FDA: OK to zap spinach, lettuce with radiation

reply to post by antarthe FDA is going to take all herbs and seeds off the shelves one by one.

Originally posted by InterestedObserver
One mention of the word "radiation" and people start freaking out. They've been doing this to our meat for years. Have you developed cancer yet? No doubt that the levels that they will be 'zapping' food with are so low that it wont make a difference to us.

Hell, they used to put radioactive metals in child's chemistry sets in the 50's and 60's. Are your parents deformed? I'll take an infinitesimal amount of radiation over E. Coli any day.

[edit on 8/21/2008 by InterestedObserver]

I think you just contradicted yourself and didn't even realize it. You asked if people have cancer yet from eating radiated mean? Last I checked plenty of people in this country have all different kinds of cancer. You don't get cancer in a matter of months or a few years. cancer starts as one abnormal cell and slowly over time, starts to take over and replicate. Not everyone is going to get cancer from stuff like this. Just like not everyone gets sick when the flu is going around. Some people's bodies are more susceptible to invaders.

No one knows how cancer really comes about. I would think that is most likely because they don't take into account the overall lifestyle of a person with cancer. It may be that cancer is a result of a combination of things so you can't pinpoint it to just one factor.

Think of all the different kinds of crap we put into our bodies every single day. Radiated meat and veggies/fruit. chemicals in our toiletries, cleaners. Pollution in the air. Obscene amounts of stress compared to other countries, which instances of cancer and other health problems are also extremely higher than other countries.

All this because the FDA is the end all be all to what is "safe" for us even though it's run by people who cater to lobbyists for the companies they are supposed to objectively scrutinize. A lot of people in the FDA go on to work for these companies. Most likely they get a high salary for a job well done.

I can't wait until I can start my own garden next year. For now I'll stick with Organic.

This sounds a lot like what that woman was saying about Codex Alimentarius. She did say that they would take all the Nutritional value out of our Vegetables by 2009. I just seen that the FDA is saying that it is "safe" and "will not lower or remove nutritional value." That rose red flags. Why would they say something like that??? She also said it was a form of population control. That makes sense considering its radiation and all... ugh!

reply to post by Ravinsomniac


I'm sorry for your loss. Are you sure you don't want to say which country the blueberries were from? I'd like to know and I'm sure others would too.

This is exactly the reason I don't eat food from 3rd world countries. When I see 'organic' stamped on something from China, for example, I just laugh. Who is foolish enough to delude themselves into thinking China would bother with actually making sure the produce they're exporting is organic? It's ridiculous...

I'm so lucky that about 90% of produce, meat, and dairy in my grocery store is from Ontario. The only things that aren't local are things that aren't produced here. I know people in most parts of the US are not nearly as lucky.

reply to post by sc2099


Come on now, food from china stamped organic, must be, except for all of the lead of course.

Youre right, in the majority of the US it is getting more and more difficult to find local foods. The mega stores have driven the small "mom and pops" out of business due to lower prices. People must actually work to obtain quality products now, which, with this so called fast lifestyle people have bought into makes the idea of eating better impossible. Why drive 20 minutes out of your way, or take the time to garden, or heaven forbid go hunting when dinner is just a drive through away. Its sad more people dont pay at least a little attention to what they consume, with obesity, heart failure, diabetes, etc... on the rise, the last thing we need is some federal nanny state organization taking the few nutrients from our food in the name of "safety".

Originally posted by ghaleon12
Well it's pretty well known that red meat increases the risk for colon cancer. These are the same people that think Fluoride is good for people, just one in a list of "safe" toxins.

You do know that their are a lot of bacteria in our environment, and in our intestines, including E. Coli? We have adapted as a species to handle bacteria, I'm not so sure about radiated food. A healthy person can eat E. Coli and will show few if any side effects. The people that die from contaminated food and the really old or those with weakened immune systems, which frankly, are about a hair away from death anyways.

