Google
This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world's books discoverable online.
It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.
Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.
Usage guidelines
Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:
+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.
+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.
+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.
+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.
About Google Book Search
Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web
at|http: //books .google .com/I
I:,,,;;*
, Google
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
FEDERAL FOOD IRRADIATION DEVEOPMENT AND
CONTROL AQ OF 1985
s mxKi MLf-
^iwBCi
HEARING
BEFORE THE
lOMMITTBE ON DEP,VRTMENT OPERj\TIONS,
RESEABCH, AND FOREIGN AORICULTITKE
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
NINETYNINTH CONGRESS
PffiST SESSION
ON
H.R 696
NOVCMBBR 18, IBKR
Serial No. 99-14
001 1Si86
V
Prinukd Tor tho uii> of Um
Google
nOAL FOOD IRRADIATION DEVELOPMENT AND
CONTROL ACT OF 1985
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SDBCOMMITTEE ON DEPAETMENT OPERATIONS,
KESEAKCH, AND FOREIGN AGRICULTURE
OP THE
COMMITTEE ON AGKICUITUEE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
NINETY-NINTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
NOVEMBER 18, 1985
Serial No. 99-14
nintsd for the use of the Committee on Agriculture
U,8. COVBRNMENT PRINTING opncB
WASHINGTON : 1986
■ bv tha 8ap«rlBtand«nt of DoeuntnU, U.S. Oovunnitnt FriDtlnc Ofle*
„GoogIe
OOMHITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
E (KIKA) in u GARZA. Teua, Chainnaa
THOMAS S. FOLEY. WaahinBton,
Vict ChtUrman
WALl^R B. JONES. North Carolina
ED JONES, TeDDMne
GEORGE E. BROWN, Ja.. CUifbcnia
CHARIfS ROBE, North Can)Uiia
JW WBAVBt, OttSPD
GLENN ENauSH. Ofclaboaw
I£ON E. PANBTTA, CUifbcnia
JERRY HUCKABY, Louiauia
DAN GLICKHAN. KwiM*
CHARLES WHTTIfY, North Carolina
TONY OOELHO. Odifbmia
TOM DASCHIf, South Dakota
OlARIZS W. SI^NHOUI. Toxai
HAIKHJ> U VIXJCMER. Hwoari
OIARlfS HATCHER. G«oTgia
BONN TALLON. SouUi CaraUna
HARI£Y O. STAGGERS, Ja.. Wot Virgiiiia
LANE EVANS. niiDcai
ROBERT UNDSAY THOMAS, Qeugia
JAMES R. OUS, Virginia
TIMOTHY J. PENNY, Miimeaota
RICHARD R STALUNGS, Idaho
TERRY L. BRUCE, Dlinni'
EDWARD R- MADIGAN, niinoiB,
Banking Miaaity Mtmbtr
JAMES M. JEFFORDS, Vermont
E. THOMAS COLEMAN, HiMouri
RON MARLENEE, Montana
LARRY J. HOPKINS, Kentucky
ARLAN 8TAN0ELAND, MinnMota
PAT RtWEBTS, KaiiBBt
BILLEHGB80N, HiMOuri
SID MORRISON, Waihingtim
STEVE OUNDERSON. WbeaMin
COOPER EVAKS, Iowa
GENE CHAPPIE, CUUbniiB
WEBB raANKUN. MiMi«aippi
TOM LEWIS. Florida
ROBERT F. (BOB) SMITH. Oragpn
LARRY COMBEST. Teiai
Prorbbionai. Stait
A. Mabio CAmuo, Oiuf of Staff
Pmixlp L. Pbam, Oninacl
Chablis Hiltt, ilinorily Staff DirecUr
BaaifABD BaxHma, Pna Stertlary
BERKLEY BEDEU* Iowa, Oiainnan
GEORGE E. BBom*. Ja., California
BARLEY O. STAGGERS, J»^ Weat Vliginia
LEON E. PANBITA. CUifomi*
CHARUS HATOIER. Georgia
TIMOIHY J. PENNY. UbiDMOta
IHOMAS S. FCM^y, W^iiivlon
HAROLD U VCHJIHER. Minavii
PAT ROBERTS, Katuaa
SID MORRISON, Waihington
OTEVE OUNDERSON. W<
COOPER EVAl^ra, Iowa
LARRY COBfBEOT. Tmm
< Efhctfve sdIt fbr Um firat MMleo of Um NliM«]Milittii CoiVMi.
,y Google
CONTENTS
HJt. 696, a bill to provide Federal coordinadon for the continued derelopment
•nd commeraalizatioD of fbod irradiation through the eatablishment of a
Mnt Operating Commiaaion for Food Irradiation in the Department of
- ■ ■■ «andt)i ■ ■•
Prepared statement
Stumeeon the safety of food irradiation _ _._....
Hod. Leon B., a Representative in Congress tnm Uie State tf Cnli-
fcmia, prepared statement „.
Roberta, Hon. Pat, a RepreeenUtive in Congress from the State of Kanus,
g statement...
Pnparal statement ...
Pnpoaed i^ulations on irradiation in the production. proccMing, and
handlins of food (FDA Docket No. SlN-OOOi—May 16, 19S4) 200
Btynjotfcson. Ari, member, scientific task force on wnolesomenees of foods
trwted with ionizing energy. Council for Agricultural Science & Technology 128
Prepared statement ...
FVampovich, Catherine J., president, Coalition for Altemativea in Nutrition &
Prepared st^ement ...
Prepared statement ...
Harfciii. Hon. Tom, a U.S. Senator from the State of Iowa ...
Hecfat, BAaijorie Mazel. Fusion Eneigy Foundation, Washington, DC...
Supplemental statemrait...
Department i
Prepaid statement
Lobin, A. Harold, M.D., director. Department of Foods, Nutrition, and Person-
al Health, American Medical Association...
Prepared statement ...
Prepared statement
Uiller, uinton Ray, legislative advocate, National Health Federation...
Prepared statement
,y Google
IV
Moagofian, Denia, cofounder and director, National Coalititm to Stop Food
Irradiation 118
Prepared Btatement 362
Suf^lemeotal statement „ 398
Food irradiation in Britain 421
Mutsman, Harry C. executive vice prendMit, Bdnitinc affoin, National Food
Proceasors Association, and diainnan, Coalition for Pood Irradiation 104
Prepared statement 342 .10
BanaohofT, Jack, Neutron Products, Inc., Dickeraon, MD 138
Tucker, Kathleen M., presideat. Health & Energy Institute 72 ut
Prepared statement 248
Van Houweling, C, Donald, staff consultant, National Pork Producers
Council 100
Precored statement 322 ,
Young, Frank E,, M.D., Ph.D., Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration,
Public Health Service, Department of Health and Human Services 62
Prepared statement 169
SuBMnTED Matkriai.
Conrad, Richard H., San Rafael, CA, letter of December 5, 1985 984
Conrad, Sally Y., senator, Chittenden District, State of Vermont, tetter of
November 22. 1986 987
Dinelli, Lyn, Citizens Against a Radioactive Dublin, letter of November 14, 'B
1985 992 dl
'Tood Irradiation: New Perspectives on a Controveiaial Technology, A Review i,
of Technical, Public H^th, and Economic Considerations," Rosanna ^
Mentzer MorriBon and Tanya Roberts, Economic Reeaarch Service, U.S. ^
Department of Agriculture, a study submitted by John H. Gibbons, Direc- ti
tor, Office of Technology Assessment 993 t]
Gofinan, John W., M.D., Ph.D., Committee for Nuclear Responsibili^, San ^
Francisco. CA, statement 1168 .
Goldstein, Ralph, member, Nev York State Assembly, letter of November 25, '
1985 1160 «
Greenberg, Richard A., director, ofiice of scientific pubUc affairs. Institute of ^
Food Technologisia, statement 1162 i
Haas. Elllen, executive directer, and Diane Baizman, director, government *,
affaire. Public Voice for Food & Health Policy, statement 1169 «
Hayles, James L., president and Mack L. Punk, industrial development man- f
ager. Port of Pasco, statement ^.... 1178 (|
Honorof, Ida, Lynwood, CA, letter of November 10, 1985 1175 .
Keating-Edh, Barbara, president. Consumer Alert, statement 1180 ''
Levy, Sharon, project leader, food irradiation reaearch project, Oregon Stu- *
dent Public Interest Research Group, statement 1186 t
Lewis, Philip F.. Chairman, Interagency Committee on Food Irradiation, U.S. i,
Department of Commerce, letter of November 19, 1985 1191 jj
Miller, Bruce, president, board of directors. Consumers Cooperative of Berke- ^
ley. Inc., letter of November 22, 1985 - 1201
Nielson. Niel E., president. Emergent Technologies, Inc., San Jose, CA, letter '
ofNovemberl8, 1985 1204
Norman, Donald, Consumers United for Food Safety, Seattle, WA. statement.. 1209 ,
Sprinsock, Brion. director, Santa Cruz Coalition to Stop Food Irradiation, )
statement 1214 ,
Welt, Martin A., chairman, president, and CEO, Radiation Technology, Inc., .
statement 1217 \
\
,y Google
FEDERAL FOOD IRRADIATION DEVELOPMENT
AND CONTROL ACT OF 1985
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 198S
> House of Representatives,
: subcoktmittee on department operations,
Research, and Foreign Agriculture,
I Committee on Agriculture,
Washington, DC.
The Bubcommlttee met, pursuant to call, at 9:15 a.m., in room
1302, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Berkley Bedell (chair-
nan of the subcommittee) presiding.
PMent: Representatives Brown, Panetta, Penny, Roberts, Morri-
rai, Gunderson, and Evans of Iowa.
Abo present: Representative £ (Kika) de la Garza, chairman of
the eominittee.
Staff present: Phillip L. Fraaa, counsel; John E. Hogan, minori^
oaonael; Glenda L. Temple, clerk; Bernard Brenner, Anita R.
Brawn, Timothy J. Galvin, and Gar^ R. Mitchell.
Hr. Bbdell. The subcommittee will come to order.
Smator Harkin has another meeting. Several of us have some
my lengthy opening statements, but in view of his needs we will
E ahead and hear from Senator Harkin first, and then we will
K opening statements from members of the subcommittee. We
■re glad to have you back, Tom. We miss having you sit on our Ag-
riouture Committee here in the House of Representatives. We
mat you are going to straighten everything out in the Senate now
that you are over there.
STATEMENT OF HON. TOM HARKIN, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE
STATE OF IOWA
Smator Harkin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
It is an honor to be back before the subcommittee on this side.
We are taking up the agriculture bill this week, and the Senate
hiqiefully will do it justice. I do appreciate your permitting me to
go first. I have another appointment that I have to rush to.
Several years ago, Mr. Chairman, when I was a member of this
;: cnnmittee, I can remember the Department of the Army came in
■ and
Mr. Bedell. Excuse me. Mr. Roberts wants to have an opportuni-
'■ ^ to welcome you.
lib". Roberts. I just wanted to welcome you.
. Senator Harkin. He wants to tell me how much he misses me
too.
(1)
,y Google
Mr. Roberts. Of course, I miss you. Anybody who has been suchgl
a staunch supporter of summer fallow, such a help to the wheats
producer, I wanted to officially welcome to the subcommittee and^^
say welcome back.
In talking with Senator Zorinsky and Senator Dole, they said it^Q
might be possible to get a fann bill by the end of this week. Would,^
that be your feeling? i^
Senator Harkin. I wish we had it 3 weeks ago.
Mr. Roberts. I certainly hope we can make some prc^ess, and^
welcome back. *'
Senator Harkin. Senator Dole made the commitment we would''*
take it up today and not get off it until we finish it. As long ae^
there is no intervening business, we ought to finish it this week. I'^
don't think there will be any amendments on summer fallow. "
Thank you. I do want to recognize Congressman Morrison who*
has really been a leader in this whole area for a number of years. IW
compliment him for that, for his bill that he introduced in the last*!
Congress and again in this Congress. Both Congressman Morrisonls
and Senator Gorton, on the Senate side, have really been leaders into
this area, and, of course, I am supportive of both pieces of legisla-iq
tion, H.R. 696 and S. 288, the Senate companion bill. I am hopeful,!^
Mr. Chairman, that both bills will receive expeditious hearing8,i|
and markup. t|
As I said, Mr. Chairman, several years ago I remember the De-ti
partment of the Army came in when I was a member of this com-t|
mittee and brought some irradiated food in for us to eat. I can re-
member eating some processed meat I think it was bacon or ham^
that had been irradiated and kept on the shelf in a vacuum-sealed <j
package I think it was preserved for 7 years, if my memory serves^
me correctly. We ate it, and I had never heard of such a thing. I^-
thought to myself at the time: Why aren't we pursuing things like^
this? ?
So little bit by little bit, more and more, people started asUiw''
questions about it. We have now reached the point where I think
this is a really viable alternative and a viable supplement to the^
kinds of food preservation techniques that we now use. *i
Right now about 24 foreign countries are using irradiation, and ^
some of them have much higher levels than what has recently^
been approved by the FDA for use in this country. It is something ''.
that I think will go a long way toward helping us not only in the'i
preservation of food but increasing the shelf life without adding i
harmful chemicals and will also I think serve to expand our export ^
markets. It will give us a new market for our foods overseas. ^
Mr. Chairman, there is a lot of talk about perhaps harmful side <i
effects from irradiation. I want to make it very clear from the <i
outset that I believe all safety precautions ought to be taken with ^
the trfuisport and the use of irradiators, whether it is cobalts or \
cesium, or whatever it might be. I understand the justifiable fear i)
in the public's mind about the use of these materials especially in \
regard to transport. But, we have proven in the past that it can be ij
done. It can be done safely and witnout any public exposure. t
I want to point out the observation that food irradiation is like i
using an industrial sized microwave oven. You apply energy to \
food. It kills microorganisms. But, no thing is kept in the food. \
,y Google
When you lu ■- irradiation to kill organisms in the food, no radi-
MioD remaini . So we have to begin to allay the public's fears in
dieir minds liiat something happens in the food that can cause
hsnn later on.
Believe me, Mr. Chairman, I am sure you know eis well eis I do
ibout a lot of the chemicals that are now being added to food: Eth-
ane dibromide, that was being used to fumigate grain, which we
faxnr is a highly cancerK:auBing substance, to a lot of other chemi-
ab that are being used to enhance the shelf life of food. I think
Hie public would be better served if they were to understand the
£5(Tence between adding chemicals which they seem readily to
■ceept right now to preserve and enhance food color, flavor, shelf
life, and what can be done with food irradiation. I think if they un-
dentand the difference, we would find a lot more public support
Srthe whole process of food irradiation.
I Mily have one copy, Mr. Chairman. Perhaps you have seen it
aid other members have. It is a little booklet put out by CAST, the
CDandl for Agricultural Science and Technology, from Iowa State
OniTCrBity. It was put out in March of this year. It is comments
ban CAST on food irradiation. I think it lays out the whole sce-
Bcrio about what food irradiation is and what it does much better
lltni any other short publication that I have seen. I don't know if
jaa have seen this or not, but I will leave it here, and you can just
pHB it around. I think it is really a fine outline of what food irra-
iSstkm is.
Mr. Chairman, there are about 30 commercial irradiators now
operating in the United States, so we have operating experience,
n^ are mostly used to sterilize equipment for hospitals. There
■R some sterilizing of food that is used for people with certain
inunune system problems. Now we are starting to see irradiation of '
Alices to kill insect infestations. There are also some experimental
irradiators now in use.
Ifa-. Chairman, the Food and Drug Administration has, as you
know, approved low-level food irradiation for spices and pork. Pork
irradiation will not proceed until the Department of Agriculture
provides labeling and other r^ulations. I hope we can see those
regulations by early next year at the latest. I know some of the
people from the Department are sitting behind me. I don't mind la-
heting. We label foods already as to their contents and that is good.
I support that.
I vTOuId hope that we can reach a consensus on meaningful label-
ing of food irradiation without unduely scaring the public that
nmething has remained in the food. I have even heard people, on
any food that is irradiated on which you put the radiation symbol,
ttist you would find near an x-ray unit or something with a warn-
ing, '^biB food has been irradiated, may cause high levels of radi-
ation." That is simply not true.
I think that would be highly counterproductive, but I see nothing
WTODg with a label that would say how the food has been preserved
K long as labeling is also done on food as to the chemicals that are
pat in the food to preserve it over a long period of time. If they are
Mb set out in the same manner, I think people would have a
better idea of what is being done to preserve their foods.
,y Google
So again I would hope that the labeling for food irradiation
would be similar to that which is used right now to outline all of
the ingredients that are already in the food.
Well, Mr. Chairman, I will sum up the rest of my testimony by
saying that we have an opportunity here to move ahead very rapid-
ly not only on low levels of irradiation for pork smd spices, but for
higher levels of irradiation, so we can fumigate all of our grain,
preserving it for longer periods of time, increasing the shelf life (^
foods, and enhance our markets abroad. It is something we have
fallen behind on in this country.
There is no reason why we have to fall behind in it, and I hope
this committee will take expeditious action on it.
Thank you.
[The booklet follows:]
,y Google
COMMENTS from CAST
^^S
^ciT for Agricultural Science and Technology
„Googlc
CouncH for
Agricufturat Science and Technology
{CAST)
Member Societies
Cnp Sconca SociMv of .
hxth Cstnnl Waad Control i
Anwtav t^/topsthologicil Socmv Mm Giowth ItegulMai SocMv cK Aman
Amancm Socimv (Oi tloniciinii*! Scisic* PquIitv Sdanca Awleiatiiin
ftmariccn Socicrv (4 AgricultunI EnginHn Hunl SociolaaK*! Socinv
AfnariunSockafyolAcFononty Sociafir of Nflmatnloaiili
Afflcicin Sociny ol Annul Sciance Scd Scbnca Socwry of Anwrica
Aqus*c Plant Mmagnmni Sociatv SouiIwti Waad Scianca Soeiair
icialSaadAnalviB Waad Scwva Sociatv of Amaica
Di Teating and Plan Analyiia Waatam Socistf of Waad Scianca
COMMENTS from CAST
Pubicaliont in Iha CXMMKJVTS tnm CAST Sariaa Aulhora ot COMMB^TS tnm CAST. oHw «
iHuallVHinnantiiiona panon. Each COMMmrbaan and ikh aa rapraaantattna ol thai amploveta. T
fAnnbat BHiy nivaHniaiivn una on tha CAST TliaiT lima it conDbuIai) bf thair amclovan. Coau
Beam af DincBm Tha Board ■ mponililt lot iha publiriiina and dHribuIing tha COMMSVrs ara bo
CtMMenTS Imm CAST, and, dapanding upon Iha tinni In thnt amntv Im IndavandarH
icontamolanyCOMMEWr lidandlnppKipnala.
COUNCILFORACIUCULTtlRALSaENCEANDTECllNOLOGV
TtkphOBt: llS-m-ll2i
,y Google
7
OD IRRADIATION'
nnpimaviDrUitrfu
k TUi
iaiion occupy lucctaivclr shone wivi
rtduuion. and lamma ndiiiisn qvsI^i
■■(■
WMfh
tpKI
■ u the tpccd
Dfl>,hlb,
■ the rnqumcT) or ihc diiuocc in livl role in food producliofi- Some of ihv
llBocr - 1-1 y«rdi> between mrre- eneT^y from ihc visible \iti\^ rtngt of ihc
f foiaa oo rwa tuccaitve whvb ricclromijnciic ipcctnun is capiured by
Mynf dufrufl. *lKrc ihc vctodiy whicli is nored in Ihc oriiiik compounds
■puM of the wivH throuih tpice produced by [^iiui. This stored chemical
Kidiallwi and Food Praccuiiit
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
waicr. The relatively
■ppliiarion in fcxKl p
contiol lo Foods Ihil
iaUy diarfcd Tke Pi)chalii(lnt PtoUnn
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
„Googlc
„GoogIe
16
Mr. Bedell. Thank you for your testimony. Mr. Roberts.
Mr. Roberts. I have no questions.
Mr. Bedell. Mr. Morrison.
Mr. Morrison. No particular question, Mr. Chairman.
I just wanted to thank Senator Harldn for his leadership in the
Senate on this particular issue and look forward to working with
you.
Tom, are there prospects over there for hearing or for perhaps
some movement on this legislation? We know they were supportive
of the appropriation that is included in the 1986 budget, but can we
go farther than that as far as that is concerned?
Senator Harkin. The last time I talked to Senator Gorton, he
was most hopeful that we could have some hearings on that on the
Senate side. As you know, in the appropriations process, we were
supportive of irradiation I think, obviously, the legislation is not
going to move this year on either side, the House or the Senate. I
don't know. Maybe you know more about what is happening in the
House than I do.
Mr. Morrison. Depends how long you keep us here. Senator.
Senator Harkin. That is right. I just don t see any possibility of
it moving this year. But I do see a possibility of it moving next
year, I sure do.
Mr. Morrison. Thank you.
Senator Hahkin. There is good support in the Senate. Just from
my talking with my colleagues, I thmk that there is good support.
Mr. Bedell. Mr. Brown.
Mr. Brown. No questions.
Mr. Bedell. I have no questions, Tom, except to thank you for
your interest in this issue and for the leadership you have shown.
Senator Harkin. Thsink you Jigain, Mr. Chairman. Thank all of
you for permitting me to go first. Thsink you.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BERKLEY BEDELL. A
IU:PRESENTATIVE in congress from the state of IOWA
Mr. Bedell. We now will have the opening statements of sub-
committee members. First, I would like to welcome everyone here
as we consider H.R. 696, "The Federal Food Irradiation Develop-
ment and Control Act of 1985," introduced by our colleague, Mr.
Morrison, who is here with us today. I think this hearing is par-
ticularly timely in view of the Food and Drug Administration's
recent approval of low-level irradiation to help control trichinosis
in pork, and FDA's anticipated decision on the irradiation of fruits
and vegetables.
Although FDA has approved the irradiation of pork, USDA's
Food Safety find Inspection Services [FSIS] now must give its con-
sent because FSIS has authority over meat and poultry inspections.
FSIS must evaluate the safety of pork irradiation and determine
any labeling £ind handling requirements for the irradiated product.
This r^ulatory activity apparently has generated increased con-
sumer interest in examining the seifety and labeling questions asso-
ciated with irradiation. Today we expect to hear from a number of
witnesses on both sides of the issue, as well as from those Federal
B with primary regulatory responsibility for irradiation. The
,y Google
17
purpoBe of our hearing is to give interested public representatives
an opportunity to express their views in an open manner, as well
as to better inform subcommittee members about the promise and
OHicenis raised by irradiation.
All witnesses have been strictly advised to keep their oral pres-
station to 5 minutes or less. We have a long list of witnesses
today, and I will ask for your complete cooperation in adhering to
the time limit so that we can hear from everyone and maximize
the time available for questions.
I would like to emphasize that point a little bit. We have eight
panels today and unless we reetlly hold to our time limits, people at
the end are simply not going to have an adequate opportunity to
express their views. I will have to inform the witnesses if they have
exceeded their time limit. We appreciate your being here.
[HJL 696 and the report from U.S. Department of Agriculture
foUow:]
,y Google
H.R.696
To provide PVdertil coordination Cor the oontinued developmrnl and rnmmerciil-
izition of food irradialion through Ihe establishment nf a Joinl Operating
Commission for Food Irradiation in Uie Department of Agriculture and
through other meansi.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
.Taniiarv 24. lash
Mr. MOBBiHUN of Wsnhinpon (for himself. Hr. Foley. Mr. Prick. Mr. Rob-
EBTH. Mr. Watkins. Mr. Wiiitrmiirht, Mrs. Lmivu. Mr Wrbek, Mr.
McCain, Mr Skbbn. Mr. Chandlkb, Mr. Pahiiavan. Hr. Lbaph of
Iowa. Mr. TATKe, Mrs. Rvbun. Hr. Rubbrt V. Smith. Mr. Ktbatton.
Hr. Smitm of Iowa. Hr. RenEU., Mr. Kaziu. Mr. ilii.i.M, Mr. {{vanr oI
Iowa. Hr. ('uKi.iKi. Mr. Vui.kmkr, and Hr. Lk>iitp(k>t) introdured the lot-
lowing hill: whirh was rpferrcd jointly to the Committers on F.nergy and
Commerre. Armrd Serviees, and Agrirulture
A BILL
To provide Federal coordination for the continued development
and commercialization of food irradiation through the estab-
lishment of a Joint Operating Commission for Food Irradia-
tion in the Department of Agriculture and through other
means.
1 Be it eitacled by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 lives of the United Stales of America in Congress assembled.
,y Google
1 SHORT TITLE
2 Section I. This Act may cited as the "Federal Food
3 IrradiatioR Development and Control Act of 1985".
4 PINDINOa AND PURPOSES
5 Sec. 2. (a) The Congress find that —
6 (1) irradiation of food at regulated doses is recog-
7 nized by international authorities and the Department
8 of Health and Human Services as safe and wholesome;
9 (2) irradiation of food inhibits or destroys the bac-
10 teria and other microorganisms which cause food to
1 1 spoil and eliminates trichinosis in pork, insect pests in
12 fruits, vegetables and gnuns, and food-home patho-
13 gens, Buch as salmonella and botulinum in red meats,
14 poultry, and fish prftducts;
15 (3) irradiation of food is one of the substitutes for
16 many of the post harvest fumigants including ethylene
1 7 dibromide;
18 (4) radiation sources used for irradiation process
19 including five MeV (million electron volts) for gamma
20 rays and x ray, and ten MeV for electrons cannot
21 induce added risks to consumers from radioactivity in
22 food;
23 (5) irradiation of food is a process, much like
24 cooking in a microwave oven, boiling, or freezing;
25 (6) additional research and development is needed
26 to determine the optimum dose level for irradiation on
,y Google
3
foods and the appropriate marketing factors in order to
apply the benefits of irradiation to a variety of products
assuring public safety;
(7) there needs to be national uniformity in the
regulation of irradiation processing of food;
(8( public understanding of ionizing radiation is es-
sential to develop widespread commercial opportunities
and to promote consumer acceptance of food irradia-
tion;
(9) irradiation is currently approved in the United
States for use of spices, fresh potatoes to inhibit
sprouting, wheat and wheat flour for disinfestation, and
twenty-five other countries, have approved application
of food irradiation on at least forty different food items;
(10) there are a variety of current or potential
uses for irradiation beyond processing of food, including
sterilization of surgical instruments and other medical
products, sterilization of baby powder, manufacture of
nonstick cookware, treatment of cosmetic products,
pasteurization and sterilization of sewage sludge, soil
and timber fumigation, seed stimulation, processing of
polymers, production of chemicals, and many others;
(11) there is an acute shortage of United States
source material required for food irradiation process
,y Google
1 and current supplies are unable to meet projected
2 demand;
3 (12) the Federal Government owns byproduct nm-
4 terial as part of our defense nuclear waste program;
5 (13) a significant return on investment can come
6 back to the United States Treasury through the lease
7 of irradiation source materials to private and public
8 agencies;
9 (14) there needs to be coordination with intema-
10 tionai organizations and Stale governments on re-
1 1 search, development, applications, and standards for ir-
12 radiation and among the many Federal agencies in-
13 volved, including the Department of Agriculture, the
14 Department of Energy, and Food and Drug Adminis-
15 tration, the Department of Health and Human Serv-
16 ices, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Nucle-
17 ar Regulatory Commission, the Department of Com-
18 merce, and the Agency for International Development;
19 and
20 (15) there needs to be coordination between the
21 Federal Government and the private secUir (or the pur-
22 pose of encouraging private enterprise development
23 and utilization of irradiation processing.
24 (b) The purposes of this Act are to —
,y Google
22
5
1 (1) change the definition of food irradiation .so ihat
2 it is defined as a food process, subject to existing regu-
3 latory authority of the P'ood and Drug Administration;
4 (2) expand research and development of ionizing
5 radiation in order to facilitate commercialization of a
6 variety of beneficial use technologies;
7 (3) provide for education regarding food irradiation
8 by ionizing radiation in order to promote public under-
9 standing and acceptance;
10 (4) provide for national uniformity in the regula-
1 1 tion of irradiation processing of food:
12 (5) ensure adequate supplies of source material by
13 providing for the safe domestic leasing of nuclear by-
14 product material for use in commercial applications of
15 food irradiation and continue ihe current foreign nucle-
16 ar byproduct distribution program; and
17 (6) provide for the creation of a Joint Operating
18 Commission for Food Irradiation within the Depart-
19 ment of Agriculture to serve as an intermediary with
20 private enterprise, Federal and State government
21 agencies, international organizations, and the public.
22 DEFINITIONAL AND REOl'LATORV CHANOES
23 Sec. 3. (a) Section 201(s) of the Federal Food, Drug,
24 and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321(s)) is amended by—
,y Google
1 (1) striking out "; and including any source of ra-
2 diation intended for any such use" in the first paren-
3 thetical material;
4 (2) striking out "or" at the end of paragraph (4),
5 and by striking out the period at the end of paragraph
G (5) inserting in lieu thereof "; or"; and
7 (3) adding the following new paragraph at the end
8 thereof:
9 "(6) food irradiation process.".
10 (b) Section 201 of such Act (21 U.S.C. 321) is amended
11 by adding the following new subsection at the end thereof:
12 "(bb) The term 'food irradiation process' means a food
13 treatment in which ionizing energy is applied to raw agricul-
14 tural commodities, processed foods, or other foods to destroy
15 the organisms which cause infestation in food, to inhibit or
16 destroy bacieria and other microorganisms which among
17 other things cause food to spoil or make the food unwhole-
18 some, to inhibit sprouting, to retard the postharvest ripening
19 of foods, and to improve the food's functional properties.".
20 (cKD Section 409 of such Act (21 U.S.C. 348) is
2 1 amended —
22 (A) in subsection (a) by—
23 (i) inserting "or food irradiation process"
24 after "food additive" each place it appears;
,y Google
7
(ii) inserting "or process" after "such addi-
tives" and after "such additive";
(iii) inserting "or clause (7)" after "clause
(2KC)"; and
(iv) inserting "or having been treated by
such a process" after "such an additive";
(B) in subsection (b) by —
(i) inserting "or food irradiation process"
after "food additive" in paragaph (1);
(ii) inserting "for such additive" after "in-
cluding" in paragraph (2KA);
(iii) inserting "or process" after "such addi-
tive" each place such term appears except the
first time it appears in paragraph (2KB) and
except in paragraphs (2)(C), {2KD), and (3);
(iv) inserting "or the source of the food irra-
diation process" after "food additive" in para-
graph (2)(A):
(v) inserting "or the proposed procedures and
methods for conducting the food irradiation proc-
ess" after the first time "such additive" appears
in paragraph (2)(B);
(vi) inserting ", unless the level of the pro-
posed food irradiation process has already been
,y Google
1 recognized to be safe by the Secretary" before the
2 period at the end of para^aph (2KE);
3 (vii) inserting "in the case of a food addi-
4 tive," after "(or," and "food irradiation process
5 or" after "for," in paragraph (3); and
6 (viii) inserting ", or in the case of food irra-
7 diation process, such information as the Secretary
8 requests" before the period at the end of para-
9 graph (4);
10 (C) in subsection (c) by —
1 1 (i) inserting "or food irradiation process"
12 after "food additive" and "food additives" each
13 place such terms appear;
14 (ii) inserting "or process" after "such addi-
15 tive" the first place it appears in paragraph (1)(A)
16 and each place it occurs in clause (i) of the provi-
17 so of paragraph (3)(A) and in paragraph (4)(A):
18 (iii) inserting "or process" after "no addi-
19 tive" in paragraph (3MA), after "the additive" in
20 paragraph (3KB), and after "an additive" in para-
2 1 gra.ph (4); and
22 (D) in subsection (d) by —
23 (i) inserting "or food irradiation process"
24 after "food additive"; and
,y Google
1 (ii) inserting "or process" after "such addi-
2 tive"; and
3 (E) in subsection (i) by —
4 (i) inserting "or food irradiation process"
5 after "food additive"; and
6 (ii) inserting "or treated by such process"
7 after "such additive".
8 (2) The heading of section 409 of such Act (21 U.S.C.
9 348) is amended by inserting "and food irradiation
10 PBOCESS" AFTER "aDDITIVES".
11 (3) The heading of section 409(a) of such Act (21
12 U.S.C. 348(a)) is amended by inserting "and Food Irradia-
13 tion Process" after "Additives".
14 NATIONAL UNIFORMITY
15 Sec. 4. (a) It is declared to be the express intent of
16 Congress to require national uniformity in the regulation of
17 irradition processing of food in order to permit national mar-
is keting of all irradiated food without jurisdictional barriers.
