| |
Nuclear Lunch: The Dangers
and Unknowns of Food Irradiation
The recent push for food irradiation fails to acknowledge the technology's
inherent dangers, its intricate connections
to the nuclear industry, and the FDA's failure to prove safety.
Beginning in 1986, the FDA has given the green light to expose nearly our
entire food supply to nuclear irradiation.
Since then, staunch citizen opposition has kept the technology out of use.
But the recent hamburger recall led both the
food and nuclear industries to push hard for beef irradiation's approval.
Its use in the beef industry would open the door
to irradiation as the "solution" to contamination crises in all food groups,
from poultry to fruits and vegetables.
With beef irradiation's quick passage through the FDA approval process,
citizen opposition, not government
regulation, remains the critical component in keeping irradiated food off
store shelves.
And from the hazards inherent in the technology to the FDA's own admission
that the safety studies are
flawed, the risks involved with food irradiation far outweigh the presumed
"benefits."
Irradiation Basics
Food is irradiated using radioactive gamma sources, usually cobalt 60 or
cesium 137, or high energy electron beams.
The gamma rays break up the molecular structure of the food, forming positively
and negatively charged particles
called free radicals. The free radicals react with the food to create new
chemical substances called "radiolytic
products." Those unique to the irradiation process are known as "unique
radiolytic products" (URPs).
Some radiolytic products, such as formaldehyde, benzene, formic acid, and
quinones are harmful to human health.
Benzene, for example, is a known carcinogen. In one experiment, seven times
more benzene was found in cooked,
irradiated beef than in cooked, non-irradiated beef. Some URPs are completely
new chemicals that have not even
been identified, let alone tested for toxicity.
In addition, irradiation destroys essential vitamins, including vitamin
A, thiamin, B2, B3, B6, B12, folic acid, C, E,
and K; amino acid and essential polyunsaturated fatty acid content may
also be affected. A 20 to 80 percent loss of
any of these is not uncommon.
Safety Studies Flawed
The FDA reviewed 441 toxicity studies to determine the safety of irradiated
foods. Dr. Marcia van Gemert, the team
leader in charge of new food additives at the FDA and the chairperson of
the committee in charge of investigating the
studies, testified that all 441 studies were flawed.
The government considers irradiation a food additive. In testing food additives
for toxicity, laboratory animals are fed
high levels (in comparison to a human diet) of potential toxins.
The results must then be applied to humans with theoretical models. It
is questionable whether the studies the FDA
used to approve food irradiation followed this process. In fact, the FDA
claimed only five of the 441 were "properly
conducted, fully adequate by 1980 toxicological standards, and able to
stand alone in support of safety." With the
shaky assurance of just five studies, the FDA approved irradiation for
the public food system.
With the shaky assurance of just five studies, the FDA approved irradiation
for the public food supply.
To make matters worse, the Department of Preventative Medicine and Community
Health of the New Jersey Medical
School found two of the studies were methodologically flawed. In a third
study, animals eating a diet of irradiated food
experienced weight loss and miscarriage, almost certainly due to irradiation-induced
vitamin E dietary deficiency.
The remaining two studies investigated the effects of diets of foods irradiated
at doses below the FDA-approved
general level of 100,000 rads. Thus, they cannot be used to justify food
irradiation at the levels approved by the FDA.
Other studies indicate serious health problems associated with eating irradiated
food.
A compilation of 12 studies carried out by Raltech Scientific Services,
Inc. under contract with the U.S. government
examined the effect of feeding irradiated chicken to several different
animal species.
The studies indicated the possibility of chromosome damage, immunotoxicity,
greater incidence of kidney disease,
cardiac thrombus, and fibroplasia. In reviewing Raltech's findings in 1984,
USDA researcher Donald Thayer asserted,
"A collective assessment of study results argues against a definitive conclusion
that the gamma-irradiated test material
was free of toxic properties."
Studies of rats fed irradiated food also indicate possible kidney and testicular
damage and a statistically significant
increase in testicular tumors.
