We need to seriously consider irradiating food. I support a clearly marked irradiated alternative for those of us who want to avoid these risks.
People are utterly terrified of even the mention of the word radiation. They freak out over radiation exposures that are less than spending a day at the beach. I say irradiate the food and don't tell them
Irradiating food? You've got to be kidding me. That would just kill anything nutritious in it. If you enjoy eating dead food then be my guest. Our food is already crap in this country, might as well add some spent plutonium to the mix. Honestly.
How about we actually enforce inspection laws on production plants, something that is currently lacking? The industrial food industry makes shortcuts galore and abuses antibiotics, and when the public gets sick from superbugs the government AND food industry acts like the reasons are isolated.
The problems are systemic. Profits take the priority to human health.
Irradiating food? You've got to be kidding me. That would just kill anything nutritious in it. If you enjoy eating dead food then be my guest. Our food is already crap in this country, might as well add some spent plutonium to the mix. Honestly.
How about we actually enforce inspection laws on production plants, something that is currently lacking? The industrial food industry makes shortcuts galore and abuses antibiotics, and when the public gets sick from superbugs the government AND food industry acts like the reasons are isolated.
The problems are systemic. Profits take the priority to human health.
A lot of our food is now genetically engineered in the US. I wonder if this coupled with the heavy use of pesticides and herbicides the engineering allows (to cut down on manpower needed to produce the foods) could be the reason for the increase in food-borne pathogens. Perhaps 'good' bacteria now being killed off by the chemicals was keeping the food-borne pathogens at bay or the non-genetically engineered plants had a natural resistance that has been lost.
Irradiating food? You've got to be kidding me. That would just kill anything nutritious in it.
Temporal said:If you enjoy eating dead food then be my guest. Our food is already crap in this country, might as well add some spent plutonium to the mix. Honestly.
Temporal[/quote said:How about we actually enforce inspection laws on production plants, something that is currently lacking? The industrial food industry makes shortcuts galore and abuses antibiotics, and when the public gets sick from superbugs the government AND food industry acts like the reasons are isolated.
Temporal said:The problems are systemic. Profits take the priority to human health.
Irradiating food? You've got to be kidding me. That would just kill anything nutritious in it. If you enjoy eating dead food then be my guest. Our food is already crap in this country, might as well add some spent plutonium to the mix. Honestly.
How about we actually enforce inspection laws on production plants, something that is currently lacking? The industrial food industry makes shortcuts galore and abuses antibiotics, and when the public gets sick from superbugs the government AND food industry acts like the reasons are isolated.
The problems are systemic. Profits take the priority to human health.
Monsanto has genetically engineered plants that can tolerate high levels of pesticides and of its primary herbicide product, Round-up. Being able to use Round up to kill off unwanted vegetation means it takes fewer farm workers to manually remove the weeds. Being able to use high levels of pesticides means less loss of product to insects and small animals so higher yields. Avoiding these chemicals and genetically-altered fruits and vegetables are the reason many people have switched to organic food - and why supermarkets now have whole sections devoted to organic products. Here is a link to a website that gives an understandable overview and seems to present a balanced view of both the pros and cons viewpoints on this technology : Genetically Modified Foods: Harmful or Helpful?What heavy use of pesticides and herbicides? Details?
I don't know about canned products. It seems to me that the canning process itself would kill any pathogenic bacteria so there would be no need for irradiation. However it is common practice nowadays to irradiate many fresh foods. There has been many studies done that show that irradiation doesn't significantly affect the nutritional content of foods. The one exception is thiamine (vitamin B1) and that is not affected enough to cause a deficiency.I don't remember where I heard this, but I thought some brands of canned foods had been being irradiated for years. Libby's products?
Monsanto has genetically engineered plants that can tolerate high levels of pesticides and of its primary herbicide product, Round-up. Being able to use Round up to kill off unwanted vegetation means it takes fewer farm workers to manually remove the weeds. Being able to use high levels of pesticides means less loss of product to insects and small animals so higher yields. Avoiding these chemicals and genetically-altered fruits and vegetables are the reason many people have switched to organic food - and why supermarkets now have whole sections devoted to organic products. Here is a link to a website that gives an understandable overview and seems to present a balanced view of both the pros and cons viewpoints on this technology : Genetically Modified Foods: Harmful or Helpful?
I don't know about canned products. It seems to me that the canning process itself would kill any pathogenic bacteria so there would be no need for irradiation. However it is common practice nowadays to irradiate many fresh foods. There has been many studies done that show that irradiation doesn't significantly affect the nutritional content of foods. The one exception is thiamine (vitamin B1) and that is not affected enough to cause a deficiency.
FYI
Any food that has this symbol on the packaging has been irradiated.
View attachment 67116316
Good catch. I rejected several more recent links because they were skewed to one side or other on this issue. I'll see if I can find some recent studies regardless of their position on GM foods.Your link's from 1999. Are there any legit studies since then?
Good catch. I rejected several more recent links because they were skewed to one side or other on this issue. I'll see if I can find some recent studies regardless of their position on GM foods.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?