19 (b) No State or political subdivision thereof may estab-
20 lish or continue in effect any requirement relating to the irra-
21 diation processing of food, or to the labeling or marketing of
22 irradiated food, which is in addition to or different from the
23 requirements of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
24 and the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act, and the regula-
25 lions and interpretations issued thereunder.
,y Google
27
10
1 (e) Any State or political subdivision thereof may exer-
2 cise concurrent jurisdiction with the Secretary of Flealth and
3 Human Services over the irradiation processing of food, and
4 the labeling and marketing of irradiated food, for the purpose
5 of enforcing requirements identical with those established in
6 the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the Fair Packag-
7 ing and Labeling Act, and the regulations and interpretations
8 issued thereunder.
9 (d) Any State or political subdivision thereof may peti-
10 tion the Secretary of Health and Human Services to adopt by
1 1 regulation as a Federal requirement any requirement relating
12 to the irradiation processing of food or to the labeling or mar-
13 keting of irradiated food.
14 LEASING OP NUCLEAB BVPBODUCT MATERIAL FOB FOOD
15 IRRADIATION
16 Sec. 5. (a) The third sentence of section 81 of the
17 Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 21 1 1) is amended—
18 (1) by inserting "at rates that reflect fair market
19 value" before the comma at the end of clause (a);
20 (2) in clause (b), by inserting "commercial or
21 other" before "use";
22 (3) by striking out "and" at the end of clause (b);
23 and
24 <4) by inserting before the period at the end there-
25 of the following: ", and (d) will encourage commercial
26 applications of byproduct material as deRned in section
■ Mil
,y Google
11
1 II e. (I), particularly as a source for food irradiation
'J process".
3 (b| The fourth sentence of section 81 of such Act (4^
4 U.S.C. 2111) is amended —
5 (1) bv striking out "either"; and
6 (2) bv inserting ", in commercial apphcations of
7 food irradiation process." after "development".
8 (c) The changes made by this section to section 81 of
9 such Act (42 U.S.C. 2111) are intended to apply only to
10 byproduct material produced as a result of the Defense Nu-
1 1 clear Waste Program.
12 ESTABLISHMENT OK JOINT OPEBATING COMMISSION FOR
13 FOOD IRRADIATION
14 Sec. 6. (a) There hereby is established within the De-
15 partment of Agriculture a commission to be known as the
16 Joint Operating Commission for Food Irradiation (hereafter
17 in this section referred to as the "Commission"). The Com-
18 mission shall carry out the functions specified in subsection
19 (c), subject to the supervision of the Secretary of Agriculture.
20 (b)(1) The Commission shall consist of eight members as
21 follows:
22 (A) one individual, appointed by the President,
23 who is representative of the interests of the general
24 public and who is not an officer or employee of the
25 Federal Government;
,y Google
12
1 (B) one individual appointed by the Secretary of
2 Apiculture from among the officers and employees of
3 the Department of Agriculture;
4 (C) one individual appointed hy the Secretary of
5 [lealth and Human Services from among the officers
6 and employees of the Departmeni of Health and
7 Human Services;
8 (D) one individual appointed hy the Secretary of
9 Energy from among the officers and employees of the
10 Department of Energy:
1 1 (E) one individual appointed by the Administrator
12 of the Environmental Protection Agency from among
13 the officers and employees of the Environmental Pro-
14 lection Agency;
13 (F) one individual appointed by the Nuclear Regu-
16 latory Commission from among the officers and em-
1 7 ployees of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission;
18 (G) one individual appointed by the Secretary of
19 Commerce from among the officers and employees of
20 the Department of Commerce; and
21 (H) one individual appointed by the Administrator
22 of the Agency for International Development from
23 among the officers and employees of the Agency for
24 International Development.
,y Google
13
1 (2) The appointments of the initial members of the Com-
2 mission shall be made before the expiration of the ninety-day
3 period following the date of the enactment of this Act.
4 (3) Each member of the Commission shall report direct-
5 ly to the authority appointing such member and each Com-
6 mission member shall serve for such period of time as the
7 authority appointing such member considers appropriate.
8 (4) A vacancy in the Commission shall be filled before
9 the expiration of the sixty-day period following the date on
10 which such vacancy occurs, and in the same manner in which
11 the origin^ appointment was made.
12 (5KA) Any member of the Commission who is a full-time
13 officer or employee of the Federal Qovenunent shall receive
14 no additional pay, allowances, or beneRts by reason of the
15 service of such member on the Commission.
16 (B) Each member of the Commission not described in
17 subparagraph (A) shall be paid at a rate equal to the daily
18 equivalent of the minimum annual rate of basic pay payable
19 for grade GS-15 of the General Schedule for each day, in-
20 eluding travel time, during which such member is engaged in
21 the actual performance of duties vested in the Commission.
22 Each such member shall be reimbursed for actual expenses,
23 including travel expenses, incurred in the course of perform-
24 ing such duties.
25 (c) It shall be the function of the Commission —
,y Google
31
14
1 (1) to coordinate and review all research, develop-
2 ment, and demonstration activities of the Federal Gov-
3 eminent relating to the use of irradiation in agricultur-
4 a) production including food irradiation process and the
5 food irradiation process activities of the Department of
6 Energy, except that any additional research determined
7 by the Commission to be required for the commercial-
8 ization of food irradiation process and the use of irra-
9 diation in agricultural production including postirrida-
10 tion monitoring and inline dosimetry shall, to the maxi-
11 mum ext«nt practicable, be conducted at existing lab-
12 oratories of the Agricultural Research Service of the
13 Department of Agriculture, at land-grant institutions of
14 higher education, and at existing Federal multiprogram
15 laboratories;
16 (2) to collect and consolidate the data produced by
17 all Federal agencies as a result of research, develop-
18 ment, and demonstration activities relating to food irra-
19 diation process;
20 (3) to coordinate informational exchange and edu-
21 cational activities with respect to food irradiation proe-
22 ess with appropriate Federal agencies, the States in-
23 eluding appropriat« interstate compacts, commodity
24 groups, export trading groups, other interested private
25 organizations, and the general public;
,y Google
15
1 (4) to encourage interest and investment by pri-
2 vate enterprises in the development and application of
3 food irradiation process;
4 (5) to consider and make reconunendatJons to de-
5 cisionmaking bodies on the labeling, packaging, and
6 handling of food products processed with irradiation;
7 (6) to encourage a better understanding by the
8 general public with respect to food irradiation process;
9 (7) if determined by the Commission to be appro-
10 priate, to petition the Food and Drug Administration
1 1 under section 409 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cos-
12 metic Act (21 U.S.C. 348) to expand the scope of reg-
is ulation allowing for commercial application of food ir-
14 radiation process; and
15 (8) to submit annually to the Congress a report
16 setdng forth the specific progress made by and future
17 plans of the Commission in carrying out the functions
18 described in paragraphs (0 through (7).
19 (d) The Secretary of Agriculture shall provide the Com-
20 mission with such staff and office facilities as the Secretary',
21 following consultation with the Commission, considers neces-
22 sary to permit the Commission to carry out its functions
23 under this secUon.
,y Google
16
1 (e) There are authorized to be appropriated such sums
2 as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this
3 section.
O
,y Google
OF AQRICULTURE
Honorable E (
1 finding* ind ■
c Egg Produces Inipeccion Ace CI U.S.C. 1031 et seq.),
f Agriculture i* reiponiible for intpcccing wat, poultry
cemine if they are adulterated. Any of auch product!
Hid be prohibited fcim diaCribuCion ia camKcce. An a
n effect purguant to aection 409 of the Federal Food,
■ it neceaaary, even Lf the food additive has been
,y Google
Accordingly, since the loo
to iocorporite
poultry, oc ig
. Poultry Product! In,pectl
• Id be ac=™pli)hed by in.e
tnold go beyon
tion h of the bill i
■ •uei, through .wndMDt of
to thee .gen.ie. for
1 far Pood IctadiicioD (hereinsftei
'itie> elreidy being c.rcied out by
,f > Conmiaiion <ril1 add a neu laye
,y Google
C*ragsDC7 workin* group on
n ■nd Techooloir Policy (O
i>d liridiatiaa under cha Co
r Coordinatioo (CIRM-C) «fai
irecting authority •
I tTradiation U uniucaaa
acion tcchnaloiy haa bcao dooe inlocsally bjr
- m. Hon fonully, the Offiu of
inaidering forBitiaa af a Subco^ictec
a InCaratancy Radiation Heacarch and
lader reprraantation of Execuciva
Tlic lc|ia
baing p
of food. Uhan the
>af*ty i. an int
■icd group of
■tion and to
Ean Caka pUca.
Sincanlr,
„GoogIe
Proposed Amendraents to the Federal Meat
inspection Act, the Poultry Producte
Inspection Act. and the Egg Products
Inspection Act
1. The Federal Heat Inspection Act i
I in section l(m)(2)(c) (21 U.S.t
: has been treated by any food in
additive" ;
in the proviso of section l(m){2)(D) (21 U.S.C.
1601(h) (2 ) {D) } by inserting "food irradiation process," after
■food additive.";
(d) in section 1(bi)(7) (21 U.S.C. S6Ql(m)[7)) by inserting
imediately before the semicolon ":Provided, That an article which
not otherwise deemed adulterated under this clause shall
DevertheleBS be deemed adulterated if the use of a food
inradiat:ion process, in or on such article, is prohibited by
re9ulations of the Secretary";
irradiation process','
The Poultry Products Inspection Act is amended -
I in section 4(g)(2)(C) (21 U.S.C. % 453(gK2)(C)) by inserting
: has been treated by any food irradiation process" after "food
additive" ;
I the provisc
|4S3(g)(2)(D)) by i
"food additive,";
(d) in section 4(g)(7) (21 U.S.C. $453(g)(7)} by inserting
i^nediately before the semicolon "^Provided, That an article which
IS not athervise deemed adulterated under this clause shall
nevertheless be deemed adulterated if the use of a food
irradiation process, in or on such article, is prohibited by
regulations of the Secretary";
le:
The Egg Products Inspection Act is amended -
„GoogIe
<b) in section 4<a)(2}(c) <21 U.S.c. |1033(«)(2)(C)) by liwerting ,
"or has been treated by any food irradiation procesB" after "food
additive" ;
1
(c) in the proviso of section 4(a)(2)(D) (21 U.S.C.
fl033(a](2)(D)) by inserting "or food irradiation process, " after
"food additive,"; '
1
(d) in section 4(a)(7} (21 U.S.C. 1033(a)(7)) by inserting ,
inmediately before the sevicolon ":Provided, That an article which
!• not otherwise deemed adulterated under this clause sltall
nevertheless be deemed adulterated If the use of a food 9
irradiation process, in or on such article, is prohibited by
regulations of the Secretary"; ^
(e) in section 4(u) (21 U.S.C. I1033(u)) by inserting »>food 1
,y Google
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. PAT ROBERTS, A
REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGR^S FROM THE STATE OF KANSAS
Mr. Roberts. Yes. ThEink you, Mr. Chairman.
In the interest of time, I would ask permission my full statement
be entered into the record.
As one of the original sponsors of H.R. 696, introduced by my
friend, Mr. Morrison, I would hope, as the Senator has indicated,
we could take all of the concerns into account and perhaps move
« a markup of this legislation at the earliest opportunity. I don't
think we could do that this session, but perhaps say in the next
year.
I want to say that this process is an important and a safe alter-
native to the use of pesticides. I think perhaps the biggest issue
that we will face during these hearings is the issue of labeling and
consumer safety and acceptance of products that have been subject-
ed to this process. I know there are trade associations out there
idio do not support labeling, but I believe it is in the long term
best interest to label the product so that the consumer is aware of
its use. If we don't label the products, the issue will become a lack
of labeling, and I think that would be unfortunate.
I yield back the balance of my time, Mr. Chairman.
^Tbs prepared statement of Mr. Roberts follows:]
,y Google
Movembac 18, 198S
Hr . Chairman. T commend yoL. for calling this heating
today. The last time this Subconnnl ttee took a loolc at
Irradiation was d-ring the ethylene dibromide (EDB) crisis. The
Subconun i t tee hearing was focused on alternatives to the use of
BDBi and Irradiation came up as a possible alternative in the
protection of stored fruit and grains.
Since that hearing, there have been several developments in
the area of approving irradiation for the protection of food. Of
particular interest to the Agriculture Committee is the use of
Irradiation on pork. On July 22, 1985, the Food and Drug
Administration approved irradiation of hog carcasses and pork
products for trichinae control, I look forward to hearing the
progress report from the Food and Drug Administration. I
understand that the issue of labeling has been brought up by the
Food Safety Inspection Service, of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture.
Irradiation ia an important and safe alternative to the use
of pesticides. However, the issue of labeling and consumer
acceptance of products that have been irradiated is of concern.
labeling, but I believe it is in the long-term best interest of
„GoogIe
irradiaclon to label Che prodi^ct so that the consume! is awace
of the _se of irradiation. If we don't laCel the ptodi.cts, the
> will bftcome the lack of labeling and not the advantages of
1 am an original co-sponsor of H.R. 696, introd.ced by Mr,
ison, I believe we have the departments involved in that
frns with the bill. However, I wov-ld hope that we co-Id take
legislation, early next year. Mr. Morrison will hove more to
)n that iss;,e and his wishes in regards to moving that
once again, thank you Cot calling this hearing. Judging
the witness list, I think we will hear from all sides of the
liation issue and look forward to that.
„GoogIe
Mr. Bedell. Thank you very much, Mr. Roberts. Mr. Morrison.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SID MORRISON, A REPRESENTA-
TIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
Mr. Morrison. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you and our ranking
member, Mr. Roberts, for these hearings, for proceeding with this
particular subject at this time. We had talked earUer in the year,
and this came right after the farm bill, and you have certainly
been true to your word.
Food irradiation has been around for many years. I have done a
little reading back into the past to find in 1920 that its effects on
insects were first noted. Most of the work, as Senator Harkin has
indicated, came following World War 11, but I think it is a technol-
c^y whose time has now come, and its impact technically as post-
harvest treatment could be revolutionary. In fact, I think we could .
say, Mr. Chairman, that the subject of today's hearing could be the
most signiflcemt development in food preservation and processing
since the introduction of canning and freezing in the last century.
Irradiation kills undesirable biological elements that contami-
nate food without seriously eroding the food's nutritional value, re-
tards spoilage, keeps food fresh and more natural tasting.
Mr. Chairman, I happen to have a couple of samples here of two
hamburger buns made on the same day, one with irradiated flour,
which was approved a number of years ago, emd the one on this
side, Mr. Roberts, is the one made with regular flour, and we can
see this was about almost 2 years ago these were produced. So it
does have some very highly desirable effects in a number of ways.
Its most immediate application is as a substitute for postharvest
chemical pesticides. Besides being an attractive alternative to EDB
and other fumigants, low doses of gamma radiation eliminate trich-
inosis in pork, stop the medfly in citrus fruits and, of particular in-
terest to me, kill the codling moth in apples and cherries. Irradia-
tion also destroys botulinum in red meats, poultry, and fish and ex-
tends the shelf life of highly perishable fresh fruits, vegetables, and
grains. The process can prevent sprouting in potatoes and onions
and delay the ripening of fruits such as bananas, mangoes, toma-
toes, pears, and avocados. It has even been used to increase the
juice yield of wine grapes.
Given all these potential applications, it is no wonder that food
irradiation has attracted substantial attention from farmers, food
processors, exporters, an infant irradiation industry, regulatory
bodies, and the public.
I am pleased, Mr. Chairmim, that the 1986 budget passed by this
Congress, even with all the fiscal restrtdnts on us, included $5 mil-
lion under the category of food irradiation for the first time for the
work that we believe should be done for demonstration of this tech-
nology, and I have just seen this morning a letter to the Depart-
ment of Energy from the Appropriations Committee fisking that
the $5 million be extended to $7 million to cover the important
products that are included.
A separate pork irradiation petition vtas approved by the Food
and Drug Administration this past summer, emd the agency is
,y Google
here, and I believe they are on the threshold of approving low-dose
food irradiation application for fresh fruits and vegetables.
So these are timely hearings and give us a chance both to look at
irradiation as a process and consider legislative reforms. The sub-
ject of today's hearing is one of those proposed legislative reforms,
H,R, 696, a bill introduced with the help of many of you back in
January.
The l^islation's Eiim is to adviince the cause of consumer and
commercial acceptance of food irradiation. Although I recognize
that both USDA and FDA have reservations about some of the
bill's provisions, I regard the bill as a rough cut, and I welcome and
encourage refinements, particularly as they relate to the proposed
Joint Operating Commission. I believe these hearings will lay the
foundation for further consideration and ultimate approval of this
bill.
I want to clarify one point, however, about a misunderstanding
about the legislation. H.R. 696 does not undermine the current au-
thority of the Food and Drug Administration to require labeling of
irradiated foods. Mr. Chairman, I would ask at this point to submit
for the record a letter from the Food and Drug Administration to
Congressman Panetta in response to his question about labeling, in
«^ch they very clearly responded that they are not aware of any
provisions of the legislation that affect Federal food irradiation la-
beling requirements.
Mr. Bedell. Without objection, it will be entered in the record.
rnie letter follows:]
,y Google
DETAITMENTOF HI
,y Google
Ptgt i - The Honoribic Leon E. PanetCi
^
t?l use ^343 ind
i^'"
„GoogIe
Mr. Morrison. In fact, the issue of labeling, of course, has been
kicked around quite a little, and I am sure the number of months
that the Food and Drug Administration has taken in moving for-
ward their proposal for low-level treatments probably have re-
volved around the question of labeling and what should be done,
find it is my feeling that they probably will include some sort of a
reasonable labeling provision.
We have a number of witnesses today, and I commend you and
your staff, Mr. Chairman, for putting together all the groups that
are here. I look forward to hearing all of these views expressed by
the variety of witnesses. While I suspect there will be some dis-
agreements, I believe we all share a common objective to insure
that we provide the consumer with safe and wholesome foods.
Mr. Chairman, I have one other item I would like to submit for
the record, a handout of studies on the safety of food irradiation,
which will react to some of the thoughts that are going to be ex-
pressed, I am sure, today since we have heard them before. I be-
lieve that should be part of the record as well.
Mr. Bedell. Without objection, it will be entered in the record
with your prepared statement.
Mr. Morrison. I thank you for this opfwrtunity to make this
opening statement.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Morrison follows:]
,y Google
OPENING STATEFtKT OF THE
HONORABLE SIO MORRISON
ON FOOO IRRADIATION
The Subcommittee on DEPARrMENT Operations, Research.
AND Foreign Agriculture
November 18- 1985
Good Morning, Mr. Chairman. First, I commend you for holding
these important hearings. i have taken a very active interest in fooo
irradiation, and i appreciate this opportunity to discuss fully, in an
open hearing- the fooo irradiation preservation process,
Food irradiation is a technology whose time has come. Its impact
AS A POST-HARVEST TREATMENT COULO BE REVOLUTIONARY. In FACT. FOOO
irradiation could be the most significant development in fooo
preservation and processing since the introduction of canning and
freezing in the last century.
Food irradiation kills undersirable biological elements that
contaminate food without seriously eroding the food's nutritional
value. it retards spoilage and keeps food fresh and more natural
TASTING. Its most IMMEDIATE APPLICATION 15 AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR
POST-HARVEST CHEMICAL PESTICIDES. BESIDES BEING AN ATTRACTIVE
ALTERNATIVE TO EDB AND OTHER FUMI6ANTS. LOW DOSES OF GAMMA RADIATION
ELIMINATE TRICHINOSIS IN PORK, STOP THE MEDFLY IN CITRUS FRUITS AND,
OF PARTICULAR INTEREST TO ME. KILL THE CODLING MOTH IN APPLES AND
CHERRIES. IRRADIATION ALSO DESTROYS BOTULINUM AND SALMONELLA IN RED
,y Google
MEATS. POULTRY. AND FISH AND EXTENDS THE SHELF LIFE OF HIGHLY
PERISHABLE FRESH FRUITS. VEGETABLES. AND GRAINS. ThE PROCESS CAN
prevent sprouting [n potatoes and onions and delay the ripening of
fruits such as bananas, mangoes. tomatoes. pears, and avocados. it
has even been used to increase the juice yield of wine grapes.
Given all these potential applications- it's no nonder that food
irradiation has attracted substantial attention from farmers, food
processors, EXPORTERS. AN INFANT IRRADIATION INDUSTRY. REGULATORY
BODIES, AND THE PUBLIC. THE FDA I S ON THE THRESHOLD OF APPROVING
LOW-DOSE FOOD IRRADIATION APPLICATIONS FOR FRESH FRUIT AND VEGETABLES.
A SEPARATE PORK IRRADIATION PETITION MAS APPROVED BY FDA THIS PAST
SUMMER. These timely hearings, given ull this interest, grant us an
OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE PROS AND CONS OF FOOD IRRADIATION AND
CONSIDER POTENTIAL LEGISLATIVE REFORMS.
One of these legislative approaches is H.R, 696. a bill I
introduced back in january, i'm pleased that a majority of this
subcohfilttee. including the distinguished chairman and ranking
Republican Member, have sponsored this bill. Tke legislation's aim is
TO advance the cause of consumer and commercial acceptance of food
irradiation. Although I recognize that both USDA and FOA have
reservations about some of the bill's provisions, I REGARD THE BILL AS
A ROUGH CUT, AND I WELCOME AND ENCOURAGE REFINEMENTS. PARTICULARLY AS
THEY RELATE TO THE PROPOSED JOINT OPERATING COMMISSION. I HOPE THESE
HEARINGS WILL LAY THE FOUNDATION FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION AND
ULTIMATE APPROVAL OF THIS BILL.
I MUST CLARIFY NOW, HOWEVER, A MISUNDERSTANDING ABOUT MY PROPOSED
LEGISLATION. H.R. 696 DOES NOT UNDERMINE THE CURRENT AUTHORITY OF THE
,y Google
Food and Drug Administration to require labelling of irradiated foods.
It has never seen my intent to ban labelling. I believe the consumer
HAS THE RIGHT TO KNOW IF THE FOOD HAS BEEN IRRADIATED, AND I AM
TROUBLED BY CHARGES THAT MY BILL IS ANT I -LABELLI NG. THE BILL IS. IK
FACT- LABEL NEUTRAL.
We have a bevy of witnesses today REPRESENTING THE COMMODITY
ASSOCIATIONS. THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY. AND CONSUMER ACTIVIST
organizations. I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING ALL THE VARIOUS VIEWS
EXPRESSED BY THESE WITNESSES ON FOOD IRRADIATION. WHILE I SUSPECT
THAT THERE WILL BE SOME DISAGREEMENTS, I BELIEVE WE ALL SHARE A COMMON
OBJECTIVE: TO ENSURE THAT WE PROVIDE THE CONSUMER WITH SAFE AND
HHOLESOHE FOODS.
Thank you, fte. Chairman.
,y Google
STU>IES OH THE StfTTt OF FOOD IMWDIATION
Nmonber 18, 1985
Those who question the safety and iihol esonenest of food
foce of the vast consensu* of studies conflralng the safety of food
Irradiation. These adverse studies used questfonable methodol ogv,
have not been replicated, and have been discounted by peer reviews.
ting Irradia
Specifically:
The Indian Study
The study oas done o
• Other studies are critical of the Indie Bettiodologv-
study In the Journnl ai Nucl ear Agrlrul tural BTol ogy c
that the Indie study mbs "not designed Hell" and the r
It!
JnurnnI al Food and Co^int ] r TtP('^°'°flY '9^6
T^hnlrBl Report Ssclas fli UlB Intgrnatlonal Pro|ect
Id the Field af faofl Irmfllatlon I 977
Jpurnal ^ Ton reol ogy 1977 (letter)
jounral Ql £sS^ BDi Cosmn-f It TiT»1rn1ngv I 9S1
Jp.lnJ BU3 Isitacl CcimltTeg Report I 976
,y Google
RustTan Stud las
Tm) 1970 Russian studies claimed that li
■slltiss occurred In ahlte rats oho wer
fish.
• Tb* studlas' mthodol ogy was quksllonable. Ths [rradlsted
uople aas stored for 2 morttis ot relatively Mgh
tBiparatures. The control sonplo (non-lrradtated food) was
• A p— r ravleif quaitlonad the Russian stiidles. The Hatick
laboratories coMntssloned a review In th* early 197Q<s. The
conclusion of the revlei was that the Russian studies did not
■eet nodern diet stnndards and that the results Hera not
statistically significant.
e The Joint Expert Cnnlttaa specifically refuted the studies.
Th« International FAO and WHO Expert Coimlttee concluded that
the aork of the Russian studies was "so poorly done that It
should never have bean reported In the I Itarature". (Journal
at Inijmtrlnl [f{tlllft|pp Tachnol ofly I 985 1
• Subsequent Russian studies support ttie safety of food
Irratflatlon. Four separate studies reported In the Rutslan
Journal sit Prop rosy PI tan I ya (1973, 1977 and tuo In 1981)
afflneed that food Irradiation Is safe and wholesana and that
prior studies were not supportable.
„GoogIe
Af I attain Studies
Some studies performed In India and the
J Irradiation result* In ttie creation of I
Responses :
• The India study's ■wthodologv "^ <|wntlonabla. A 1981 jcaurnwl at Food
Srlanfo article criticized this study because tlie Irradiated wheat was
heot sterilized. It vas Ihe heat starll Izatlon, not the Irradiation,
that cau»ed the atlatoxln production.
• Other ttudles refute the aflatoxin conclusion. See AppI egate and
Chlpley In Pou 1 1 ry Science. I97S! BuMerman, Bornnart, and Hartung In
the Joiirniil al food Sclercp. I973j and GuMbOt In £flQd Irradiation.
1970,
• The adverse studies don't repllcats actual use conditions. In the
leading United States oflatoxin study, the mold spores were Irradiated
In aqueoos suspension, then Inoculated Into grain. Under proposed FDA
regulations, however, grain ulth any mold present would be Irradiated
after harvest. Thus, concludes the FOA, "the study does not replicate
actual use conditions". (40 Federal l^f^ter ;T17, February 14, 19841
,y Google
Canadian I aboratory studies reported in 1961 gnd 1963 were abte to produce
Incraese In -Hie redlatlon resistance of a bacterial strain. These studtas
tu tha concern that food Irradiation mav create mutations of radiation
mhtent foods.
Th*»a s-^u(ll•s are not practical. The foods were Irradiated JBJ timet.
Af-f-er -t^s-t inanY treatments of any process, a certain resistance iiould
star+ -fro b« seen. Foods In the ccmnerclal sector ■III not be Irradiated
B4 tines.
> llBsul't-s ar* not unique. Even witti these mul tl-lrrsdlatlons, no mutated
radla'I'lon resistance uai found to yield a greater resistance than
na-tural ly occurring organisms. (Journal at Indu^trliil Irradiation
T^H»nl OQV. 1985)
,y Google
HTce Fed Irradtatad Chtcken Stydy
An AnarlcBn study reported Pn 1 9M, Involvtng the feeding of radiation
sterti lied chicken to mice, resulted In questions requiring toxicologtcal
Interpretation. This study Is referred to as the Raltech study.
Responses!
• The 40S« laval nas high. The dose level In the Raltech study nos about
S.9 Hegarads, a dose ?9 tlpnes higher than the dose level no* being
considered by FDA for approval. Even the supervlser of the Raltech
study agrees that this high dose study only confirms the safety of
Ion-dose food Irradiation applications.
• Pmt Ravlea disnisses the study. At the FDA's request, the National
Toxicology Progran this past spring conducted a peer revlen of the
Raltech study. The conclusion of the revlea: no pathological effects
from food Irradiation were found. The FDA futher concluded: "the
NTP's Board of Scientific Counselors concluded that the available data
did not allow the study [the Raltech study] to be categorlied as
demonstrating a carcinogenic response. The agency has reviewed all
I Including the Raltech study, showed treatment-related effects that
■out d preclude approving [low-dose food Irradiation applications]."
<50 Federal Register 24190, Jure 10, 1965)
,y Google
66
Mr. Beobll. Thank you, Mr. Morrison, and thank you for your
leadership in this area.
Mr. Brown held hearings on this subject in the last Congress and
has been very active on this issue. We appreciate all you have done
as well, George.
We next mil hear from the Department of Agriculture, ft-om
Don Houston, the Administrator, Food Safety and Inspection Serv>
ice, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
STATEMENT OF DONALD L. HOUSTON, ADMINISTRATOR, FOOD
SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OP AG-
RICULTURE, ACCOMPANIED BY WILLIAM HELMS, ASSOCIATE
DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, PLANT PROTECTION AND QUARAN-
TtSE, ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE;
HAROLD REUBEN, DEPUTY ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL;
AND TERRY B. KINNEY. ADMINISTRATOR, AGRICULTURAL RE-
SEARCH SERVICE
Mr. Houston. With me today is Mr. William Helms, Associate
Director for Plant Protection and Quarantine for the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service, Mr. Hal Reuben from our General
Counsel's Office, and Dr. Terry Kinney, Administrator of the Agri-
cultural Research Service.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify on H.R. 696, which pro-
vides for Federal coordination for continued development and com-
mercialization of food irradiation through the establishment of a
Joint Operating Commission for Food Irradiation in the Depart-
ment of Agriculture.
Let me generalize by saying that we recommend sections 3 and 4
be amended to take into account the responsibilities of the Secre-
tary in administering the Fcxleral Meat Inspection Act, the Poultnr
Products Inspection Act, and the Egg Products Inspection Act. We
oppose section 6 on the basis that coordinating mechanisms are al-
ready in place, and a new layer of authority is unnecessary.
Turning to research activities, USDA has conducted research on
food irradiation for more than 30 years. That research has involved
the use of low-dose irradiation of up to 100 kilorads as a quarantine
treatment for insects in place of chemical fumigants and for the
control of trichinae in pork; the use of medium doses of between
100 kilorads and 1 megarad for the control of microorgfuiisms for
pasteurization; and the use of high doses above 1 m^arad for steri-
lizing foods.
On February 14, 1984, the Food and Drug Administration [FDA]
issued a propraed rule to permit the use of food irradiation at doses
of up to 100 kilorads for inhibiting the growth and maturation of
fresh f^i^ts and vegetables and for disinfestlng foods of insects. The
proposal would also permit the use of irradiation to disinfest spices
rf microbes at doses not to exceed 3 megarads, or 3,000 kilorads.
We expect FDA to issue a final rule on the proposal soon.
With the loss of ethylene dibromide as a fumigant £md the cur-
rent lack of acceptaUe chemical alternatives, it is becoming more
a^iarent thrt radiation treatment of certain commodities may play
an increasingly important role in tUlowing their continued move-
ment in national and international commerce. Accordingly,
,y Google
56
USDA's Agricultural Research Service [ARS] has expanded its re-
search program in anticipation of an FT)A ruling. ASS is concen-
trating on selected fruits and determining the radiation dosage nec-
essary to provide quarantine security.
Insect pests and commodities under investigation are the Carib-
bean fruit fly in mangoes, grapefruits, oranges Euid tangerines from
Florida; the Mexican fruit fly in mangoes, grapefruits, oranges, and
tangerinet from Texas; the West Indian fruit fly in mangoes from
Mexico; the codling moth in apples and walnuts from Washington
and California; and the cherry fruit fly in cherries from Weishing-
ton. We expect to complete these projects by the fall of 1987.
Results of the research can also be used to control pests on com-
modities from other areas, such as the Caribbefui fruit fly in man-
goes from Haiti and Puerto Rico or the Mexican fruit fly in man-
goes from Central America.
Much of USDA's irradiation research has been with papayas.
That work has shown that irradiation has definite advantages over
chemical fumigation or vapor heat treatment of papayas because:
One, it is much more efficient and can be a continuous process;
two, it ensures complete disinfestation; three, unlike many fumi-
gants, it leaves no residue on the fruit; four, it prolongs the shelf
life of fruit by delaying ripening, unlike fumigation and vapor heat
treatment, which tend to accelerate ripening; and, five, in the long
run it would produce a cleaner environment because a smaller
volume of pesticides could be applied to the preharvested fruit crop
if irradiation were used for quarantine treatment.
Research on radiation treatment for the Mediterranean, oriental
and melon fruit flies found in Hawaiian papaya was completed sev-
eral years ago. We will begin studies of other commodities as soon
as possible.
USDA research in medium-dose tmd high-dose food irradiation:
Bacterial contamination of meat and meat products can be reduced
at irradiation doses between 100 and 600 kilorads. Studies are un-
derway to determine optimum exposure regimes for extending the
shelf life of meat and poultry, reducing microbial spoilage, and re-
ducing or eliminating food poisoning bacteria.
Stenllzation of food with high doses of irradiation has been in-
vestigated for many years by the Department of Army and USDA.