One landmark study in India found four out of five children fed irradiated
wheat developed polyploidy, a chromosomal
abnormality that is a good indication of future cancer development.
Irradiation proponents often claim that decades of research demonstrate
the safety of food irradiation, but the studies
they use to prove it are questionable. For instance, their "proof" includes
studies completed by Industry Bio-Test (IBT),
a firm convicted in 1983 of conducting fraudulent research for government
and industry. As a result of IBT's violations,
the government lost about $4 million and six years of animal feeding study
data on food irradiation. Some of this
discredited work is still used as a part of the "scientific" basis for
assurances of the safety of food irradiation.
Accidents Happen
Workers in irradiation plants risk exposure to large doses of radiation
due to equipment failure, leaks, and the
production, transportation, storage, installation, and replacement of radiation
sources. The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) has recorded 54 accidents at 132 irradiation facilities
worldwide since 1974. But this number is
probably low since the NRC has no information about irradiation facilities
in approximately 30 "agreement" states which
have the authority to monitor facilities on their own.
New Jersey is home to the highest concentration of irradiation facilities,
and virtually every New Jersey plant has a
record of environmental contamination, worker overexposure, or regulatory
failures.
Accidents can be nearly fatal to workers and extremely dangerous to the
surrounding communities.
For instance:
In 1991, a worker at a Maryland facility suffered critical injuries when
exposed to ionizing radiation from an
electron-beam accelerator. The victim developed sores and blisters on his
feet, face, and scalp, and lost fingers on
both hands.
In 1988, Radiation Sterilizers, Inc. (RSI) in Decatur, GA, reported a leak
of cesium 137 capsules into the water
storage pool, endangering workers and contaminating the facility. Workers
then carried the radioactivity into their
homes and cars. Cleanup costs exceeded $30 million and taxpayers footed
the bill.
In 1986, the NRC revoked the license of a Radiation Technology, Inc. (RTI)
facility in New Jersey for 32 worker-safety
violations, including throwing radioactive garbage out with the trash and
bypassing a key safety device. As a result of
this negligence, one worker received a near lethal dose of radiation.
In 1982, an accident at International Nutronics in Dover, NJ, contaminated
the plant and forced its closure. Radiation
baths were used to purify gems, chemicals, food and medical supplies.
In 1974, an Isomedix facility in New Jersey flushed radioactive water down
toilets and contaminated pipes leading to
sewers. In the same year, a worker received a dose of radiation considered
lethal for 70 percent of the population.
Prompt hospital treatment saved his life.
Not a Silver Bullet
Irradiation poses serious risks, and it still does not ensure safe meat.
Although it kills most bacteria, it does not destroy
the toxins created in the early stages of contamination. And it also kills
beneficial bacteria which produce odors
indicating spoilage and naturally control the growth of harmful bacteria.
Irradiation also stimulates aflatoxin production.
Aflatoxin occurs naturally in humid areas and tropical countries in fungus
spores and on grains and vegetables. The
World Health Organization (WHO) considers aflatoxin to be a significant
public health risk and a major contributor to
liver cancer in the South.
In addition, irradiation will likely have a mutagenic effect on bacteria
and viruses that survive exposure. Mutated
survivors could be resistant to antibiotics and could evolve into more
virulent strains. Mutated bacteria could also
become radiation-resistant, rendering the radiation process ineffective
for food exposed to radiation-resistant strains.
Beyond Beef
Though the current push for food irradiation focuses on meat, if the technology
is adopted by the meat industry and
used on a mass scale, vegetarians as well as meat eaters will be impacted.
If adopted, the number of new irradiation facilities built would range
from dozens to hundreds, depending on how the
meat industry chose to utilize the technology. At the same time, the companies
that build them will be looking for ways
to offset their costs, and approaching other food industries to use the
technology. Poultry, spices, and even fresh fruits
and vegetables -- foods for which irradiation has already been approved
by the FDA -- could easily be the next foods
to pass through the irradiators.
