|
|
|
|
.
.
.
.
***To Whom It May Concern,
I am against irradiation of spinach and lettuce! Here are some of the problems I
have with it:
The formation of free radicals, which can set off chain reactions in the body that
destroy antioxidants, tear apart cell membranes, and make the body more susceptible to cancer, diabetes, heart disease, liver damage, muscular breakdown and other serious problems.
-Serious health problems in laboratory testing, including, including premature
death, fatal internal bleeding, cancer, stillbirths and other reproductive problems, mutations and other genetic damage, organ malfunctions, stunted growth and vitamin deficiencies.
-The creating mutant forms of dangerous bacteria, like E. coli and Salmonella
-Nutrient loss in foods, including the destruction of vitamins and essential fatty
acids.
-The formation of carcinogenic chemicals, like benzene and toluene.
-While irradiated lettuce and spinach must be labeled in supermarkets, there are
currently no labeling requirements for restaurants serving irradiated produce or other items. Patrons and clients may consume irradiated lettuce and spinach in the future without their knowledge, nor consent.
-There are many alternatives to irradiation. Visit OCA's Irradiation Alternatives
page for more information Sincerely, Grace Hill
***Please clean up industrial feed lots rather than irradiating our food! Irradiating lettuce, spinach and other foods will further harm us. Besides destroying nutrients, it creates toxic free radicals and forms carcinogens. Restaurants, schools, hospitals and nursing homes are not required to label the irradiated food they serve. So consumers really don't stand much of a chance to make an informed choice. Thank you.
***Do not irradiate the food supply! What we should do, as a population, is work to multiply our good bacteria so that when the uncommon case of E.coli comes into contact with our immune system, it can be easily defeated. This is done by increasing non-irradiated produce in the diet among other measures. By irradiating the food supply, all beneficial enzymes and beneficial bacteria will be killed. Sterilization is NOT the answer as it will breed to super bugs and a chronic, unhealthy US population. Please reconsider. Thanks, Charles H. Town Age 22
The FDA and USDA are like George Bush...they won't listen to anyone!
***Rather than dealing with the problems inherent in a disease-ridden factory-farmed food system, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced in mid-
September it will allow the irradiation of lettuce and spinach. Food irradiation is
the controversial practice of bombarding food with high levels of x-rays (ionizing
radiation) in order to destroy disease causing pathogens. Unfortunately, in the
process of irradiation, other hazards arise, like the creation of toxic free radicals, vitamin and nutrient loss, and the formation of carcinogenic chemicals.
While irradiated lettuce and spinach must be labeled in supermarkets, there are
currently no labeling requirements whatsoever for restaurants, schools, hospitals,
or nursing homes serving irradiated produce or other nuked foods such as beef.
Please address how to clean up industrial feedlots instead of irradiating our food.
***Allowing irradiation of lettuce and spinach is an irrational response to a
continuing problem of mass-farming and lax health regulation and inspection.
The reason that we have seen an increase in the outbreak of salmonella and e.
coli is that the farms and distribution centers are filthy. Irradiation is not
a panacea for food-borne illness. It is a overly simplistic bandage to offer an
false level of confidence in the public sector.
Irradiation is not a safe solution. Not only do we see vitamin loss and the
loss of essential fatty acids in irradiated foods, there is a real possibility
of promoting a mutation of the strains of e. coli and other food-borne
microorganisms. Additionally, concerns over the formation of free radicals,
which can set off chain reactions in the body destroying antioxidants, tearing
apart cell membranes, and making the body more susceptible to cancer, diabetes,
heart disease, liver damage, muscular breakdown etc. Laboratory testing of
irradiation has shown serious health concerns, including, including premature
death, fatal internal bleeding, cancer, stillbirths and other reproductive
problems, mutations and other genetic damage, organ malfunctions, stunted
growth and vitamin deficiencies.
I insist that the public not be misled and ill-informed. While simple labeling in the grocery may allow a consumer to make his own choice about the use or irradiated food, this does not prevent restaurants, school lunchrooms, hospitals, etc. from serving unknowing consumers foods that have been irradiated. Given the known and potential health concerns, this is hardly and acceptable solution.
*** I am absolutely horrified about the decision made by the FDA to start irradiating food such as spinach and other leafy greens. GMA's chief science officer Robert Brackett stated: "It's one big step forward in improving the safety of fresh produce," he added.