In 1980, the Army transferred to USDA its programs related to the
irradiation of meats, Including data generated from completed
work. This data euid the results of wholesomeness studies of pre-
cooked irradiated chicken were delivered to FDA on Mfux^h 30,
1984. FDA Indicated that it would review the data for its relevance
to other proposed uses of irradiation and food preservation. Future
USDA research will concentrate on low doses of irradiation studies
for quarantine treatment, medium dose studies for determining the
relative susceptibility of bacteria to irradiation and the effect of ir^
radiation on food quality.
Thus far, USDA research suggests that irradiation could be suc-
cessful as a commercial treatment to stop the spread of exotic
pests. The Department believes that irradiation as a quarantine
treatment has great potential for permitting the movement of sev-
eral commodities in international and national commerce. Particu-
lar^ atbvctive is its lack of potentially adverse effects on the envi-
,y Google
57
ranment. If low-dose irradiation is approved for use on tiniits and
vegetables, USDA will move as rapidly as possible to establish
treatment schedules. USDA's Animal find Plant Hesilth Inspection
Service [APHIS] would establish treatment schedules based on AES
leeearcb.
Wfaile we are prepared to move {ihead quickly if FDA approves
the use of low-dose irradiation on fruits and vegetables, an ap-
lODved treatment schedule for papayas is the only one that USDA
could implement immediately. More work is required for the treat-
ment of apples and walnuts for codling moths and of citrus for var-
ious kinds of fruit flies. In addition, before irradiation is used on a
large commercial scfile, industry needs to be convinced that the
pioccoo can work. While some in industry have already invested in
developing irradiation treatment, demonstrations are need^ to
show even larger groups that irradiation is feasible as a quarran-
tine treatment.
Mr. Chairman, I know my time is up, but in about 2 minutes I
can complete this testimony.
Mr. MoRBisoN. Mr. Chairman, I might ask Mr. Houston be given
the extra time since he is making a presentation for several agen-
dee at one time.
Blr. Bkdbll. Is there objection? If not, you may proceed.
Mr. Houston. USDA considers FDA's July 22 approval of irra-
diation of fresh pork another approach that FSIS, as a public
healtih agency, may take in deeding with the risk of human trichi-
nosis. Shortly after FDA's action, USDA received a petition from
Radiation Technolc^y of Rockaway, NJ, requesting FSIS approve
the use of irradiation for the treatment of &esh pork. On the bfisis
of that petition. FSIS b^an:
One, developing a Gnai rule adding the irradiation of fresh pork
to the list of food additives found in the Federal meat inspection
r^ulations — although the rule will be final when published, it will
[vovide for a public comment period after publication;
Two, developing interim guidelines relating to plant operating
procedures, the safety and training of employees, sanitation, facili-
ties, quality control programs, emd labeling; and
Three, preparing a proposed rule that will outline our speciHc
regulatory autbority and the direction we pro[>ose to take in devel-
flfnn^ long-term procedures and policy relating to the r^ulation of
irradiation. I want to emphasize that the final rule which is devel-
oped as a result of Ibis phase of rulemaking may modify the inter-
im guidcdinee.
A workable irradiation inspection program should be in place
riiortly after the first of the year. Under the guidelines, every irra-
diatkm plant will have to submit a quality control program to FSIS
for approval before it may irradiate pork.
U^A inspectors will monitor critical control points identified in
quality control programs to verify that the irradiation process is
being api^ed correctly.
In addition to FSIS requirements concerning facilities, equip-
Bwnt and sanitation, irradiation facilities must comply with the re-
quirements of certain other Federeil agencies before a grant of in-
spection is issued. Other Eigendes are the Nuclear Regulatory Com-
- ' " — the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and
,y Google
the Environmental Protection Agency. USDA will work closely
with these other Federal agencies.
Another important component of the interim guidelines will
focus on wholesale and retail labeling of irradiat«d pork producte.
With regard to wholesale labeling, irradiated products in cotnmer-
cial distribution channels must be clearly labeled as irradiated.
This labeling must be maintained at every stage of distribution to
prevent the possible reirradiation of foods. For retail labeling, we
will require that irradiated fresh products bear a label statement
to that effect. Processed meat products, which are so-called second-
generation foods, may contain various amounts of meat and other <
ingredients. Therefore, we are considering the need for processed ,
products made from irradiated pork to bear a label statement that
ingredients have indeed been irradiated. We are aware there may
be a level of irradiated ingredients that would be so insigniflcant as
to not require labeling.
Mr. Chairman, in closing let me say that in addition to develop-
ing methodology for use by agricultural industries, USDA's proper
role in the development of a new technology includes ensuring that
all safeguards have been identified for consumer protection snd
product qusdity. USDA will continue its research efforts and will
continue to develop regulatory programs and provide technical in-
formation on irradiation to industry and consumers.
This completes USDA's testimony, Mr. Chairman. My colleagues
and I will be happy to answer any questions you or other members
may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Houston appears at the conclu-
sion of the nearing.]
Mr. Bedell. Thank you very much.
Mr. Morrison.
Mr. MOBRISON. Thank you.
Mr. Houston, I notice in your comments you have suggested
amendments be offered so you bring the acts which you administer,
meat products, poultry products, egg products, so they too would
reference a change as far as irradiation we are proposing as far as
the Food and Drug Administration is concerned. Is that accurate?
Mr. Houston. That is accurate, yes, sir.
Mr. MoRKisoN. Your feeling, while those acts reference back to
section 409(b), which we specifically reference in the bill H.R. 696
that is not adequate and you want it very definitely clarified that
you continue to have authority over these processed products?
Mr. Houston. Yes; we look upon it as conforming language.
Mr. Morrison. I just wtmt to comment, Mr. Chairman, that we
have absolutely no opposition at all to the request made by USDA.
These are important safety pn^ams which they administer and
there was absolutely no intent at all to short circuit any of their
processes.
Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Mr. Bedbll. Mr. Brown.
Mr. Bbown. I don't think I have any questions of this witness,
Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Bedkll. Mr. Morrison, is it section 3 or 4 where they wanted
the change made?
,y Google
Hr. MoKKzsoN. Mr. Chairman, we thought that had been ade-
qfiately haziciled but where there is any concern, eis Mr. HouBt<m
eipre^ed, ^e certainly would be wilUng to make the modifications
that have been proposed.
Mr. B^DKu^. Was that section 3 or 4? He objected to changes in
both aectioiis 3 and 4, is that right?
Hr. Houston. Yes, sir; sections 3 and 4.
Mr. Bkdbl:!^ Does this take care of both of those concerns?
Hr. Houstozi, can you tell us?
Mr. Houston. Yes; If we would amend sections 3 and 4 as we
hare desciribecl in the testimony and with the lat^uage that we will
ntjie available to the committee that will solve t£e problem.
Hr. BedelJ'- No; my question is, since Mr. Morrison has agreed
with you that the effort is not to take away the authority of the
Department, do sections 3 and 4 both address that issue or do they
addreas different issues?
Hr. Houston. They address that issue.
Hr. Bedkll^ You atso oppose section 6. You say it is not needed.
Tour testimony says the Omce of Science and Technologv Policy is
couideriiiK a Commission on Food Irradiation, As I understand it
jou believe "we don't need section 6 because the Office of Science
and Technology Poliqr is considering that. I, for one, think consid-
ering is quite different from instituting. Would you feel we should
change tnat to say it will be there until such time as they institute
(odi a commission or do you feel it ou^t to be deleted r^iardlees?
Hr. Houston. We believe it should be deleted r^ardless. We are
ooKemeA that such a coordinating mechanism mandated by law
takes aw^ay a great deal of flexibhty that may be needed in the
future. Irradiation is an evolutioniiry process at this point, and I
thinlr y^B need to remain flexible. I don't think we need to add
mechanisms that are going to create more costs at this time and
fnxn what we have seen, there simply isn't the need for this kind
of mechanism.
Mr. MoKBisoN. Mr. Chairman, if you will yield to me, I would
like to comment only on that so we bring this issue completely out
in the open. As I understand, there is proposed in the White House
a coordinated group under Mr. Kwworth as the Science Adviser to
the President. That is just &ie. The problem is that I am not so
tore it vrill exist from administration to administration and that
was the reason for our thinking on a joint operating commission
that gets together for meetings on a r^ular basis the people from
the various agencies that have been involved in food irradiation.
So, that was our thinking. Again though we are choosing to be
flodble on this subject.
We don't wemt to create any sort of bureaucratic monster, but we
did include consumer representatives as well as tiie representative
from each of the ag^icies, feeling tiiat that mi^ht have the abilify
to move through frcmi administration to administration as opposed
to waiting for something that might well be established by tlus cur-
rent administration.
Bfr. Bedeix. I think probably the chairman should be candid. My
experience 'th I' . Keyworth is such that I wouldn't give him
anything. I i i very bad experiences with Mr. Keyworth in
regard to t on l Business Administration and his absolute re-
,y Google
fusal to obey the law. I think we ought to get it right out in the
open that he refused to come before one of our subcommittees in
the Small Business Committee. He is not conforming with the law
as the Congress passed it in regard to a small business issue.
Mr. Evans, do you have any questions?
Mr. Evans of Iowa. None.
Mr. Bedell. Who pays for the supervision of this process? Do the
taxpayers pay for that or is there a charge by those processors?
Mr. Houston. No, sir. This would operate under the Federal
Meat and Poultry Inspection Program, which is funded through the
appropriations process with the exception of overtime payments
which the industry pays. Our annueil appropriations is in the
neighborhood of $365 million a year and we collect an additional
$30 to $32 million a year in overtime payments from the industry.
Mr. Bedell. Any further questions?
Mr. Roberts.
Mr. Roberts. I am sorry for being absent, Mr. Chairman. Are we
in the business of having questions for the whole panel now or ia
this just after this
Mr. Bedell. This is the whole panel.
Mr. Roberts. Dr. Kinney, when we had testimony last May we
were talking about some plan which in regard to apples, walnuts, I
think the fruit fly in r^ard to grapefruit, Mexican fruit fly in
regard to grapefruit and I weis wondering if you could give us a
very brief update on those activities and if you are conducting any
further research into the use of this process on stored grain?
I might as well toss in the kitchen sink here as well. You indicat-
ed at that time you were redirecting funds toward more research.
Could you give us an update with those numbers?
Mr. Kinney. Mr. Roberts, I would flrst of all, I would like to
submit a complete summary for the record, but I have here this
morning Dr. Jane Robens, who is on our National Program Staff
and she could give us a more detailed brief summary of what we
are doing now. I can say that we have expanded and continued our
research on irradiation, including traditional work on fruits.
Mr, Roberts. In the interest of time, Dr. Kinney, why don't we
move on except that I would like to have submitted to the subcom-
mittee where we are in regard to the planned research at that time
and now it has been some time since we have had that hearing. I
am particularly interested in the use in regard to stored grftin
which is obvious, being from my county.
[The information follows:]
Dr. Knntnr. Reeearch on use of radistion for control of insects on/in frrain was
completed many years ago and approved for commercial um by FDA in the 6ff».
Therefore, we Udned our emphasis to fruits. The research for the melon fly, and the
Mediterranean and oriental fruit flies in Hawaiian papaya is complete. Currently,
we are Inveating $664,400 and 11 scientiste for use of radiation as a quarantine
treatment method. The locations where research are being conducted, and the com-
moditiee and peet species involved are as follows: Miami, Florida— CariUiean fruit
fly in grapefruits, oranges, and tangerines; Weslaco, Texas — Mexican fruit fly in
roangoee, oranges, tangerines, and grapefruits; Yakima, Washington — codling moth
in apples, and cherry fruit fly in cherries; and Fresno, California — codling moth in
walnnta.
,y Google
61
Mr. Roberts. I am wondering also if the Department has taken
on the issue of labeling of food items. If anybody would like to re-
spond to that?
Mr. Houston. Mr. Roberts, as I mentioned in the testimony, we
will have a pork irradiation program on-line shortly after the first
of the year. As part of our interim guidelines, we will require label-
ing of the products involved. This includes those products that are
moving in wholesale as well as products that appear at the retail
level; both will have to carry some kind of mention that they have
indeed been irradiated. We are flexible in the terminol(%y being re-
quired at this time. For example, it might be labeled "treated to""
destroy trichinae" or "irradiated" or "treated with irradiation."
There are a number of possibilities that could be used. We have
these as part of our interim guidelines, and obviously as long terra
policy is develped through the rulemaking process, there could be
aome changes. But that is our position at this time.
Mr. Roberts. I am particularly interested in the consumer reac-
tion to labeling and to this process in regard to consumer accept-
ance. Have you done any surveys on consumer reaction to labeling?
Has that been considered?
Mr. Houston. I don't recall any surveys off hand. I have looked
at some reports which would indicate that there is growing con-
sumer acceptance for the use of irradiation as an alternative to
chemical treatment. There are some surveys conducted by the
Good Housekeeping Institute which show this. That being the case,
we believe that if we are going to continue to have that acceptance,
oonaumers need to know whether the foods they purchase have
been irradiated. I think if we do otherwise we may raise feelings of
distrust and suspicion about the use of irradiation.
I believe we are at a crossroads. It looks to me as if pork is going
to be the first major commodity on the market that has been irra-
diated, and I think if we handle it poorly we could set back the
whole process for quite some time. I suggest we be open and
honest, and tell consumers what is occurring and give them a
choice.
Mr. Roberts. I certainly appreciate your comment in that
r^ard. I am afraid if we don't go through the process of labeling,
whether it be — I have a suggestion here, ionized for your protection
is one.
We have international symbol here, which is another one. If we
don't do this right with full public disclosure and acceptance, I
think the issue Uien becomes the labeling and not the process, and
that would be most unfortunate.
I thank the chairman.
Mr. Bedell. Mr. Houston, is there a problem if you reirradiate
some of these things? Ete you have any indication that is a prob-
lem?
Mr. Houston. The Food and Drug Administration has set limits
rcgardii^ irradiation of pork for destroying trichinosis. It is be-
tween 30 and a 100 kilorads. Obviously, if we reirradiate foods then
we go past those standards which PDA has set, so we want to be
sure that doesn't occur again.
Mr. Bedell. What problems does that cause?
S8-005 O - 86 -
,y Google
62
Mr. Houston. Well, I would defer to the FDA, Bince they made
the sfifety decision,^ but eis you reirradiate the dosage level in-
creases and we then become unsure about the safety data support-
ing irradiation at those levels. It is for that reason they have put
an upper limit on allowable dosage levels.
Mr. Bedell. Have there been tests at the upper levels?
Mr. Houston. Yes. I would prefer to defer to FDA, who will
follow me, as to the evaluations they made in making safety deter-
minations.
Mr. Bedell. OK.
Any further questions?
If not, we appreciate your testimony very much. We may be con-
tacting you with further questions.
STATEMENT OP FRANK E. YOUNG, M.D., PH.D., COMMISSIONER.
POOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ACCOMPA-
NIED BY SANFORD A. MILLER, PH.D., DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR
FOOD SAFETY AND APPLIED NUTRITION: THOMAS SCARLETT,
CHIEF COUNSEL; AND MR NORRIS, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
Dr. Yotmc. I would like to introduce on my left, Dr. Sanford
Miller who is head of the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nu-
trition; Mr. Scarlett, the Genered Counsel; emd Mr. Norris, my
Deputy Commissioner.
We have studied the process of food irradition for many years be-
ginning with 1963, when FDA approved the gamma irrfuliation for
the conserving of canned bacon.
I have listed, in appendix B of my prepared testimony, a variety
of actions. Suffice it to say, since 1979, we established a committee
to look at the safety of irradiated foods, and are convinced at this
time that under the 100 kiiorad level that the process is safe and is
a very important consideration for a substitute for some of tiie
chemical pesticides at this time.
We have, accordingly, in 1981, offered an opportunity for the use
of irradiation for insect infestation. In 1983, we approved the
gamma irradiation for microbial decontamination of specific spe-
cies and v^etables, and in 1984, we proposed a rule in ^e Federal
Register in regards to sprout inhibition and shelf life extension for
fresh fruits and vegetables.
In 1984, Edso, we Eunended the Food Additive Regulation to pro-
vide for the safe use of a source of gamma irradiation to control
insect infestation and, as was mentioned, in 1985, eiIso, we looked
at the amending for the Food Additive R^ulations to permit the
gamma treatment of pork to control trichmella spiralis infection.
All of this was related to our assumption based on our scientific
evidence that that was a safe process.
We appreciate the opportunity to conunent on H.R. 696, and with
tiie exception of some technical issues that were raised and some
concern as addressed in my testimony to be sure that we have the
continued authority to deal with this regulation, we feel that this
is a bill that we would not object to at aU.
,y Google
We do feel, however, that the Joint Operating Commission is a
commisBioR that is not as effective at this time for three m^or rea-
sons.
First, we feel that the flexibility is an important point.
Second, we feel that at this time of diminishing economic re-
source for the Federed Government that this would eidd an undue
burden in regard to the cost of this particular Commission.
And third, we feel that it would be appropriate to maintain the
flexibility that can be not just through the fix-it type committee
through OSTP, but other mechanisms in which we could work to-
gether.
I have been plesised at the very close relationship between USDA
and FDA as we have explored this. We have worked hand in hand
and w^e do not feel an additional commission, respectfully, would
substantially improve that cooperation.
Mr. Chairman, in view of the number of panels, I will cease my
informal comments here and be delighted to answer any questions
that I can.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Young appears at the conclusion
trf'the heanng.l
Mr. Bedell. Thank you very much. Dr. Young.
Mr. Roberts.
Mr. Roberts. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Young, what is the FDA's policy on the labeling of this proc-
Dr. Young. We are currently determining what is the best way
to go forward on labeling it. In the view of some who feel this proc-
ess is .a safe process, one could ai^e that labeling isn't necessary
at all.
In fact, if one looks back, historically, when we begfin to preserve
food with salting and then moved to various cooking and finally
canning, we rec(^nized these are processes that modify food for
stages of preservation.
Thoee who feel this is a completely safe type of treatment
wonder whether we need any specific labeling at all.
On the other hand, as you so clearly articulated, there is a con-
cern as to whether or not we should have labeling so that consum-
ers would fully know that this is an irradiated product.
Irradiation does not leave any residue at the 100 kilorads that we
are treating this with. 'To our knowledge, there is no unseife change
in the food, but there is the issue of should consumers know what
the process was.
At the very moment, we are trying to decide what is our appro-
priate policy.
Mr. Roberts. Would it be appropriate, in your opinion, to use the
international symbol for this process? I think you have that pro-
posed in your r^ulations.
Is that not correct?
Dr. Young. That is correct. It is one of the items that we are
considering, and if one did choose to label that would clearly be an
option.
Symbols do provide a mechanism whereby we can clefirly indi-
cate to the public the type of process, but at the moment, until we
determine whether or not the labeling would be appropriate, it is
,y Google
64
hard to know whether the symbol would be better than any par-
ticular words as our collea^es in agriculture are using.
Mr. Roberts. I have a comment from one of the industry publica-
tions that says that you are maintaining that the use of a logo in
this country for a minimum of 2 years is necessary before you can
consider allowing that to replace any statement like the one I am
suggesting, "Ionized for your protection."
Do you fee! that a 2-year period is necessary in terms of the lead
in? It is my understanding this is a pretty well accepted intema-
tioned symbol.
Is it such in this country we are just not familiar with it, and
that would take us 2 years to get to that place or what?
Dr. Young. The symbol has not yet been decided on internation-
ally.
It is used in the Netherlands and South Africa most extensively
and the Codex Alimentarius is b^inning to consider whether an
international logo could be given.
But until we determine whether or not labeling, per se, is recom-
mended, we had considered various options so that the Ic^ could
be identified. But it has clearly not been established yet as an
iRtemational norm.
Mr. Roberts. It has been standard in my famOy. This looks like
a Pac Mfm kind of thing. I Etm not too sure what that means.
Dr. Young. It is alleged to be a tulip.
Mr. Roberts. We will tiptoe through that subject here. No hiss-
ing here, please.
No more questions.
Mr. Bedell. Mr. Morrison.
Mr. MoBKisoN. Dr. Young, just on my behalf personally, I want
to thank you for the leadership of the Food and Drug Administra-
tion in this food irradiation area.
We patiently, sometimes impatiently, wait for the regulations to
be finalized. As I understand, you are proceeding with the 100 ki-
lorad limit, and is it true that that is reflected in countries around
the world that have used the World Health Organization recom-
mendations that your level is only one-tenth of the level approved
in other parts of the world?
Dr. Young, The FDA baa, over the years, been a conservative
regulatory agency, and thus we feel that there is a layer of safety
at the level that we are recommendii^ emd did not find any undue
risk that we could identify at all from the 100 kilorad level, and
thus, it is below what has been used in some of the 21 countries
that have approved this process for some particular foods to date.
Mr. Morrison. As I recall from reading the World Health infor-
mation, that they didn't find any undue risk at 10 times the level
of treatment you are proposing.
Dr. Young. There is no question that at higher levels others
have thought that there was no particular risk as well.
Mr. Morrison. Is this perhaps an effort by the Food and Drug
Administration to be absolutely certain that what you are propos-
ing is in the best interest of consumers?
Dr. Young. Yes, it is.
,y Google
65
We feel at this point at 100 kilorads, it would be no way in which
there would be substantial modification of the food products and
also would be very difHcult at 100 kilorads to detect any changes.
It is one of the reasons that we chose this. It would be very luird
to design experimental models, because the chemge is so infinitesi-
mally small.
Dr. Miller, would you like to comment on this, please?
Dr. Miller. Yes. The problem was and is that the data base on
which the Joint Committee for Research depended, in our opinion,
had some questions concerning the studies that were used.
We would agree that, on the whole, the pattern of studies indi-
cate no problem even at that level.
But in an effort to be, as I say, ultracautious in this regard, we
have decided we would like to proceed at the levels above 100 kilo-
rads in an orderly fashion.
We will proceed one by one, rather than trying to reach a gener-
ic conclusion, and for the moment, for example, we are looking at
some data concerning the use of levels above 100 kilorad to prevent
salmonellosis in chicken, and we decided to take that route in
ordeT to avoid any of the debate over the quality of the data bfise
that led to that original one megarad dose.
You are quite right. We are being very, very cautious in taking
each step as it comes.
In conclusion, for 100 kilorads, we are convinced that generically,
that is a sfife dose.
Mr. Morrison. In essence, you are establishing that level below
which you will not have to do a tremendous review.
Dr. Miller. That is correct.
Mr. Morrison. However, you will consider petitions — as you
have in the past — for treatments above that level as we understand
better some of the commercial implications of higher levels of
treatment.
Dr. Miller. Exactly. We have tried to encourage the industry to
come ahead with petitions on individual food items providing the
appropriate data and indeed, in most cases, have laid out what
kmds of additional studies we would need in order to fill in what
we think the holes were for particular products.
In the cases of chicken, we have inclicated certain studies which
we think need to be done, and in other products, other studies, as
weU.
It is a question of being cautious rather them knowing something
is unsafe, and we would rather be convinced it is safe.
Those are two different things.
BAr. Morrison. Thank you.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Bbdell. Mr. Brown.
Mr. Bbown. No questions.
Mr. Bedell. Mr. Evans.
Mr. Evans of Iowa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would certainly agree that the U.S. Government has been very
conservative and deliberate in its considerations on acceptability of
this practice.
I had the privil^e of servii^ on the staff of the Atomic Energy
Commission hearing here in Wetshington, DC, almost exactly 30
,y Google
66
years ago, and the gentleman who had his desk next to mine was
the Project Officer for Food Irradiation at that time, and he also
had his desk drawer full of pork chops and steaks that were pack-
eiged in plastic and did not need refrigeration, and I stayed there
for several years, and as I remember, he had the same steaks and
pork chops in his desk drawer, unspoiled, at the end of that time as
he did when they were put in there.
It would seem to me that 30 years is a very adequate time to de-
termine the acceptability of some practice of this sort.
Specifically, I am curious about the dosage rate, and I would
agree with you that 100 kilorads of geimma radiation would be ex-
ceedingly safe, but 1 am wondering, on some of these projects, at
what level of gamma radiation dosage can any residual effects
begin to be detected?
What I am getting at is how do you know it was limited to 100
kilorads, and at what point does it b^n to show up in terms of
examining a product to determine if that level has been exceeded?
Dr. Young. This is a very difficult question, and one of the rea-
sons that we deliberately went on a conservative approach to estab-
lish a level of safety, and then go on a case-by-case basis, is that it
is hard to determine the additional levels. Those are done by long-
term animal feeding studies and analysis of nutrients. Dr. Miller
can provide some additional information on that, but basically it is
on a case-by-case basis by which we look at these, using animal-
feeding studies and an analysis of nutrients.
Mr. E3vANB of Iowa. But in terms of physical characteristics of
the product, am I correct it would require much more massive
doses before there is any detectable change in the nature of the
product with any scientific instrumentation or examination proc-
esses that we have at the present time?
Dr. Miller. Right. Even at the high doses which are being con-
sidered for the purposes of sterilization, which are in the order of
mfignitude of 2 and 3 megarads and above, even then there is no
induced radio-activity in the product, as we all know.
In terms of physical changes, a lot depends on the condition
under which the food is irradiated, but then physical changes occur
in thermal processing too. Csmned green beans certainly don't taste
the same as fresh ones, and pasteurized milk doesn't taste the
same as raw milk, but it so happens that with the 100 kilorad level
and below, it results in a product which is very little changed; in
fact, so much so, sir, that we have great difficulty in distinguishing
such products. In fact, we usually can't tell at all when these prod-
ucts have been irradiated.
Mr. Evans of Iowa. Which is one of the reasons you want to put
a sign on it?
Dr. Miller. Which is one of the reasons we want to put a sign on
it. We have inspectional authority in our proposal, and more than
that, we have said again and again that an area of research that is
al»olutely required is post^irradiation dosimetry. How can we in
fact detect the fact that the products have been irradiated in order
to prevent let's say foreign products from coming in that are irradi-
ated or not in plants we can't inspect?
Mr. Evans of Iowa. And claiming that they are?
Dr. Miller. That is r^ht, exactly.
,y Google
67
Mr. E)vANS of Iowa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Bedell. Than;;: you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Gunderson.
Mr- Gunderson. I have only one question as to the caution that
the Government has taken. You have heard that certain people
have allied that the approval of the pork irradiation was rushed
through. Do you want to comment about that?
Dr. MiLLEH. It depends upon what kind of cosmic view you have
of things. I suppose the period of time in which we looked at the
pork irradiation proposal in detail was relatively short compared to
the way we looked at everything else, but pork irradiation and the
irradiation of any food have basically the same set of criteria that
one looks at, A great deal of that work had already been done at
the time we went ahead and looked at the product.
We had looked at the irradiation of pork very early; in fact all
the way through pork was one of the products with which we were
concei-ned. I don't think we rushed through it at all. I think there
are some who would say we have taken too long, but I think so far
as I am concerned it has just been the right time.
Dr. Young. I would just add as Commissioner that the Center
has particularly been vigorous in looking at this. The reeison that I
asked Dr. Miller to comment on this is his extensive examination
over the years of his leadership in the Center on the safety of irra-
diation and I would agree, looking at this from the Commissioner's
office, that there has been a prudent analysis not only of this par-
ticular action that we are looking at on fresh fruits and vegetables,
but also on the more extensive examination of what should be done
oa the irradiation of pork.
Dr, Miller. One further point. The levels we approved are
within that 100 kilorad level which we on both the basis of experi-
mental data on the one hand and theoretical analysis of the worst
possible case situation — meiking assumptions about the maximum
amount of unknown products that might be produced and the max-
imum toxicity, carcinogenesis if you will, that might be eissociated
with these products — have come to the conclusion that the
amounts which are produced under those circumstances are so
small as to be insignlHcant, even assuming the worst possible cases
for their toxicity.
And so the question with pork was not really a question so much
of its safety. On that we were pretty well convinced. It was other
issues, concerning dose penetration and how it is going to be done,
and so on, that had to be considered as we went ahead with this. 1
don't think we were hasty in reviewing this problem.
Dr. Young. I would aLsis tike to add, if I could, please, sir, that as
a physician there has been interest in looking at food irradiation
not in these doses that we are looking at here at very low levels
but at higher doses for preparation of food products for individuals
who are immimocompromised.
This study has been going on for a number of years, and I would
like to submit for the record some of the correspondence that we
have, because in this case of the compromised host, there is an ad-
vantage that cfin be used through sterilization at high levels of
food products, and thus we are considering the full range on a case-
by-case basis, but we should not overlook the medical issues that
may be important in this process as well.
,y Google
Mr. Bedell. Without objection, those letters will be introduced or
held in the Bubcommittee files.
Mr. GuNDBRSON. Do you gentlemen suggest by the general
nature of research that affects not only pork but all food areas that
once you have made the initial approvals that we can see a whole
series of approvals in relation to irradiation?
Dr. Young. We would predict at this moment that there would
be an increased use of irradiation for food products. We established
this level at 100 kilorads because we feel that this is a level which
is, to the best of our scientific analysis, safe. We would anticipate
looking at a ceise-by-case level beyond that, and in other processes,
but certainly as Dr. Miller has focused, the pork irradiation is
within that 100 kiloreid level that we looked at and consider as
safe.
There are other uses that have been particularly recommended
for spices that exceed the 100 kilorad level, and there may be
others, once the industry, the public and the scientific community
gets more experience with this particular form of preservation.
Dr. Miller. Just to expand a little bit on the statement, the
answer to your question directly is yes, because basically the chem-
istry is the same, and we know a great deal about radiation chem-
istry, which we have learned over the past 100 years. Our chemiste
could then predict whether or not there would be anything special
about 8 particular product based on either water content, composi-
tion, and so on, and then we need to know whether we should have
any special studies done.
At this sub-100 kilorad level thus far, for most products, safet?
issues have been established. Finally, the question that comes up
only is: is it effective for whatever you want to use it for? And that
is another question. It is a technological question that hea to be an-
swered rather than a safety question.
Mr. GUNDERSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Bedell. Mr. Roberts, did you have another question?
Mr. Roberts. Yes, Mr. Chjurman.
Along the same line that my colleague from Wisconsin has
raised one issue I think in conjunction with the criticism that we
have heard in regard to the pork issue is that in that same story
one other issue that was raised wbb the chemical changes that food
undergoes in this process, and I am wondering — and I suppose this
question should have been asked of the USDA — I am wonderii^, is
tne Department or are you, is the consortium, if you will, are you
doing any research? Just how extensive is the research in terms of
scientific knowledge in regard to the area of chemical changes in
food that has gone through this process?
Dr. Young. The Department of Agriculture has been focusing
more on the reseeirch aspects than FDA has. The only nutrient
that have been looked at extensively are thiamin and the question
of whether there might be some change there. But the levels that
we are using in our approval process are so low that we do not con-
sider at this moment any substantial nutrient changes.
But, Dr. Miller, would you like to add anything further to that?
Dr. Miller. USDA is doii^ some extensive work on nutrient
changes. The standard we use is that the change in nutrients
should be no different, no greater than that produced by any other
,y Google
, and from data bo far for things like pork, it just s
that it doesn't happen, losses Eire no greater. However, further
work is going on in that area, and it is a question we raiise with
every petitioner, because it is one of the areas of question we need
to deal with.
USDA is also I think looking into some of the chemical chemges
associated with chicken for the use of irradiation for control of sal-
monellosis. And if the industry is going to want levels above 100
kilorads in petitions then we are going to want substantial data in
some cases on the chemical changes taking place. Yes, we keep on
exploring that not only for the individual products, but just to in-
crease the whole data base, so that the more we know the less we
need for the future.
Mr. Roberts. Thank you.
Mr. Bedell. Dr. Young, on page 3 of your testimony you say,
"Concerns are twofold. First, there is concern for the possible long-
term toxicological effects of the radiolytic products formed in foods
as a consequence of this irradiation process, that the concern is
proportionaJly to absorb those significantly in food in one's diet." Is
that to say that the concern is that irradiation might cause some
effects on the food that people eat that could then give them prob-
lema?
Dr. Young. Yes, that was the original concern that was raised
when the process was looked at many years ago. In the use of ioniz-
ing irradiation there is a possibility from the variety of sources to
change particular chemicals. Pfirt of my past expertise was work-
ing as a professor of irradiation biology and biophysics, in which
we looked at radiant energy in regard to cell biology, and the focus
that one looks at is what does this added energy do to proteins, car-'~ ' ^
bofaydrates, and lipids within cells. At the level which we have /
chosen to approve this process, 100 kilorads, there is essentially no, ^^
significant radiolytic products that we could detect that would be
harmful.