Whether you're a meat eater, a vegetarian, or waiver somewhere between
the two, this renewed push for food
irradiation should concern us all.
Radiation-resistent strains of salmonella have already been developed under
laboratory conditions, and scientists at
Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge have found that one bacteria
occurring in spoiled meat and animal feces can
survive a radiation dose five times what the FDA will eventually approve
for beef. Scientists exposed bacteria , called
D. radiourans, to between 10 and 15 kilograys (kGy) or radiation for several
hours - enough radiation to kill a person
several thousand times over. The bacteria, which scientists speculate evolved
to survive extreme conditions of
dehydration, survived the radiation exposure.
The Nuclear Connection
To irradiate beef and poultry in the US on a mass scale, hundreds of irradiation
facilities would need to be built.
Currently, the radiation source for most irradiators is cobalt 60, supplied
by the Canadian company Nordion
International, Inc. But the only isotope available in sufficient quantities
for large-scale irradiation is cesium 137, which is
also one of the deadliest. With a half-life of 30 years, cesium 137 remains
dangerous for nearly 600 years.
The US Department of Energy (DOE) initially encouraged food irradiation
as part of its Byproduct Utilization Program
(BUP) created in the 1970s to promote the commercial use of nuclear byproducts.
The DOE claimed nuclear
byproducts "have a wide range of applications in food technology, agriculture,
energy, public health, medicine, and
industrial technology," and wanted to "ensure full realization of the benefits
of the peaceful atom."
The US Department of Energy initially encouraged food irradiation as part
of its Byproduct Utilization Program created
in the 1970s to promote the commercial use of nuclear byproducts.
At the same time, it would transfer the burden of nuclear waste from weapons
production to consumerism a fact the
DOE admitted to the House Armed Services Committee in 1983: "The utilization
of these radioactive materials simply
reduces our waste handling problem; we get some of these very hot elements
like cesium and strontium out of the
waste."
Not only would this take care of the DOE's waste problem, it would develop
the technology to reprocess spent nuclear
reactor fuel in order to recover cesium 137. The reprocessing would also
enable the DOE to recover plutonium, the
main ingredient for nuclear weapons.
After the 1988 irradiator accident in Decatur, Georgia, the DOE stopped
actively promoting food irradiation and the
use of cesium 137. But the store of cesium 137 is ready and waiting.
Irradiation Today
With the FDA's approval of beef irradiation, the irradiation industry is
poised to use it as a springboard for flooding the
market with a new wave of food irradiation promotion. To be successful,
however, irradiation proponents must
convince retailers that consumers want the technology. The irradiation
industry sees education or "consumer training"
as the key to citizen acceptance.
In response, scientists at major land-grant universities, with the full
support of the USDA, are developing "educational"
materials. Iowa State University (ISU), home of one of two publicly held
food irradiation facilities in the US, developed a
pro-irradiation educational video with a $39,000 grant from the USDA Extension
Service. The USDA gave grants to
projects designed to influence public acceptance of food technologies,
specifically food irradiation.
But citizens don't want irradiated foods.
Surveys conducted in 1990 and 1994 by HealthFocus, a marketing consulting
firm specializing in consumer health
trends, found that over 80 percent of consumers were concerned about food
irradiation. A study at ISU found when
consumers are given solid arguments both for and against irradiation, acceptance
of the technology is substantially
lower than if they were only given the pro-irradiation side of the story.
An August 1997 CBS News poll found
nationwide 73 percent of people oppose it, and 77 percent say they wouldn't
eat irradiated food.
Citizen aversion to irradiation is so strong, no major supermarket chain
will carry irradiated foods, and all the top
poultry companies in the nation have stated they will not adopt the technology.
The US government may approve its
use, but that doesn't mean citizens will believe it's safe, or that they
will buy irradiated food.
Excerpted from the Food & Water report "Meat Monopolies: Dirty Meat
and the False Promises of Irradiation" by
Susan Meeker-Lowry and Jennifer Ferrara. For a copy of the complete report,
contact Food & Water.
go to FoodAndWater
|
|