FDA all but forcing irradiation? Check it out

I guess this means you'll never use a MICROWAVE oven to heat things either?
I hope there's no LIGHT in your basement, since that is "radiation" too.

__________________
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Mom's were cleaner hands down. Besides, bugs add a little protein.

Danuaus do you have a quote for that? Everything I have seen shows they are saying it depletes the nutritional value like any other processing. Even the quotes from the sites on this very thread say that.

__________________
www.salmonslayer-simplelife.blogspot.com

salmonslayer, GoldCityMuse's post #21 in this thread has the link.

Did I say anywhere it was the radiation that I had a problem with? Did I? The sun produces radiation, for cryin' out loud!

I have a problem with the govt messing up the food supply and telling us it makes no difference when their own studies prove the opposite.

salmonslayer, post 26 I put in some links, Steve L has a quote from the CDC in the post below that.

salmonslayer, this is from the link in post #21:
Yes. Irradiated foods are wholesome and nutritious. All known methods of food processing and even storing food at room temperature for a few hours after harvesting can lower the content of some nutrients, such as vitamins. At low doses of radiation, nutrient losses are either not measurable or, if they can be measured, are not significant. At the higher doses used to extend shelf-life or control harmful bacteria, nutritional losses are less than or about the same as cooking and freezing

I would have the say the thiamin levels are significantly reduced.

And I have yet to find any study of the nutritional levels of irradiated foods after they have been cooked. If anyone has a link to that info I sure would like to see it.

Here is your post -
Only one of your links was to an EPA web page (The third link - dated 2006).

The second doesn't mention either the EPA or nutrient levels in irradiated foods at all.

The first one (dated May 1, 2001) specifically states - Here is a link to a more recent (6/27/12) web page -
http://www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/sources/...diation_affect
So, your 'proof' of EPA's 'lies' is one older web site, where someone over simplified.

I'm done banging my head against a wall.

Danaus29, I didn't notice the above post of yours.

You do know, don't you, that the single largest source of ionizing radiation is RADON?

http://www.nj.gov/dep/rpp/llrw/download/fact03.pdf

Watcher, microwaves and cell phones emit NON-ionizing radiation. Not the same thing, at all.

Just to clarify, the quotes in my post #27 were from the links in Danaus29's post #26.

Danaus29, all I've done is read what you posted, and commented on it!

This has been going on since the early 50's that is 70 Years. And if ANY short or long term side effects were to take place they sure would be doing it now, and there isn;t any that can be in direct link to such things as this form of food preserving it for a longer shelve life. You still have to refrigerate, you still have to cook it to a proper temp and so on. It does Not Kill All the bad things that are present in food.

__________________
Oh my, dishes yet to wash and dry

See My Pictures at
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/0903/arabianknight/

This proces has been used since the 50's and around the world as well as in the USA, it is nothing new at all. Why is that some seem to think this is a all new process that has so many unknowns in it? It isn't and has been successfully used for many many years now in combating all sorts of food born nasties.
http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/...radiation.html

__________________
Oh my, dishes yet to wash and dry

See My Pictures at
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/0903/arabianknight/

My issue with this isnt the irradiated foods. It's the FDA forcing it's hand like all the gov't bureaus. This isnt something that should be forced on all producers. what doesn this do to the little guy? Are you folks even thinking about that?

The issue isn't how long they've been using this process, what countries do, or do not. It's not about fear. It's not really even about health. This is actually about big gov't pushing it's hand yet again to control the market. Look passed your noses.

__________________
“If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as a sorry state as the souls who live under tyranny." ~ Thomas Jefferson.

The consuming public demands safe food and must rely upon enforcement of regulations which guarantee it. Anyone who is against it is against the health and welfare of anyone not in the position to produce their own. Denying that is a perfect example of absolute "me first" selfishness. I care about the safety of what everyone else consumes, why should you not wish that I also be afforded the same?

Martin

The food grown by my neighbor who runs a truck farm doesnt need to be irradiated or be strapped down by all these uneccessary "food safety" regulations. People should get a choice. People should get a choise about this just like with GMOs end of story.

Why is this "same for everyone" mentality taking over? It will NEVER be the same for big ag farms vs little truck farms. Something like this would shut down farm to fork sales, farmers markets, and me, selling little boxes of produce to friends down the way. But please, let us be forced to irradiate everything in the name of safety. Bologna. Be responsible for yourself.

__________________
“If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as a sorry state as the souls who live under tyranny." ~ Thomas Jefferson.

Hahnnah, I respectfully disagree about it being a control issue. Regardless of how we may feel about the USDA (I'm not fan BTW), it is their job to seek ways of making food safer with all the recent (and large scale) illnesses and deaths due to fresh food contamination.

Granted there are better ways of doing that, but if you look it from the prespective of an easy, cheap, and mass manner, then irradicating food would make sense to someone in the business of seeking safer food means. Especially in view of the large number of studies showing it to be safe (or at least the USDA's belief that it is safe).

I tend to disagree with their solution to the problem, but from their perspective it makes absolute sense and would be a HUGE solution. It has nothing to do with control, rather about solutions -- which by the way, American's have been fussing and fuming about that they want safer food methods from the USDA.

__________________
"Challenges are what make life interesting -- overcoming them is what makes life meaningful."

Karen,

I understand what you are saying. Mass produced foods? Go ahead, nuke em'. Little market gardens? my box of veggies? Leave those alone. There have to be differences in the actions taken, ya know?

__________________
“If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as a sorry state as the souls who live under tyranny." ~ Thomas Jefferson.

Because American's won't pay the financial cost of producing food for that 'choice'; plus the small truck farmer has to abide by the same safety measures as commerical producers do. After all, if he sells to the general public -- he IS a commercial producer.

Food producers cannot afford to do half their products one way and half the other way without passing it on to the consumer. Most Americans simply can't afford to as food costs are through the roof as it is. Organic foods are not even affordable for most Americans; let alone foods produced with GMO, without GMO, with irradication, without irradication...etc., etc.

If American's want a choice, the simplest and most affordable choice is to grow their own food. That's the agenda we should be pushing, not fussing over how commercial food production is or isn't done. If people grow their own food, they automatically have a choice and it wouldn't matter whatsoever what commercial producers do or don't do.

The point being, we already DO have a choice; we just don't promote it enough. During WWII the 'Victory Garden' movement changed a nation and people ate well and better. It was a huge success until people got home from the war and got lazy and dependant on others to provide for their families.

__________________
"Challenges are what make life interesting -- overcoming them is what makes life meaningful."

Doesn't just happen to big companies but also local markets. The below link is very local and very recent. What does one tell the 3 people who got sick? Tough luck? Grow your own meat next time?

www.dailyunion.com/main.asp?SectionID=36&SubSectionID=110&ArticleID=1 3532

Martin