I DISAGREE in the strongest possible language! Not only is using radiation on
food unsafe, the produce is no longer 'fresh.' I am taking every measure to
discover which companies are using this techniques, such as Dole, and organizing
widespread boycotts. This measure is absolutely unacceptable, the American people
will never stand for it.
*** If our food supply was treated and handled properly in the first place there would be no need to irradiate any of it. I'm totally apposed to this practice and won't purchase anything unless I know for sure it hasn't been irradiated.
*** My family is unhappy with the choice that the FDA has made on the use of irradiation on lettuce and spinach. We would like to have the use of irradiation be banned on any food, especially lettuce and spinach. We feel that we should not be treated as unintelligent beings. There is evidence that shows that irradiation destroys vitamins and phytonutrients in the food being irradiated.
Irradiating food makes food more dangerous, not safer. Some major concerns with
food irradiation include:
-The formation of free radicals, which can set off chain reactions in the body
that destroy antioxidants, tear apart cell membranes, and make the body more
susceptible to cancer, diabetes, heart disease, liver damage, muscular breakdown
and other serious problems.
-Serious health problems in laboratory testing, including, including premature
death, fatal internal bleeding, cancer, stillbirths and other reproductive
problems, mutations and other genetic damage, organ malfunctions, stunted
growth and vitamin deficiencies.
-The creating mutant forms of dangerous bacteria, like E. coli and Salmonella
-Nutrient loss in foods, including the destruction of vitamins and essential
fatty acids.
-The formation of carcinogenic chemicals, like benzene and toluene.
-While irradiated lettuce and spinach must be labeled in supermarkets, there are
currently no labeling requirements for restaurants serving irradiated produce or
other items. Patrons and clients may consume irradiated lettuce and spinach in
the future without their knowledge, nor consent.
-There are many alternatives to irradiation.
The concern over keeping food safe from bacteria should be resolved at the
source of contamination. The lettuce and spinach do not carry E.Coli on their
own. They are contaminated by external sources such as cattle or water
contaminated by the cattle.
The FDA needs to find a less dangerous way to prevent the contamination of
lettuce and spinach from E.Coli.
Do people in the FDA or other government associations want their children or
their relatives to have compromised immune system? The ones who impose
irradiation may find themselves with their families at risk to the dangers that
irradiation causes. Please take more care in your decisions for you may be the
one who develops cancer or other diseases that which this irradiation causes.
Understand that the folks who want this to be, may be the first to be affected.
"What goes around comes around."
Do you know what you are eating? Is is really healthy? Be wise, not just clever.
Some fruits and vegetables may be irradiated. The US government as
well as 40 other countries has approved food irradiation for several
types of food.
Please see the following resources:
Food Irradiation Backgrounder - Food Marketing Institute (FMI)
Food Irradiation Backgrounder
To see which Food is being irradiated in the United States please go to:
Center for Disease Control (CDC)
Foods Irradiated in the US
Tara Smith, R.D.
Food Safety Information Specialist
USDA National Agricultural Library
10301 Baltimore Ave.
Beltsville, MD 20832
tsmith@nal.usda.gov
301-504-5515
Food Safety rio at USDA
Food Safety nal at USDA
The process passes food quickly through a radiation field--typically gamma rays produced from radioactive cobalt-60. The Atomic Energy Commission (now part of the U.S. Department of Energy) explored food irradiation as part of President Eisenhower's "Atoms for Peace" program. Food not Bombs. Approval Year Food Dose Purpose 1963 Wheat flour 0.2-0.5 kGy Control of mold 1964 White potatoes 0.05-0.15 kGy Inhibit sprouting 1986 Pork 0.3-1.0 kGy Kill Trichina parasites 1986 Fruit and vegetables 1.0 kGy Insect control, increase shelf life 1986 Herbs and spices 30 kGy Sterilization 1990 - FDA Poultry 3 kGy Bacterial pathogen reduction 1992 - USDA Poultry 1.5-3.0 kGy Bacterial pathogen reduction 1997 - FDA Meat 4.5 kGy Bacterial pathogen reduction 1999 - USDA (pending)Meat 4.5 kGy Bacterial pathogen reduction FDA approved the first use of irradiation on a food product in 1963 when it allowed radiation-treated wheat and wheat flour to be marketed. In approving a use of radiation, FDA sets the maximum radiation dose the product can be exposed to, measured in units called kiloGray (kGy). The following is a list of all approved uses of radiation on foods to date, the purpose for irradiating them, and the radiation dose allowed. Food Approved Use Dose Spices and dry vegetable seasoning, decontaminates and controls insects and microorganisms 30 kGy Dry or dehydrated enzyme preparations controls insects and microorganisms 10 kGy All foods controls insects 1 kGy Fresh foods delays maturation 1 kGy Poultry controls disease-causing microorganisms 3 kGy Red meat (such as beef, lamb and pork) controls spoilage and disease-causing microorganisms 4.5 kGy (fresh), 7 kGy (frozen) Are consumers ready to buy irradiated foods? Many consumers are quite willing to buy irradiated foods. This is particularly true if the purpose of the irradiation is clearly indicated. Consumers are interested in a process that eliminates harmful microbes from the food and reduce the risk of foodborne disease. In test marketing of specific irradiated foods, consumers have shown that they are willing to buy them. Typically at least half will buy the irradiated food, if given a choice between irradiated product and the same product non- irradiated. If consumers are first educated about what irradiation is and why it is done, approximately 80% will buy the product in these marketing tests.
