A continuation of what is in our food: Irradiated food

Hello its ProTo, again, i can see that food additives and chemicals discusion is on the up again, so i thought i would make a continuation of my project 'what is really in our food ?'. The topic of intrest now is Irradiated food.

Irradiated food:

Wikipedia's definition of Irradiated food is:

Food irradiation is the process of exposing food to ionizing radiation in order to destroy microorganisms, bacteria, viruses, or insects that might be present in the food. Further applications include sprout inhibition, delay of ripening, increase of juice yield, and improvement of re-hydration. Irradiation is a more general term of deliberate exposure of materials to radiation to achieve a technical goal.

So from that little sniipit weve learnt that irradiated food is food that has been exposed (on perpose) to ionizing radiation to a point where it kills 'all' microrganisms, bacteria and viruses. But isnt radiation bad for us ? So couldnt exposing our food to radiation be a problem ?

To put it simply, it is.

Irradiated food has caused a myriad of health problems in laboratory animals (and people in a few studies), including chromosomal damage, immune and reproductive problems, kidney damage, tumors, internal bleeding, low birth weight, and nutritional muscular dystrophy.

So there telling us that it effects animals, and some humans very much in a bad way. But the Food Standards Agency say it good.

Decades of research worldwide have shown that irradiation of food is a safe and effective way to kill bacteria in foods and extend its shelf life.

So one person is saying it is bad for us, and another is saying its fine. So should we trust the FSA ? In MY opinion, not a chance, the FSA has let EVERY bad chemical into our food. There record on protecting us is terrible. In surprised that there still allowed to operate. But there is a 3rd party who in my opinion is the most honest and they say.

The long-term health consequences of eating irradiated food are still unknown.

Atlast an honest group, so now we know that it is either bad or unknown, so the FSA doesnt know if its good or bad, theyve just saw the money and carryed on. So no proof to say that it is good, but alot saying its bad.

Irradiation can alter the food as well, it can modify tatse, texture, odor and coulor. If you expose an egg to 30% of the radiation that the FSA does you loose over 24% of the vitamin A held in it, so the vitamins are getting killed in this process. But the FACS says that this is no more than what would be lost due to canning and packaging.

There may be a reduction in the vitamin content during the process but this would be no worse than the loss during canning, drying, freezing or cooking. Spices are the food products that are the most commonly irradiated and because they are eaten in small quantities, any loss of vitamins would not be meaningful.

So there 'may' be a reduction in vitamins ? There is definatly a reduction, if 100% of all eggs exposed to this are loosing 24% of there Vitamin A, i call that as more than a 'may' be lost, that is a WILL be lost.

Once again we are being lied to and getting poisoned.Ill leave you with a quote from a great site where the link is below.

For consumers, the risks involved with food irradiation far outweigh any benefits. And even though the process might kill some harmful bacteria, the food can be easily re-infected after irraditation, either while being shipped, sold or prepared by the consumer.

This is a first carry on post of many from the what is in our food project that can be found HERE.

I hope you enjoyed reading this thread, and im sure my others will get better, aint typed one up in a little while. Stay Well ATS.

ProTo Fire Fox - Pain in the neck for food companys.

Link to wiki definition: Link
Link to first Health problem quote: Link
Link to FSA quote: Link
Link to honest group quote: Link
Link to 'may be lost' quote: Link

So who should we trust over what's safe? If we shouldn't trust "a series of expert committees, involving the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Consultative Group on Food Irradiation (ICGFI), as well as the FDA " (wiki) then who should we trust?

Hello Jim_w the bad thing is there is no one that we can trust, you can try to eat organic but some organic farmers have been caught putting chemicals in there food and claiming that there organic. I would say eat organic for the time being and wait 5-10 years and we should know for sure what we can and carnt eat by a proper authority.

But irradiation offers huge benefits, so if it's safe then it's a very good thing - it makes our food cheaper and allows us to eat a wider range of foods safely. You seem to be suggesting that we never trust any new technology at all, but if we do that then where do we stop? There's no way that everyone can eat the amount they want without using some modern technology like fertilizers, pesticides and so on.