U.S. Seeks to Ease Irradiated Food Label

[seafan]

Source: AP

Tuesday April 3, 6:12 pm ET


WASHINGTON (AP) -- The government proposed Tuesday relaxing its rules on labeling of irradiated foods and suggested it may allow some products zapped with radiation to be called "pasteurized."
The Food and Drug Administration said the proposed rule would require companies to label irradiated food only when the radiation treatment causes a material change to the product. Examples includes changes to the taste, texture, smell or shelf life of a food, which would be flagged in the new labeling.

.....

The FDA also proposed letting companies use the term "pasteurized" to describe irradiated foods. To do so, they would have to show the FDA that the radiation kills germs as well as the pasteurization process does. Pasteurization typically involves heating a product to a high temperature and then cooling it rapidly.

In addition, the proposal would let companies petition the agency to use additional alternate terms other than "irradiated," something already allowed by the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 but that no firms have pursued, according to the FDA.

.....

A 1984 FDA proposal to allow irradiated foods to go label-free garnered the agency more than 5,000 comments. Two years later, it reversed course and published a final rule that requires the small number of FDA-regulated foods now treated with radiation to bear identifying labels, including the radiation symbol.

.....

Read more: http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070403/irradiated_food.html?.v=4

[rec_report]

1. K&R. n/t

[shain from kane]

2. Glutenize it.

[aquart]

3. Yeah, this is a great time to try that.

Have they had their sterile brains irradiated?

[AndyA]

4. This is great timing, isn't it?

Pets are dying. We've had tons of produce recalls. Peanut butter.

Yeah, let's relax the standards even more, as Ann Coulter says, everything is going "swimmingly."

[damntexdem]

5. I have no problem iwth eating irradiated foods -- but ...

EVERY consumer, including myself, has the right to know what has been done to the food.

[SpiralHawk]

6. Yes, it is absolutely a matter of free will, free choice

One would think that the republicons would be totally for labels, so consumers could make free will choices.

But no. That free will talk is just so much blather from republicon corporate propaganda catapulters.

"You vill eat der corporate industrial clone mutant chemicalized irradiated food product dietary units, or ve vill show you proles ve haff ways of dealing with you. So shut up, sit down, and open your ugly gobs."

- Korporate Republicon Profiteers

I hope any visiting republicons won't get OVEREXCITED
by this image of BRAVE NEW FOOD. BUT THEN AGAIN, WE KNOW HOW
THEY ARE ABOUT PHALLIC IMAGERY

[rec_report]

7. Key members of the Bush regime should be subjected to the process, since...

it's 'harmless' and not worthy of a 'label.'

:eyes:

[crikkett]

11. Have you seen the Bush Family cookbook?

one of the favorite recipes is canned vegetables in mayonnaise.

Oh, you meant they should be irradiated not eat irradiated.

Is that nice?

[Robbien]

8. Who has the final say on this proposed rule? The FDA?

Since a lobbyist heads up the FDA it appears the new rule is a sure bet.

So much damage done. Don't these guys realize they have to eat this junk too?

[seafan]

9. More from the article:

.....

The FDA posted the proposed revisions to its rules on irradiated foods on its Web site Tuesday, a day before they were to be published in the Federal Register. The FDA is publishing the proposal as required by the 2002 law.

FDA will accept public comments on the proposal for 90 days. A consumer group immediately urged the FDA to drop the idea.

"This move by FDA would deny consumers clear information about whether they are buying food that has been exposed to high doses of ionizing radiation," Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch, said in a statement.

.....

The proposed rule would apply only to foods regulated by the FDA. However, if and when the rule is finalized, the Department of Agriculture could undergo a similar process to change the irradiation labeling requirements for the foods it regulates, including meat and poultry, said Amanda Eamich, a spokeswoman for USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service.

.....

Wonder if Bush's FDA considers a web site's mention to be adequate notification about the "public comment period?"

[davidwparker]

10. I prefer my non-irradiated food lable, thank you. Like Frontier's

non-irradiated herbs that I purchased the last time I went to the store.

I hate this mass-market, global economy, NAFTA-WTO, multi-national corporation BS. It's like you gotta try to find a cave to hid in to escape it.

[crikkett]

12. what are current labeling laws? what does the label look like?

Inquiring minds want to know.

[seafan]

13. Label here

More info on food irradiation:

http://www.hi-tm.com/Documents/Irrad.html

[crikkett]

16. thank you very much.

[Tesha]

14. Here's a "Radura"; almost cute, isn't it?

Here's a "Radura"; almost cute, isn't it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radura



Tesha

[crikkett]

17. radura reminds me of soylent green. thanks.

wow.

[City Lights]

15. America has been "Busheurized."

It sucks!

[truthisfreedom]

18. I love technology.

I've seen some irradiated foods and how long they can last. It's quite amazing. SO many things can go wrong... I'm not sure how I feel about this new rule. IF and ONLY IF the source of radiation is PURELY electronic, not from radioactive substances, it seems safe to me. Whenever radioactive substances are involved, there's always the potential for disaster.