Not According To My Research!
Many consumers are OPPOSED to buying irradiated foods.
This is particularly true if the dangers of irradiation are clearly indicated.
Consumers are concerned about a process that poisons the food and reduces
nutrition. In test marketing of irradiated foods, consumers have shown
they are opposed to buying foods treated with irradiation and want them clearly labeled so they can avoid buying. Typically, at least 97% will avoid buying
irradiated foods if given a choice between irradiated products and
the same product naturally produced. If consumers are first educated about
what irradiation is and how dangerous it is, approximately 99% will avoid
irradiated products in marketing tests.
The only way the FDA, USDA and Grocery Manufacturers Association can market
irradiated foods is through Deception, by not labeling the products so consumers won't boycott and complain. Corruption at the highest levels of government!
The reason irradiation labels act as warning labels is because consumers are opposed to irradiated foods! Consumers are motivated to buy foods labeled organic because they are trying to avoid irradiated foods and genetically engineered foods. Consumers want to eat natural and healthy and avoid irradiated poison food and genetically engineered poison food.
***It is sad and sickening to hear that the US Federal Government has approved the use of irradiation on fresh vegetables sold to consumers. As a health and nutrition counselor, I fully understand the magnitude of this action and I passionately oppose it. As a private individual, I am completely outraged. Over the last several years, I have watched as our freedoms are rapidly evaporating in
this country. I can't even sing the national anthem any longer as the words no
longer ring true. Our Founding Fathers would be disgusted...
*** While irradiation may cut down the incidence of food-borne pathogens, you are
approaching the issue symptomatically, when you should be approaching the issue
at its source. The problem resides exclusively in industrial farming and
production methods. Smaller farms can control quality without resorting to
irradiation. Your stance smacks of being minions of corporate producers, the
ones that should be burdened with controlling the quality of their food. But
instead, you allow oversized farms to continue what is clearly a failing model
of healthy food production from the soil through to the grocery store.
The actual solution is to move back toward a system that rewards small farms
over industrial operations. When the farmer knows their customer and has to
look them in the eye, they don't dare take shortcuts or engage in risky farming practices.
I hope at the very least that the cost of the new system is placed squarely on
the shoulders of the businesses that require such measures and not on the
taxpayer, who is simply the victim of industrial food operations and their
inability to control for quality.
***The use of Ionizing Radiation for the Control of Food-Borne Pathogens and Infectious Protozoa is a bandaid for the larger problem that is the American Factory Farming Industry. The real danger for the public is the insidious practices of these agro-conglomerates. Many FDA and USDA rules hurt small farmers, who, for example, can no longer butcher their own meat because of regulations in place as a result of meat-processing abuses committed by the largest producers.
Big business loathes regulations and would like to have the market decide the
demand for irradiated vegetables, provided it can deceive people about how food is
produced. Currently there's the pesky FDA rule stating that irradiated food must
be labeled as such. And there's something about the line "treated with radiation"
that spooks us crazy consumers.
So the next big battle for agro-conglomerates is to change "irradiation" to the
euphemism "cold pasteurization." The goal is to slip this by consumers until cold
pasteur... er, I mean bombarding with ionizing gamma radiation ... becomes
standard practice for most vegetables.
If the FDA is actually going to let this be done to our food-reducing it's nutritional value-then the least it can do is ensure that consumers are properly educated on the subject and are given a clear choice with proper labeling.
