Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

market-farming - Re: NPR/food irradiation

market-farming AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Market Farming

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "five springs farm" <fsfarm AT mufn.org>
  • To: "market farming" <market-farming AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: NPR/food irradiation
  • Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 12:08:19 -0400


>I have searched diligently & have found no factual evidence anywhere of
what you stated.

I will not say that I have searched diligently, but a quick look around the
internet info on irradiation does not *seem* to address this apparently new
(unless NPR has completely misled, which I do not expect from them, but do
not discount as possible, either) "electron" technology. Their point was the
lack of radioactive isotopes being involved, so that there is no radioactive
material on the site and no radioactive residual possible on the food. I
agree that the underlying issue is cleaner and more sanitary processing as
well as better conditions for livestock. On the other hand, if this is
indeed a new process that does not involve radioactive material I think we
should not be dismissing it out of hand. Nor accepting it at face value. BUT
if it is radiation in another form or a back door to public acceptance of a
clearly (if it is irradiation in sheep's clothing) inappropriate process
then we need to know that (and I do mean *know*, not suspect or believe or
wish).

Jim and Jo
The Community Farm Newsletter
http://www.mufn.org/public/tcf
----- Original Message -----
From: Dave Bennett <dbennett AT micoks.net>
To: market farming <market-farming AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2000 7:48 AM
Subject: Re: NPR/food irradiation


> I don't have to "ask myself" about this, I too am concerned. What I asked
was for your sources for your posting of a statement that appeared to be
presented as a fact. I have searched diligently & have found no factual
evidence anywhere of what you stated. Ev
> en from organizations who most would like it to be true. Your reply below
is very typical of propogandists on both sides: make outrageous statement
and when asked to back it up try to discourse on surrounding non-issues.
>
> The references you cite also cannot provide any more scientific proof than
you.
>
> Leigh Hauter <lh AT pressroom.com> wrote:
> __________
> >As usual, Dave, I don't think you know what you are talking about. But
> >maybe that's a place for private communications.
> >
> >Ask yourself, who is funding food irradiation? Look at the absence of
> >testing on its health effects. What vision of a food delivery system
does
> >it fit into? Why have the meat inspectors union come out against it?
> >There are a lot of unanswered questions before this corporate technology
is
> >rammed into our food system.
> >
> >For more information why don't you look at Public Citzen's web site.
> >Particularly Critical Mass Energy Project. From there I can give you
other
> >places to look.
> >
> >---
> >You are currently subscribed to market-farming as: dbennett AT micoks.net
> >To unsubscribe send a blank email to
$subst('Email.Unsub')
> >To subscribe send email to lyris AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
> >with message text containing: subscribe market-farming
> >
> >
>
>
> Dave
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to market-farming as: fsfarm AT mufn.org
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
$subst('Email.Unsub')
> To subscribe send email to lyris AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
> with message text containing: subscribe market-farming
>
>






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page