to oppose pending petitions to legalize irradiation for processed foods, which comprise 37 percent of the typical American's diet; molluscan shellfish, such as clams and oysters; crustacean shellfish, such as lobsters and shrimp; and meat products.

    A fifth petition seeks to double the maximum dose of radiation to which poultry can legally be exposed.

    "The risk that the FDA is taking with the health of the American people cannot be overstated,"

    said Wenonah Hauter, director of Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program. "If government officials knowingly allow people to eat food that contains these chemicals, they are courting a major public health disaster."

    Though federal regulations require the FDA to determine whether food additives proposed for human consumption are likely to cause cancer, birth defects or other health problems, the agency has not done so for cyclobutanones, nor have agency officials explained why they have failed to do so. Under federal law, irradiation is considered a food additive.

    Americans likely are unwittingly eating irradiated foods containing cyclobutanones.

    Though most irradiated food sold in stores must be labeled, there is no such requirement for restaurants, schools, hospitals, nursing homes and other institutional settings. And there is no labeling requirement for foods with irradiated ingredients, except those containing irradiated meat. Moreover, due to a lack of reporting requirements for food companies, it is unknown how much irradiated food is sold in the US, or where.

    "Children are likely to be especially vulnerable to the risks of these untested chemicals in their food,"

    said Peter T. Jenkins, policy analyst at the Center for Food Safety. "It is beyond me why the FDA would take a chance by exposing American children in this way. The science is against it."

    Au, an environmental toxicology professor at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, is internationally recognized for his work on the toxicological mechanisms that induce human disease. For more than 20 years he has taught, published peer-reviewed research and served on expert committees. He has received numerous awards, and has published or co-published more than 100 articles.

    "An emphasis should be placed on the products that are unique to the irradiation process and that are potentially mutagenic, e.g. 2-DCB [2-dodecylcyclobutanone]," Dr. Au wrote in the affidavit. "Without conclusive evidence regarding the safety of these products, the safety of irradiated food cannot be assured." Au urged the FDA to "seriously and explicitly" consider "repeated observations" of genetic damage and reproductive toxicity in feeding experiments.

    Though cyclobutanones were first identified in irradiated food in 1971, it was not until 1998 that German government scientists discovered that one type of cyclobutanone, 2-DCB,

    caused genetic damage in rats, and genetic and cellular damage in human and rat cells.

    Subsequently, the scientists found that two other types of cyclobutanones -- 2-TCB and 2-TDCB -- caused genetic and cellular damage in human cells. Rat feeding studies of these two chemicals are expected to be completed soon.

    Despite these findings, the FDA not only has failed to publicly acknowledge the potential risks posed by cyclobutanones, but the agency proceeded to legalize irradiation for three classes of food even after the first two German studies were made public.

    Last year, the FDA legalized the irradiation of eggs, juice and sprouting seeds despite the fact that several high-ranking agency officials four months earlier had attended an international conference in Beijing at which the 2-DCB toxicity findings were presented and discussed.

    Ironically, cyclobutanones are so easily detectable and have been known to remain in food for such lengthy periods - more than a decade - that they are commonly used as "markers" to determine whether food has been exposed to ionizing radiation.

    The groups are calling on the FDA to take several steps:

    refrain from legalizing irradiation for any additional foods until comprehensive, published, peer-reviewed research is conducted on cyclobutanones;

    conduct a comprehensive analysis of the cyclobutanone levels in foods covered by irradiation petitions already approved by or pending before the FDA;

    convene public hearings to thoroughly explore the potential health effects of cyclobutanones.

    Hidden Harm can be viewed

    here . Au's affidavit is available here .

    http://www.planetagenda.com/Irradiated%20Foods%20Hidden%20Harm.htm

    I don't wish to scare monger....I'm just concerned myself.

    Thanks!

  • Mr. Kim
    Mr. Kim

    Latte, Thank you!

  • drwtsn32
    drwtsn32

    Yes, irradiation can damage DNA in food. If that creates unsafe chemicals then we need to explore it. However, irradiating food does not cause the food to become radioactive. I've heard people over the years say that and it's simply not true.

    Microwaving, on the other hand, does not damage DNA of food like irradiation can. I'm surprised that there are people that won't even own a microwave. All it does is excite water molecules so that they produce heat.

  • Mr. Kim
    Mr. Kim

    Well, enjoy the food.

  • Stephanus
    Stephanus
    Yes, irradiation can damage DNA in food.

    True. Now, so what? Our bodies break down ALL dna in our food, whether it be damaged, from "ordinary" food, or from GMOs, to be reassembled in the forms our bodies can use. That's what our bodies also do to proteins - I've yet to see the Greens arguing that ingesting too much cow protein will make you grow horns and udders, but seeing the way they're going with their bullshit pseudo-science such as the precautionary principle, it may only be a matter of time...

  • Bendrr
    Bendrr

    I'm surprised that there are people that won't even own a microwave.

    Ok, ok.....Yeah I truly don't own and don't want a microwave. But it's not what you think. I just don't care for microwaved food that much. Don't tell me you can't tell the difference. I love cooking and the way I look at it is that if I'm going to cook, I'm going to take the time to do it right. I acquired a microwave not too long ago, as a matter of fact. Previous tenants in the upstairs apartment left two of them behind. Didn't really need it here at home (see previous views of cooking) but knew the guys at the shop would love one in the break room. So I took it to work and made everyone happy. Including me, as I found out today. I bought some of those "Pasta Anytime" microwave meals and tried one out today, after having to ask they guys how to work that infernal contraption. When I sat down in front of my toolbox and took my first bite, my mind became a little more open to the idea of using microwave radiation to cook a quick lunch. So there!

    As far as using radiation to treat food, I'm not against it. I know that they're not turning out food that will make me glow in the dark or make me sterile. I'm not ignorant, I'm not stupid, I'm just not "educated". If it's done safely and has no side effects, great! My post that said let the market decide was exactly right. Show the authorities that it is safe first, which has obviously been done to some extent, and then let the irradiated products compete with the non-irradiated ones. The customers will make the final decision. Eventually "word of mouth" that "it's ok" and society's inevitable grudging acceptance of irradiated food will make it something we don't even think about.

    Mike.

  • drwtsn32
    drwtsn32
    Yeah I truly don't own and don't want a microwave. But it's not what you think. I just don't care for microwaved food that much. Don't tell me you can't tell the difference.

    Of course... many things don't cook well in the microwave. It is invaluable for heating up leftovers, drinks, making popcorn, etc., though. I would never use it to cook meat products but it works well on vegetables. In addition, there are some well-designed microwavable dishes that are really good. There are of course some that are really bad. You just have to experiment.

    If you have the time and energy to cook all of your foods the good ol' fashioned way, I envy you.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit