Skip to comments.FDA proposes softening label requirements for irradiated foods[To be called ”pasteurized”]
Posted on 04/06/2007 11:31:51 PM PDT by Dacb
WASHINGTON - 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.
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.
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. 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 FDA acknowledges in the proposed rule that allowing alternative ways of describing irradiation could confuse consumers: Research indicates that many consumers regard substitute terms for irradiation to be misleading, the proposal reads in part. FDA officials were not immediately available for comment.
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.
Foods still require FDA approval before they can be irradiated. Examples currently radiated include a small number of fruits, vegetables, spices and eggs. The technique kills bacteria but does not cause food to become radioactive.
Recent outbreaks of foodborne illness have revived interest in irradiation, even though it is not suitable for all food products. For example, irradiating diced Roma tomatoes makes them go mushy, the FDA says.
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 USDAs Food Safety and Inspection Service.
Good. Irradiated foods are safe.
Astronauts have been on irradiated foods for decades now. It is quite apparent that it is safe.
I believe contaminants that cause ‘Mad Cow’ disease still can’t be eliminated by irradiation. Or has that changed?
Prions are not stopped by irradation.
I buy organic meat, veggies and dairy products. Keep it local and keep it clean is my motto.
It’s about time! How long’s it been now, 30, 40 years? .............. FRegards
I’m not against radiation.
The changing of language to control people is absolutely disgraceful, and there SHOULD be public outrage, and the paperpushers who were lobbied into tabling this proposal should be fired, and the companies and lobbyists who pushed this should be publicly named and disgraced.
The question is not, “Why not?”, the question is based on the precautionary principle, “Why should the consumer lose his right to clear and precise information and the ability to maintain a Precautionary Principle in regard to the the very sustenance he feeds his and his family’s bodies?”
Trade groups, lobbyists and bureaucrats should NOT have the power to change the definition of a word, definition of a process that has saved hundreds of millions of people from death and suffering over the last century.
And they justify this by potential increased profit. Not by potential increased public health.
Prions are very mysterious things, and I’m not sure there is real agreement as to whether they even exist.
It is clear that there are malformed proteins in Mad Cow, but whether they were made that way by “prions” or not... well maybe the jury is still out on that question.
If they don’t really exist, than that would explain why it’s so hard to destroy them.
At least until Nowak's defense team gets hold of that tidbit. "Yeah, it was the irradiated food that fired her brain, that's the ticket!"
I’ve got nothing against irradiating food to keep it fresh, but the technique will then likely be used to make up for poor sanitation in food handling. S**t in food is still s**t, even if the bacteria have been safely irradiated.
Isn't America wonderful?
There's always someone willing to cater to folks willing to pay more, and there are always people willing to spend the extra money.
Soon you'll be able to pay more for food labeled "From Non-Cloned sources." if you're willing.
So are you being sarcastic,ignorant,or advocating everyone must eat/drive/wear/abide in cheapest/shoddiest/mas-produced commodities?
Lighten up Francis.
And don’t forget LOCAL. :)
“So are you being sarcastic,ignorant,or advocating everyone must eat/drive/wear/abide in cheapest/shoddiest/mas-produced commodities?”
Yes, he did seem a little hostile. Perhaps he has an agenda with irradiated foods/agribusiness.
People are free to choose what they want. I prefer to buy local food for multiple reasons. In addition to quality, it also supports the farmers/ranchers in our area.
Them LOCAL illegal Mexicans is a lot cleaner than them out of town illegal Mexicans.