In the case of the very high doses used for sterilization, as I men-
tioned, for patients that were receiving treatment for immunocom-
promised status, there some of the irradiated food was up to 25 per-
cent of the diet and over a 10-year period of time there were no
reported adverse reactions there, but in prudent chemical analysis,
scientists would look to determine at various levels whether
changes existed within the foods themselves. At the level that we
are recommending the first baseline of approved, there does not
seem to be any problem with radiolytic
Mr. Bedell. At the sterilization level can you detect changes?
Dr. Young. At the sterilization level we would be much more
able to detect these changes over a period of time.
B4r. Bedell. Can you detect changes in food that is irradiated at
the sterilization level? Do you?
Dr. Young. I would predict that we would be able to see some
changes in some of the thiamin residues. This has not been ana-
lyzed carefully enough to my knowledge to give a detailed analysis
of each of the nutrients.
YiT. Miller, could you provide any more detail?
Dr. Miller. You do fmd changes in these products that are not
uniform from product-to-product, so that you can't say, well, if you
,y Google
70
find this one particular chemical it means it has been irradiated.
But the fact is that as the dose goes up the more products are pro-
duced in the product, but Qiat is the same thing that occurs with
a>oking, for example. The higher the temperature at which you
cook, or if you broil the food rather than bake the food it produces
a whole new set of chemicals in it, and that is what happeira with
irradiation as well. It is not surprising.
The real question is: Are those residues toxic? That is the real
issue, and the data, as I said before, for these high levels, is that,
there has been no evidence of toxicity at these high levels, but
there were certain flaws in the studies that would lead us to say,
still being very cautious, that we need more work in order to be
certfiin that those flaws are covered. So, yea, there are changes, but
we don't believe, thus far there is evidence those changes produce
toxic residues.
Mr. Bedell. If there was toxicity, would that be likely to cause
malignancies?
Dr. Miller. Not necessarily. It depends on the nature of the
chemical, and there are all kinds of toxicities in what occurs.
Mr. Bedell. Are there any other questions?
If not, we thank you veiy much for your testimony and for your
work in this area.
Dr. Young. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Bedell. Our next panel consists of Dr. Robert Alvarez, Envi-
ronmental Policy Institute, Washington, DC; Ms. Kathleen Tucker,
executive director. Health and Energy Institute, Washington, DC;
Dr. Catherine J. Frompovich, president, Coalition for Alternatives
in Nutrition and Healthcare, Inc., Richlandtown, PA.
Again, we would request that you hold your testimony to not
more than 5 minutes.
Mr. Alvarez, we will hear from you first.
STATEMENT OF ROBERT ALVAREZ, DIRECTOR, NUCLEAR WEAP-
ONS AND POWER PROJECT, ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY INSTI-
TUTE
Mr. Alvarez. Thank you very much.
My name is Robert Alvarez, director of the nuclear project of the
Environmental Policy Institute. EPI is a public interest, nonprofit
oi^anization engaged in research, publication, public education,
and public advocacy as they relate to environmental issues.
The Environmental Policy Institute strongly opposes enactment
of H.R. 696, a bill to encourage the commercialization of food irra-
diation technologies. There eire severed compelling reasons for this.
First, the irradiation of food involves an ultrahazardous technolo-
gy which poses several types of risks to the public and workers.
Food irradiation facilities, as envisioned by its proponents, will uti-
lize very large quantities of intensely radioactive substances which,
even in very small quantities, can cause death from acute radiation
syndrome. One food irradiation facility will be generating as much
as 10 times more low-level radioactive wastes— in curie content —
than eUI sources combined in the United States for the year 1981.
,y Google
71
Food irradiation facilities pose serious contamination risks to
local water supplies due to the potential for leaking or ruptured
capBules containing radioactive sources in cooling pools.
I would like to draw your attention to an event which occurred
throughout the 1970*8 and 1980's at an irradiation facility called
International Neutronics in Dover, NJ. During the 1970's the pool
of this particular facility containing cobaltr60 leaked into the
water, and by the 1980*8 attempts were made to decommission the
pool. An estimated 5,700 liters of contaminated water was released
onto the irradiator building floor. The water seeped out eventually
and contaminated soil outside. Moreover, employees dumped an un-
known quantity of radioactive water down the shower drains.
I wrould request permission that the portion of the regulatory
document concerning this event be put in the record.
The other issue is that the regulations governing public expo-
sures from irradiation facilities are much more lax than for com-
mercial nuclear powerplants. For example, citizens living near eui
irradiation facility are allowed to receive 20 times more radiation
exposure yearly (500 millirems) than from commercifil reactors (25
niillirems).
Second, irradiation facilities are poorly regulated. The Nuclear
R^ulatory Commission has allowed industrial radiation facilities
to be located in populated areas which has led to serious public
health consequences. For example, a food school kitchen serving
40,000 children weis heavily contaminated by a commercial radi-
ation plant in 1979 at levels in excess of EPA standards. A variety
of accidents have occurred with radioactive sources in the commer-
cial sector. Sometimes radioactive sources are simply lost. At one
facility. Radiation Technology, in New Jersey, company employees
were caught by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission placing radio-
active materials in a dumpster for disposal as nonradioactive gar-
. hird, the risks of occupational exposures in food irradiation fa-
cilities are considered by the NRC staff to be the most dangerous.
This is because of the potential for exposure to lethal levels of radi-
ation. In 1977, a worker at Radiation Technology, Inc. v/as reported
by the NRC to have received a dose of 22 rads (radiation absorbed
dose) which is close to the dose which would be lethal to 50 percent
of the people so exposed. It also may be the largest occupational
exposure to ever occur at an NRC licensed facility. The incident
was directly caused by a management decision to mlow the source
to be raised with inoperative interlock and safety devices, in viola-
tion of license requirements. That the NRC allowed this plant to
continue in operation given such a serious breach of SEifety is an
example of the Federal Government's weak regulation of such a
dangerous industry.
Occupational risks to workers chronically exposed to low-level ra-
diation at the DOE's Hanford facility, which processes radiocesium
for food irradiation, are being found to be quite serious. Hanford
workers have been shown in a series of studies to have risks of
dying from radiation-induced cancer which are 10 to 20 times
greater than current protection standards assume.
Fourth, irradiation intended to eliminate one food heizard may
intensify another. From the environmental perspective, the cre-
,y Google
72
ation of radiation resistant bacteria and viruses pose health risks
which deserve further study before food irradiation is commercial-
ized.
Fifth, the food irradiation industry is the sole creation of the nu-
clear weapons industry which is desperately seeking ways to exter-
nalize their enormous nuclear WEtste costs. Under a scheme offered
by the Department of Energy [DOE], the DOE is proposing to lease
its radiocesium, then offer to transport the sources to and from fa-
cilities. After the source has been spent, but is still quite radioac-
tive, DOE plans to return the radioactive wastes back to the Han-
ford facility for disposal essentially in shallow landfill facilities.
Sixth, food irradiation is another nuclear boondc^le that will re-
quire multimillion dollar subsidies from the taxpayer for a technol-
ogy with no proven history of commercial success. If left to fend for
itself in the marketplace, the food irradiation industry would have
been dead by the late 1950's. The major subsidies by the nuclear
weapons program over the years — which for the most part was de-
cided in secrecy — has more to do with the viability of food irradia-
tion than its commercial need.
Finally, H.R. 696 is a bill that abr(^ates the rights of States to
protect the health and safety of its citizens. The proposed l^isla-
tion forbids State and local governments from regulating food irra-
diation independently and forbids them from requiring consumer
labeling or other consumer protection not required under Federal
law.
Mr. Bedell. How much more time do you need?
Mr. Alvarez. These are my recommendations. I will be done in 1
minute.
In addition to not allowing H.R. 696 to become law, the Congress
should take the following steps: require environmental impact
statements for all federally subsidized efforts to commercialize food
irradiation; require labehng, if the Food and Drug Administration
does not; convene an independent review of the actual commercial
and technological viability of food irradiation through the Office of
Technology Assessment; and hold up funds for the construction of
food irradiation facilities in the DOE bucket until such an assess-
ment is done.
This concludes my testimony. Thiuik you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Alvarez appears at the conclu-
sion of the hearing.]
Mr. Bedell. Ms. Tucker, did you have testimony as well?
Ms. Tucker. Yes, I do.
Mr. Bedell. You may proceed.
STATEMENT OF KATHLEEN M. TUCKER, PRESIDENT, HEALTH
AND ENERGY INSTITUTE
Ms. Tuckbr. Thank you for the opportunity to testily before your
subcommittee this morning regardii^ the hazards of food irradia-
tion. We are appalled by Food and Dn^ Administration proposals
to allow secret irradiation of our fresh fruits, v^etables Emd grains
with ionizing radiation either from gamma sources like cobEdt-60 or
cesium-137 or by machine sources of x rays of electron beams. Our
concerns are listed in great detail in ^e comments which the
,y Google
73
Health and Enei-gy Institute and the Environmental Policy Center
submitted to the FDA and which we have provided to this subcom-
mittee. We respectfully request that these comments be made part
of this hearing record.
Our comments are far too extensive to summarize in a mere 5
minutes. The Health and Energy Institute opposes H.R. 696, the
Federal Food Irradiation Development and Control Act of 1985, be-
cause it is economically unsound, infringes on States' rights and
promotes an unsafe technology which can endanger both human
health and our physical environment.
Using ionizing radiation to preserve food is like using a chain
saw to cut butter. Our Feder^ tax dollars should not be wasted
promoting such a technology, as sought by H.R. 696. We believe
food irradiation brings more false promises from the nuclear indus-
try. Once we were told that nuclear power would be too cheap to
meter. Now the electrical nuclear power industry has proven exor-
bitantly expensive and some utilities feel it will bankrupt them.
Irradiat^ food will be more expensive. Extending the shelf life
erf chicken or fish an extra week could cost around 5 cents more
per pound. Food irradiation will require greater centralization of
food processing, because food irradiation facilities are capital inten-
sive ventures. Noel F. Sommer of the University of California at
Davis, a postharvest patholc^ist, notes that costs of a facility must
also include such items as refrigeration and tremsportation of
produce to and from facilities. Promoters sometimes pull their fig-
ures out of the air, he warns. Often these figures have been greatly
underestimated.
Writing to the FDA in June 1981, Griffith Laboratories U.S.A., a
food processor, pointed out that:
According to published figures, radiation processing of spices would be approxi-
mately three times as costly as current acceptable processes . . . We do not see any
Gsvmvble economic benefit, but rather the reverse, especially on the small manufac-
turera.
Tax dollars should not be used to subsidize industries that will
make our foods more expensive and require greater centralization
of the food distribution system. Teix dollars can be spent more
wisely to sdd farmers instead of middlemen in the American
market.
H.R. 696 will change current law so that labeling of irradiated
foods to the consumer will no longer be required by the Federal
Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. This is by reclassifying it from a food
additive to a food process. Current law requires a straightforward
statement, "Treated with ionizing radiation." Consumer acceptance
studies have consistently shown that consumers are likely to avoid
irradiated food if they know about it. That is why the industry is so
anxious to eliminate the food labeling requirements or substitute
something that will mislead the consumer.
Consumers have made it clear to the FDA that they want to
know if their food is irradiated. The thousands of comments re-
ceived by the FDA in response to their proposed rulemaking over-
whelming opposed secrecy in labeling. Both the States of Oregon
and Vermont are considering legislation to require that irradiated
footls be labeled to consumers.
,y Google
74
H.R. 696 forbids State and local governments from regulating
food irradiation independently of the Federal Government and for-
bids them from requiring consumer labeling or other consumer pro-
tection not required under Federsd law. This is an outrageous effort
to shield a dangerous technology from elected ofliciEds who try to
protect their constituents. Consumers should be given the opportu-
nity to avoid irradiated food, because serious questions have been
raised by reputable scientists about consuming such food.
The safety of consuming irradiated foods is open to serious doubt.
Many scientists from colleges and universities across this Nation
have urged the PDA to delay action on irradiated foods until more
is known about the hazards. Scientific studies have already demon-
strated such problems as: One, the loss of vitamins smd nutritiontd
quality in foods which are irradiated; two, the potential for genetic
damage and cancer resulting from eating irradiated foods; three,
increased growth of naturally occurring aflatoxins, which are
potent cancer-causing agents due to the irradiation process; four,
creation of new chemicals in the food, called radiolytic products by
the ionizing process; and, five, increased risk of food poisoning
caused by the radiation resistant botulism bacteria.
The FDA discounted the need to determine the overall effects on
a diverse population of eating a variety of irradiated foods over a
lifetime. The FDA declared irradiated food safe by ignoring the evi-
dence of a variety of scientific studies. An FDA memorandum
dated April 9, 1982 states that a task force reviewed 441 studies
and initially accepted 266. Using certain criteria, they eliminated
many studies and examined in detail 32 studies indicating adverse
results of eating irradiated foods and 37 studies that appeared to
support safety. Next they declared all but five studies — which sup-
ported safety — "deficient."
I have been trained as a lawyer and when you find that there
were 32 for and 37 against or something in that nature one would
r^ard that as a debate instead of a consensus on the safety of
something, but what the FDA did
Mr. Bedell. Are you about through?
Ms. Tucker. I would beg for additional time.
Mr. Bedell. How much additional time, because we are going to
have to be pretty strict here. How much time do you need?
Ms. Tucker, Could I have another 4 minutes, please.
Mr. Bedell. What are the wishes of the subcommittee?
Mr. Brown, I would like to ask permission for her to have an-
other 4 minutes.
Mr. Bedell. Without objection.
Ms. Tucker. Thank you very much.
We do not think it is appropriate to base the safety of a hazard-
ous process on five studies, ignoring a vast literature containing
evidence suggesting that irradiated foods may be hazardous to our
health.
In a review of 1,223 wholesomeness studies conducted by J.
Bama for the Hungarian Academy of Sciences in 1979, study re-
sults were classified as either neutral, adverse or beneHcial. Each
study could have several outcomes, since studies could address
more than one issue. Barna found 1,414 adverse effects, 185 benefi-
,y Google
75
affects axid 7,191 neutral effects. Clearly, there is research evi-
e siiggeBt.ing potential harm to humans.
jma pro^vided breakdowns for items considered, £ind I will pro-
some examples. For bacon, he found 86 neutral study results,
dverse study results and no beneficial results. For soybeans he
d 60 adverse study results, no beneficial results and 26 neutral
y results. For sucrose, a very common food component, he
d 39 adverse study results, 38 neutral, and one beneficial. For
I oil he found 13 adverse, 5 neutral, and no beneficial results.
ae studies reviewed by Barna were those considered by a se-
ed expez*t committee on wholesomeness sponsored by the Inter-
ional Atomic Energy Agency and others. This so-called expert
imittee declared irradiated food safe. The International Atomic '^
3rgy Agency is not a public health organization; its mandate is
promote nuclear technologies. We contend their declaration of
nolesomeness is analogous to claims by the American Tobacco In-
itute that cigarette smoking has not been proven dangerous to
m'b health.
1 would like to draw the subcommittee's attention to a couple of
rtudies indicating adverse effects to support our overall concern.
In a study of feeding freshly irradiated wheat to malnourished
children, conducted in India, children fed freshly irradiated wheat
developed blood abnormalities — polyploid cells associated with
cancer induction — while control children fed the same diet did not
show this problem. The wheat was irradiated at the same levels as
proposed no^n^ in the United States. The study was published in a
scientific journal. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
Food irradiation promoters have suggested that the study was
fraudulent, and they claimed it was repudiated by the director of
tie institute conducting the study. We wrote to the institute, and
we have attached their response, which indicates that they stand
behind their study. And also that the institute cited as claiming
that the study was fraudulent — never made such a claim. In fact,
similar problems with freshly irradiated wheat have been demon-
strated in the blood of both monkeys and mice.
Another study looked at drosophila melanogaster — fruit flies —
for genetic dameige when fed irradiated chicken. That study found
that fruit flies fed gamma irradiated chicken have seven times
fewer offspring than those fed thermally processed chicken. Donald
W. Thayer of the Department of Agriculture considered this find-
ing alarming, and worthy of further investigation.
We believe that the scientific literature thus far creates contro-
versy over the safety of feeding irradiated foods to our children.
We, therefore, recommend the following: Commercialization of food
irradiation should be halted; an environmental impact statement
should be prepared for the food irradiation process before more
funds are committed or spent for development in this field; the
many unanswered questions about the safety of eating irradiated
foods should be addressed by agencies that do not promote nuclear
tecbnolc^es, such as the Department of Energy; H.R. 696 should
not be passed into law; and any food or food ingredient that has
been irradiated with ionizing radiation should be clearly labeled to
the consumer as required by current regulations.
,y Google
76
We do not want to see a misleading Sunshine sjrmbol as has been
suggested by some members of the industry.
I would like to present several hundred signatures on petitions
opposing food irradiation, along with documents attached to my
testimony describing cesium-lST and cobalt-60, the radioactive sub-
stances that the industry wants to use, the DOE projects that have
been funded in secret hearings and some of the scientific study in-
formation which I have cited.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Tucker appears at the conclusion
of the hearing.]
Mr. Bedell. Dr. Frompovich.
STATEMENT OF CATHERINE J. FROMPOVICH, PRESIDENT, COAU-
TION FOR ALTERNATIVES IN NUTRITION AND HEALTHCARE,
INC.
Ms. Fromkjvich. Thank you for the opportunity to present com-
ments in opposition to food irradiation.
The issue of primary concern to us is that of sfifety which in-
volves the various aspects, phas^, and techniques used in the food
irradiation process together with contradicting or questionable in-
formation on research and testing.
In many instances a very definite toxic effect was observed in
some phase of the investigation, clearly associated with the irradia-
tion, and this w£is so stated. However, when the final evaluation of
the study was summarized, this observation was somehow lost and
the conclusions stated that there were no toxic effects that could be
associated with irradiation.
A toxic effect has been observed in some phase of the experiment
and was noted as being clearly associated with irradiation. Some-
how through several reports and interpretations the observation
became less and less significant until it disappeared. Ultimately,
the writer concluded that the irradiated food had been more benefi-
cial for the animals than the control diet.
The most serious question in my mind is: Will there be genetic
mutations as a result of food irradiation? In a statement submitted
by Radiation Technology, Inc., a petitioner to USDA/FDA for food
irradiation licensing, the following information appears: "Muta-
tions are an inevitable consequence of irradiating foods, yet the
creation of new organisms and/or organisms with increased patho-
genicity is not a probable event for the following three reasons,"
(a), (b) and (c) and (c) says, "Changes in DNA will induce DNA
repair mechanisms so many mutations will only be temporary
(iMram and Farkas 1977)."
Still another question: How can one say DNA mutations will
only be temporary? Who is to say who will be subject to the muta-
tions? What right does private industry or anyone else have to re-
program DNA repair mechanisms?
l^e report from which I recite this statement is known as "Find-
ine of No Significant Impact" for Food Additive Petition 4M3789,
submitted by Radiation Technology, Inc. which concerns the use of
gamma irradiation to control trichinae and other helminths in
pork. Send to DMB Docket No. 84F-0230. Approved date: January
,y Google
77
£, 1985. "h/LBLy I ask that this information be made part of the
^Uc lieEkxixiss on record.
Mi. Bedklj.- Without objection.
Ma. PRoaffPOViCH. Still another question: Why did the FDA ap-
prove pork li-radiation just 3 days before the new EPA guidelines
would have required an environmental impact report?
RegEtrdin^g the studies to support safety of food irradiation proc-
eeoQg, my question is why only "5 studies appeared to support
safety, and all the remaining 64 were determined to be deficient"?
Originally, 441 summarized studies were presented; of that 266
were accepted or accepted with reservation, 147 were rejected and
28 were not cat^orized and only 5 appeared to support safety. This
poees another question: How can food irradiation be deemed safe
based upon such a minute number of accepted studio? This infor-
mation appears in a Department of Health and Human Services
Memorandum from Food Additives Evaluation Branch, HFF-156,
dated April 9. 1982 for the subject: "Final Report of the Task
Group for the Review of Toxicology Data on Irradiated Foods."
May I ask that this information be made part of the public hear-
ings on record.
Mr. Bedell. Without objection.
Ms. Fbompovich. Still another question: How can a petitioner for
the irradiation process claim that labeling not be required? In a
letter dated July 30, 1985 from Radiation Technology, Inc. to
USDA-FSIS, its president, Martin Welt, states:
Althm^h the FDA is required by current r^ulation h> consider fmx] irradiation
an additive, I believe that the FSIS can do away with a carrythrough labeling re-
quirement on the grounds that the additive would only be considered incidental to
the proceas and not of any substantive value.
Pasteurization is required by law to be on a label and so should
irradiation along with the number of rads used to irradiate the
foods or any food component.
May I ask that this be made part of the record.
Mr. Bedell. Without objection.
Ms. Frompovich. And my final question: How come there are no
food irradiation guidelines? In my letter of August 27, 1985, to Dr.
Eogel at USDA, I asked if there were guidelines for irrftdiatlon
doses and rads similar to the manual on chemicals known as "Com-
pound E)vaIuation and Analytical Capability Annual Residue
Plan." Dr. Engel asked Dr. George Pauli of Division of Food and
Color Additives, HFF-330, Center for Safety and Applied Nutrition,
to answer my question which he did in his letter dated October 10,
1985. Dr. Pauli said: "We have no such guidelines." Why?
B4r. Bedell. Excuse me. Dr. Frompovich. What is your situation
with r^ard to time?
Kfs. F^oupovicH. About a half a minute. May I have it, please?
Bfr. Bedblu You may proceed, of course.
Ma. Frohpovich. Thank you.
IF there are no food irradiation guidelines, how can the process
possibly be approved?
In summation, I would like to request that much more impecca-
Ue research be done at various levels before our government con-
siders this process. In addition, I respectfully request the FDA to
,y Google
78
withdraw its present approvals on the foods already approved for
the food irradiation process.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Frompovich appears at the con-
clusion of the hearing.]
Mr. Bedell. Thsmk you very much.
Mr. Roberts.
Mr. Roberts. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
I said in my earlier statement at the beginning of these hearings
that judging from the witness list I thought we would hear from all
sides of the issue, and I looked forward to that. We certainly have
had that with this panel. I want to thank you for your comments
and for your statements. That is what this hearing is all about.
You have asked some good questions, and I think as we go through
these hearings, why, we will try to answer them as best we can.
Ms. Frompovich. Excuse me. May I have some input to you, sir?
Mr. Roberts. Yes, ma'am.
Mb. Frompovich. Could we possibly be considered as resource in-
dividuals on this issue?
Mr. Roberts. I beg your pardon?
Ms. Frompovich. May we be considered as resource individuals
on this issue?
Mr. Roberts. I think everybody that is going to testify will be re-
source people in terms of the testimony that they provide.
Ms. Frompovich. Thank you.
Mr. Bedell. Mr. Morrison.
Mr. Morrison. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Alvarez, you make a number of allegations concerning the
relationship between food irradiation and the nuclear industry. Do
you have the same attitude toward medical irradiation?
Mr. Alvarez. No, sir. In fact, if I may with permission, this is
my wife, Kitty Tucker. Kitty had Hodgkin's disease in 1963 and
was treated with irradiation, and I believe very strongly it saved
her life; but I think there are limits to this, and there are benefi-
cial uses of irradiation. There is no question about that, but at the
same time there are uses of irradiation which in my view pose un-
acceptable risks to society, and in my opinion food irradiation is
one of those.
Mr. Morrison. Then your questions about facilities and the rela-
tionship with the nuclear industry, you say those do not apply to
medical treatments or sterilization of the various things used in
hospitals?
Mr. Alvarez. No, I make no such claims. A great deal of the iso-
topes for the use of medicine came from the Federal Nuclear Pro-
gram.
Mr. Morrison. But you do not want it applied to food, even
though it is the SEime process.
Mr. Alvarez. Well, I think that it is pretty clear that the com-
mercial use of radioisotopes for medicine have been shown to be
commercially viable without a significant heavy Federal subsidy
over the years. However, I would say that if food irradiation were
to fend for itself around the same time that the radioisotope indus-
try had to fend for itself, which was the late 1950's, food irradiation
would probably be a footnote in history books.
,y Google
79
May I make another comment about this. You see, food irradia-
tion to me appears to be more of a product of glacial bureaucratic
drift than commercial viability. The primary source of funds for
food irradiation are not coming from the U.S. Department of Agri-
culture but they are coming right out of the nuclear weapons
budget. Now that raises a question: Is the nuclear weapons pro-
gram an agency involved in food safety?
Mr. Morrison. Are you aware that the separation of cesium that
jTOU included in your comments is finished? There will be no more;
that is, it is much too expensive and they are aware of that now.
Mr. Alvarez. Yes, I am aware of that, and I am also aware that
there are at least some plans that are being entertained at the Sa-
vannah River Plant to separate cesium so the possibilities that
more irradiation in the form of cesium ceuinot be ruled out is my
understanding.
Mr. Morrison. My understanding is that the separation that was
done in Hanford in my district was because the material — it re-
duced the threat of the radioactive defense wastes that were in
storage in tanks that were designed for 25 years and lo and behold
after 30 years some of them started to leak so that that separation
was made, and it was an expensive separation of materials. There
were about 77 million curies there, and it has been oversubscribed
by twice. Most of that will be used for medical purposes. In fact,
one of the reasons for H.R. 696 was to get food irradiation added to
the list of use, priority use for any radioisotopes the government
may happen to nave title to. I guess the point is this. There will be
no tie as far as future food irradiation is concerned back with the
nuclear industry in any way, shape or form.
Cobalt is produced commercially. It does not have a tie except in
Canada to the use of irradiation sources, and I anticipate, as I see
it, that these source materials will be machine generated and have
absolutely no relationship to the nuclear industry. Does that
render moot then many of the arguments that you make in your
paper?
Mr. Alvarez. With all due respect, Congressman, I say that they
do not because if you just look and see what is happening, the De-
partment of Energy is spending the lion's share of the money for
the conunercialization of this process, and the lion's share of that
money is going for the utilization of radiocesium sources.
In Dublin, CA there is at least plans to construct a major cesium
irradiator. "There is a mobile irradiator that is planned to be hauled
around the farmland of the Northwest, I respectfully disagree, sir.
Mr. Morrison. Those are demonstration facilities. The point that
I am making is that cesium, which you seem to count on, they are
not going to separate. It is expensive to separate, and at half the
cost of cobalt they cannot afford to do it.
Mr. Alvarez. I understond, sir, but there is, I believe, at least
depending on what you read somewhere between 80 and 90 million
curies of radiocesium.
tb. Morrison. Yes, and there are 144 million curie requests for
that.
Mr. Alvarez. I understand. Also by 1985—10 years ago there
were requests for 264 nuclear powerplants, but they just did not
happen, so I think we have to look at reality.
,y Google
Just to summarize, I think that this rediocesium that has been
separated at Heuiford will have to be disposed of as radioactive
wastes unless it is commercialized, and thus millions of dollars
would have been poured down the drain.
Mr. Morrison. Well, it has a very great beneficial use, Mr. Alva-
rez. Some of it goes toward food processing. I think that would be
no different for society as long as it is sfife Eind the Food and Drug
Administration is handling it than it would be for the handling for
the sake of medical, which you seem to support.
Mr. Alvarez. I respect your vieira, sir.
Mr. Morrison. I thank you, sir.
Mr. Chairman, I wish I had more time.
Mr. Bbdell. Mr. Brown.
Mr. Brown. No questions.
Mr. Bedell. Mr. Panetta.
Mr. Panetta. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I would like to ask
unanimous consent that a statement that I prepared be inserted in
the record.
Mr. Bedell. Without objection.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Panetta follows:]
,y Google
FOREIGN OPERATIONS
NOVEMBER IB, 19BS
He. Chairman, subcommittee Henbers, thank you for scheduling thlc
bearing today to coneldec issues concerning the use of food
liradiation and to levleu H.R. £96, a bill designed to provide F
ceocdination foe the continued tcEearch, development, and
coiaeiciallzatlon of food licadiation.
1 believe It lo eitcenely important that we hold foturaa liki
fully addiesB [lublic concerns on this issue, ks you know, recent
actions at the federal level have ptompted a great deal of debate
concerning the safety and wholesomenesa of food Irradiation. Aa I
hav-e stated before, alnce th S technology holds the potential to
replace highly toxic and carcinogenic post-harvest pesticides, ]"
believe that it deserves further research. However, it is very
important that evidence on all eides of the Irradiation isEi
brought to light
nd fully exam
ined to
nsure tha
t this technol
ogy
presents no health hazards. I
important
Chat if the
technology is fou
d to be safe
made aware of
the
fact that food is
irradiated so
that th
t their own
deciBions. Label
ng is an impo
rtant pa
t of any
is
issue.
There is clearly
great deal c
f confuB
on regarding the Impact
and
intent of recent
ederal actior
s pertai
ing to £o
Dd irradiation
The
public should be
ware that such action
Include
both the propo
Bed
regulatory change
by the FDA
hat were
released
or public com
ment in
1984, and legisla
ion which has
reduced 1
provide
Federal coordinat
on for the tt
search,
aevelopmen
comercialization
of food Irradiation.
In this regard, t
ere is addlt
ona] con
-ern about
the Impact th
at
B.R. 69G would have on food ir
adiation
labeling
requirements.
In
order to clarify
this issue, I
wrote, to
the Food
and Drug
Aitalnistration (FDA). In a let
Bponse, t
he Agency stat
•it is not aware
3£ any ptovis
R. 696 th
at would affec
federal food Irra
ng requi
would like to submit a copy of
r for Che reco
rd. It
is my understand!
g that cuirer
t Federa
regulati
ons require th
irradiated foods must be label
d at bot
the reta
1 and wholesa
le
level. However,
o date, since
very fe
foods ha
ve been irradl
ated on
a cooBierclal basi
, consumers
arely se
labels a
the recall 1
evel
which indicate th
s befir i
radiated.
198< the FDA
did propose change
3 in its regul
concerning food i
radiation wh
affect la
beling requirements.
To date, no actio
proposed
changes and the
Agency will be ta
ing into cona
ideiatio
approxira
ately 5,000 co
mmenta
„GoogIe
I proposed rules
! fedei
^ood I
the
jould pe
tilotads) to control insect
:lon and delay the ripening of fresh fruits and vegetabli
: labeling. Current regulations require irradiated foodi
Clearly labeled. The proposed rule would only require labeling
vholesale, but not the retail level. As I have stated before, 1
firmly belieire that all irradiated foods must be clearly labeled at
both levels. PDA is now in the process of reviewing the comments
received and deciding whether amendments to the proposed regulations
are warranted. Pinal regulations will be published once that process
second, Rep. Sid Horrison has intioduci
establish a Joint Operation CommiEsion
and promote activities that would faci:
, 696,
irdinat
ilch >.
1 effoi
: federal food
open puDiic QiscuEBion ot tnls technology.
1 at ion labeling requirements.
of potatoes to inhibit sprouting, and tt
allows irradiation of porK to control ti
time, commercial use of food irradiatloi
■ food products in the U.S.
approved. They
As a ree
nedfly c
ult of the ethylene dlbromlde (EDB) suspension and the recent
:rlees in California and Florida, interest has been renewed ii
of Irradiation as a viable alternative for highly toxic post-
harvest pesticides. AS you linow, EDB was banned for agricultural use
in 1984 by the Environmental Protection Agency because it was found t
be a carcinogen. EPS had been popularly used as a post-harvest
fumiqant on fresh fruit to prevent the spread of tropica] fruit fliei
Unlllte EJX and other toxic pesticides, irradiation will not leave a
toxic residue on the food.
:etully n
□f food irradiation since 1981,
lis technology holds the potentii
•chnology deserves further
fidence Co date indicates that
It low doses and for uses
,y Google
Iht Honorable Leon E. Panetta
Houit of Representittnes
MshlngtOil, D.C. ZOSIS
' 0«»r *. Pjuetti:
tter of September
liivaa of H.R. .691
introl ^ct of l5S5.'
»mwtr: The curr
lonlilflg nmjtio
food irniliitton labeling rei|ulr«i
In additton. please advise m n
n labeling regulrementi are strict
' '■■■■r-fib'lin"'
FDA ha; Interpreted these ri
as appropriate.
enii to apply only to foods d
t nay have been previously
e then added to a fooiJ xhtch
Therefore, the jbeljng
regulatory action involving Irradta
Sestlon K: Evaluate and Identify
radtatian labeling requirements.
„GoogIe
. 4 of H.R. 6W CCUfW
c let 1^1 OSC ^M3 aM
le'j cn*i>9e feileril fooa
9.» iwl 179. 2<
,y Google
21 Ol a«. I (4-l-M Edition)
(c> The substance! IdentlOed In
parkcrsph taK2> o[ thi* secLlon may
be used In surface lubticajils used to
faclllLate the drawlns. stamplnc. and
tonaint of metallic articles from
rolled toll and sheet stock provided
that total residual lubricant remalnlnc
on the metallic article In the form In
which It contacts food does not exceed
0.015 mllllsram per square inch of
food-contact surface.
