You may now short VIFL with absolute impunity.
I'll be real suprised if VIFL gaps up after this front page Section B story. Love that lead:
December 3, 1997
FDA Approves Irradiation In Low Doses for Red Meat
By BRUCE INGERSOLL
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
The Food and Drug Administration Tuesday approved irradiation as a safe
way to rid meat of bacteria. But few meat processors seem willing to be
the first to bring irradiated beef, lamb or pork products to market.
The process, which involves zapping the raw meat with gamma radiation
or accelerated electrons, still conjures up images of mushroom clouds and
nuclear meltdowns in the minds of some opponents and consumers,
despite the FDA's endorsement of the technology.
J. Patrick Boyle, president of the American Meat Institute, is optimistic
that a market will emerge. "Consumer surveys in recent years show a
growing appreciation of the benefits of this process," he said. The approval
of irradiation for meat gives the food industry solid scientific footing for
making "its pitch to the consumer about the value of this product," said
acting FDA Commissioner Michael Friedman.
"Will we hit the jackpot? I really don't know. It depends on the extent to
which the meat industry embraces irradiation," said John Masefield,
chairman and chief executive of Isomedix Inc., based in Whippany, N.J.,
which waited more than three years for the FDA to act on its irradiation
petition. At this point, he said, "There are a lot of people who want to be
second."
Isomedix, which was acquired for $142 million two months ago by Steris
Corp. of Mentor, Ohio, is the leader in the embryonic irradiation industry.
For several years, it has been using gamma radiation from cobalt 60 or
beams of accelerated electrons to irradiate spices and tropical fruit, as well
as to sterilize medical devices. Also competing in the field of gamma
radiation is SteriGenics International of Menlo Park, Calif., and Food
Technology Service Inc. of Mulberry, Fla., which specializes in irradiating
produce and poultry.
All three companies saw their stock prices rise Tuesday on the Nasdaq
Stock Market on news of the FDA approval. Steris's stock rose $1.4375
a share to $49.4375. Food Technology Service rose $6.50 a share to
$11.625, and SteriGenics International rose $3.1875 a share to
$21.9375.
Most consumer groups, while recognizing the process's promise, don't
want it to become a substitute for food-safety systems now in place. And
the Vermont-based anti-irradiation group Food & Water Inc. vowed
Tuesday to wage advertising-and-leafleting campaigns against any big
company that dares go first.
ConAgra Inc., for one, said it would consider irradiating food, but hasn't
decided whether, or when, to market it. "We're happy it's a choice we can
offer consumers," said Lynn Ferris, a spokeswoman for the Omaha, Neb.,
food processor.
The reaction from meatpacking giant IBP Inc. was decidedly less
enthusiastic. "We have concerns about the effect of irradiation on color
and taste," said Gary Mickelson, a spokesman for the company based in
Iowa. "We believe additional testing is warranted."
Although poultry irradiation was approved several years ago, only a few
supermarkets and restaurants nationwide offer irradiated chicken and
other fowl to customers. Major processors such as Tyson Foods Inc. are
reluctant to risk a consumer backlash against brand-name products that
they have advertised and promoted at enormous expense.
The few restaurants that do serve irradiated chicken say they are pleased.
Scott Dickinson, executive chef at Orlando's Church Street Station, said
he willingly pays a 20-cent-a-pound premium for irradiated breasts
because of its much longer shelf life. It also gives him "peace of mind" that
his customers -- who aren't told they're eating irradiated chicken -- won't
get sick and sue for damages, Mr. Dickinson said.
The FDA also approved irradiation for pork to control trichinosis several
years ago, but the industry has hardly used the method, largely because the
disease is no longer common.
Last month, Congress boosted the prospects for wider use of irradiation
technology by ordering a change in FDA labeling rules. Foods that have
been irradiated will no longer need to be identified as such in type that is
larger than the list of ingredients on labels. The willingness of the FDA's
Dr. Friedman to vouch for the safety and effectiveness of irradiation should
help as well.
Irradiation, he said, "has been shown to significantly reduce bacterial
contamination" without changing the fundamental properties of meat or
making it radioactive. Dr. Friedman brushed aside a main concern of Food
& Water activist Michael Colby, saying, "At the doses we've approved for
frozen and fresh meat, nutritional changes are minuscule."
There have been several major meat recalls in recent months -- including
the Hudson Foods Inc. recall of 25 million pounds of ground beef feared
tainted with a potential deadly strain of E. coli bacteria. Widespread
salmonella contamination in poultry has also raised concern. So some
industry leaders say that irradiation is looking better as a weapon in the
fight against salmonella and other pathogens that kill an estimated 9,000
Americans each year and sicken millions more.
"This isn't a silver bullet," cautioned Mr. Masefield of Isomedix. "This
doesn't mean you can have very poor housekeeping at your plant and then
clean up at the end. It's additional means for controlling pathogens."
The cost of irradiation could slow consumer acceptance, said Caroline
Smith DeWaal, spokeswoman for the Center for Science in the Public
Interest. Agriculture Department economists estimate that irradiated meat
could cost two cents to five cents more per pound than regular meat,
assuming widespread use of the technology. Consumers might discern a
taste difference as well, she said.
--Rekhu Balu contributed to this article.
Copyright c 1997 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
|