***
Before even considering food safety, irradiation is irresponsible and
unnecessary when we already have nuclear waste with a half-life of thousands of
years sitting for decades at sites that were not designed for long-term storage;
and the government still has not taken any effective action to solve this problem.
As well, the FDA seems to play it fast and loose with food additives that have
not been proven safe.l believe the burden should be on the irradiation
proponents to prove the technology is safe; the burden should not be on
consumers or their representatives to prove it unsafe. Having worked at a
nuclear power plant, I know how dangerous nuclear material is, and I believe it
is unsafe.
Closer supervision of factory farms and large-scale agriculture practices --
including traceability of produce, which certain works for the organics sector
-- would be a more sensible approach to tracking our food supply and dealing
with sources of contamination.
The expensive training, staffing and safety procedures required for the use of
nuclear materials, plus the addition of more nuclear waste to our ever-expanding
stockpile of such hazardous materials, is neither cost-effective nor safe.
And, should the process be approved without labeling, it would only serve as a
testament to the FDA subservience to big agribusiness.
As an agency that has officially labeled high fructose corn syrup as "natural,"
the FDA certainly has rendered its official opinions suspect, so why should
citizens (the people you are supposed to work for) believe or trust your
opinions and policies? And what about the recall of all of those FDA approved
drugs?
 . . . . .The FDA |
.
.
Consider this: People have been eating pretty safely without irradiation for as
long as there have been people; otherwise there wouldn't be so many of us.
Remember, you are supposed to protect citizens, not corporations.
*** This is nuts. Why do you have to irradiate food, just make the producers test
their products and maintain their farms. Science is not the answer in this case, good agricultural practices are!
*** Mississippi Market is a consumer-owned co-op with nearly 30 years of experience in the natural foods industry. Our members, shoppers, and staff value truly sustainable foods, considering everything from how the farm workers were treated to how the soil was prepared for planting.
The proposed amendment, Docket #FDA-1999-F-2405, provides a quick fix for
killing bacteria in lettuce and spinach but does nothing to address the real
problems facing our food supply.
Irradiating fresh greens is merely applying a band-aid to the problems in our food
supply. Instead the focus should be on getting large scale agriculture under
control and reducing our reliance on unsustainable products like petroleum based
pesticides and fertilizers. By encouraging smaller farms with smaller distribution
chains, we reduce the risk of crop contamination and have a traceable food
supply.
We encourage the FDA to avoid this risky, nutrient-leaching radiation treatment on
our leafy greens. Instead, let us look to the source of contamination.
***
We represent 14,000 consumers in Madison, WI who collectively would not
purchase foods which have been irradiated. Despite the unfortunate occurrences of
previous outbreaks, we do not support the FDA's recent endorsement to allow
irradiation of spinach and lettuce as a means to correct irresponsible
growing/handling practices.
***We represent people with cancer. Most people with cancer go through therapy that includes radiotherapy. They have been exposed to as much radiation as is humanly possible to sustain. Therefore the trend toward irradiating food products to protect us, will not be helpful to those who have been treated conventionally for cancer.
Additionally we, as consumers, believe that the best way to fight bacteria is to
have better safety methods at the farm level. It is certainly possible to farm in a
healthful way - large factory farms do not practice 'safe farming' but they should be required to do so.
We ask that you focus your efforts toward safe farming and not irradiation.
But if you do irradiate food, we ask that ALL products be clearly labeled in a way
that consumers will IMMEDIATELY recognize. Thank you for your consideration of our comments. Ann Fonfa, President www.annieappleseedproject.org
***I am disappointed with the low interest the FDA takes on the food the Americans consume. I am repeatably reviewing documents that state how foods are harmful to our health yet the FDA is approving them as "safe". Bottom line, if we believed the FDA to be interested in our health we would all be affected by the food we eat in some manner.
There are three different methods used to irradiate foods, and while one of them does involve the use of nuclear radiation, none of them render the food itself radioactive. Each method uses an energy source, either gamma rays, x-rays or electron beams, to produce high frequency energy that breaks the chemical bonds in cells that are essential for cell growth and reproduction.
No one really knows for sure if there is any effects using this type of treatment, because there haven't been any studies conducted on people who have eaten irradiated foods over a long period of time. At the very least, irradiated foods are slightly less nutritious, since the process destroys nutrients such as thiamine (an essential B vitamin) and also vitamin C. The U.S. Department of Agriculture claims that this loss is insignificant, which isn't surprising since it's the same position they've taken regarding the nutritional decline of our food supply overall.