(d> Subject to any prescribed limita-
tions, the quantity of surface lubricant
used In the manufacture of inetatllc
articles shall not exceed the least
amount reasonably required to accom-
plish the intended technical effect and
shall not be Intended to nor. In tact,
accomplish any technical effect In the
food Itself.
(e) The use of the surface lubricants
In the manufacture o( any article that
Is the subject of a regulation In Parts
114. lib. n«. 171. 17B Uid I n»Ab of
thU phapter must comply with any
apeclflcatlons prescribed by such reiu-
latlon lor the finished form of the ar-
Ucle.
<f> Any substance that Is listed In
this section and the subject of a regu-
lallon In Parts 114, ITS. 116. 177, 118
and I 119. 4S of this chapter shall
comply with any applicable specifica-
tions prescribed by such regulation.
I SibL IT8t-l1U u
_l VJB.C Hl(»). 140: sees. 40».
101<e>. 7(M. 70 Stat. «1» u uacndcd. 13 6ut.
17M-1TSI u unendcil. 7t Slat }»-401 u
amended 131 US.C. 14>. 17111). 17ail
[43 FH HW«. M«r 14. I»77. as uneoded at
41 KR 31B. Jan. 4. ia»: «■ PK 10111. Mar.
IB. 1S84; *» yR 39S1». July 33. 1M4I
• l7HJ33a TtrpcBC resins.
The terpens resins Identified In
pwacraph u> al this section may be
iSeo. MKk:
safely used M components of polypro-
pylene film Intended for use In contact
with food, and the terpen e resins Iden-
tified In paragraph <b) o( this section
may be safely used as components of
polyolefln film Intended for use In
contact with food:
(a) Terpenc resins consisting of the
hydrogenated polymers of terpene hy-
drocarbons obtainable from sulfate
turpentine and meetinc the following
specifications: Drop-softening point ot
11B*-13B- C: Iodine Value less than 10.
<b) Terpene resins consisting of paly-
men of beta-plnene and meeting the
following specifications: Acid value
less than 1; saponification number less
than 1; color less than 4 on the Gard-
ner scale as measured In M percent
mineral spirits solution.
I ITUMS Ttlntthj'kB* (lj»l 4N:-*tl>rl-
huoaU).
Telnethylene glycol dl <3-ethylhex-
oale) containing not more than 3]
parts per million ethylene and /or
diethylene glycols may be used at a
level not to exceed 0.1 percent by
weight of twine as a finish on twine to
be used lor tying meat provided the
twine fibers are produced fionv nylon
resini complying with | 177.1SO0 of
this chapter.
I ITB.)1» Ttlrahyiroturan.
Tetrahydrofuran may be safely used
in the fabrication ot articles Intended
for packaging, transporting, or storing
food*, subject to the provisions of this
<a> It Is used as a solvent In the cast'
Ing of film from a solution of polymer-
ic resins of vinyl chloride, vinyl ace-
tate, or vlnylldene chloride that have
been polymerized singly or copolymer-
teed with one another In any comblna-
„GoogIe
food and Dfwfl A
tlon. or It mky be lued a* a lalvent In
the caating of film prepared from
vinyl chloride copolymen complying
with 1 177.1080 of this chapter.
(b) The midual amount of letrahy-
drofuran In the film doe* not exceed
1.5 percent by weight of Illra.
■ l78Jt1B UlIraBWiBt blue.
Ultramarine blue may be lafely used
a* a component of article* Intended
for use In producing. muDufacliirlni.
packing, processing, preparing, treat-
ing, packaging, transpartlng, or hold-
Ins food In accordance with the follow-
ing prescribed conditions:
(■> II Li used as ■ colorant In the
manufacture of the following articles:
(1) Flexible, semirigid, and rigid
plastic materials.
(3) Textile* and textile tiben as pro-
vided In I 177.3800 of this chapter.
lb) The quantity used shall not
exceed the amount reasonably re-
quired to accomplish the Intended
effect.
PAIT 179— IIIADIATION IN THE
PRODUCTION, nOCfSSING AND
HANOUHG OF FOOD
liia#t A-ttManad}
liifcyrt » ■■*»M— and RsdMlH Swnn
Bm.
11S.JI Source* of nulUllon used tor inspec-
tion ol food, lor Inipeetlon dI cscksted
lood. and for coniroUlne food procru.
n».M Ultnvloli
Subpart A— |l«*arvad|
and ladialion
1 179.11 Sound or radiallon UMd for In-
■pecUoB of food, fur jiupcclktn of
packaged food, and tor eon trailing
roe4 procculng.
Sources of radiation for the pur-
poses ol Inspection of foods, for In-
spection of packaged food, and for
controlling food processing may t>e
aafely used under the following condt-
(a) The radiation source Is one of
the following:
(1) X-ray tubes producing X-radl-
atlon from operation of the tube
source at energy levels ot 300 kllovolt
peak or lower.
(11 Sealed units producing radiations
at energy levels of not more than 3.3
million electron volts from one of the
following isotopes: Ainedciuin-141,
ceslum-137. cobalt-ao. lodlne-135. kryp-
ton-85. radlum-226. and strontlum-H.
(31 Sealed units producing neutron
radiation from the isotope Callfoml-
um-ZSI (CAS Reg. No. 13981-17-4) to
measure moisture In food.
<b> To assure safe use of these radl-
(1) The label ot the sources shall
bear. In addition to the other Informa-
tion required by the Act:
(I) Appropriate and accurate Infor-
mation Identifying the source of radl-
allor
(1!) The
<0B. 701. SI Stat. I0S5-
71 sut. iisi-nga u
C. 1«B, }71i, unleu all>tr
amended 111
Souicc 41 FR UU5. tlu. IS. II
uiimuro energy ot radi-
ation emitted by X-ray tube sources.
(2> The label or accompanying label-
ing shall bear
(1) Adequate directions tor Installa-
t that no food (hall
le exposed to radiation sources listed
n paragraph <a> (Hand (2) of thb sec-
ion so as to r<K:elve an abaorbed dose
n excess of 1.000 rads.
(Ill) A statement that no food shall
le exposed to a radiation source listed
n paragraph (aK3) ot this section so
J to receive an abaorbed doese In
xcess of 200 milllrads.
4-17U u
,y Google
I I7«.22 Cmmu radlalloa for Uw Ircal-
Bwal at food.
Okinnik radlktlon (or the ticmttnent
or cerlmin tooda maybe ufely u«ed
IT lollowlnE condlttocu:
21 cm ch. I (4-i-as EdiiiMi)
<>) Th« rkdiatlon fource coiulsU ol
■Ckled unlU containing the Isotope
coball-60 or cesium- 13T.
(b) The gamma nullatlon I* uied or
Intended for use In a itngle treatment
at (ollowa:
o assure safe use, the label and
'labeling ol the food shall bear, In addi-
tion to the other Information re<)utred
by the act, the tallowing statements:
<I> "Treated with huilzlng radiation"
or '"Treated with gamma radiation" on
retail packages.
(2) "Treated with ionizing radi-
ation—do not Irradiate again" or
"Treated with gamma radiation — do
not Irradiate again" on wholeiale
packages and on Invoices or bill* ot
Ikding o( bulk shipments.
1>. iseil
for Ike ti
Electron beam radiation for the
treatment of food may be safely used
under the following conditions:
(a) The radiation source conslats ot
an electron accelerator producing a
beam of electrons al energy level* not
to exceed S million electron volt4.
(bl The electron beam i
used or Intended lor use :
treatment as follows:
«c> In the case of electron beam radi- tensity and power used In the procesa-
allon used for treatment of food, a Ing shall be made with recorders cou-
permanent record of the radiation In- pled to the electron accelerator, and
„GoogIe
Food md Drvg AdmM«lralt«n, HHS
Lhe record! ih»ll be reUlned tor Food
Mid Drug AdmlnUtratlan Inipectlon
lor » period ot I yeu. Such record*
■hftll proTlde inrormatlan IdenUtylng
completely the (ood that hH been lub-
Jected to the rMtlktlon recorded there-
^^(d) To uaure ule lue. the label and
labeling of the rood ihall bear. In addi-
tion to the other In formation required
by the act. the lollovtng statement*:
<I) "Treated with Ionizing radiation"
or "Treated with electron rvdiatlon"
on retail packages.
(3) "Treated with lonlilng radi-
ation—do not Irradiate again" or
"Treated with electron radiation— do
not Irradiate again" on wholesale
packages and on invoice* or bill* of
lading or bulk shipment*.
|t7*.4S
ii*ed ror heating food under the fol-
lowing condltlonK
(a) The radiation source con*l*t* at
electronic equipment tM«dudnc ndio
waves with (pedrtc trcquendei lor
this purpose authortied bjf Uie Feder-
al Communication* Conunlwlon.
(b) The radiation li iwed or IntMtded
ror use In the production of heat In
rood wherever heat la necessary and
eirectlve In the Ireatnwnt or procM»>
Inr of (ood.
I injl UHntloM railalloa for Uw frM>
CHlag and Iwafirt mt tuoi.
Ultraviolet radlatloa for the proeeaa-
Ing and treatment of (ood may be
safely used under the (oUowlnc condl-
(a) The r
ultraviolet e
emit wavelength* within the range of
3200-3000 Angstrom uiUU with 00 per-
cent or the emlialon being the wa*e-
length 353? Angstrom units.
(b) The ultraviolet radiation la usad
iise as followi:
The packaging materials identified
In thi* (ectlon may be safely subjected
to Irradiation Incidental to the radi-
ation treatment and processing of pre-
packaged foods, subject to the provi-
sions of this section and to the re-
quirement that no Induced radioactiv-
ity U detecUble In the packaging ma-
UrlBl Itself:
(a) The radiation of the rood Itsell
shall comply with regulations In this
part.
otherwise Indicated, iDddental to the
use or gamma radiallon In the radi-
ation treatment of prepackaged foods:
<1) Nitrocellulose-coated or vtaiyll-
dene chloride copolymer-coaied cello-
phane complying With |in.l300 of
this chapter.
<3> aiasslne paper complying with
I 17S.170 of this chapter.
<3> WsK-coatcd paperboard ootaply-
Ing with i ns.l70 of this chapter.
(i) Polyolelln film prepared (ram
one or more of the baalc olefin poly-
mers complying with 1 117.1910 of this
chapter. The llnlshed film may con-
„GoogIe
Mr. Panktta. Also a letter sent to me from Ida Honorof to be
included in the record as well.
Mr. Bbdbll. Without objection.
[The letter appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]
Mr. Panftta. Let me ask of all members of the panel, obviously
the issue here is one that involves some degree of dispute and yet
some feeling that if it is found to be safe, that it can be useful.
Do you have any objection to additional research into the use of
irradiation?
Ms. Tucker. I feel that there needs to be additional research into
the safe^ of irradiated foods before there is Einy movement forward
to commercialize it in the United Stetes. If we move forward with
the current FDA proposals, what we are saying is let's make our
children and our grandchildren the guinea pigs. We are facing a
rising cancer rate, a rising cancer death rate, despite spending bil-
lions of dollars trying to find cures for cancer. What we have dis-
covered through our quick review of the literature is that every
food irradiated has different radiolytic products formed in it. Now,
perhaps some of these foods are safe to eat. Perhaps some of the
producte formed are not dangerous and perhaps others are danger-
ous, but in an effort to push forward a new industry that is not
about to make it on its own, the Federal Government is proposing
to subsidize demonstration projecte through the Department en
Ener^. We feel that studies that have suggested adverse efTects
shouM be replicated. We feel that a lot of unanswered questions
^ould be answered before there should be any movement forward.
We do not think the research should be done on the American con-
sumer. I think it ought to be done in the laboratory.
The study done in Indiana on real live children was done because
the researchers believed the earlier research. The earlier research
had only looked at stored wheat. There is nothing in the FDA pro-
posal to require that food be stored long enough for whatever it
was that caused the polyploids in these children's blood to disap-
pear.
The replication studies indicated that they found the same kinds
of problems in laboratory animals.
Mr. Pametta. Ms. 'Tucker, to the extent that the legislation
before us provides for unifying the research effort and trying to
direct research at this issue, why would you oppose it on that
basis?
Ms. TucKEB. My reading of this legislation is that they will set
up a new agency to promote food irradiation just as the Atomic
Knergy Commission promoted new technology.
Mr. Panbtta. Would you say that about any bill that sought to
do research in this area?
Ms. Tucker. No. I think that bills looking into the safety should
rightfully belong some place like Health and Human Services or
the Department of Agriculture.
Mr. Alvarez, Sir, may I interject a comment. This bill is not a
research bill. This bill is a commercialization bill and that research
is designed for the goal of commercialization. It is like the Synfuels
Corporation. You can say Synfuels is for R&D and for research, but
where is Ui t money truly going? It is goiiw for the commercial
demonstrati , This bill makes it a policy of the Federal Govem-
,y Google
90
ment to promote it by spending money to build plants. That is the
bottom line of this bill.
Mr. Panetta. But the Federal Government does that with a
number of areas. We do that with alternatives, with energy, in the
health area, in a number of areas. We are constantly involved in
tr3ang to determine whether a new technolc^y can be workable. So
what is the problem with that?
Mr. Alvarez. Well, there is a difference between research and
development and commercialization.
Mr. Panetta. But that is just a matter of your interpretation,
isn't it?
Mr. Alvarez. Indeed, and in terms of research may I just make
the following comments. One of the basic claims about the safety of
food irradiation is that astronauts eat it. OK. Well, as you may
know, the American Medical Association for many years had de-
clared the use of irradiation of the fetus during pre^ancy as safe
because doctors were doing it, and they did not find anything; and
in 1959 a British physican. Dr. Alice Stewart, reported that there
w£is more than a 50 percent increased risk of dying from childhood
cancer as a result of these exposures. This was occuring at the time
when 26 percent of all pr^nant mothers were receiving fetal z
rays in the United States.
On the safety of food irradiation I would say it is comparable to
the knowledge that we had about fetal x rays in the 1950's, which
is nil.
Mr. Panetta. But wait 1 minute.
You are essentially making my point.
Mr. Alvarez. Excuse me, sir.
Mr. Panetta. It is my question.
Mr. Alvarez. I understand.
Mr. Panetta. You are essentially makir^ my point. The question
is if there is a need for additional research into this issue, then
why shouldn't we proceed with additional research? I mean the po-
sition, I take it, the panel takes is because there is a need for addi-
tional research you should not do any research.
Mr. Alvarez. No, sir. My position is much different than that, if
you had read my statement.
My position is that our opposition to food irradiation is primarily
because of the implications of this technology. This is an ultraha-
zardous technology that is poorly regulated, that the implications
of which is that there will be a quantum jump in the amounts of
intensely radioactive materials circulating in society and throuj^
commimities. That in £uid of itself from our point of view is sum-
cient enough for us to oppose this technol(^y. ,
However, since you did ask about food safety, I wish to draw i
your attention that there is a need for more research mainly be- |
cause the credibility of food safety research in this country |
Mr. Panetta. Would you support legislation to do that? ,
Mr. Alvarez. I would support l^pslation that would not bar the ;
rights of States to regulate this industry. 1 would support I^iala- ;
tion I
Mr. Panetta. Answer my question. Would you support addition- ;
al legislation to provide for research in food irradiation?
,y Google
91
Mr. Alvaebz. I would support additional legislation except I
would not do it in the context of H.R. 696 and only for the purpose
of determining its safety.
Mi-. Panbtta. I would be interested in your conunents along
those lines.
Mr. Alvarez. Very gocxi.
Mr. pANETTA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Bkdell. Thank you.
Mr. Alvarez, you talked a little bit about the radioactive waste
problem. Is this a different situation than what is used in medicine
in r^ard to the waste that is generated?
Mr. Alvabsz. Yes.
Mr. BsnELL. I, for one, am not sure of the difl'erence.
Mr. Alvarbz. You are talking about vastly larger quantities. Ra-
dioisotopes in medicine usually involve maybe a few hundred
curies at a time that are in use in any given facility for the pur-
pose of radiotherai:^ or diagnostic purposes.
We are talking about a facility that is going to house as much eis
10 million curies of an intensive radioactive substance.
Now, in 1981, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission estimate
ed that all sources combined including the medical industry, re-
search industry, the Government and commercial sector, generated
aliout 94-95 million curies of low-level radioactive v/aate.
Now, a food and radiation facility using a 10 million curie source,
because of the fact that this radio cesium has a half life of 30
years, a certain amount of it will decay and will have to be re-
placed with another fresh source, and therefore you are going to
have to be taking stuff out which is low level waste and putting
new stuff in in order to metintain a uniform enei^ field.
Elveiy 5 years they would have to replace approximately one-sev-
enth of that source. If you do some calculations based on decay and
what is left there, this means that this plant in 5 years will gener-
ate about 1.5 million curies of low-level radioactive waste that has
to go somewhere.
That is substantially larger than 90-pIus million curies generated
from all sources combined in the United States for the year 1981.
Mr. MossisON. Mr. Chairman, will you yield just for a moment?
We agree, Mr. Alvarez, that the radioisotopes we are talking
about do not generate waste. They become wastes themselves.
Mr. Alvarbz. That is correct.
Mr. Morrison. So it is already out there. It is goii^ to become
waste no matter where it is so we might as well make some benefi-
cial use of it.
It does not generate radioactivity. It cannot impart radioeictivi-
ties to the structure in which it exists, and so what you are talking
about is going to happen anyway.
Mr. Alvarbz. I am not sure.
Ms. TuCBER. A big difference is if you have a very dangerous ra-
dioisotope and you have it contained in one spot, the likelihood it is
going to be released into the environment and kill people, and
damage the environment, is going to be much less than if you
divide it up into little pieces and ship it all around the country.
Consequently, we feel it would be much more dangerous to be
shipping ce iim throughout the farmland in this country emd
,y Google
where an accident might occur and never be detected sent to facili-
ties who may go bankrupt and leave the tridium plants in tJie
Southwest United Statea.
We feel that your cesium redistribution plans through this food
irradiation program will not be very beneficial to the rest of the
States.
Mr. Morrison. But you don't feel that way about the fact it is
now spread all across the United States in commercial radium fa-
cilities.
Ms. TucKEH. Most facilities use cobalt 60 rather than cesium 137.
At least that is what I have been informed.
Mr. Morrison. I can assure you that the medical use and re-
search use for cesium will far exceed the food irradiation use but,
Mr. Chairman, the reason I asked for time at this point was the
fact the materials that Mr. Alvarez is telking about are going to be
wastes anyway and this bill includes a provision that says the De-
partment of Energy can tease that material and then it brings it
So we retein the authority to make sure that the safety of these
products are guaranteed as far as the public is concerned.
We are not generating more nuclear wastes. It may be generated
in different places, but if in fact there can be a beneficial use for
society, then obviously that problem is worth the investment.
Mr. Alvarez. May I make just a comment, please?
Mr. Bedell. First, is it correct you would have less radioactive
waste because of the fact it has lost some of its potency, or is that
incorrect?
Mr. Morrison. It shifts from being a highly radioactive material
to having decayed to being considered as low-level radioactive
waste.
Mr. Alvarez. I just wanted to make a comment about this.
Indeed, the Department of Energy is planning to lease its radio-
cesium. The last I read was about 12 cents a curie, maybe more or
less. But that is about a factor of 10 less than the going market
price for radiocobalt.
What happens when the stuff does leave the plant; where will it
go? Presumably it will go back to Hanford.
The Energy Department is in the process of a major relaxation of
ite internal nuclear waste management standards so that these
wastes could be disposed of in sheillow burial pits. I consider this
not to be an accepteble way of treating with radioactive waste.
The Hanford land base right now is being treated as a giant
sponge; 137 billion gallons of radioactive wastes have been dumped
r^ht into the ground there and to just add more to that burden is
not necessarily a beneficial use of a radioisotope.
Mr. Bedell. I don't think you add to it, do you, because you have
already got that. You have to get rid of it and it has been estab-
lished it would have to be less potent, fewer rads.
Mr. Alvarez. I guess it is weighing the risk of transporting this
on highways and run the risk of this spilling out on communities.
Mr. Bedell. My time has expired.
Does anyone else have further questions? I have one or two yet.
In regard to India, you indicated there was some problem in
India. Could you tell us what that is?
,y Google
Ms. Tucker. I was referring to a scientific study conducted in
India where the researchers fed exactly the same diet to two
groups of malnourished children. The title of the study is "Effects
of Feeding Irradiated Wheat to Malnourished Children," conducted
by Dr. Bnaskaram and Dr. Sadasivan.
Children received irradiated wheat that had been freshly irradi-
ated. In other words, this wheat had not been stored for 1 or 2
years. It had been freshly irradiated.
The reasons the researchers were interested in this was because
they have certain rules in India, but no storing grain because they
previously had fsunines where many people died while the grain
bibe were full. So they fed the freshly irradiated wheat to malnour-
ished children and the malnourished children given the irradiated
wheat developed blood and normalities.
Now, the researchers had not expected to have any problems.
They thought this study would show that it was slightly safe to eat
irr^iated wheat. The levels at which the wheat was irradiated
were under 100,000 rads.
Now, it is currently legal to irradiate wheat in the United States,
but no one is doing it because it is too expensive to irradiate wheat.
There are viable options to preserving wheat. We believe that
there are viable options to preserving our fresh fruits, vegetables,
and grains that we should be pursuing instead of developing this
hazardous technology.
Now, researchers, after finding these problems in the blood of
children, instead of repeating it on other innocent victims, decided
that they had better run some tests in the laboratory, and they fed
freshly irradiated wheat to mice. They found the same kinds of
blood abnormalities develop. They fed it to monkeys. They found
the same kind of blood abnormalities.
They concluded that freshly irradiated wheat should not be fed
to people.
Mr. Bedell. A hundred thousand rads, is that what we are talk-
ing about?
Ms. Tucker. This particular study used 75,000 rads, which is well
under the proposed FDA levels.
Mr. Bedell. 5,000 rads?
Mr. Alvarez. 75,000.
Ms. Frompovich. Excuse me, sir. This study is in the information
that I am putting into the record. It has been recited.
Mr. Bedell. My question is, the FDA is going to approve 100. Is
that 100,000 rads?
Mb. Tucker. The FDA is proposing 100,000 rads, up to 100,000
rads. Anything under that would be allowable.
Mr. Bedell. Thank you.
Mr. Ri^rts, do you have some questions?
Mr. Roberts. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
In the interest of the record here, I would like to ask in regard to
the Indian study, I have a particular interest in this issue. When
you mentioned wheat, my ears start to perk up.
We have about a billion eight in terms of carryover. We are
going to have a lot of wheat on the ground out in my country and
virtually all of it is going under loan. We have to have a means of
storing it and preserving it. With the hearings over 18 months ago,
,y Google
94
led by my colleague from California on the EDB situation, we have
to have some alternatives.
There are a few chemicals left that are, say, in that cat^ory, but
if I am any judge of public opinion or activities or the testimony
that you have provided, I would guess that you would not be for
those chemicals either. So we are taking a look at what would be
possible, and as we go down the list to acceptable alternatives, I
guess I look at this one as one we ought to take a good, hard look
at.
Certainly 1 am not a part of any cabal from the nuclear waste
industry in r^ards to why 1 have an interest in these hearings, or
a plot or a conspiracy.
In regard to the Indian study, what was the sample size? Hie
information 1 have here says that only 12 children were involved
and it was done on malnourished children, and that these children
are certainly more vulnerable to this particular blood disorder.
Other studies were criticed and then I have a laundry list of six dif-
ferent studies who refuted that study.
I am not saying it is wrong. I am just saying, this is the informa-
tion I have along with your information.
How are we going to store all this wheat?
Ms. Tucker. Congressman, I would like to naake two points. First
is that I, like you, was told that the Indian study had been refuted.
I have yet to see a citation to a single scientific journal article re-
futing this study.
Second, I was told that
Mr. Roberts. Wait I minute.
I have the Journal of Food find Cosmetics Toxoiogy, 1976, techni-
cal report, series of International Project in the Area of Feed Irra-
diation, 1977, the Journal of Toxology, 1977, and a letter, the Joui>
nal of Food and Cosmetic Toxology, 1981, and the joint expert com-
mittee report of 1976.
Ms. TucEES. We wrote to one of the scientists who was part of
that joint committee report asking — because we had been told that
he had said the study was fraudulent.
Our response from him was that, well, they had discounted the
study because they said that about 4 percent of the general popula-
tion is expected to have polyploids in their blood.
Tlie stiidy done on the children was a small number of children,
thank goodness, and since it showed damaging effects. Now, it
doesn't take a genius to figure out that if you have a study sample
of 15 children, they added another five children to see if the stored
wheat would also — if the stored irradiated wheat would have the
same effects as the freshly irradiated wheat.
And so they had a total of 15 children and this particular re-
searcher gave me the preposterous explanation that since one
would expect to find 4 percent of the population to have polyploids
in their blood and none of the con^ol groups are polyploids in
their groups there was something wrong with the study.
His explanation to me was not logical.
Mr. Roberts. That was one of the scientists that took part in
this.
One of how many?
,y Google
95
Ms. Tucker. Yes. I would be happy to review the other citations
which you give because I haven't seen those.
Mr. Roberts. I thinlc that would be helpful for the subcommittee.
Ms. Tucker. The director of the Institute also explained, no, he
had not repudiated the study and gave us further information
about why they had conducted the study in the first place.
I think this is the type of study that ought to be looked into in
some American laboratories. What happens to the food that makes
it di^erent when it is freshly irradiated than when it has been
stored for a long time?
Apparently we don't know. My second response is that especially
for wheat we have a viable alternative that is not environmentally
hazardous.
You see 100,000 rads of radiation does not sterilize the wheat. It
merely either kills off the insects or inhibits their ability to repro-
duce.
By driving these insects of oxygen which can be done both in the
fields or in the grain bins themaelves we can achieve the same goal
of killing off insects that might eat up the wheat.
I think that we ought to be pursuing these kinds of preservation
tecfanolc^es rather than promoting ultrahazardous technologies.
Mr. Roberts. I am not sure that is an economical alternative.
•Ms. Tucker. They are doing it in Europe and Asia.
Mr, Roberts. You people aren't going to be upset if I continue to
eat beef jerky that has been dried by the sunlight in the same proc-
ess, is it?
Ms. Frompovich. That is your choice, sir.
May I have some input for 1 second, Mr. Roberts?
Mr. Roberts. Certainly, Doctor.
Ms. Frompovich. We in the field know that there is a lot of sub-
clinical nutrition in this country, especially in the ethnic groups, in
the poor minorities and this is a place where we could probably see
this same type thing happening.
Thank you.
Mr. Roberts. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Alvarez. I just want to add about the Indian study is this
data was presented at the annual meeting of the American Nucle-
ar Society in Washington, DC, last fall and much to our shock and
surprise, the individuals who have conducted research in this field
for the Government, U.S. Government on nuclear radiation said
that ihe Indian study was fraudulently performed and that the Na-
tional Institute of Nutrition declared it to be fraudulent.
This kind of ad hominem behavior, I think, is in violation of sci-
entific freedom and responsibility. It is very hard to accept these
kinds of— this kind of research, when these kinds of claims are
made before important public forums. That is something that these
b&B should be held accountable to.
If you can't Bnd something wrong with the merits, you shouldn't
be l3dng about it in an ad hominem fashion and quite frankly, that
is jiist what happened.
Mr, Roberts. I'm sorry. I yielded back my time, but one other
consideration here.
When you say people lie, I suppose we ought to look into that. I
am sure we ought to look into that in terms of that all^ation, but
,y Google
96
it is my understanding that the methodology was in question in
1981 again the Journal of Food Science article that criticized that
study because the wheat was heat sterilized eind it was their theory
it was heat sterilization not the process that caused the problem.
Obviously we are not scientific experts that can make Uiat kind
of judgment, but I think we have clearly two different schools of
opinion.
I appreciate your bringing this to our attention.
Mr. Alvarez. Sir, I just want to add the fact there is a debate
over this very important study is an indication that there is a lack
of consensus about food safety, and therefore I think from the point
of view of public health, you don't meike a major decision to serve
irradiated food to thousands of people when there is no consensus.
Mr. Bedell. Dr. Frompovich, you indicated that one of the prob-
lems was that there were no guidelines for radiation. I have to
assume that if we move forward with it, the Department will cer-
tainly put out guidelines as to how this is to be performed.
Ms. Fbompovich. I don't think the guidelines can be mzmufac-
tured in 1 week or 10 days or overnight, and with the way this food
irradiation is being pushed through, I think we are going to have
some of it on the meirket very soon, and therefore I think that
should be taken into consideration.
No food should be on the market until there is
Mr. Beuell. You feel if they do move forward, there should be
guidelines.
Ms. Frompovich. Yes, sir, and specifically it should be marked.
Mr. Roberts. Can I please ask one other question, Mr. Chair-
man?
Mr. Alvarez, I get the feeling when I read the testimony of
people who are extremely concerned about our policy in tenna of
food safety in this country, we are just in pretty bad shape, that
the consumers choice and quality of the food product today in this
country is something that if I could use some adjectives and ad-
verbs from your testimony, I think it would be pretty grim to say
the least.
Is that your feeling, we in this country, in terms of food safety,
are on a perilous course and that the farmers' product and then
after the middleman processes through here, when you walk in
Safeway, Giant, or whatever, we are headed toward some real prob-
lems?
I am talking about a general statement now, not a specific thing
in terms of this process.
Mr. Alvarez. Well, sir, I do not consider myself to be an expert
on the safety of foods and what is being treated in foods.
However, in looking merely at the record of food irradiation, I
think the credibility of this research is in question.
In particular, a good deal of the research done pertaining to
safety food irradiation was done by an agency, a private oorporar
tion which was eventually indicted and whose chief executive ofH-
cers were sent to prison for performing fraudulent research.
Mr. Roberts. I am not into that.
Mr. Alvarez. I understand, but the public is not into that and
the public
,y Google
97
Mr. RoBEKTS. If I might reclaim my time emd ask for a specific
answer to my general question, rather than a continued laundry
list of accusations in regard to this particular thing, I would appre-
ciate it.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Bedell. We had testimony that there are 21 countries that
had already approved this. Are some of those mtyor countries? Are
you folks luiowledgeable in that regard?
Ms. Tucker. We do have lists back at our office of the countries
that have approved food irradiation. By and large, they are for a
small number of food items and they are approving them by food
item and to our understanding, and we have been told this both by
reporters and people within the industry, is that most countries are
kwking to see what the United States is going to do before they at-
tempt vast commercialization.
I do understand that there is irradiated food now being served in
SouUi Africa, in the Netherlands, and in Japan. I am not certain of
the status of food irradiation in countries like the U.S.S.R.
Mr. Bedell. Do you know if there have been any problems in
those countries where they have done this?
Mb. Tucker. No; I do not. The types of problems we fear in terms
of health are the kind that do not appear immediately. You do not
eat a piece of irradiated food and drop dead. We are concerned
about the long-term genetic problems and long-term potentiab for
diseases like cancer.
Ms. Frompovich. Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. May I please ad-
dress that question?
Mr. Bedell. Yes.
Ms. Frompovich. One of our collee^es who will be testifying
later on this afternoon has some information that was just received
fivm Great Britain about their decision on food irradiation which
Doay be to the negative.
Mr. Bedell. Thank you very much. We appreciate your testimo-
ny very much.
Our next panel will be Mr. Richard Graves, chairman. Govern-
ment Relations Committee, United Fresh Fruit and Vegetable As-
sociation, Alexandria, VA; Dr. C. Donald Van Houweling, director
of Government affairs, National Port Producers Council in Des
Moines, lA; Lawrence T. Graham, executive vice president, public
affairs. National Food Processors Association in Washington, DC;
Dr. Harry C. Mussman, chairman. Coalition for Food Irradiation in
Washington, DC.
We will add Dr. Harold Lubin, director. Department of Personal
Health Program/Pood and Nutrition, American Medical Associa-
tion in Chicago, IL.
STATEMENT OF J. RICHARD GRAVES, JR, CHAIRMAN, GOVERN-
MENT RELATIONS COMMITTEE, UNITED FRESH FRUIT AND
VEGETABLE ASSOCIATION
Mr. Graves. Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, I am
Richard Graves of Graves Brothers Packing Co. in Wabasoo, PL.
We grow and ship citrus products both domestically and overseas
under the name of Indian River Citrus Sales.
,y Google
I also Eun the chairman of the Government Relations Committee
and past member of the board of directors of the United Fresh
Fruit and Vegetable Association. United is the national trade asso-
ciation for the fresh produce industry. The 2,500 members include
growers/shippers, wholesalers, retailers and affiliated industries
from across the United States and 21 countries. United members
handle 80 percent of the fresh produce commercially marketed in
the United States.
