Comments on: Zapping your greens

By: Hampton Howell, Ph.D.

Hampton Howell, Ph.D. — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 17:54:47 +0000

I hear very intelligent concerns on both sides of this argument–but let's move from impassioned belief to sober accurate science.
Where's our science when we need it?
1. What ARE the most effective non-irradiation cleansers, between vinegar, Clorox, and hydrogen peroxide, and other candidates?
2. Can't we measure phytonutrient destruction after irradiation and microwaving? If not now, why not next week or next month???

By: Lee, Yorktown Virginia

Lee, Yorktown Virginia — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 13:41:22 +0000

It is not possible to have "radiation on top of your salad." It is possible to have radioactive contamination on your salad. My concern would be the containment of the radionuclides used to irradiate the food. If the food industry is not able to maintain clean food production, why would we expect them to be able to maintain uncompromised radionuclide containment in their irradiation equipment.

By: Jo

Jo — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 04:32:43 +0000

Fletch's response was spot-on! Irradiation alters the food! Follow the money trail and see who benefits from irradiation and check out the revolving door between the FDA and corporations. I have absolutely no respect for the FDA as it is an organization that is rife with conflict of interest and sham science. Attempts to irradiate food have fallen several times. Why is it that media outlets suddenly show all sorts of food contamination stories and then tell us that our super-hero remedy has arrived...irradiation? Money is in the equation. I just shake my head in dismay when I see how easily people give up their thinking caps when a fear story floats around. Do some independent research on stevia and FDA rulings, for example, and then decide if you trust the FDA has your best interests at heart.

By: Laine

Laine — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 01:30:32 +0000

I have some experience with radiation and I wouldnt recommend it for food sterilization. I eat fresh produce daily and have never had a problem. This is with the current food inspection methods in place. In my opinion, as long as consumers are purchasing quality produce and washing it properly then they should avoid any problems. Sure, we see bacterial outbreaks from time to time but perhaps those affected were pre-disposed to some other illness and had lowered immune systems. 200 people affected in 2006 out of 300 million total population is not significant and therefore doesnt warrant a change in produce screening methods. Especially not irradiation.

By: pat

pat — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:25:29 +0000

Just because the FDA says it is okay – that is supposed to make us feel better – like we trust the FDA!

By: Kraig Rasool

Kraig Rasool — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 18:20:11 +0000

The FDA's ruling and policies really are sooo outdated....Its like they
are still watching black and white television on a 25 inch console.
Their decision lacks quality and concern....I really believe that they
take into effect when they make a ruling on food safety they probably say to themselves.... "Well we might lose a few, but in the long run..."
And if the public would standup a little more and protest decisions that
they make we as a whole would have more say on what foods we eat
and the amount of anything added to make them more appealing and
healthier.

By: Judith

Judith — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:17:36 +0000

You use both words: "radiation" and "irradiation" in your article. Do they mean the same thing? If different, could you explain the difference?
The process sounds safe, according to the FDA, and I would prefer to eat processed spinach than spinach which might contain e-coli or salmonella.

By: Fletch

Fletch — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:03:40 +0000

Of course, the FDA says the irradiated food isn't altered by the radiation. This statement is an insult to the intelligence of anyone with a pulse. Why? Because if the radiation doesn't alter anything, then how can it kill e.coli and salmonella?

The whole point of the radiation is to kill living organisms. And it works by causing fatal damage to the tissues and DNA of those microorganisms. So guess what it does to the plants? Since radiation isn't selective, it also irradiates the plant fibers and tissues, causing DNA damage and the destruction of enzymes and phytochemicals.

Amazingly, the FDA claims this does not count as "altering" the food because these changes aren't visible.

If it weren't such a nutritional atrocity, it would be downright hilarious. DNA changes are not visible to the human eye, but they can result in serious health consequences. Just ask anyone born with two Y chromosomes.

Eat up, guinea pigs!
Of course, the radiation pushers will claim that nobody really knows whether irradiating the food kills just 1% of the phytochemicals or 99% (or something in between). And they don't know what the long-term effect is on human health, either. This is exactly my point: The irradiation of fresh produce is a dangerous experiment, and we've all been involuntarily recruited as guinea pigs.

I will be curious to see a serious scientific inquiry into the nutritional damage caused to fresh produce by irradiation. I also find it simply astonishing that this decision by the FDA has been made in the absence of such scientific studies. Much like it does with the pharmaceutical industry, the FDA prefers to poison the people first, and then figure out later just how much damage might have been caused.

I say when you're dealing with the food supply, you should err on the side of caution. We are talking about the health of the nation here. This is not a small matter. It should be treated with extreme caution, skepticism and scientific scrutiny. Instead, it is being addressed with a gung-ho attitude framed in mind games and enforced ignorance.

In other words, rather than figuring out whether food irradiation is actually safe, the FDA would rather simply pretend it is.

Welcome to Make Believe Land, where all your food is now safe and nutritious, courtesy of the FDA!

By: Tom

Tom — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:41:54 +0000

I would purchase meat and veggies irradiated over non-irradiated without hesitation. I'm curious why have such an adversion to this. There is no risk with respect to radioactive contamination. Those afraid of that should make an attempt to understand the technology before juming to conclusions.
Enforcement and improvement of food standards needs to be maintained, but this seems like a no brainer for helping to reduce the risk.
I'm interested in seeing some reference to the research behind the destruction of "phytonutrients". Nutrients cannot DIE, they are chemical compunds. I've never heard of Vitamin A, B...Riboflavin, etc. dieing.
My kooky mother-in-law won't use the microwave because she thinks it alters the chemical composition of the food.
1- It heats the food by exciting the water molecules (tuned to the rotational frequeny of water).
2- Cooking food period can alter aspects of differemt foods chemical composition (simple food science).

By: A. Riley

A. Riley — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:27:02 +0000

If you know the food has been Irradiated, do not eat it.