RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Irradiation
Criticism and concerns about food irradiation
Concerns have been expressed by public interest groups and public health experts that irradiation, as a non-preventive measure, might disguise or otherwise divert attention away from poor working conditions, sanitation, and poor food-handling procedures that lead tocontamination in the first place.[65]
Consumer advocacy groups such as Public Citizen or Food and Water Watch maintain that the safety of irradiated food is not proven, in particular long-term studies are still lacking, and strongly oppose the use of the technology.[66][67]
Concerns and objections include the possibility that food irradiation might do any of the following:
- Mask spoiled food
- Discourage strict adherence to good manufacturing practices
- Preferentially kill "good" bacteria and encourage growth of "bad" bacteria
- Devitalize and denature irradiated food
- Impair flavor
- Not destroy bacterial toxins already present
- Cause chemical changes that are harmful to the consumer
- Be unnecessary in today's food system[68]
Processors of irradiated food are subject to all existing regulations, inspections, and potential penalties regarding plant safety and sanitation; including fines, recalls, and criminal prosecutions. But critics of the practice claim that a lack of regulatory oversight (such as regular food processing plant inspections) necessitates irradiation.[69]
While food irradiation can in some cases maintain the quality (i.e. general appearance and "inner" quality) of certain perishable food for a longer period of time, it cannot undo spoilage that occurred prior to irradiation. Irradiation cannot successfully be used to mask quality issues other than pathogens. As with heat pasteurization (for example, milk), processing by ionizing radiation can contribute to eliminate pathogen risks from solid food (example meat or lettuce).[68] For comparison, milk heat pasteurization is not being alleged to be a method "to cover up poor food quality"; consequently, food irradiation should not be accused to serve such criminal purposes. Under a HACCP-concept (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point) radiation processing can serve and contribute as an ultimate critical control point before the food reaches the consumer.
Opponents of food irradiation and consumer activists argue that the final proof is missing that irradiated food is "safe" (i.e. not unwholesome) and that the lack of long-term studies should be a further reason not to permit food irradiation.[70] Opponents also refer to a number of scientific publications reporting significant negative effects of irradiated food, for example
- Polyploidy in malnourished Indian children
- Increase of aflatoxin production by irradiated microorganisms
- Vitamin deficiencies at extremely high doses to the complete diet
- Non-vitamin effects at higher doses (free radicals?)
- Change in chronaxie in rats
However, those experiments could be either not verified in later experiments, could not be clearly attributed to the radiation effect, or could be attributed to an inappropriate design of the experiment etc.[62]