Wrong.


prettymuch any human gets e.coli in any part of their body besides their colon, they're in for a world of hurt. try thinking first.

This sounds like a great idea... As long as the people doing the radiation zappage are shielded properly.

X-ray radiation is merely the result of photons knocking electrons around. When photons collide with electrons, or nearly miss the atom but are deflected, their momentum is converted to an electromagnetic wave in the X-Ray frequency basically.

Nothing lingers. Sure, it alters atoms and molecules, but the lettuce is dead!

Eating it won't cause any problems, look what your stomach acid does to food! A lot more then removal/addition of a few electrons here and there.


I'm level 1(Ditech) certified for Servicing diagnostic imaging equipment by the way.

[edit on 22-8-2008 by HorrorRoach]

Food Irradiation uses a small pulse of Gamma radiation from an enclosed Cobalt-60 radiation source. The gamma radiation does not have a lasting radioactive effect on the food treated with it. The problem with irradiation is that it destroys enzymes mainly. Other than that it is like any other part of the light spectrum in its heating effects on the nuclei of the atoms that make up the product being irradiated.

I for one find a problem in something that is not directly related to the process itself. My only problem with it is that this treatment will encourage manufacturers to ignore other quality measures because instead they will rely on this quick kill technology to make inferior products safe enough so that they do not immediately sicken or kill consumers but they will still be of a lower overall quality as a result of this broad spectrum method of decontamination for biological pests.

In the case of fresh living foods it is simply not acceptable to rely on such safeguards instead of producing a better safer product through superior methods of handling and production. A living thing that is irradiated is then dead as a result of the process. We do not just consume molecules of nutrients like a pill. We also need to consume things that are alive and absorb the life force in them as well in order to be healthy. This short cut is one that will ultimately result in far poorer quality products being pushed on the public.

reply to post by UFOTECH

Concerns have sometimes been expressed by public interest groups and public health experts that irradiation, as a non-preventive measure, might disguise or otherwise divert attention away from poor working conditions, sanitation, and poor food-handling procedures that lead to contamination in the first place.[48]

Processors of irradiated food are subject to all existing regulations, inspections, and potential penalties regarding plant safety and sanitization; including fines, recalls, and criminal prosecutions. Furthermore, while food irradiation can in some cases maintain the apparent quality of certain perishable food for a longer period of time, it can not undo spoilage effects that occur prior to irradiation. Irradiation can therefore not be successfully used to mask quality issues other than pathogens. Under a HACCP-concept (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point) radiation processing can serve and contribute as an ultimate critical control point. ~ Wikipedia

I've worked in food manufacturing, including irradiation processes, and yes - I can confirm that HACCP and other food safety protocols are still enforced - and cutting corners can be a quick way of getting the plant shut down. This isn't a guarantee of food quality, however, as sanitation and quality enforcement is only as good as the USDA officials assigned to inspection. However, being concerned over irradiation being used as a "cover" for sloppy production methods should be a low priority especially since the only contaminant it can cover up is pathogens - and it does so by killing them.

As far as people being concerned over the irradiation of their food, it's a bit foolish IMO. There's really no residual radiation from the process even with the highest levels (1,000,000 RAD, which the vast majority of your food isn't exposed to). In fact, you're exposed to far -FAR- more (and more diverse and potentially harmful) radiation from natural sources every day of your life than you are from the food you eat. To put this into exaggerated terms, it's like running through a shooting gallery and being concerned over the one guy with a BB gun instead of a high powered rifle.

As for the irradiation breaking down enzymes within the food - IIRC there is some truth to this. However the loss of nutrients via the process vs. the potential cost of not irradiating our food and allowing these pathogens into our food supply is worth it. Stricter sanitation practices do not guarantee the destruction of pathogens the way irradiation does - and the cost to the food industry to implement that level of sanitation would be devastating. To say nothing of the increased costs to consumers. It can work well on the small scale, but not for mass production.

