ASK BONNIE for March 2000

Question:

I read you current newsletter with regard to irradited foods. There is no sufficient evidence that irradiated food is unsafe. What is the basis for your remarks?

Answer:

I have studied food irradiation for at least 12 years, beginning as a student in the School of Public Health at the University of Illinois. I have personally read dozens of pro (mostly industry produced) and con articles regarding this subject. The consensus of the research indicates that irradiation reduces food-borne illness and prolongs shelf life to some extent. The FDA says that although this causes some nutrient loss, it does not make foods radioactive. Critics say that the technology has not been adequately tested, and that the health and environmental hazards (especially storage, transport, and workers' exposure) far outweight the potential benefits. Proper food handling and hygiene, they say, are the best solutions to food-borne illness. There is also a concern that the process does not kill botulism, even though it kills the odorous bacteria whose bad smell is a warning sign of contamination. Evidence also points to a greater vulnerability to fungi and insects after irradiation. The mealy texture of many fruits produced by irradiation also makes them less palatable so that people may avoid eating them.

The best summary I have personally read regarding the scientific evidence related to food irradiation comes from my public health mentor, Samuel Epstein, Ph.D., M.D., professor of environmental medicine at the University of Illinois Medical and Public Health Schools. He has stated the following:

"Food irradiation was the brainchild of the Atomic Energy Commission's efforts during the Eisnehower administration to find practical uses for the flood of radioactive wastes from nuclear weapons. Claims of safety are unproven at best. High energy irradiation produces complex chemical changes in food with the formation of poorly characterized radiolytic products, including benzene. Radiolytic products kill bacteria, molds, and larvae, and thus prevent spoilage, a major attration to the purveyors of produce and poultry contaminated with salmonella and E. coli. However, concentrated extracts of irradiated food products have never been tested for cancer and other delayed adverse effects. The need for such studies is overdue, especially in light of numerous reports of chronic toxic effects in studies on test animals that were fed unextracted, whole irradiated food. The studies found reproductive damage in rodents and chromosomal damage in rodents, monkeys, and children. Also, a study in India discovered chromosomal abnormalities in malnourished children fed freshly irradiated wheat.

Irradiation also reduces levels of essential nutrients in food, especially vitamins A, C, E, and B- complex. A Japanese study found vitamin C content of potatoes was reduced by nearly 50 percent. The industry admits to this but suggests that the problem could be taken care of by taking vitamin supplements.

Another area of possible carcinogenicity deals with workers who will be exposed to cobalt-60 or cesium-137 and communities where such radioactive materials are transported and stored. In 1988, at a Decatur, Georgia plant that irradiated medical supplies, some steel rods corroded, exposing employees to radiation and contaminated twenty-five thousand gallons of water with radioactive isotopes.

Despite this evidence, the FDA aproved irradiation. This is consistent with revocation of the Delaney law which banned the deliberate contamination of food with any amount of carcinogenic chemicals...The problem of food borne illness would be better solved through the use of more government inspection and tighter and higher standards for animal care and processing".

How many other fiascos throughout history were declared completely safe until serious health problems arose? A few brought to mind:

- The medical community declared cigarette smoking perfectly safe.
- Original Coca-Cola contained a substantial amount of cocaine.
- Thalidomide was deemed safe for pregnant women until their babies were born without fingers, toes, arms, and legs.
- The use of antibiotics in animal feed is now being given a second look due to antibiotic resistant strains of salmonella, E. coli, and shigella and human immunity to the very antibiotics used in animal feed.
   
Our newsletter downplayed the irradiation issue. As an American citizen, I feel I have the right to avoid questionable toxins in my food. Much of the irradiated food labels will be hidden from my scrutiny, forcing me to buy only certified organic products. I shouldn't have to pay more money to eat safe food. Most of my clients feel the same way.

Have a happy, healthy day!

ASK BONNIE appears each month on www.nutritionalconcepts.com

© Copyright 1999 Nutritional Concepts, Inc.  All rights reserved. Reproduction of any page on this website in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.   Disclaimer: The information contained on this website is not intended as a substitute for medical advice nor is intended to diagnose, cure, mitigate, or treat any disease. For health problems relating to individual needs, consult your physician before adopting any suggestions made by the website.