Among the concerns voiced by George Tritsch, research professor emeritus at the Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, N.Y., and others is that bombarding foods with gamma rays creates free radicals, the unstable molecular fragments that go about our bodies crashing into cells as they search for an unimpaired molecule to render them stable again. In addition, certain fats subjected to irradiation produce potentially carcinogenic byproducts, such as formaldehyde and benzene, although many scientists dismiss this concern because similar compounds are created during ordinary cooking processes.
***We as consumers should be aware of what we are putting into our bodies; therefore, if a food is irradiated, it must be labeled as "irradiated" and not a name that replaces that.
***
Request to Allow Irradiation:
Reference 22 - Letter From Petitioner for FAP 9M4697 dated July 23, 2007
Notification Notification
Agency: FDA Document Type: SUPPORTING & RELATED MATERIALS Comments Due:
Docket ID: FDA-1999-F-2405 Document ID: FDA-1999-F-2405-0006.2
Date Posted: Aug 22, 2008
View this Document: View as format pdf View more Documents in this Docket
Reference 33 - Memorandum for FAP 9M4697 dated July 16, 2008
Notification Notification
Agency: FDA Document Type: SUPPORTING & RELATED MATERIALS Comments Due:
Docket ID: FDA-1999-F-2405 Document ID: FDA-1999-F-2405-0007.1
Date Posted: Aug 22, 2008
View this Document: View as format pdf View more Documents in this Docket
Reference 47 - "Preliminay FoodNet Data on the Incidence of Infection with Pathogens...MMWR/CDC
Notification Notification
Agency: FDA Document Type: SUPPORTING & RELATED MATERIALS Comments Due:
Docket ID: FDA-1999-F-2405 Document ID: FDA-1999-F-2405-0007.2
Date Posted: Aug 22, 2008
View this Document: View as format pdf | View more Documents in this Docket
Public Citizen - Supplement
Notification Notification
Agency: FDA Document Type: OTHER Comments Due:
Docket ID: FDA-1999-F-2405 Document ID: FDA-1999-F-2405-0011
Date Posted: Aug 22, 2008
View this Document: View as format pdf View more Documents in this Docket
Reference 23 - Memorandum to the File for FAP 4M4428 dated November 18, 1997
Notification Notification
Agency: FDA Document Type: SUPPORTING & RELATED MATERIALS Comments Due:
Docket ID: FDA-1999-F-2405 Document ID: FDA-1999-F-2405-0006.3
Date Posted: Aug 22, 2008
View this Document: View as format pdf | View more Documents in this Docket
Reference 10 - Memorandum for FAP 9M4697 dated August 10, 2001
Notification Notification
Agency: FDA Document Type: SUPPORTING & RELATED MATERIALS Comments Due:
Docket ID: FDA-1999-F-2405 Document ID: FDA-1999-F-2405-0006.1
Date Posted: Aug 22, 2008
View this Document: View as format pdf View more Documents in this Docket
Reference 25- Memorandum for FAP 9M4697 dated December 21, 2001
Notification Notification
Agency: FDA Document Type: SUPPORTING & RELATED MATERIALS Comments Due:
Docket ID: FDA-1999-F-2405 Document ID: FDA-1999-F-2405-0006.4
Date Posted: Aug 22, 2008
View this Document: View as format pdf View more Documents in this Docket
Feeding studies of irradiated food
Reference 26 - Memorandum to the File for FAP 9M4697 dated June 20, 2008
Notification Notification
Agency: FDA Document Type: SUPPORTING & RELATED MATERIALS Comments Due:
Docket ID: FDA-1999-F-2405 Document ID: FDA-1999-F-2405-0006.5
Date Posted: Aug 22, 2008
View this Document: View as format pdf View more Documents in this Docket
Reference 19 - Memorandum for FAP 9M4697 dated February 20, 2008 [FDA-1999-F-2405-0007]
Notification Notification
Agency: FDA Document Type: SUPPORTING & RELATED MATERIALS Comments Due:
Docket ID: FDA-1999-F-2405 Document ID: FDA-1999-F-2405-0009
Date Posted: Aug 22, 2008
View this Document: View as format pdf View more Documents in this Docket<
***Consumer Comments on Food Irradiation
bravenet.com