[edit on 22-8-2008 by Lasheic]

I'm a bit upset about this. Even knowing they are going to do it doesn't ease the pain when it happens.

Here's some choice words from a smarter dude than me:

In promoting this food radiation policy, the FDA has accomplished what all the terrorists in the world could not: The mass irradiation of the U.S. food supply -- much like setting off a dirty bomb over the nation's farms (but with less radiation). This destruction of the nutritional value of the food supply is a far greater threat to the health of the U.S. population than any terrorist event, including 9/11. And yet it is being done by our own people, TO our own people, by a lawless agency that answers to no one. FDA officials are not voted into office by the People; they are appointed by politicians. They answer to no one, they refuse to follow federal law, and they operate as tyrants over a quarter of the U.S. economy.

We should be more than just alarmed -- we should be outraged! The FDA has committed an act of war against the People. With this decision, the FDA has firmly positioned itself as an enemy of the People, and a bringer of death and disease to the nation. Why are our elected representatives in Washington allowing this madness?


Think about this: If the FDA has its way:

• All your food will be irradiated, pasteurized or killed
• All your children will be vaccinated
• All your medicine will be based on pharmaceuticals
• All your free speech about health will be suppressed
• All informative labeling on food and supplements will be outlawed
• Growing and selling non-irradiated garden vegetables will become a crime!

Source:NaturalNews.com

This must be some sort of aether shock to bacteria but it does
not eliminate the poison already in the food.

Or does it.

Radiation, alpha or beta (the dangerous one), can kill bacteria but
can it cure a poison?

If alpha radiation, then the electronic shock must break up the bacteria.

A radiation source can possible be made into a battery charger.


ED: Yes. Its all done by the Illuminati that AJ and Lyne always talk about.



[edit on 8/22/2008 by TeslaandLyne]

Organic food is irradiated too, out in the fields.

There's this huge external fusion reactor responsible for it.

It's called the sun.


Learn some science, please.

Originally posted by marg6043
I guess I will have to start buying my spinach and lettuce from local organic growers rather than retailer stores for now on.

ignorance and fear is a natural response to the unknown, humans havent come very far, even in this age.

the radiation kills bad things, it does not turn the food into mutant monsters in rubber suits that will all eventually show up in tokyo and make a fuss

when the radiation is turned off, it does not linger on the food plants.

organic is pretty fashionable these days, there has been nothing conclusive to prove it is any better than typical mainstream food, for the most part.

you may get extra protein from ingesting the occasional grub (bad news for vegetarians) and if you pay twice the price for a tomato, its easy to insist it tastes better

i grow my own, as much as i can, i like to take myself off the grid as much as i'm able to, but i've noticed no appreciable difference between what i grow and have gotten at the grocery

its all good.

I have heard some hearsay about something that has been posted earlier, they are reducing and or destroying any vitamins or minerals, including as a side effect destroying the molecules of flavor and essence.

The olden folk tell of a time when the food tasted better, when the meat was meatier, and the fruits more succulent...

we are closer now, the time of grey men will be upon us! we wont even care!
things will be so bland and boring that we will only have the media and drugs as means of escape...

Savor every meal, appreciate what we have now...

this is yet another version of fluoride in the water.

reply to post by feydrautha

i grow my own, as much as i can, i like to take myself off the grid as much as i'm able to, but i've noticed no appreciable difference between what i grow and have gotten at the grocery

I concur with this statement. I also grow my own tomatoes (never cared for spinach) and I can honestly not tell the difference between store bought and home grown tomato produce. The only time there is a noticable difference is when you pick them fresh off the vine in the middle of the day, at which point the flavor is at it's peak and the sun-warmed fruit is extremely flavorable. After 24 hours in the fridge though, there is practically no difference between them.

People are in denial about their food habits.

The western world is going through a massive health crisis due to refined sugar, lack of fibre, excessive meat and fat consumption, toxins due to industrialised food production, GMO's and now they want to add radiation to the mix and say it's good for you? Wake up.

