StORES Magazine - September 2007 - (Page L22) FOOD SAFETY Marked by Controversy Debate continues over policy of labeling irradiated food BY LIZ PARKS actions have taken up sides in the ongoing debate about whether the Food and Drug Administration should continue placing irradiation labels on some treated foods. F One school of thought reasons that labeling to identify all irradiated foods with the words “treated by” or “treated with” irradiation, along with the irradiation symbol (called a radura), should continue because it has not been conclusively proven that irradiated foods are safe and consumers have a right to know if a product has been irradiated. The other school argues that irradiation is a safe and efficient way to kill bacteria, but that the word “irradiation” frightens some people and might mislead them to believe that the process makes food radioactive. Food safety would be enhanced, proponents of a labeling change say, if the label were removed in those instances where the process has no discernible effect – “no material change on taste, texture, smell,” in the FDA’s words. Information about any nutritional changes would still appear on the FDA’s Nutrition label. Irradiation of food is a process in which food products are exposed to a controlled amount of radiant energy to kill harmful bacteria such as E. coli O157:H7, campylobacter and salmonella. The process also can control insects and parasites, reduce spoilage and inhibit ripening and sprouting. Since the shelf lives of irradiated foods are longer, there are operational efficiencies that, for food producers, distributors, retailers and restauraL22 STORES / SEPTEMBER 2007 “While pasteurization and irradiation have the same goals, they are not the same process. Calling irradiated foods ‘pasteurized’ is like saying that boiling and roasting are the same thing because they both cook foods.” — Urvashi Rangan, Consumers Union teurs, could reduce shrink and permit perishables to be transported over longer distances from potentially cheaper sources. FDA, USDA O.K. Because irradiation is considered an additive in the United States, however, it needs to be approved by the FDA and, in the case of meats and poultry, by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, as well. The FDA and USDA permit certain foods to be irradiated at specific dose levels; still pending before the FDA are industry requests to irradiate crustacean shellfish – including shrimp, crab and lobster – and ready-to-eat foods, such as deli meats, pre-bagged salads, frozen meals and baby food. The rule change, if implemented, could also allow a food producer or manufacturer to petition FDA to use, under appropriate circumstances, an alternate term for irradiation such as pasteurization. Last fall, the E. coli spinach outbreak brought renewed attention to the food irradiation debate, with advocates claiming that the potential for future outbreaks could be better controlled by using irradiation, and opponents arguing that irradiation is a dangerous quick fix, “a Band-Aid to cover up poor practices before the product even reaches the consumer,” as Joseph Mendelson, legal director for the Center for Food Safety (CFS), puts it. Irradiation opponents also argue that more attention should be focused on “addressing the unsanitary conditions of factory farms that cause many food-borne illnesses,” according to WWW.LPINFORMATION.COM http://WWW.LPINFORMATION.COM
For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.