On behalf of United, it is a pleasure for me to testify before the
subcommittee today on the issue of food irradiation. United fully
supports the development and research of food irradiation as one
possible fdtemative to some postharvest treatments of fresh
produce. Although not a panacea for treating all fresh produce
commodities, irradiation does offer the possibility of improving the
trade and marketing potential of fresh produce.
The produce industry has been severely hampered in meeting
foreign quarantine regulations with the cancellation by the Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency of ethylene dibromide, EDB, a post-
harvest fumigant used to disinfest certain commodities. Because of
the cancellation of this important fumigant, the produce industry
is interested in the improved import emd export potential irradia-
tion offers to produce, in particular papaya, mangos, and apples,
among others. Although the industry is also interested in irrsidiat-
ing citrus, further research and development is needed to deter-
mine the correct dosage without injuring the product.
In August 1985, United conducted a survey of a portion of the
membership on the potential use of food irradiation by the fresh
produce industry. Although all respondents agreed that food irra-
diation would eventually impact the produce industry, that impact
will not be immediate. As one member responded, "After we, the
public, become better informed, food irradiation will be a part of
our every day lives, and the agricultural and produce industries
will change radically."
There are still many hurdles to overcome before ffxid irradiation
will be commercially used by the fresh fruit and vegetable indus-
try. Some of these are: achieving appropriate dose levels for disin-
festation and marketability; economic viability; hemdling and dis-
tribution procedures; and the most important, the education of con-
sumers and the food industry.
United has undertaken several activities over the past couple of
'ears to help educate our members. Articles on food irradiation
tave been published in our trade magazine, OUTLOOK; workshops
on food irradiation have been held during our annual conventitm;
and United has distributed white papers on food irradiation to the
membership.
On the subject of the successful use of irradiation, United's
survey respondents were primarily concerned about consumer ac-
ceptance of irradiated produce. Because of the necessity for con-
sumer education on irradiation. United was one of the founding
members of the Coalition for Food Irradiation. This coeilition of
food groups has been recognized as a credible source for informa-
tion on irradiation and is conducting activities to inform the press.
Government officials, and the general public.
E
„GoogIe
I now would like to comment specifically on H.R. 696, the "Fed-
eral Food Irradiation Development end Control Act of 1985," intro-
duced by CongresBman Sid Morrison. United commends Mr. Morri-
son for taking the initiative in the U.S. Congress to bring this issue
to the forefront. The most important issue I wish to address today
is the issue of labeling produce at the retail level.
Although H.R. 696 changes the definition of food irradiation
from an additive to a process, the bill retains FDA's authority to
r^ulate it as em additive. That means that FDA has the authority
to require mandatory labeling of irrac'ited produce at retedl.
The produce industry understands the interest on the part of
some consumers who may want to know that their produce has
been irradiated.
However, there are several very practical problems that prohibit
the accurate labeling of produce at the retail level, including the
inherent quality of the perishability of produce, space limitations,
misbranding, and enforcement.
Several suggestions have been made as to how irradiated produce
may be labeled. One option offered is to place a sticker on each
piece. Certainly there are machines which place stickers on such
commodities as oranges, avocados, papaya or bananas. It is not fea-
sible, however, to place stickers on individual mushrooms, brussel
sprouts, asparagus stalks, and many other items.
Another suggestion is to place the shipping container with the
appropriate labeling in view of the buyer. T^e amount of space
that would be taken up by the shipping containers would severely
limit the amount of produce that would be offered for sale, indi-
rectly increasing the cost of the produce to the consumer.
Placing signs or cards in the proximity of the irradiated commod-
ity is a third suggestion. Because produce managers constantly
change the arrangement of the produce department, it would be ex-
tremely difUcult to ensure that the sign is in the correct space.
This easily could lead to misbranding of the product.
Maintaming pricing information in the produce department is a
difficult task and exemplifies the burdens produce managers have
with signing.
There are several potential misbranding dangers should produce
be required to be labeled. Consumers purchase produce with their
hands. They pick it up, feel it for ripeness, look for uniformity in
color and in some cases smell it. It there are two bins of apples for
example, one irradiated and one not irradiated, there is nothing to
prevent the consumer from picking up an apple from the irradiated
bin and mistakenly putting it back down in the nonirradiated bin.
lie retail establishment could be held legally liable for misbrand-
ing even though control is completely out of their hands. Further,
a lack of packaging to label, since most produce is sold by piece un-
packaged, a manner that is generally preferred by consumers and
is diflerent from some meat product irradiation of produce does not
prevent a health problem, it only prevents the spread of unwanted
exotic pests in produce.
For any law or r^ulation to be efTective, it must be enforceable.
Because of a lack of enforcement capability on the part of FDA and
the unfairness of putting retailers into situations where they
cannot control possible misbranding. United urges that H.R. 696 be
,y Google
100
amended to exempt irradiated fruits and vegetables from the man-
datory labeling at retail.
Instead, United recommends that irradiated produce be regulat-
ed just like other produce which has received a poetharvest treat-
ment by requiring labeling of the shipping containers. An inherent
protection in labeling of the shipping containers will be the preven-
tion of irradiating the commodity again, insuring that the produce
has been treated within the safety limits established by the FDA.
In addition FDA and the appropriate State agencies will be able
to endorse these regulations in the packing houses or irradiati<Hi
facilities.
Mr. Bedell. What is your time situation, Mr. Graves?
Mr. Graves. Fifteen seconds.
United urges the subcommittee to make this amendment to
insure enforceability of possible regulations.
Thank you again for inviting me to testify. I would be happy to
answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Graves appears at the conclusion
of the hearing.]
Mr. Bedell. Thank you very much.
We will now hear from Dr. Van Houweling, of the Pork Produc-
ers Council.
STATEMENT OF C. DONALD VAN HOUWELING, STAFF
CONSULTANT, NATIONAL PORK PRODUCERS COUNCIL
Mr. Van Houweling. Mr. Chairman, members of the subcom-
mittee, we appreciate very much this opportunity to testify at this
hearing.
The National Pork Producers Council represents practically all
the commercial pork producers of the country. Rather than read
my statement, I will try to summarize it and submit the entire
statement for the record.
Mr. Bedell. Without objection, the entire statement of each of
3«)u will be entered in the record.
Mr. Van Houweung. The NPPC's primary interest in radiation
relates to trichinosis. Our del^ates in 1982 adopted a resolution
Cfdling for the council to adopt a pn^am to eliminate trichinosis
from the pork supply. This led to the establishment of a task force
which has become known as the trichinosis safe pork task force.
Trichinosis is only a minor public health problem. There are less
than 100 cases of trichinosis reported annuEilly, but we believe now
we have the technolc^y and this minor problem should be eliminat-
ed.
It has always been of concern to pork producers for another
reason, because we believe it interferes with the demand for pork.
One of our surveys indicated that 25 percent of the consumers
ate less pork because of their concern about trichinosis. The same
survey showed that many of the people ate less pork because it had
to be cooked so thoroughly and therefore became dry and less pal-
atable. So we think there are real advantages to eliminating trichi-
nosis from the pork supply.
The task force that I referred to, the trichinosis safe task force,
began to look at methods that could be used for testing hogs to cer-
,y Google
101
tify that the pork from those hogs was free and we have been able
to get one test reo^nized.
Another one is nearly to be by the FSIS, but irradiation is also a
consideration we have had from the outset.
The Department of Energy approached our task force early on
and pointed out that there had been research done over the years
to show very low levels of irradiation could make pork safe as far
as trichinosis was concerned.
They have contributed to research that we conducted at the
USDA. Part of the research is one of the reasons the FDA has ap-
proved the petition for the approval for the irradiation of pork.
There was additional work done at Iowa State University on the
palatabiHty of microbial population of pork subjected to irradiation.
I am happy to say that work conclude there were no adverse ef-
fects. In fact, the taste of the pork seemed to improve with the stor-
age up to 21 days.
Now we recognize that one of the important considerations is
consumer acceptance of irradiation. For that reason, last winter we
conducted a survey of consumers to determine what their attitude
w£is in regard to irradiation.
Forty percent expressed a concern, but to put that in perspective,
1 should point out that there was a higher concern, 57 percent, in
regard to chemicfd additives of chemicals used in the production of
food.
There was a higher percentf^e concerned about diseases that
could be contracted from food and there was also a concern about
preservatives.
I have a more complete report of the results of that survey which
was in one of our publications, which I would submit as part of the
record.
Mr. Bedell. Without objection.
Mr. Van Houweling. As far as labeling is concerned, we believe
products should be labeled. We believe the consumers have a right
to know the product has been irradiated, and we believe that in
time irradiation will be an added value to food.
For that reason, we favor radiation. The exact form we haven't
decided, but we are inclined to think that a Ic^o or symbol, as has
been suggested, would be the ideeil way to convey the message. This
will require an educationfil program by the Government and indus-
try to be effectively done.
We also recognize whether or not this radiation will be used by
the meat industry is probably depending on two points. One, again,
the Eicceptance of consumers of the irradiated product, and second,
the economic feasibility of this process versus other methods of
processing food or meat.
Now, specifically in regard to legislation, we would like to com-
mend the introducers and the coeponsors for introducing this legis-
lation. We certainly favor the general purpose of it.
We have two or three concerns.
One, in r^ard to the labeling the irradiation as a process, if the
requirements for the approval of the process are as difficult to
obtein as for a food additive, we are not sure what has been gained
by labeling a process rather than a food additive.
,y Google
102
There is no question in our mind that it is properly a process,
but whether or not the requirements that have been suj^^ested in
the bill for the approval of the process might not be more than is
required.
We also do not feel that the inclusion that has been referred to
would have a particularly useful effect. Our concern is again that
the agencies involved might defer some of their decisionmaking to
the Commission and it might lead to further delay rather than ao-
complishing the purpose which the Commission is ostensibly eetab-
lished for.
We also believe that the section 5 on the leasing of nuclear tw-
producte could better be handled in another bill than in a food biU.
We don't doubt that there is a need for this kind of l^islativa
action, but we prefer to see that separated from this food biQ.
Thank you. If there are any questions, I will be glad to answer
them.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Van Houweling appears at the
conclusion of the hearing.]
Mr. Bedell. Thank you. Dr. Van Houweling.
We will next hear from Mr. Graham.
STATEMENT OF LAWRENCE T. GRAHAM, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESI-
DENT, PUBLIC AFFAIRS, NATIONAL POOD PROCESSORS ASSO-
CIATION
Mr. Graham. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I have a longer statement also I would like submitted.
Mr. Bedell. Without objection, your entire statement will be ad-
mitted into the record.
Mr. Graham. I will try to summarize my summary to not repeat
some points that have alreeidy been made.
I £im Lawrence Graham, executive vice president, public affairs.
National Food Processors Association. I am pleased to have this op-
portunity to testify.
NFPA is a scientific and technically based trade Eissociation that
represents nearly 600 companies including most of the nuyor food
processing companies in the United States. Our members pack
processed fruits, vegetables, meat, fish, £md specialty products, in-
cluding canned, frozen, aseptic, dehydrated, pickled, and other pre-
served food items.
Included in our membership are companies that manufacture
packaging and processing equipment or provide supplies and serv-
ices to the food processing industry. This association's diverse mem-
bership and scientific background have made our interest almost
automatic in the potential for irradiation.
NFPA feels it has always been in the forefront of technological
development in food matters and irradiation is just another k^cal
area for us to explore.
It is our understanding in FDA's fmal proposal on the low doee
of irradiation of fruits and vegetables, the final r^ulation will re-
quire the packaged fruits and vc^tables included in the statement
"treated with irradiation" on the label.
,y Google
103
We have not opposed the labeling. We feel it is inevitable for
consumer acceptance. We are just concerned the right message is
conveyed on the label.
As you know, it has been mentioned here today within the past
decade EPA has canceled and suspended the registrations of a sig-
niiicant number of valuable and widely used pesticides.
We believe that the judicial use of pesticides will continue to be
essential to production of economical and wholesome food but these
recent developments demonstrated need for increased efforts by
both Government and private industry to develop safe and effective
nonchemical pest controls.
NFPA and its members believe irradiation is one of the most
promising alternatives to pesticides. I think it is important to re-
member that all new food processes were questioned extensively by
consumers before acceptance and widespread use.
Canning, freezing, pasteurization, and microwaving were new
technolt^es whose safety and efficiency were questioned. Con-
sumer eicceptfuice of irradiated food will also be an evolutionary
We believe that irradiation on the basis of FDA approval and in-
creasing use will, like earlier processing technology, ultimately be
viewed as safe, effective, and beneficial to consumers.
Although it is our understanding there is no intention to make
any substantive change in section 409 of the Food, Drug and Cos-
metic Act except to highlight that irradiation is not the same as
other food additives, but rather is a process, the lengthy amend-
ments to that section are cumbersome and could create confusion
or lead to misinterpretation.
We think it would be simpler to leave section 409 untouched,
particularly since section 201 of the act defines food additive to in-
clude any source of irradiation intended for such use.
We have other specific language changes in the bill which are in-
cluded in my longer statement. But in any event, we believe that
the bill would provide a soluabie mechanism to promote irradiation
research and development to foster greatly needed consumer edu-
cation.
The legislation also promotes rational and consistent use of food
irradiation and to reduce unwarranted burdens on commerce by
preempting State and local food irradiation different than or differ-
ent to those imposed by FDA.
An area of concern to the food processing industry is a negative
reaction by the consumer to anything that maybe connected with
nuclear power. For this reason, we question the appropriateness of
section 59<aX5) of H.R. 696 in what is in legislation promoting a
new food processing technology. That section deals with the leeising
of nuclear byproduct material.
The American Medical Association, the World Health Oi^aniza-
don, the American Council on Science and Health have already en-
dorsed irradiation as a safe food process.
The technology is already widely used in hospital facilities, espe-
cially for patients on immunosuppressive dri^s who are required to
have a diet free of microbiologic contamination.
We are also presently working with the Department of Enei^
on a cooperative agreement which would provide us a cesium agn-
,y Google
104
culture commodities' irradiator which would be built next to our
food research laboratory in Dublin, CA.
Our present laboratory facilities in California and Seattle and
Washington, DC, enable us to do research in all types of food proc-
easing and packaging. A radiation faciHty next to our California
lab would enable us to study the interaction between different
types of food processing, for example, irradiation and thermal proc-
essing or irradiation and freezing — would also allow us to do senso-
ry evaluation work and nutritional studies.
This demonstration project, as you know, was created by Con-
gress as a way to eissess the feasibility of this type of tectuiology
transfer.
DOE has said the use of radiation to treat foodstuffs would con-
stitute an evolutionary process and could do much to reduce post-
harvest losses of food, increase international trade potential, and
eliminate health threatening micro-organisms in food.
We have not signed a final agreement with DOE but we are
working with them toward that goal and we look forward to par-
tidpating in food irradiation reseztrch.
We feri once they have developed a satisfactory agreement to ir^
radiate fruits and vegetables, such a process will eventually become
widespread.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Graham appears at the conclu-
sion of the hearing.]
Mr. Bedell. Thank you very much, Mr. Graham.
We will next hear from Dr. Mussman.
STATEMENT OF HARRY C. MUSSMAN, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESI-
DENT, SCIENTIFIC AFFAIRS, NATIONAL FOOD PROCESSORS AS-
SOCIATION, AND CHAIRMAN, COALITION FOR FOOD IRRADU-
TION
Mr. MusSBiAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the sub-
conunittee.
On behalf of the Coalition for Food Irradiation, I would like to
thank this subcommittee for the opportunity to appear before you
and to present the views of the condition regarding food irradiation
technology and the consuming public.
The Cofdition for Food Irradiation was created approximately I
year ago at a time when the food indust^ realized, recognized, mat
there was not broad understanding on the part of the consumer of
what this technolt^ was a\l about and that in order for the irrar
diation of foods to take its place rightfully as part of the preserva-
tion technology available to the food processing industry and for
which the consumers would benefit, that it would be necessary to
bring to the consuming public bald, honest, credible information re-
garding this technology.
It was for that purpose that the coalition was formed and that
has been essentially the mission of the coalition during the interim
period to date.
We have submitted as part of our prepared testimonjsr a copy of
the white paper that we have put U^ther as a coalition activity
which has been widely distributed in an attempt to address many
,y Google
105
of the current concerns which consumers have been raising from
time to time in attempting to deal with them, as I said a moment
ago, honestly, credibly, so that the consumers can be in a position
to make a more informed understanding judgment.
The makeup of the coalition is trade associations and companies
in the business of processing foods.
Some of the trade associations included in the Pork Producers
Council from whom you have already heard, the American Meat
Institute, the United Fresh Fruit & Vegetables Produce Marketing
Association, others, plus a number of companies, something in
excess of 20 m^or processing companies in the country who believe
that the potential for food irradiation is such that it warrants
oiaking an effort to attempt to get the consumer to understand
better what this technology is about.
No one wishes to simply hand this technolt^ to the consuming
public and expect them to accept it. I believe everyone understands
that in order for them to accept it, they must be better informed
about the technology itself
The coalition's broad-based membership suggests a variety of
ways in which irradiation could be employed by the food industry.
The fresh fruit and vegetables and spice industries could use irra-
diation as an alternative to the many chemicals and pesticides used
to treat and disinfest their crops.
The meat and poultry industries could use irradiation to elimi*
nate micro-oi^anizisms and parasites that cause disease.
Both of these are extremely highly regarded as tradeoffs that
should be brought to the public's attention.
The processed food industry could employ the technology to
either sterilize packaging materials or combine the treatment with
other processes to develop new interpretetions of nutrition foods
for the American public.
The benefits of the process are many. We have already elaborat-
ed them, but I think they bear repeating.
Consumers will be able to buy products that stay fresher longer
since the process can extend the shelf life. It can also reterd mold
and spoilage bacteria.
Despite existing health and safety stendards and warnings to
consumers about proper food handling, disease-carrjdng bacteria,
such as salmonella, and parasites such as trichinae, harm a
number of individuals each year.
Widespread use of irradiation could address these problems, not
necessarily solving them completely, but certeinly making a sub-
stantial impact on what the future of those diseases would be in
this country.
T think the main points that I need to make regarding the coali-
tion's message to the consumer are the following.
They address the individual concerns that have been rjiised by a
number of consumer groups. One, irradiation does not make food
radioactive.
Two, irradiation does not create harmful new substances in food
and alter the nature of the food.
Three, irradiation does not create new strains of bacteria which
become resistant at some future point.
,y Google
106
Pour, irradiation does not significantly alter the nutritional qual-
ity of foods, probably not any more than most other preservation
methods might.
It is important to recognize that the food industry is conservative
by nature and unwilling to jeopardize its relationship of trust with
consumers by employing a controversial new technology. However,
I think the food industry has made it abundantly clear they believe
the potential of this technology is such that it warrants being given
an opportunity to work.
Let me conclude, Mr. Chairman, with a commendation also as
the others have of Congressman Morrison and the cosponsors of
this bUl H.R. 696.
We support as this coedition the general principles of the bill. We
believe that it will do much to enhfince the consumer education ef-
forts which the coalition is undertaking.
We acknowledge that there are some flaws in it which others
have already mentioned, but in a general sense, the coalition is
fully supportive of this legislation as a step forward in having this
technology accepted by the American public.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Mussman appears at the conclu-
sion of the hearing.]
Mr. Bedell. Thank you, Dr. Mussman. Dr. Lubin.
STATEMENT OF A. HAROLD LUBIN, M.D., DIRECTOR, DEPART-
MENT OF FOODS, NUTRITION, AND PERSONAL HEALTH, AMERI-
CAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, ACCOMPANIED BY THOMAS
WOLFF, DEPARTMENT OF FEDERAL LEGISLATION
Dr. Lubin. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, my
name is Harold Lubin, and I am director of the Department ol
Foods, Nutrition, and Personal Health of the American Medical As-
sociation. Accompanying me is Thomas Wolff of the AMA'a Depart-
ment of Federal Legislation. The AMA appreciates the invitation
to testify today concerning H.R. 696, the Federal Food Irradiation
Development and Control Act of 1985.
AMA supports H.R. 696. Many years of international experience
have demonstrated that foods irradiated at levels of up to 10 kilo-
grays, or 1,000 kilorads, are safe to eat. In fact, in 1980, the Joint
Expert Committee on the Wholesomeness of Irradiated Foods con-
cluded that "The irradiation of any food commodity up to an aver-
age dose of 10 kilograys presents no toxicological hazard" and "in-
troduces no special nutritional or microbiolt^cal problems." The
Codex Alimentarius Commission, a United Nations organization
under the auspices of the WHO emd the FAO, has recommended
unconditional clearance for foods irradiated at a dose not exceeding
10 kGy, or 1.000 kilorads.
Food irradiation leaves no residue in food. Moreover, while food
irradiation does cause slight chemical and ph3r8ical changes in food,
these changes are no more significant than the chetnges that occur
f^m other accepted food processes such as boiling or freezing. Over
30 years of study using sophisticated ancilytical techniques to ascer-
tain what imique radiolytic products [URP's] may be formed in ir-
,y Google
107
radiated food have failed to detect the production of any URP's of
toxicological concern.
Food irradiation produces no significant reduction in the nutri-
tional quality of food. In addition, it has a number of important po-
tential applications. Food irradiation is effective in killing Uie
micro-organisms that cause food spoilage. Thus, fcxMJ irradiation
could extend the storage life of numerous perishable foods, thereby
increasing the productivity of U.S. food processing and distribution
and opening new export opportunities. These factors are very sig-
nificant since a considerable eunount of the world's 'food supply is
loet each year through spoilage in the postharvest disinfestation of
foods and v^etables.
Food irradiated may also be an alternative to p^ticides by which
health concerns have been raised. Moreover, it may be effective in
controlling trichinae in fresh pork and salmonella in red meats,
poultry, and ftsh.
In our view, formal official reclassification of food irradiation is
important in terms of public acceptance of the fact that food irra-
diation is a safe process, not a potentially hazardous food additive.
It is important to note that food irradiation does not make the irra-
diated food radioactive, since it is done at energy levels well below
those required to induce radioactivity. We believe it is appropriate,
however, that the bill would not eliminate the FDA's authority to
r^ulate food irradiation. This would offer to the public assurance
of continued protection.
The AMA supports the establishment of the Joint Operating
Commission for Food Irradiation. The Commission would perform
the vital function of coordinating research concerning food irradia-
tion that currently is fragmented among many Federal agencies.
The Commission would also have the important function of promote
ing public understanding and acceptance of food irradiation. This
would entail informing the public of the many potential benefits of
food irradiation and addressing any unwarranted concerns r^ard-
ing the process.
Finally, we believe it is appropriate for the Commission to have
the authority to petition the FDA if it believes that the commercial
application of food irradiation should be expanded.
We also support the provision in the bill that would preempt
State and local lawE that are in addition to or different from the
FDA's requirements concerning food irradiation. We believe that
the regulation of food irradiation should be uniform throughout the
country in order to ensure that the nationwide marketing of irradi-
ated food is not impeded by inconsistent or conflicting State and
local government requirements.
lie AMA recognizes that questions must still be addressed con-
cerning whether food irradiation will be a cost-effective process for
some commercial applications. Moreover, additional educational ef-
forts by the food industry, the Government, and health profession-
als may be needed to help ensure widespread consumer acceptance
of the use of food irradiation. However, we believe that enactment
of H.R 696 is an important first step in promoting the use of the
promising technology of food irradiation. We support early adop-
tion of this legislation.
,y Google
108
Mr. Chairman, the AMA appreciates your invitation to testify
before the subcommittee and stands ready to work with you con-
cerning this important issue.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Lubin appears at the conclusion
of the hearing.]
Mr. Bedell. Thank you. Dr. Lubin.
Mr. Morrison.
Mr. Morrison. Thank you, Mr. ChfiirmEm.
I have some comments for all of you, which we don't have time
for. Let me start with Mr. Graves, on behalf of particularly the re-
tailers that are members of your ot^anization, you have a concern
about misbranding of individual items acquired for labeling, is that
accurate, and the impact that it might well have at retail levels?
Mr. Graves. I think the concern is that produce is constantly
moved around in a produce department. Also the produce on tiie
whole is not packaged. It is sold by piece, and it is very difdcuit to
label individual pieces of produce, and it is edso very difficult to
keep signed placement above produce because of the movement of
produce within the department to keep that in an accurate posi-
tion.
Mr. Morrison. And I suppose that is the reason why products
tiiat have been fumigated or treated in other ways currently under
existing laws are not required for labeling at retail?
Mr. Graves. Yes. Of course, there Jire many processes in fresh
produce that are applied during the conversion from the field con-
dition to the packaged condition, and all of these processes are
mztrked on the shipping container.
Mr. Morrison. So that is available at the wholesale level, but it
has never really been made a requirement as far as retail sales are
concerned?
Mr. Graves. It is available to the retailer in that area. It is not
avEtilable to the consumer at the final point of purchase.
Mr. Morrison. Thank you.
Dr. Mussman, I guess more of an expression of appreciation than
anything, because the coalition, 1 think, has put together an effec-
tive force, distribution of facts and figures, that I think are neces-
sary, since all the surveys seem to point out that consumers like
the product, they are a little concerned about it until they know
something about it, and your coalition is making the effort to see
that they do have facts upon which to base their opinions. I think
that is most effective and will help all of the groups, so we appreci-
ate that very much.
Do you have plans to expand now the distribution of a number of
your materials for the sake of consumer education?
Mr. MussMAN. We are attempting to get them to any group or
individual who may be expressing interest in knowing more about
the technology. As you have said, there are a number of consum-
ers, we estimate perhaps as meiny as half of the consuming public,
are not very familiar with this technology. They have been condi-
tioned for perhaps 30 years or more to be suspicious of anything
with the word "irradiate" or "irradiation" attached to it, so it rep-
resents a significant challenge for the coaliticHi to attempt to put
into tjhose people's hands the kind of information which permits
,y Google
them to make a better informed judgment regarding whether they
like or dislike the genertd idea.
We will indeed attempt to get the information that we are put-
ting together more broadly disseminated than we have in the past.
Mr. Morrison. Thank you.
Dr. Lubin, I appreciate the support of the American Medical As-
sociation, and know that you went throi^h a rather lengthy proce-
dure to reach that conclusion. One of the previous panels had some
shots taken at the medical community, if you will, because of the
change in attitude by doctors toward the use of x rays on expectant
mothers, emd they compared our knowledge of food irradiation now
to the knowledge of medical fraternity back in the 1950's when
they took x rays every time you turned around.
Could you refute that in any way? Don't we have a lot of re-
search on irradiation that takes us well beyond that point?
Dr. Lubin. Thank you for bringing that to light. One of the
mf^or docilities is that often items are compared which are not
comparable. First of all, I would emphfisize that I think the infor-
mation which was provided was oversimplified, and in fact I would
appreciate the data that supports even the contention that many
infants were deunaged because of radiation exposure when their
mothers were pr^nant, but even if we took that at face value,
which I think we cannot, it certainly does not bear any comparison
witii the issue at hand.
Furthermore, I think, as many people have pointed out, foods
which are irradiated or ionized for protective and better purposes
of improving the food supply prevent any kinds of danger at the
doses that are being proposed. I think, in short, there is not a
public safety hazard, and I can't emphasize that strongly enough.
Mr, Morrison. You sort of underlined "at the doses proposed."
Isn't that a significant factor? In effect, you can refute most of the
negative aspects of the studies that have been quoted here this
morning because they were at significantly higher level doses of
treatment?
Dr. Lubin. That is correct. I think we are aware, as the FDA
pointed out, that they tend to work in a very conservative and
measured concerned way for the interests of the public and safety.
It at best would be 10 times less than the internationally accepted
doees for many kinds of foodstuffs, and even that level has been a
significant factor, less than many applications which have been uti-
lized over at least 15 or 20 years, and for which there is no emer-
gence of any adverse effects information at all.
Mr. Morrison. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chair-
Mr. Bedell. Mr. Brown.
Mr. Brown. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I find it reassuring that all of you gentlemen have been so firm
in jrour presentations with r^ard to the safety of this process, and
yet I am still equally concerned about the attitude of the consum-
ers, and I am heartened by the fact that you seem to believe also in
the importance of a consumer education program.
I think you are all well aware of the histoiy of the introduction
(rf* new technologies in this country, where quite generally there is
an attitude on the part of the established institutions seeking to in-
,y Google
110
troduce this that it is obviously safe and we don't need to be con-
cerned, and consumers have been disillusioned by this in the past.
So it is very important that we conduct not only a full-scale re-
search program, but a full-scale consumer education program.
Just speaking in very general terms, we have seen the develop-
ment of nuclear energy and some of its processes which did not live
up to the original touting of it. We have seen the widespread use of
chemicals which turned out in many cases not to be as beneficial
as we had hoped. We have seen in the early days of air pollution,
for example, we were told not to worry, a little air pollution can't
hurt you, and then the medical profession found out lat«r that it
did. These are things which are of concern to the American people,
and we have to reassure them.
Now, there is one gap in all of the testimony this morning that
bothers me a little, from those who are proponents of this, and that
is not so much the food safety aspect but we have not really dealt
with the problem of the widespread distribution of the radiation
sources.
I eun going to ask Dr. Lubin if you can comment as to whether or
not there have not been cases where the widespread distribution of
radioactive sources in medicine have actually, through careless-
ness, mistakes, and so forth, created hazards in some cases, and we
have not dealt not only with the safety of the facility, but with the
safety of the transportation process, which has been brought up by
some of the groups. These, too, will need to be addressed in some
realistic way, and I hope that ell of you are aware of this and are
giving some thought to it.
Would you comment. Dr. Lubin, with regard to the safety record
of the use of radioactive sources in the health field, due to causes
which we didn't anticipate or could not control, but nevertheless
existed.
Dr. Lubin. Congressman Brown, I would better serve you and the
other members of the subcommittee if I indicated that I would be
pleased to get available information to document what I believe to
be the case. But not being a radiation expert, I would be more com-
fortable to provide that to you, so that anyone who questioned it
would have something to go back to.
1 think that it would be unfair and inappropriate to say that any-
thing in the life in which we live is perfectly safe. I think in terms
of relative risk and a great deal of benefit to the large segment of
world and our own society, there is no question that the safety
factor is not a significant or major one, and in fact probably is not
the one that should really be focused upon for the public, eind I
would be pleased to have the opportunity to pursue that and get
you that information.
Mr. Brown. I think I probably agree with you on the overall re-
sults, but I still think we need the information, because our tactics
should be not to say "trust us" to the public, but to provide evi-
dence that we should be trusted.
Dr. Lubin. I agree wholeheartedly.
Mr. Brown. I am old enough to have been through a couple of
generations of the use of x rays in health, for example. When 1 go
to my dentist today, I get a lot more protection from x rays, and so
,y Google
Ill
do the staff, than they did 10 or 20 years ago, and the reasons are
they found that there are defective x ray machines.
lliere are all Borte of problems that we have gradually sought to
correct over the yeeirs, and I think all of us know, and we now hope
that we are a lot safer than we were 20 or 30 years ago. We would
like to start out with that level of safety today in this area, and I
think it will help us to get the consumer acceptance that is abso-
lutely necessary, as all of you know, if this is to be successful.
Dr. LuBiN. I think the point you make is an excellent one. Con-
gressman Brown. I would like to further emphasize that the intro-
duction and utilization of this process by no means negates the
need for careful hygiene, carefiil occupational safety efforts, and
many of the things which we have learned through experience over
years that are longer than any of us are old. I think it does, howev-
er, indicate that we need to take some strength and reassurance
^m that safety record, rather than being frightened from ap-
proaching new eind advisable technologies that could be of a great
deal of benefit.
Mr. Bhown. Thank you.
Mr. Bedell. Thank you, Mr. Brown.
Dr. Lubin, apparently this has been used in hospitals fairly ex-
tensively; is that correct?
Dr. Lubin. That is correct. 1 believe that Dr. Miller earher indi-
cated some experience in immunocompetent or immunocompro-
mised individuals who may have taken for as long as 10 years up
to 25 percent of their food intake on a daUy basis which had been
irradiated for their protection.
Mr. Bedell. Do you know if there has been tiny indication of any
problems with any of those?
Dr. Lubin. To my knowledge there has not been. There is cer-
tainly no published information to that effect.
Mr. Bedell. The United Nations apparently has done some work
in this regsad, you indicated in your testimony, I think?
Dr. Lubin. That is correct.
Mr. Bedell. What have they done, do you know? Have they done
any research?
