Sanet Post, Bob MacGregor,
About Food Irradiation - Reply
January 20, 1997

Risk is a relative concept.

For example, how do the carcinogenic compounds produced during food irradiation compare to those produced during high-temperature cooking (like barbecuing or frying)?

Does irradiation destroy more food enzymes or vitamins than cooking does?

Is irradiation done to kill microorganisms that might be a health risk -- or specifically to de-activate enzymes that cause foods to degrade in storage? Or, for some other reason?

I've also always been a little leery of claims of "severe" risk of anything -- in this case, transport of nuclear materials. What experience is there with public exposure to radioactivity related to transportation of nuclear materials?

As for my prejudices:
My first choice is fresh food -- raw or cooked gently (though I have to confess to occasional barbecuing!)
My second is frozen food.
My third is commercially canned staples (vegetables) or dried foods (pasta, beans, etc.).
Irradiated food, if it were available here, would not be my first choice, the existing choices fill my needs pretty well.

Maybe food irradiation fills a need that justifies whatever additional risks there might be. My guess is that the greater concern is similar to use of rBST or genetically-engineered crops -- that is, will the consumer be afforded the choice, or will the resulting products be indistinguishable from currently-accepted products (ie, not labelled as having been produced or preserved in a different way)? This is a very real concern; it puts the burden of public safety squarely in the hands of government regulators and private food multiglomerates -- not the most reassuring place to put your trust, I think most sanetters will agree!

BOB