Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site amdahl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!oliveb!3comvax!bnrmtv!amdahl!ems
From: ems@amdahl.UUCP (ems)
Newsgroups: net.med,net.physics,net.cooks
Subject: Re: sterilizing food with radiation
Message-ID: <2253@amdahl.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 21-Nov-85 18:53:04 EST
Article-I.D.: amdahl.2253
Posted: Thu Nov 21 18:53:04 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 23-Nov-85 05:48:04 EST
References: <6202@amdcad.UUCP> <225@redwood.UUCP>
Organization: Circle C Shellfish Ranch, Shores-of-the-Pacific, Ca
Lines: 74
Xref: watmath net.med:2806 net.physics:3619 net.cooks:5458

> Phil Ngai <phil@amdcad.uucp> writes:
>+---------------
>| I understand that preliminary tests are being done on the use of
>| radiation to sterilize food. The food is exposed to a source of
>| radiation  ...  My question is, are the results of breaking large
>| molecules at random places likely to be completely innocuous?...
> +---------------
> 
> This seems to be changing recently. I don't know the social or economic
> driving functions. I think the new E-beam machines may be cheaper. I do
> know that in the years since the technique was first tried, our general
> cultural paranoia of anything with the word "radiation" in it has added
> a new cost element to the process -- the necessity to educate the public
> at each and every proposed processing plant site that such irradiators
> are NOT in any way related to nuclear weapons, power plants, or waste sites,
> and are NOT going to poison them and destroy the local environment!
>
On a local (VERY liberal) radio program there was a discussion of the
food irradiating industry.  It was strongly biased against, so the
info presented may be of questionable quality, but for what it is worth
here is their side... (I don't have my own position on this so I
need to borrow someone elses ... :-)

They didn't mention E-beam machines.  They did spend a great deal of time
discussing the use of Cesium-mumble and Cobalt-mumble isotopes.  The
assertion was that this was a way to utilize nuclear waste from the
electric and bomb industries, thus reducing the need to store/dispose
of said waste and justifying the creation of it.   They also pointed
out that the quantity of isotope used was an order of magnitude or
so greater than at your local hospital.  (And supposedly, therefore,
not 'reasonable' for comparison).

> Hmmm... there is one point of commonality: Since some versions of food
> irradiators DID contain lethal quantities of radioactive substances
> inside their lead shields (such as Co-60), you have the usual problems
> of transportation (while building the plant), disposal (tearing it down),
> and security (don't want some terrorist stealing this 20-tonne gamma source
> and driving down the street pointing it at people! ;-} ). But the articles
> I've been reading lately imply that the cost-effective versions will probably
> employ electron-beam techniques, which have NO transportation hazards.
>
Or, as happened in Mexico, melting it down for scrap and distributing
the resultant *TONNES* of radioactive steel all over Mexico and the
Southwest of the U.S.  (Yes, this really did happen and they still
haven't found it all).  The radioactive pellets are small and
not that massive.

> As far as long-reaching effects from the molecular disruption, I have
> no new info. They certainly weren't as sensitive to those issues back
> when the technique was first developed. The main (intended) disruption
> was to the enzymes that cause decomposition of other proteins, and only
> secondarily the sterilization.( You can kill bacteria with other techniques,
> but the natural catabolic enzymes continue to tear down the food.)
> 
An interesting point was made that the FDA was trying to pass
a ruling that exempted them from the need to show that the
process was safe, therefor letting them off of the liability
and testing hook.  Don't know if this was really true.

There were, of course, claims that testing had been done showing
birth problems and such in animals fed on iradiated foods ..

I can't help but think that psuedoRANDOM breakdown products
of something as complex as living tissue is bound to have
some real nasty stuff in it.  (Personal conjecture, though
it was also a thought expressed later in the talk show...)
-- 

E. Michael Smith  ...!{hplabs,ihnp4,amd,nsc}!amdahl!ems

'If you can dream it, you can do it'  Walt Disney

This is the obligatory disclaimer of everything. (Including but
not limited to: typos, spelling, diction, logic, and nuclear war)