Dr. Lubin. The joint expert committee I think reviewed periodi-
cally, going back to 1976, at intervals of approximately 3 years, and
the last review of which 1 am familiar was in 1980, and published
in 1981 all of the existent research data.
I think there is certainly more that is emerging, and we learned
this morning that there may be even more than we could review,
£ind all of those reviews genereilly indicate the safety, as we also
learned efficacy has not been addressed as strenuously, and cer-
tainly there are questions which still require further research and
answers.
Mr. Bedell. Mr. Brown accurately pinpointed a problem, and
that is there has been some concern expressed by previous wit-
nesses as to whether or not this will be well accepted by consum-
ers, because of some of the problems that have developed in the
past where initially we did not think there were concerns. Appar-
ently, this group is not concerned over that.
,y Google
112
Dr. Van Houweling, I would assume that the previous panel we
had would be reluct^t to buy pork that had been irradiated, for
example.
Mr. Van Houweling. Congressman Bedell, one of the reasons we
joined in the Coalition for Food Irradiation very early was we tried
to get out correct information to consumers. I referred to a survey
that we did. As I said, it shows that people are concerned, but they
are concerned about a lot of other things about food safety, like
chemicals and preservatives. We think it is largely a matter of edu-
cation. There are concerns about- the constituency or chaise in the
food. Expert after expert says that you change food when vou cook
it, you freeze it, and you dry it as well, so we believe it is largely a
matter of good consumer education of the facts.
Mr. Bedell. And you believe that will come if it is approved with
labeling, where information is given to them so they know what
they are buying?
Mr. Van Houweung. I think that is right. But we do think if it
is commercially available, then there will be greater effort on the
part of those companies to convey that information as well. They
are not going to participate in this unless they see a market for the
product.
Mr. Bedell. Mr. Graves, I have a little bit of trouble with the
objection to the labeling for consumers of fresh vegetables and so
on. It would appear to me that consumers should have an opportu-
nity to know what is put in what they buy, and I guess I have trou-
ble believing that if chemicals are added, for example, that they
should not also be properly labeled for the consumer.
And I do not agree with your statement, by the way, that it is
too difficult, because they move vegetables around, for them to
have a sign. It seems to me it should not be any great problem to
list the chemicals. I have trouble with your argument.
Mr. Graves. Mr. Chairman, we agree that the consumer should
know what the produce has been treated with, and the item that
we are talking about here, we are not talking about a preservative
or using irradiation as a preservative in the fresh fruit and vegeta-
ble industry. It will be used just to control exotic pests that occur
in the fruit, like fruit flies. Mainly, in the State of Florida right
now, for instance, the Carib fly. There is a very practical problem
to labeling each piece of merchandise.
Mr. Bedell. I understand that clearlv enough but I do not under-
stftnd the problem of having it where the consumer buys it. I would
think the information should be available in regard to chemicals
that are on the article as well. I do not accept your argument that
since you move things from here to there you can't very well label
them as to what they are. If you are going to label, for instance, it
seems a pretty difficult argument.
Mr. Graves. Take citrus. It is produced in at leeist three different
areas in the United States, and each of those areas have suhareas
and each of those suhareas have different processes and use differ-
ent chemicals of waxes, of soaps, of fungicides on the produce, and
I am talking more in this instance specincetlly of citrus. If vou have
that produce in the average supermarket which might have the
citrus from at least four or five or possibly six of those areas all in
produce bins, how would you label each one of the individual bins
,y Google
113
and say that the fruit, that a produce clerk actually put the fruit
in the proper bin? That is the problem that we have, is that there
are multiple processes.
Mr. Bedell. Of course, you could always have trouble with a
clerk putting something in the wrong bin, 1 don't argue with that.
But I would argue that if you have three bins of apples, where you
have got Jonathan apples and you have got delicious apples and so
on, that the label or sign be required to state any additives that
have been used on those apples that might be of health concern to
people. I guess there is no point in aiding that, although I have
trouble with it.
Mr. Graves. I think the main point is that the produce comes
from so many different areas of the United States and from the
world, and it is difficult to keep it each separate according to the
district in which it was produced, because again I say the processes
do vary Irom one district to another.
Mr. Bedell. Are there any other questions?
If not, we thank you very much for your testimony, and the sub-
committee will recess to reconvene at 2 o'clock this afternoon for
the remaining testimony.
[Whereupon, at 12:20 p.m., the subcommittee recessed to 2 p.m.
of the same day.]
AFTERNOON SESSION
Mr. Bedell. The subcommittee will come to order.
Our next panel consists of Mr. Denis Mosgoflan, Mr. Bernard
Fensterwald, and Mr. IMUler.
Unless there are any statements of any of the members of the
subcommittee, we will hear from you first, Mr. Mosgofian.
STATEMENT OF DENIS MOSGOFIAN, COFOUNDER AND
DIRECTOR, NATIONAL COALITION TO STOP FOOD IRRADIATION
Mr. Mosgofian. Thank you very much.
I appreciate this opportunity on behalf of both the members of
my union and the members of the Nationed Coedition, for this op-
portunity to present testimony on this matter.
Before I do, may I introduce into the record letters that I just
received from both Representative Barbara Boxer, and from Sena-
tor Alan Cranston, indicating their oppcsition to H.R. 696.
Mr. Bedell. Without objection they will be entered in the record
with your prepared statement.
Mr. Mosgofian. Thank you very much.
My name is Denis Mosgofian. 1 am an occupational health in-
^Tuctor to the graphic communications industry, and a photolitho-
grapher by trade.
I represent the 3,500 members of my union, the Graphic Commu-
nicatioiis International Local 583, as well as the members of the
National Coalition to Stop Food Irradiation, of which I am co-
founder and director. It is our view that H.R. 696 is a deeply flawed
piece of legislation.
It is flawed in its premises, its assumptions, and its intents. First,
H.R. 696's assertion that "irradiation of food ... is reo^nized by
international authorities and the Department of Health and
,y Google
114
Human Services as safe and wholesome," is neither proof of its
safety nor sufficient grounds for this legislation.
Until recently, international authorities and HHS recognized
DES, benectin, thalidimide, sulfites, and asbestos as safe and
wholesome.
We now know better.
It is important to not« that what is international to <Hie body is
national to another, and local to others. We are impressed by
proofs of safety, smd not by reference to authorities. At this point
there is no firm proof of safety.
The second flawed presumption on which H.R. 696 sits is that
"irradiation is a process, much like cooking in a microwave oven,
boiling or freezing." This could not be further from the truth.
Gamma radiation is not a cooking technique.
It is ionizing energy; boiling, freezing and microwaving are not.
It is completely misleading to relate them.
Ionizing gamma radiation precedes cooking; it does not replace it.
Gamma radiation's unique radiolytic producte will be added to the
varied hfizards of cookmg, and will increase the total toxic load
peoples bodies must contend with today, and we must look at
gamma radiation in the context of all the other treatments we
apply to food.
We must remember that gamma radiation kills, by moleculeu*
disruption and free radical chemistry, in order to appreciate its dis-
tinction from other food treatments. It is what ionizing radiation
does that matters. H.R. 696 glosses this over.
Gamma irradiation adds adulterative compounds to food which
were not there originally. It was with this understanding that Con-
gress adopted the 1958 additives amendment to the Food, Drug and
Cosmetic Act, and explicitly included food irradiation in the food
additive classification. H.R. 696 seeks to void that congressional
intent by falsely declaring gamma radiation is like boiling, ete.
The legislative intent in H.R. 696 of changing food irradiation
from "additive" classification to "process" is specifically to remove
irradiated food from FDA rigorous scrutiny, testii^ requirements
and labeling obl^ations stipulated by the 1958 additives amend-
ment quite on the contrary to the testimony given earlier with re-
spect to FDA still having authority over this. Authority is one
thing, but what they would actually do is the other.
And the intent is then to provide the FDA with a foundatitm we
believe and the impetus to confidentially continue their no-retail
label rulemaking process through the Federal Register. H.R. 696
seeks to effectively take the FDA out of the picture.
I cannot emphasize enough honest labehng protects consumers'
right to know and preserves our right to choose, or to say no. We
have the right to say no, or yes; and that is what would be elimi-
nated if there were not an explicit requirement that comes under
the additives amendment for labeling.
In terms of "process" — baking, boiling, freezing — there is no FDA
safety review, except as to poor senitetion for microbacterial con-
temination. It is irresponsible to endorse the institutionalizing of
this casual procedure for ionizing radiation.
This is what H.R. 696 asks you to do. An additive to f
the cornerstone of H.R. 696.
,y Google
115
The biird«i of food safety responsibility rests with the Govern-
ment, not the consumer. H.R. 696 would institutionalize irresponsi-
bility in administrative food scrutiny and simultaneously limit citi-
zen review of precluding State and local elected ofllci^ from es-
tablishing more stringent consumer protection than may be estab-
lished by the proposed Joint Operating Commission for Food Irra-
diation.
I only have about 1 minute.
May I go ahead?
H.R. 696 fails by omission to spell out a single consumer protec-
tion, and in the same l^islation seeks removal of existing protec-
tions by changing food irradiation to a process.
It appears to us, and this is the next point we think is critical,
that H.R. 696 is designed to promote the Department of Energy by-
products utilization program proposal for nuclear waste manage-
ment. This prx^ram is the promotion of a socially acceptable indus-
try, which will warehouse America's nuclear waste, notwithstand-
ing the proposal to also increase production of cobalt 60, at our two
plants in Dickerson, MD, and Pleasanton, CA.
Food irradiation depends upon a network of food irradiating
plants. These are proposed to each house 3 million curies or more
of radioactive cesium-137 or cobalt-60.
Nfjw H.R. 696's passfige is needed, we believe, to open the door
for this pn^ram.
As you can see this program for food irradiating facilities will
promote the widespread proliferation of radioactive waste. This
will increase the likelihood of irreversible radioactive contamina-
tion of our communities jmd highways from inevitable human
error and etccident, miscalculation and negligence, and de facto im-
possibility of permanently and perfectly contfiining radioactivity.
In conclusion, only a full technolt^y eissessment and environmen-
tal impact review of the ultrahazardous radiation will offer us a
firm b^inning point for determining the actual consequences of
launching food irradiation, for once launced, the effects will be ir-
revocable. H.R. 696, in our review is dangerous in its intention and
alarmingly irresponsible.
I urge you to reject it and food irradiation.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Mo^ofian appears at the conclu-
sion of the hearing.]
Mr. MosGOFiAN. Now, in addition I have brought with me just as
a sampling of the kind of consumer response that we have gath-
ered in the central and northern California regions, a petition, for
example, largely centered around salmonella, 1,013 statures
gaUirared in a couple of months by a group opposing food irradia-
tion.
Th^ asked me if I would be kind enough to submit them to you
for t^ record. As well, I have a statement here which I may not
r^d I understand, which is from a woman named Linda Duietli,
who is with the group Citizens Against a Radioactive Dublin and
th^ are in battle with the Department of Energy and the National
Food Processors AssociatitHi over the placement of their cesium ag-
ricultural conunodities, agricultural cesium irradiation demonstra-
tion £Eunlity.
,y Google
116
She would like, on behalf of their organization and the citizeniB of
Dublin, to have this letter introduced, as well, into the record.
Mr. Bedell. Without objection they will both be entered in the
record or held in the file.
[The letter appears at the conclusion of the hearing; the petitions
are held in the committee files.]
Mr. M08GOFIAN. One other person who was going to testify. Dr.
Noel Sommer from Davis, his wife is ill and he was unable to leave
the hospital, and I have two of his documents which I would like to
include as well as part of the record.
I think you for this opportunity.
Mr. Bedell. Without objection.
Mr. Fensterwald.
STATEMENT OF BERNARD FENSTERWALD III, LEGISLATIVE
COUNSEL. NATIONAL NUTRITIONAL FOODS ASSOCIATION
Mr. Fensterwald. We appreciate the opportunity to testify
before the House Agriculture subcommittee.
The National Nutritional Foods Association appreciates being
given the opportunity, too.
We would appreciate the complete statement be admitted in the
record.
Mr. Bedell. The entire statements of all the witnesses will be in-
troduced.
Mr. Fensterwald. The National Nutritional Foods Association is
comprised of approximately 4,000 retailers, wholesfilers, and manu-
facturers of natural foods; headquartered in Costa Mesa, CA. We
are the voice of the health food industry, representing businesses
in all 50 States, and the District of Columbia.
We will shortly celebrate our 50th anniversary, and recent sur-
veys indicate 10 of 15 American consumers shop regularly at a
health food store. The National Health Foods funds a complete sci-
ence department including the full-time biochemist on staff.
This, plus the extensive research conducted by our manufacturer
members over the last 50 years is also at the disposal of the sub-
committee at your request. We believe that the public has the right
to know the nature of its food supply and the steps taken to process
it.
Its safety and wholesomeness must be kept as the upper most cri-
teria in determining the food future of food irradiation.
For this reason we urge the Congress and the FDA to move
slowly in its approval of food irradiation and to require the testing
necessary to ensure its safety. As an adjunct to this fundamental
concept we submit that any use of food irradiation must be dis-
closed to the public through proper labeling.
The association believes radiation has not been adequately stud-
ied to determine its safety. And the Second National Congress for
Food Protection was held in May 1984 about ionizii^ radiation:
Aa this process becomes important in the preparation of a particular food, studies
■h<Hild be undertaken on the possible formaUon of toxic compounds in that food and
the effects od the processing on nutrient bioavailability. Particular attention should
be directed to the possible formation of any previously unidentiried compounds in
that food and how tney may affect food aaiety and nutrition.
„GoogIe
117
We doubt that Mr. OIbod's criteria have been fully met in the
short period of time that has elapsed since he made that statement.
In fact, safety testing of irradiated foods has produced over the
years a number of coniflicting results.
Discussions of these studies in detail is included in our written
statement. Additional scientific studies have shown that irradiation
can lead to the destruction of unsaturated fatty acids, which are
required for the normal structural integrity and functioning of cel-
lular membranes.
These studies used the fatty acids of fish oils as targets of irra-
diation. As the subcommittee is undoubtedly aware, dietary fish oil
fatty acids have gained widespread attention, both in the scientific-
health community and in the media, and research is currently un-
derway into their application as protective agents against heart
Ionized radiation damages living cells through radio-chemical re-
actions, many of which involve the production of radiolytic, highly
reactive oxidizing agents. Therefore, antioxidants occurrii^ natu-
rally in foods undergoing irradiation are chemically consumed in
reactions with these radiolytic products. Overall the amount of
ascorbic acid, tocopherols (vitamin E), B-Carotene, other vitamins
and minerals, and certain amino acids naturally contained in food
will be reduced.
With or without such precautions, we face a significant reductiim
in protective materials which have been present in foods through-
out evolutionary time if we allow for the wholesale irradiation of
food.
One must conclude these protected materieils have served a pur-
pose in insulating humans from natural radiation Euid from natu-
rally-occurring oxidative toxicants.
Why should we lower our actual defense at a time when environ-
mental pollutants and carcinogens are on the rise?
Intensive scientific investigation and public interest is currently
being given to these naturally-occurring protective agents agEunst
degenerative disease and some aspects of the aging process. Pru-
dent diets emphasizing these agents have been recently recom-
mended by a number of Government agencies, including the Na-
tional Academy of Sciences, the National Cancer Institute, USDA,
FDA, the American Cancer Society, and American Heart Associa-
tion.
What these studies suggest is that while the right band is
making advances in the protection of society through enheinced nu-
trition, incredible as it may seem, the left hand is advocating the
large-ecale introduction of a food-processing technique which specif-
ically destroys many of these protective nutrients.
The need for exact quantification of nutrient loss and for strict
supervision of commercial irradiation procedures is apparent. The
NNFA believes the continuous eveiluation of irradiation and of the
processing specifications and conditions are mandatory.
We doubt that extrapolation from the animal studies done to
date, and from the limited use of irradiated foods by astronauts
and cancer patients, can be used for accurate predictions of safety
and nutritional adequacy by the entire diverse population of our
,y Google
118
Nation, cBpecially down the road 20 years when a lai^ portion of
our diet has been irradiated.
We have also strongly endorsed labeling of irradiated foods at
point of sale. Americein consumers have a basic right to know what
they are purchasing.
When they buy and use foods traded by canning, pasteurization,
freezing, pickling, dehydration, salting, et cetera, they have a rea*
Bonable knowledge of how that food has been treated. There is no
special reason that we are aware of that creates special treatment
for irradiation and mandates that its use be kept secret.
If I could have about 1 minute 1 will be finished.
Mr. Bedell. All right.
Mr. Fensterwald. For these reasons we oppose passage of H.R.
696. First, we believe the bill as presently dreifted will play right
into the hands of the nuclear industry which is the largest propo-
nent of food irradiation who desire quick approved of ttie process
for commercial use.
Rather we urge the Congress and the FDA to move cautiously
and slowly because no one knows at this point what the long-term
nutritional effect will be when large segments of our population
eat irradiated foods as sm expanded portion of their diet.
Second, we oppose H.R. 696 because: One, it will allow irradiated
foods to be sold without proper labeling, and two, it will deny State
and local authorities the opportunity to require labeling even if the
FDA declines to do so. Quite frankly, Mr. Chftirman, one has to
question the motives of the proponents of this legislation who wish
to ram it down the throats of the American public but they try to
hide it from them at this time. This above all else is the outrage
that must be avoided.
Again, Mr. Chairman, the NFAA appreciates the opportunity to
testify today and if we can answer any questions we will be happy
to do so.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Fensterwald appears at the con-
clusion of the hearing.]
Mr. Beoell. Thank you, Mr. Fensterwald.
Mr. Miller.
STATEMENT OF CLINTON RAY MILLER, LEGISLATIVE
ADVOCATE, NATIONAL HEALTH FEDERATION
Mr. Miller. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and distin-
guished members of the subcommittee. We appreciate very much
your allowing me to appear at this important hearing to offer com-
ments and proposed amendments of the National Health Federa-
tion on H.R. 696.
We support wholeheartedly the testimony of all the people on
the fourth panel today and the amendment specifically proposed by
Mr. Robert Alvarez of the Environmental Policy Institute.
With my testimony, Mr. Chairmem, I have six exhibits that I
would like to have included in the record, if 1 could.
Mr. Bedell. Without objection they will be entered in the record
or held in the committee Hies.
Mr. Miller. My name is Clinton Ray Miller. For 23 years I have
been the legislative advocate for the National Health Federation.
,y Google
119
NHF is a SO-yearold national consumer organization of responsi-
ble, aware, environmental, health, and fitness minded activists who
take very seriously our mutual responsibility for the safety and
wholesomenesB of uie food we eat.
We have learned by sad experience, Mr. Chairman, we cannot
del^ate this responsibility to State or Federal bureaucrats who are
often on their way through what Merton Mintz of the Washington
Poet called a revolving door into or from high-paying jobs in the
very industries they are supposed to regulate.
In 1962 we "fathered" and won virtual unanimous approval of
NHPs "Human Guinea Pig Amendment" which, for the first time
in recorded history, in any country specifically prevented any fur-
ther medical experimentation on humans without their informed
consent.
This NHF amendment has fundamentally changed the practice
of medicine not only in the United States, but throughout the civil-
ized world.
Now come the propon«its of food irradiation and want us to par-
ticipate in an unprecedented massive medical experiment without
our knowledge and consent.
Members of the National Health Federation and increasingly
millions of other individuals are deeply concerned that eating irra-
diated food is still in the experimental stage. NHF agrees with Ih-.
Sanford A. Miller, Director of the U.S. Food emd Drug Administra-
tion's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, who testified
earlier here today. When asked if he felt irradiated foods should be
labeled, he stated:
Yea, I peracmaUj' do. llie Department may have another view on this — which th^
did, of courae, at that time— and there actually are some eood reason why ^ou
■bimldn't have to do it. My own feelings are that it should be labeled, and when it is
■aid and done, I think it will be.
The NHF is unalterabiv opposed to H.R. 696 [S. 288] in its
present form. Unless it is drastically amended we will do all in our
power to ui]ge our thousands of members and millions of friends to
Idll this l^islation.
NHF proposes the following amendments to H.R. 696:
One, we urge you to amend out all language in this bill which
declares or implies in any way that it is U.S. policy that "Congress
finds that irradiation of foods is * * * safe and wholesome." You
will find that statement on page 2, lines 5 to 8 of the bill.
Congress may pass a law stating it is safe to buy, sell, transport,
store, keep track of, use and dispose of the massive amounts of
highly radioactive material which would be used in hundreds and
poBHibly thousands of food irradiation plants — some of which would
be located near or in our lai^est cities — but that doesn't make this
terribly dangerous technology one bit safer them it really is.
Saying it is safe doesn't make it safe.
Congress can pass a law stating it finds the world is flat, but that
doesn't bend the horizon one inch.
We therefore suggest for amendment No. 1: On page 2, strike out
the present language on lines 5 to 8, and in its place insert wording
somewhat as follows:
inds tha- ,_, __
with drying, freezing and canning. 1
„GoogIe
The technology itself is extremely hazardouB even if the irradiat-
ed food is found to be absolutely safe. The transportation, storage,
use, and disposal of radioactive material is the most hazardous
tecixnology yet used to preserve food.
Amendment No. 2: We suggest you delete all language from the
bill which would remove food irradiation from the current statuto-
ry requirements it be r^ulated by FDA as a "food additive."
After hearing the testimony today we think there should be a
third amendment that would require mandatory prison terms for
any irradiation plant which exceeds the limits imposed by FDA.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. MiUer appears at the conclusion
of the hearing.]
Mr. Bedkll. Thank you very much, Mr. Miller.
Mr. Brown.
Mr. Bhown. I have no questions.
Mr. Bedell. Mr. Morrison.
Mr. Morrison. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. MoBgofian, you took generally some hard shots at irreidiation
facilities. Would you close down the medical facilities that exist in
the country?
Mr. MosGOFiAN. No; But I don't think they are related. It is sort
of a little bit like relating space ships and apples. They are not the
same thing.
Mr. Morrison. They are the same pleuits. I have been through
the plants that are radiatii^ medical supplies at the same time
they have done some good.
Mr. MosGOFiAN. You are talking about the irradiation facility
that irradiate medical supplies.
Mr. MoEEisoN. Right.
Mr. MosGOFiAN. The distinction we want to draw — actually I am
concerned to some extent about them and how much they would
proliferate. At this point there seems to be some vagueness as to
the number of independent irradiating facilities in the United
States.
That is not to say they aren't hfizardous. The one in Tucson
which had to be shut down by the Governor of Arizona, or the one
in Dover, NJ, the cleanup of which was just finished at a cost that
was probably at least half again as the initial cost to put it in are
illustrations of the kind of safety and track record as well as the
kind of community contamination hazard that is opposed from resi-
dents in those areas.
That has nothing to do with what they were doing with either
the tridium, or the cobalt 60 in either of those two instances.
The situation we are dealing with and the ones that the people
that I represent are concerned about are one, not only the effects
on the food which is a whole cat^ory into its public health hazard
and long-term medical hazard but second, the possibility of, in fact,
the actual fact of proliferating our waste supply of throughout both
America and the developing world as the proponents of this idea
are talking.
,y Google
121
If that happens that is irreversible. Whether you and I like irra-
diation is irrelevant. That is irreversible phenomenon and once
that takes place there would be nobody around to basically turn
that back so we can say 20 years from now well, that was a mis-
take.
Now, let's clean it up. We can't even clean up effectively Three
Mile Idand. There is still rtiging controversy around that one facUi-
ty that had that m^jor accident.
Mr. Morrison. That is totally different. You talk about compar-
ing thin^ In the same Three Mile Island there the reaction makes
ot£er thmgs radioactive. In the case of the irradiation of food or
medical supplies there is no way anything can become radioactive.
Mr. MosGOFiAN. That is not the issue.
Mr. Morrison. The issue I am addressing.
Mr. MosGOFiAN. I thought you asked me if I would shut down
and I can't understand it. At first I thought you were talking about
hospitals.
You were talking about those irradiators which, in fact, irradiate
medical supplies such as sutures and medical supplies, is that
right?
Mr. Morrison. Yes.
Mr. MosGOFiAN. I said the question here is the hazard that is op-
posed from both proliferation and contamination and part of that is
not addressed in your question.
I am concerned about those two things just as we should be con-
cerned because we actually have a track record that shows that ir-
radiators are hazardous facilities.
This is a ultrzLbazardous industry. It is not a game and it needs
to be treated as such. H.R. 696 does not recognize that, particularly
in light of the attempt to even take the food portion out from un-
derneath additives classification which requires FDA rigorous scru-
tiny labeling and put it in a more benign classification of process.
The facility in Dover, NJ that had that spill, that had the 5,700
liters or gallons of internal spill, the external spill, over a year it
has taken to clean that faciUty up, the situation in Tucson, AZ,
with urine samples of children and mothers in that school district
coming up with a high level of tritium in the urine.
I can't manufacture that and that is not something we should
brush aside. I have a quote here.
Mr. Morrison. Why don't you just answer the question. Would
you like to close £dl these facihties?
Mr. MosGOFiAN. I would close any facility that poses any hazard
to any community they reside in; yes.
Mr. Morrison. You are saying they could properly regulate it to
be safe indeed?
Mr. MOBGOFiAN. I am not convinced at this point and I don't
know very many people who are convinced that, in fact, it is possi-
ble to properly control contamination from radioactive materials. I
don't see, in fact — I do think we should be very careful about the
distinction between food irradiation which has another whole com-
ponent and radiation of medictd supplies.
It appears to me that jwlitically, nde the tails of irradiatii^ med-
ical sucmlies and squeeze food in under the door is
Mr. Morrison. If I can reclaim my time.
,y Google
122
I am not asking the question for that reason but you are taking
some very hard e£ots, all of you on this panel, at irradiation facili-
ties themselves.
I visited a few of them and I don't see it as an ultrahazardous
industry if the radioisotopes or the source materials are properly
handled just like tmy other industry.
Mr. MosGOFiAN. I don't see where the track record shows they
have ever been properly handled.
Mr. MoRfiisoN. I think there are a number of firms around this
country and they probably all in all have a relatively good record
compared with other industries.
One other point. I realize 1 am out of time.
You indicate in your testimony the legislative intent of H.R. 696
changing it from an additive to process is to remove it from scruti-
ny.
I wrote the bill and I CEm't find that anywhere. It certainly
wasn't my intent, and yet you, in your letter, are declarii^ this is
the legislative intent.
This was not to remove it from anybody's scrutiny, and it is veiy
carefully written that way so it leaves it totally in the hands of the
Food and Drug Administration just as if it v/aa an additive, but
changes from this term additive, which it is not, to a process which
it is.
Mr. MosGOPiAN. May I respond to that?
Mr. Morrison. Certainly.
Mr. MosGOFiAN. It is an additive precisely why it was put in the
1958 amendment. It does create additional compounds and there is
no way to avoid that. That is what the controversy around this is
all about.
Mr. MosRisoN. Does any process not change the product in some
way?
Mr. MOSGOFIAN. It is not the same as microwaving, freezing, or
boiling, or baking. None of those ionize. The difference between
gamma radiation and microwave utilization is the outer electro
rings in the target tissue are disrupted momentarily and new com-
pounds are created.
It is precisely those new compounds which are the center of this
issue. Those are called the unique retdiolytic compounds. They are
particularly h£izardous when what we have is electrotoxins or in-
secticides, and fertilizers that are left in food will in fact be target-
ed by gamma radiation.
The result will be a whole new category of unknown or unique
electrolytic products. The toxicity in long-term consumption has
never been established. It is impossible to say at this point what
the consequences will be.
We know just with respect to, say, a drug like thalidomide, we
have a statement right here from the William S. Merrill Co. execu-
tive who said, "We have firmly established the safety dosage and
usefulness of Kafadon, which is the brand name of thalidomide by
both foreign and U.S. laboratory in clinical studies in the 1960's. '
We know what happened there.
Mr. Morrison. How long do you think it would take before we
could establish something you would be comfortable with?
,y Google
123
Mr. M08GOFIAN. Dr. John Govenan, radiation physicist and
author of the book "Radiation and Human Health," has said that
it would take a long-term study of a lai^e population, perhaps
200,000 people, perhaps 50,000 people for a period of at least 30
years in order to determine the overall effects, but there are other
methods that can be used which could at least give us a glimpse,
for ezEunple, into the biolc^cal availability of the nutrient profile
after it has been gamma radiated.
If you take a substance, and I am not a trained biochemist, I am
working with trained people but I am myself— suffice it to say, I
am sure you aren't either.
Mr. Morrison. Perhaps since I am out of time, we will just say
the 20 some countries in Europe that have approved it, we will get
some sort of reading out of those areas within a reasonable amount
of time.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the extra time.
Mr. Miller. Could 1 just get a clarification on this one point of
food additive from the Congressman?
If you wrote the bill, I have looked at the Food, Drug and Cos*
metic Act, under chapter 4 and I find 11 sections, none of which
have to do with food processing.
Section 409 takes it from food additives but I don't see where it is
going to go under food processing.
Which section woulcf it be under? If we take it from food addi-
tives, where in the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act do we r^ulate it
under food processing
Mr. MoRBisoN. You will find a number of sections in the hill that
under food processing, under the section of food irradiation process-
ing so it plugs it right back into 409.
The letter which is part of the record from the Food and Drug
Administration says this does not diminish our authority at all.
Mr. Miller. I don't understand how we are going to regulate it
as food processing if there is no section in here that regulates food
processing.
Mr. Morrison. It is in the bill.
Mr. Miller. I was unable to find it; that is why I asked for clari-
Hcation.
Mr. M08GOFIAN. It is actual bOl itself? I have the bill.
Mr. MnxER. There is no new section if we are going to regulate
fisod processing. I think we should regulate food processing and I
think your idea, Congressman, is excellent.
I thmk we should relook at edl food processing. I think we ought
to add a section 412 and put it — food processing. This is the place it
ought to be and then define food processing so, we who are inter-
ested in consumer protection, can know what FDA's jurisdiction is
on food processing. This would cover cooking. This would cover can-
ning. These things that have been said that this is no more harm-
ftil than maybe it is time we relooked at pasturization and cooking
and canning under a secticm on food processing.
Mr. Morrison. I will certainly join you on the concept of relative
risk because I think we should be looking at all these procedures
and doing some comparison and I get the feeling irradiation would
come out pndtably looking rather well.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
,y Google
124
Mr. MosGOFiAN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make one brief
comment.
In Britain currently, unless it has been changed within the last 5
or 6 days, irradiation of food is both banned for domestic consump-
tion as well as for export. In Germany, while it is OK for export, it
is illegal for domestic consumption.
When international authorities are referred to, it is our belief
that what is internationed to us is national to someone else, maybe
local to someone else.
I am not impressed by that. I don't think we should be impressed
by intemationed authorities. I think we need to look at the actual
evidence.
Mr. Bedell. We have been joined by the chairman of our full
committee. Mr. de la Garza, did you have any statements or ques-
tions at all? We appreciate your joining us.
The Chairman. No thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Bedell. Fine. Mr. Mosgofian, can you tell me what happened
in England in regard to that situation?
Mr. Mosgofian. No. I have a document cfdled "Food Irradiation in
Britain?" published in September 1985. We are in touch with
the London Food Commission, but I can't tell you why the British
Government made it illegal. I do know, however, they put it into a
category called novel and irradiated foods.
So it was in the first place put there. That may have been for
historical purposes. I don t know why they have banned it but they
have.
[The publication entitled "Food Irradiation in Britain?" appears
at the conclusion of the hearing.]
Mr. Bedell. Where are they irradiating food in Britan?
Mr. Mosgofian. I don't know, Mr. Chairman. I will be glad to
find that information out for you.
Mr. Bedell. I think it is something that would be of interest to
the subcommittee. We are trying to learn all we can about this
issue. I hope you understand the situation that exists on the sub-
committee. We have testimony from the Government people that
tell us they cannot detect any difference in food that has been irra-
diated.
Apparently it has been used extensively in hospitals. Apparently
the United Nations says that it is a satisfactory process. Appetrent-
ly a number of countries are doing this. Apparently it haa been
used £is I understand it in the Army with no detrimental effects. So
we have all of this testimony then we have some groups coming
forth, and I don't question your sincerity for one minute, coming
forth saying that they think this is a dangerous procedure. I think
we also have to, at least speaking for myself, say there are two
things we have to consider.
One is that we have done things that looked safe, but we found
out later tJiey were not. On ^e other hand, there are people and
groups that are always resistant to any change.
We understand those things fully on the subcommittee, but I can
assure you that in my opinion the subcommittee members are seri-
ously trying to understand this issue and trying to do what would
appear to be in the best interest of our country and people.