Radiation will only lower the nutricional value of food, it will alter the biochemical makeup of it, turning it into unhealthy slush that will go right through you. You will be eating yourself into starvation, all the health aspects of the food will be gone.

I have stopped using a microwave for this very reason, and now they want to make me eat irradiated food? F'em.

Here's the reality of the situation: You want to be healthy? Eat fresh organic food. That's your best shot. Sure, you might get a virus or a bacteria, but you will be better equipped to handle it. And the alternative is a 100% certainty of malnutrition. For God's sake people think.

And this is without even going into the energetic content of food, which is dissipated by radiation... This will attack the very interface between soul and body, let alone the massive physical damage it will cause over a few short years.

If they tested irradiated food on prisoners for 30 years I would feel
safer that nutrition was still there.

Illuminati science has no back up and its all dollar pressure from the
isotopes handlers.

Which in a nice way might help in giving us home electric generators
some day like the Dr. Moray 50KW but more compact.

TheOneEyedProphet

when the meat was meatier

Fat makes the meat taste better.
The push to lean meat is a marketing ploy.

Well some meats were too fatty but now too lean.

The excess fat on humans must come from sugar as Atkins said but
the fear of fat he never extinguished.
Milk has a lot of sugar and Atkins said use cream in coffee which is
all fat and not that inviting. I switched to a light cream which somehow
makes me think of original Pennsylvania fresh milk.
And some big price but I'm not a walking Michelin man.

reply to post by Zepherian


And yet life expectancies keep going up and up and up! If "they" were trying to poison us and rob us of vital nutrients we need to live healthy and productive lives, wouldn't we see the reverse trend? Now, I agree that people often have poor eating habits, as they often chose convince over healthy food choices and they have absolutely NO idea how to proportion their food. Much of what we eat in bulk is loaded down with fillers and then flavored - or is just flat out disgustingly fattening and filled with high fructose corn syrup. There's one product in particular I remember seeing on the store shelves being bought up by a rather obese family that made me hang my head in shame - Jimmy Deans Sausage and Chocolate Chip Pancakes on a stick w/ extra syrup. w... t... f....

Also, if you want to get technical, living on the edge of starvation might actually be good for your. Studies done on mice show that caloric restriction diets lead to noticeably longer and healthier lifespans. However, CR diets are very dangerous if not carefully planned and stuck to. Implementation of a poor CR diet can actually decrease life expectancy - so it's not recommended to try unless you have the willpower to stick with it and are under the guidance of a healthcare professional. In the near future this won't be an issue as advances in Gene Therapy will allow us to turn off our Fat/Insulin Receptor Gene. This gene was a bonus to humanity back when we were still hunter-gatherers and our food supply was inconsistent. Our bodies held on to every calorie we took in because there was no way of guaranteeing that the next harvest/hunt would be successful. This isn't really needed anymore, and shutting it down will allow the body to use only what it absolutely needs and expel the rest. Studies done in mice have shown that recipients of this gene therapy treatment gain all the benefits of a healthy CR diet while remaining thin and healthy with no apparent side effects - despite being over-fed on a high calorie diet.

Calorie Restriction Diet


Leptin Gene Therapy

Scientific American - Reprogramming Biology
(Has some info on the Fat Insulin Receptor Gene: See Below)

RNA interference (RNAi), which science learned about only in the past several years, can turn specific genes off by blocking the messenger RNA those genes produce. Because viral diseases, cancer and many other types of illness depend on gene expression at some crucial point, RNAi heralds a breakthrough technology. One example of a gene that we would like to turn off is the fat insulin receptor gene, which tells fat cells to hold on to every calorie. When that gene was blocked in the fat cells of mice during a study at the Joslin Diabetes Center, those mice ate a lot but remained thin and healthy. They lived almost 20 percent longer, obtaining the benefit of caloric restriction without the food restriction.1

[edit on 23-8-2008 by Lasheic]