Julio,
I think they may choose one of the two but not both as the costs of doing multiple strelizations will quantuple the price of the product which the consumer will never accept. If the food is that fithy where microbes have blended with the molecules in the meat itself, i would prefer to throw that in the trash can whether it is ozonated or irradiated. But since we are having a surface problem it may be more economical and due to general public appeal Ozone will gradually be well accepted. But at the same time i would like to point out that soon we shall see more irradiated meat products on the shelves in supermarkets.
Methods of food production, processing and distribution that increase the distance between the producer and the consumer, either physically or spiritually, can hardly contribute to sustainability or strengthen the bond between ourselves and our planet. I believe this argument alone is enough to put irradiation into the undesirable technology category.
Visit this web site :
consumersinternational.org
I found a very old article on the web and suspect that there is a lot of things that are still unanswered and why FDA was pressured to clear irradiation of food in 60 days. Looks like they did not have a choice here. Also why some nations like Germany who are leaders in cropping have totally banned food irradiation and do not import any irradiated food (There must be some reason). I guess more research should have been conducted. In other nations where irradiation is being followed is going to be dwarfed by the scale USA is planning on in general.
Here is an old article:
Food irradiation: we may be zapping up the
wrong tree.
Environmental Nutrition 1994 Dec;17(12):1,6
Klausner A
950753
Food irradiation has been proposed as one solution to the
food safety problem. But consumer advocates warn that
food irradiation poses safety risks of its own, though not the
most feared one---that food would become radioactive. The
Food and Drug Administration says food irradiation is safe
and effective at approved levels. Whole foods that have
been irradiated must be labeled "Treated by Irradiation" or
"Treated with Radiation." There is no law, however,
requiring labeling of prepared or packaged foods that
contain irradiated ingredients or for irradiated food sold in
restaurants or delis. The benefits of food irradiation are
undeniable. But some experts have raised concerns that food
irradiation may give consumers a false sense of security
about the safety of the food supply. Food irradiation
opponents also cite research showing the process depletes
nutrients. Food irradiation also forms residual substances
such as benzene and formaldehyde--both known
carcinogens. And it produces free radicals and
chemically-altered food components, whose long-term health
effects are unknown. Many scientists argue that the same
products that form during irradiation also result from other
food processing techniques and are found naturally in food.
Because of such uncertainties and fear of public protest, only
one plant is currently irradiating foods for retail sale.
Irradiated foods are slowly making their way into institutional
food service operations. Reports on consumer acceptance
are mixed.
But proponents are saying its safe. Whatever the scientific community says. I am thinking that there is still a lot of unknowns. It will surface soon if the whole meat industry uses that because of the very fact that staple American diet is meat.
"...only 1 percent of consumers named irradiation as a fresh produce safety concern, reflecting unfamiliarity with the treatment by the general population.There are three common, yet unfounded, fears associated with irradiation: fear of radioactive food, fear of irradiation facilities melting down, and to a lesser extent, fear that irradiation treatment will enable retailers to sell consumers spoiled goods. In reality, irradiation proponents point out, irradiation does not make product radioactive because the cobalt source is `neutron less'. Fission (nuclear chain reactions) does not occur during irradiation, rendering meltdowns impossible. However poor building design could allow for some seepage into the local environment."
Regards
Sri. |