,y Google
125
The real documentation of problems appears to me to be feiirly
nited. Now that doesn't mean there may not be problems. I un-
»r8tand your concern but except for what occurred in India which
apparently somewhat questionable eind some of these studies
hich I again think are subject to question, I don't know that we
ave very much documentation one way or another to indicate this
harmful to the people who eat the products.
Mr. MosGOFiAN. That is actually an interesting point, Mr. Chair-
kan. It would then point to the conclusion that the appropriate be-
inning point for Congress is a full technology assessment, an envi-
>nmental impact study which would then give us absolute solid
round presuming that the study was done to a protocol or design
lat would answer the appropriate questions.
It would give us a place to stand on and say we now have the
>eciflc documentation. 1 am not convinced for example, that the
idian study showed anything more than a specific chromosonal
image result which needs to be further studied.
The aflotoxin toxin studies, the studies which reveed aflotoxin
txin, probably the second most feared toxin in food, is enhanced in
s lethalness after getmma radiation. I am not convinced that
jesn't need to be thoroughly examined or those studies should be
listed to their face.
It is the case for example, that one strain of the ^wres of the
instrictium botulism which is the most feared toxin in food actu-
Uy is given a free reign in the ecology after gamma radiation be-
luse the gamma radiation essentially wipes out everything else.
I think in fact what we have all be presented with, and I have
sen working on this for some time probably since March 1984
ben I first heard about the fruita and vegetables ruling, is that
lere has been a mixing of sales hyperbole on behalf of those folks,
lose industry people and government people who are interested in
romoting this industry and mixed that up with the kind of evi-
;nce that is necessary to establish something which has the conse-
iences that this has.
I would rather have done something else over the last 2 years of
ly life but I felt the consequences of this were so grave I didn't
ave any choice either for myself or my children or their children.
When we look at the FDA paper that was published in 1968 by
le FDA when they banned the radiation of pork that the Army
id been given permission to do from 1963 to 1968, we see that the
DA's own paper indicates that there were such adverse effects,
zalth effects that they could no longer consider it safe or wise to
low or give permission for the irradiation of that canned bacon
id other pork products and the Army withdrew its next petition
ir canned ham.
Until Jul^ 22, 1985, just 3 days before the new EPA ruling would
ave gone mto effect, the FDA had not edlowed any irradiation of
}rk products and has certainly answered such questions as what
going to happen to the very fatty pork tissue in lithium produc-
on which is a known carcinogen or any effects that are in the
DA's own literature.
I am not making this up. This was published in 1968. None of the
laterial in here has been shown in any long-term study to be
roven beyond the question of a doubt it no longer is valid.
58-005 O - 86 - 5
,y Google
Why was the science not valid at that point? I have a serious
question and that is — I am sure you do too — wl^ is there an at-
tempt to continually minimize those negative effects which have
been shown and at the same time and negate them almoet orally
and each time they get rereviewed as one writer in the FDA said it
appears they disappear until those negative effects no longer have
a reality.
Mr. Bedell. Of course, I think probably we have some question-
able health effects on all the different ways we try to preserve food,
whether we do it through chemicals or something else. There is
some cause for concern, I think. I think we make every effort to try
to minimize that concern, and I guess I would also feel that we
can't really ignore the testimony of the American Medical Associa-
tion. Do you disagree with that?
Mr. MosGOFUN. I do but
Mr. Bedell. Why should the American Medical
Mr. MosGOHAN. The American Medical Society, even the person
himself, has said he has not examined all of the data beisis tl^t has '
been used to determine the conclusions that, for example, have '
been — that were drawn by the joint committee, the joint conimis- *
sion on food irradiation. :
Mr. Bedell. I say why would they have any prejudice? I know of ;
no reason they would wemt to change oneprocess or another. 'i
Mr. Miller. Could I address that, Mr. Chairman? ^
Mr. Bedell. I can understand why the Atomic Energy Commis- 's
sion might, or somebody of that nature, hut I don't see why the p
American Mediced Association would have any reason to favor or <
oppose one process over another. Did you have something to add? i
Mr. Milleb. I wemt to state briefly I remember very clearly the
American Medical Association giving the same kind of approval to t
DES, diethylstilbestrol, in the production of chicken ana «niw>fllff. t
In fact they said we could safely implant it in the ear of beef t
cattle. They said we could put it in the necks of chickens and they i
believed it was so safe they gave it to women to prevent miscar-
riage. Then the AMA had to back off when it realized that tiiou- ^
sands of the female children of those women given DES were show- r'
ing up with vaginal cancer. They told the women they had given ;
this drug, this 'sfife" drug that it was "absolutely sate" with the 7~
same assurances they have told you they know of no adverse side ^
effecte to eating irradiated food. *
Now even then the Food and Drug Administration did not ban ^
DES. It wasn't until an oversight congressional committee of this *
Congress headed by Representative Fountain, who, unfortunately, '
has left us, insisted FDA look at the hard evidence that diethylsnl- '^
bestrol was causing cancer that the Food and Drug AdministratioD ^
and AMA reluctantly and b^p^dgingly admitted what they had '^
done. It was too late when they found out there were thousands *=
and thousands of women who gave vaginal cancer to their dauj^ ^
teis. AMA doctors administered DES and with the same safety as- ^
Burances they have stated here apply to irradiated food. I am cer- '
tain they didn't have any bad motives. ^
It is Just they have bad science. They just say, let's rush into thia ^
with the whole country and then let's apologize after we are there. > '
"Shoot from the hip and emiend it in the record." You can do that ''
,y Google
127
in Congress, but you can't do it with the lives of people. The AMA
has a bad, beid track record. All the way from the Dalcon Shield to
DES to Oraflex to Mer. 29 to Bendectin. It wasn't until Congress
through the magnificent Fountain committee held hearings that
the A^IA or FDA ever withdrew these hazardous drugs from the
marketplace.
The AMA has begrudgingly stopped using every single drug they
have withdrawn only under constant oversight hearings of Con-
gress. I think the rapidly declining membership of the AMA shows
ho^v much they represent the people. They are down now to 45 per-
cent of the medical doctors that even belong to them. Twenty-three
years ago, when I first came to lobby Congress they had 70 percent.
At the rate they are going in another 45 years nobody will belong
to them, and they shouldn t. They have lost credibility.
Mr. BEnsLL. It is good to have you say that about somebody else
other than the Congress of the United States.
Mr. Miller. The Congress has done a good job, sir. The Congress
has done a magnificent job.
Mr. Bedell. Thank you very much. Are there any further ques-
tions?
If not, we appreciate your testimony very much. Thank you.
Mr. Miller. Thank you.
Mr. Bedell. Our next panel consists of Dr. William Marion, In-
stitute of Food Technologists and the Council on Agricultural Sci-
ence and Technology, Ames, lA, and Dr. Ari Bry^jolfsson, Council
on Agricultural Science and Technolo^ at Ames, lA.
We will hear from you first. Dr. Marion, i^ain, we would ask
you to hold your testimony to no more than 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM W. MARION, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESI-
DENT, COUNCIL FOR AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOL-
OGY
Mr. Marion. Thank you very much. Congressman Bedell, Con-
gressman de la Garza, other distinguished gentlemen. My name is
William Marion. I serve as executive vice president of CAST, which
is the Council for Agricultural Science and Technology, based in
Ames, lA. In addition, I do cochair the Committee on Research for
the Institute of Food Technologists. The latter is a scientific society
representing some 25,000 to 26,000 food scientists and food tech-
nal<^ist8 in academia, government, and industry.
lliank you for the invitation to appear before you this afternoon,
and to comment on H.R. 696. I commend you for the efforts that
have gone into this bill. Both CAST and IFT have published docu-
ments in the field of food processing previously. CAST presently
has a major task force underway — and I regret that I don't have
tboee documents in front of me today — that has a m^or task force
imderway on the topic of irradiation. The first of the two publica-
tions, "wholesomeness of Food Treated with Ionizing Energy," has
been written and is in the review process today. It should be pub-
lished within a month or so.
A second paper on applications will be published some time in
early 1986. Dr. Brynjolfsson, who is here with me, is a member of
that task force.
,y Google
128
It has been said on a number of occasions that there have been
no totally new food processing technologies developed in the twen-
tieth century. Meiny reflnements in the long-established processes
of canning, drying, freezing, curing, and fermenting have been
made. The previous speakers referred to the use of microwave
energy. It has become very common in home cookery. The use of
ionizing radiation can become an option for a new and valuable
food processing technique.
Low-level irradiation of food offers several advantages. It will
greatly extend the shelf life of perishable foods such as strawber-
ries. Pork, which contributes significantly to the nutrition of most
Americans, is sometimes viewed with suspicion by consumers who
fear trichina infection. The incidence of trichinosis infection in
humans is very low indeed — 30 cases in 1983; 95 in 1982.
Nevertheless, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and other ad-
visory groups correctly point out that pork should be cooked to a
well-done stage. That implies interned temperatures of 165 to 170
degrees Fahrenheit. Actually, trichina are inactivated at much
lower temperatures — 138 to 145 degrees Fahrenheit, but in choos-
ing to be ^e, consumers eliminate the use of pork in a number of
traditional European recipes.
The use of irradiation to inactivate the few trinchia that may be
present could have a positive effect on pork consumption, likewise
it could do a great deal with the use of the surplus grain supply
that is produced here in the United States, and likewise it would
have a very positive effect on processing and marketing activities
associated with the pork industry.
Mr. Chairman, I make my remarks in very brief form. I wish to
say, in closing, the passage of H.R. 696 opens the door for a useful
and safe food processing technique.
Now it ia my pleasure, sir, to introduce Dr. Ari Bryi^olfsson, sir,
a physicist from Natick Laboratories.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Mcuion appears at the conclusion
of the hearing.]
Mr. Bedell. Thank you.
Dr. Brynjolisson.
STATEMENT OF ARI BRYNJOLFSSON, MEMBER, SCIENTIFIC TASK
FORCE ON WHOLESOMENESS OF FOODS TREATED WITH IONIZ-
ING ENERGY, COUNCIL FOR AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY
Mr. Brynjolfsson. Mr. Chairman, my name is Ari Brynjol&son.
From 1972 to 1980 I was Director of the U.S. National Food Irradia-
tion Program, conducted by the U.S. Department of Army at the
Natick Laboratories in Massachusetts. I appreciate the opportuni^
to present to you the statement on findings of the task force on
wholesomeness of foods treated with ionizing energy, organized by
the Council for Agricultured Science and Technology, CAST, as we
call it.
A list of task force members is attached as enclosure 1 with this
statement. I have the full text of the statement with me, and I will
maiw that available for the record here. I have also several other
documents that I would like to submit for the record. I have my
,y Google
er related to the subject, and I have another paper that was
Bented in 1980 but is still credible, and I have a report, "Whole-
leness of Irradiated Food" by the Joint Expert Committee in
1, which I think would be nice to have for the record, so that
,ple could see it.
^. Bkd^xJ'- Without objection, it will be entered in the record or
Vd in the committee files.
Mi. Bryi^joi-fsson. And then I have three reports here which I
j^ynV go hea.'vdly into the documentation of the safety. This is on
Iw tosicol<^p.cal evaluation of irradiation in food. They are difficult
\a come by, so I metke them available for the record here.
Mi. Bedklj— They will eiIso be entered in the record without ob-
jection.
Mt. Bryi^JOL-fsson. I also have here this recommendation.
Mr. Bedei.J'. I am not sure any of us understand what is in the
feport, but we wU enter them in the record anyway.
Mr. Bry3*JJOUSSOn. I will report on the msgor findings of the
CAST committee or the task force. The major finding of analysis
were as follo-wrs:
(A) It appears proven with reasonable certainty that foods irradi-
ated with doees up to an avereige dose of 58 kilc^gray are safe and
wholesome. Ilus conclusion is based on two principally different
approaches:
(a) liie analyses and toxicological evaluation of the radiolytic
pnxlucts' (b) ^^^ extensive animal feeding studies.
(B) The effect of irradiation on the nutrition are insignificant or
ojmparable ■with other currently accepted food treatments.
(Q j\ie irradiation does not introduce any special microbiological
problem. Like any other method of food professing, it requires ad-
tierence to high hygienic standards and sound food microbiological
principles.
(D) No induced activity is produced in the food when the pro-
posed sources are used.
From these findings, we may conclude that:
The process of preserving food by irradiation up to em avereige
dose of 58 kilogray accordingly should be recognized as safe and
wholesome. Irradiation, like other processes for preserving the food
tor public consumption, requires adherence to high hygienic stand-
ards and sound principles in processing, storing, and d^tribution of
the food.
FDA and/or USDA should accordingly inspect and approve the
irradiation facilities for processing and control of the foods, and
like in other federally inspected plants keep surveillance to assure
adherence to good manufacturing principles for the benefit of the
omsumer. Present standards and regulations for treatment of non-
irradiated foods, such as standard hygienic manufacturing prac-
ticee, can be expanded and applied also to irradiated foods.
FDA and USDA should be permitted to set more stringent stand-
ards for design and operation of irradiation facilities for processing
rf food than those that NRC has set for design and operation of ir-
radiation facilities used for processing of nonfood items.
The Codex Alimentarius, the international general standard for
irradiated foods in international trade, forms a reasonable frame-
,y Google
130
work for r^ulating and processing not only for international trade
but also for trade within the country.
Mr. Bedell. Dr. Brynjolfteon, how much more time do you need?
Mr. Brynjolpsson. About a minute and a half.
Mr. Bedell. Fine, you may go ahead.
Mr. Brynjolfsson. These standards could with simple modifica-
tion be applied to foods treated with sterilizing doses. Likewise, the
Codex "International Code of Practice for the Operation of Radiation
Facilities Used for the Treatment of Foods" forms a framework and
provides guidelines for operating the irradiaticHi plants fw proceas-
ing of foods.
Mr. Chairman, there are a few other comments that I would like
to make which focus more directly on the bill. Under the heading
"Findings and Purposes" on page 2 we have in the paragraph sec-
tion 2(aX2) the words "and eliminates trichnosis in pork." I think
this is human trichinosis from eating trichine pork, so we should
replace trichnosis by trichina, the word trichina. I would, however,
prefer to have it "it eliminates parasites such as Toxoplasma
gondii in meats" because I think we should remember that there
are other parasites Eind elements in foods and in meats, Toxo-
plasma gondii, for example, which is very common in meats. About
25 percent of the population in the United States have antigens,
and this causes birth defects and medformation in children. Very
low doses of irradation could eliminate that.
I believe also that in another section we could make some
changes referring to how we charge for assistance. I feel it would
leave more flexibility if it would be easier for the universities and
other institutions of that kind to get cobalt at lower cost, and
would not have to charge at the current rate.
Finally, I worked for establishing the existing Subcommittee on
Interagency on Radiation Research and Policy Coordination of the
Federal Coordinating Council for Science Engineering and Technol-
ogy, and I believe that might be a better forum for coordinating
food irradiation work than the committee that is suggested in the
bill.
This is just for your consideration. I think the bill is very good aa
it is. Thank you, Mr. Chairmem.
[The prepeu'ed statement of Mr. Bryit)ol&son appecu^ at the con-
clusion of the heEuing.]
Mr. Bedell. Thank you. Any questions, Mr. de la Garza or Mr.
Roberts.
Mr. Roberts. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I must admit to the
same state of confusion that my chairman has as to the relative
safety of this process. I have heard from earlier panel members
that I should eat my beef jerky in Dodge City, KS, at my own risk,
and 1 am not too sure, Mr. Morrison, whether I should eat this
apple or not. On the one hand, I have the AMA eaid CAST telling
me this will keep the doctor away, and on the other, that if I bite
into this I will be like Eve and open up Pandora's box of original
sin in terms of gene mutation.
I note very few members of the press have eaten one.
Mr. Bedell. If the gentleman will yield, I have already had one
and I am just as mean as ever.
,y Google
131
Mr. RoBEBTS. I think this is the dilemma we face. We have some
very fine testimony from you here, doctor, saying that unquestion-
ably this iB safe and wholesome, and we have just the opposite 180
de^ees away, black is black and white is white, from a collection
of folks who beheve very strongly that that is the case.
Does CAST have any research in regard to the irradiation of
wheat? Because we had a case study, now, a very tragic case, over
in India, and 1 asked some of the other panels. Are you conducting
research in regards to this process of preserving wheat?
Mr. Bbynjolpbson. No. We are not conducting research at CAST.
Mr. Roberts. Are you aware?
Mr. Bhynjolfsson. Oh, yes. We are aware of the Indian study.
We are very much aware of them.
Mr. Roberts. Do you have a summary of that? Is your conclusion
such that we should be more careful and look into this situation
with the report of the India situation, or is it something that you
would still say is wholesome?
Mr. Brynjolfsson. Yes, I addressed that in my paper that I sub-
mitted for the record, but let me here mention a few facts as I see
it. liiis question, of course, has been a primary focus for a great
many years. It has been brought up again and again, and again
and again we have looked at the question to see if there was any
I point that we should investigate further. What I am talking about
! IB the question of possible mutagenicity of eating irradiated foods.
j It was raised in 1957, it was raised in 1962, it was reused in 1966, it
I was raised again and again, and every time when the scientists
I looked at it, they could not find anything.
j The India studies are on very few individuals. The statistical
data do not support any conclusion whatsoever. The best that they
can do is to raise suspicion. Because they raise suspicion, this was
I piincipally a good laboratory that did the studies, the Nationed In-
stitutes of Health in Heidelberg. Therefore, it was looked at very,
I very closely in India under the auspices of international processors,
and of course many similar kinds of studies were done in the
1 United States, emd they all came out that there was nothing to sup-
port the suspicion.
lliese studies were of course very well-known to the Expert Com-
mittee in Geneva, the Expert Committee under the World Health
Organization auspices.
Mr. Roberts. Do you agree with this. Dr. Marion? Is that your
conclusion as well?
Mr. Marion. This is our conclusion. I would hope in this case
that we could distinguish, and it may be very difficult in the short
time, to talk about a body of literature. We wish, as representatives
of CAST, to speak about the introduction of low-level irradiation
and its potential impact in many areas in food processing.
If one were to go back to some of the very early literature of the
fifties, and look at some of the very high dosage used, then one can
imagine other things occurring, but it is our general feeling based
on uie summary of the best literature — and I must say when the
study appears within a month or so we will have been as exhaus-
tive as we can in a survey of worldwide literature — and it is our
impression that a summary of that literature says we are speaking
about a safe process, if used within measurable limits, susteunable
,y Google
132
measurable limits, and we feel we are talking on the best data that
we can find in the world today.
Mr. Roberts. I apprecdiate that. Thank you for the time, Mr.
Chairman.
Mr. Bedell. Mr. Brown.
Mr. Brown. Gentlemen, 1 suppose you would both agree that
there is no way we can ever be absolutely certain that anything we
do is going to be free from risk; am I correct in that?
Mr. Marion. I do agree with you, sir.
Mr. Brown. Some of the previous witnesses have indicated that
we do need to make much more extensive technology assessments.
They have suggested long-term studies on large populations of
humans, which is not the normal way we conduct studies of the
risk of many kinds of drugs or other things of that sort. I suspect it
would be impossible to do that if there was any possibility that
there would be an endangering of human lives.
Do you feel that there is any course of action which could be
taken in the way of a more systematic technol(»y assessment or
risk assessment that would end all of the speculation on this or
brine us to a higher degree of certainty about this, something that
hasrTt been done yet?
Mr. Brynjolfsson. You raise a very important question, and I
am very happy to have the opportunity to elaborate on it. Animal
experiments are not extremely sensitive, but they are extremely
relevant. They are about the nest that we have, especially when
the imimals are mammals, so we thought is there any way that we
could do better than those animals experiments, which we can
never be happy with, because of course we should he safe. We must
be sure that it is safe. So what did we do?
We used absolutely the b«it techoI(^y to analyze the radioactive
programs that are formed in the food. We went to the best experts
m this country and universities and wherever we could find them
that have the best instruments to do that kind of experiment, and
we took those data, collected them, ansdyzed them, and looked at
the chemistry that was behind those data. We brought those data
to a completely independent group of toxicologists that are used to
evaluating the chemicals. They looked at them after the public
evaluation that I have submitted for the record. They could not
find any reason to doubt that irradiated foods were wholesome.
The chemical compounds that are produced are in the order of
parts per billion, and we have hundreds of them. Those chemical
compounds are usually commonly found in food. Actually, we have
not found any compounds that are not commonly found in food,
processed or unprocessed food. We have failed to find any chemical
or radiolytic product that is not Eilready in the food or that is in
similar foods.
In addition, those chemicals that are produced by the irradiated
products are in small quantities, and we have not found any that
would indicate to us that they could be harmful to humans, and
therefore these people put their scientic name on the line saying
there is nothing to be concerned about.
Mr. Brown. That is a veir strong statement. Do you know of any
studies that have been made on a somewhat different basis of Uie
risk? I am thinking here of an overall comparison of the risk of the
,y Google
1S3
present system of food processing versus the risk of processing
through irradiation or versus the risk of some other new technolo-
CT that we haven't looked at, chemical treatment or whatever, so
that we could assure the public that there are risks even to the
present system, there are risks from eating unprocessed foods with-
out any treatment. There are risks from treating food by irradia-
tion. There are risks of treating food with chemicals, bleaching
agents or whatever, so that we could, for the purposes of public en-
l^htenment get across the idea that we live in an environment
that always has risks, but the risk in this area is different, no dif-
ferent or less than it would be if we did not make this kind of a
change.
Mr. BftyNJOLPSSON. Mr. Chairman, that was one of our difficul-
ties, that we were in many ways, when we were doing those stud-
ies, breaking new roads, roads that were not there before. We had
to research what is, for instance, a good control for comparison.
Are frozen foods better controlled than the heat-processed foods,
because all those processes may produce some chemical compounds,
and principally if you want to kill the bacteria, you must cause
chemical processes.
Id many cases it was not well known before we started, so part of
our work was to in a way see what is there before we irradiate the
food. What we found is that many of those products, when we are
making it so sensitive and looking for such small quantities, that
they are in the food, they Eire ubiquitous in the food and in the en-
vironment, and what we in a way find, for instance, that actually
the chemicEil processes that are produced by the irradiation are
much fewer and in smaller quantities than are produced by most
other processes, like heat processing.
Mr. Marion. If I might add. Congressman Brown, the era we Eire
in in the 1980'b offers us the best analytical techniques we have
ever known in the history of the world, and we all know that there
ig a certain amount of risk associated with our food supply, riding
in a taxi or with other things, and yet at the same time we put a
great deal of confidence in the pasteurization of milk.
Just the other day in the Chicago area, we had a mtyor error oc-
curring in a well-known pasteurization process, and yet, based on
the best analytical techniques that can be employed today in the
1980's, low-level irradiation of food appears to be safe. It is not an
absolutely guarantee, but it appears to us to be safe.
Mr. Brown. We respect that point of view, but I am looking at
tlds from the standpoint of how we reasBure the American public,
and they are actually skeptical of assurances today, and with every
right because we have had assurances in the past that didn't live
up to the billings, so I am looking for simple ways that we can do
it.
Take the example of wheat as one. We could take wheat and not
subject it to Einy kind of treatment. We could tEike it and irrEtdiate
it, or we can take it as I think we experimented with, Emd subject
it to some sort of an inert gas, which by depriving oxygen to the
ot^nisms serves the same purpose.
There are probably hEizards or risks to be associated with eEich
one of these processes. Is there any way we could look at them Eind
say what is the compEu^tive risk between these three approEu:hes
,y Google
134
to trying to improve the quality of a particular food product for ',
human consumption, and that could be a fairly involved compari- .'
son, I understand? 1 am just asking for information that uuie j'
kinds of Etnalyses have been made. \
Mr. Marion. Toxicologists are spending a great deal of time on ,
the question of assessment of risk, and it is difficult, but I am ,,
happy to say tests are improving in the assessment of r^k, and yet i
it is going to be rather difficult right now to compare a procei :^
such as irradiation to, say, heat stenlization, but one does the best :j
one can, at least in searching for certain products that are known -
to be harmful, if they are present in such-and-such amounts, and BO jl
that approach has been used extensively, and yet not one of u> >~
would say that we are dealing with something that is an absolutely ■
safe one, and yet I would submit to you, sir, that in the study that ^-
is forthcoming from CAST, we have attempted to look at all toxico> ^
logical data and experimental data on a very wide basis for cluea of ^
tlus sort. w
Unfortunately, that is about all I can offer at the momrait ban t
in terms of questions on risk. ^
Mr. Brown. We will look forweutl to seeing that study. The sub- a
ject of trying to structure an adequate framework for risk ana)ym c
risk assessment, is one that we have grappled with on a broader ^
basis here in the Congress, and we recognize that we do not yet ;_
have a conceptual framework which allows us to do this in a com- t:
pletely satisfactory way, and we are hoping that as we move b
through each of these important areas, sudi as irradiation, we can ^
broaden our knowledge of how to improve that process as we do it s
Thank you. I have no further questions. t=
Mr. Bbdbll. Mr. Morrison. r
Mr. Morrison. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I notice. Dr. Bryi^olfsson, that in your information — let me just g
read a sentence or two. "During the last 37 years, the effect of irra- :
diation on the wholesomeness of food has been studied more thai- '■
oughly than that of any other processing of foods," and that in «
1966, they issued the statements, "Foods irradiated up to absoiiMd i
doses of 5.6 megarads" of cobalt and so forth "have been found to :
be wholesome, that is, safe, and nutritionally adequate." That ml t
later expanded to move it up to 10 kilorads. a
I wanted to point out to those not familiar with the numbers and :
that is 58 to 100 times the level being proposed as safe by the Food '■
and Drug Administration. W
la my mathematics accurate. Doctor? ^
Mr. Brynjolfsson. Yes, it is correct
Mr. Morrison. So they have built in a most significant safsty : .
factor even from these some 37 years of experiments that were part '
of the United States Government work? V
Mr. Brynjolfsson. Yes, and let me also make it clear that these t
data, the safety factor, using a safety factor of 100, they built it in u
for 58 kilogray, so these data support that even 58 kilogray is saft )
with that margin of safety that is used for other processes, so wh«) >
we are talking about one kilogray, we are factormg 100 and foctor 'c
ing 58; 5,800 above the use level. «
Mr. Morrison. Thank you. l^
,y Google
I also wont to point out that we do have a little bit of time limit
as far as the astronauts and the fact that they have been eating
food that has been sterilized through irradiation for a number of
yeara.
Dr. Marion, I wanted to mention an appreciation to CAST for a
number of things that they do, but one of the recent things I en-
joyed reading was an analysis of a number of natural foods that do
not come under the jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administra-
tion, because there are no additives, there is no process, and yet
they have toxicity that would frighten a number of people in this
room that have testified on irradiation.
Do you have any observations on that emalysis, including our fa-
vorite, carrots?
Mr. Marion. In many other foods, as you point out, sir, there are
natural toxicants present, and obviously neither we nor other great
bodies of thinkers can do anything about that, because they nave
built in, those have been built in over many years of evolution
within those products. Certainly with regard to potatoes, with
r^ard to just a wide number of products that are naturally pro-
duced, there are a number of toxicant substances that are formed.
Casaba, which is not well known to us in this country except for
a limited number of products from it, has very high levels of toxic
subetances in it, and one has learned to either eat those food prod-
acts in relatively low amounts, small amounts, or there have been
certain processing techniques that have adjusted after a fashion
the toxicity, but we are dealing with that, and it simply says that
in all probability, the safety of the irradiation process that you are
identimng here, we are dealing with greater safety than we would
be dealing with with the toxicants present in a number of our nat-
ural foods.
Mr. Morrison. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. ChairmEui.
Mr. Bedell. Thank you, Mr. Morrison.
Dr. Brynjolfsson, you indicated that you were involved in this ex-
periment that was done by the Army; is that correct?
Mr. Brynjolfsson. Yes.
Mr. Bedell. Previous witnesses have indicated that that was
called off because of problems that they encountered with people
who had eaten the food; is that correct?
Mr. Brynjolfsson. Called off because of?
Mr. Bedell. Previous witnesses have indicated that the Army ex-
perimented with this process for several years and I thought you
were involved in that effort.
Mr. Brynjolfsson. Yes.
Mr. Bedell. And apparently they found there were problems
with the people who ate the food that had been so processed, and
therefore they stopped the experiment. Is that accurate?
Mr. Brynjolfsson. No, no; no, sir. The only test subjects were
exposed, testers would eat the irradiated food, except in the fifties
there were a few experiments with humans, eind there were no ad-
vene effects found when those humans were exposed to irradiated
food or had irradiated food, 100 percent of irradiated foods for an
extended time. Iliere were no adverse effects. These are scientific
reports well documented. There cfui be no question about it.
,y Google
136
Mr. Bedell. I thought the previous witnesees indicated that
there had been probletns. and therefore, that the Army had
stopped irradiation because it had caused health proUems ■m«ig
those people who had eaun the irradiated food.
Mr. BRiTtJOLfSSDN'. No; no. sir. That must be a conqdete misiui-
derstanding.
Mr. Bedeu- There were no health problems erf an j of the soldiers
that had eaten irradiated foods?
Mr. Bkyxjoltsson. That is right. The reascKi that the Army
transferred the program to the VS. Department of Agriculture
was only because thiey felt this was not their missitm to devdm
new food processes. They felt that it was more properly placed with
a civilian agenc>', and it had nothing to do with that not bong good
for the Army. The Army will use it when industry produces it.
Mr. Bedeli. We have also had previous testimony that indiffiitffd
this process could cause the aflatoxin to be in greater concentra-
tions and cause greater problems. .-Vre you acquainted with that?
Mr. Brtxjolfssos. Yes. of course, we would look into thin^ like
that. The statistics that the witness was referring to were aome
Indian studies, and this was done with cooked food, on cooked food,
where they had destroyed all the antifungal activity in the food
before they put the fungi into the food. It has nothing to do with
the real world where we would, for instance, irradiate the foodB.
the v^etables or the potatoes, because they items have antifungal
activities in them, built in them, and the experiment as reported
here is baaed on misunderstand completely of what it was about
Mr. Bedell. That experiment you say was conducted on food that
had already been cooked, is that what you are saying?
Mr. BbytiJOLFSBON. Yes; that is right.
Mr. Bedeli- And normally this process would be applied to un-
cooked food; is that what you are sa>'ing?
Mr. Beynjolfsson. Yes. cooking destroys the antifimgal activi^,
so if you cook the food emd then put the micro-organisms into it, it
has nothing to do with radiation. They would grow better in that
food.
Mr. Bedeli. The previous witnesses have also testified that irra-
diation changes the chemistry of the food in a technical way, and
we don't know how or what the eRects might be of those chemicals
that would therefore be in the food as a result of irradiation, if I
understood their testimony correctly.
Mr. BRrNjOLFSsoN. Yes.
Mr. Bedeu. It affected part of the molecules somehow.
Mr. Bbykjolfsson. Yes, that could be said. There are some
chemicals. Actually, I would say the shortcoming of food irradia-
tion is more in a line that it does not inhibit some of the chemical
reactions that will break the food down, because irradiation does
not, for instance, inactivate enzymes, so that food will ^t soft and
the texture will soften in the food because the irradiation does not
inhibit those enzymes, but food technologies, they know these kinds
of limitations. They are faced with them all the time. Also in the
case of nonirradiated foods, so they must try to develop proccaoca
that stabilize the food. The chemical changes that are caused by ir-
radiation are otherwise extremely small.
,y Google
137
Mr. Bedell. I guess the thing I Eun trying to understand myself
is — if I might have another minute or two.
Mr. Morrison. Plesise, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Bedell. If the radiation changes the composition of the food
so that it, in effect, creates new chemicals in the food by changing
some of the chemical composition of the food, the question is, are
those chemicals that were created by the irradiation potentially
harmful to the health of individuals.
Mr. Bbynjolfsson. Yes.
Mr. Bedell. We need to try to understand this.
Mr. BsYNJGLFSsoN. Eveiy process will cause some chemical reac-
tions, and what we have found is that the chemical chemges caused
by irradiation are relatively smaller than in most other processes.
But to then look at those chemical compounds that are formed in
the food when we irradiate it, that is what we did in these studies
which was then given to the toxicologist to study for irradiation — if
these chemical substances that might be formed by irradiation,
that we could see they were formed and that we also said might be
formed, if they could be harmful.
And the toxicologist came out and said no, they couldn't be
harmful.
Mr. Morrison. Mr. Chairman, if you would yield on that point
just for a moment, I recalled your earlier comments, doctor, you
said you then went through these chemicals which had been cre-
ated by the irradiation process and found that, in fact, they also
occurred naturally in food.
In other words, there was nothing new as far as the chemical
compounds that were created are concerned.
Mr. Brynjolfsson. Yes, that is right.
Mr. Morrison. You felt fmrly comfortable with the supposed by-
products of which we have heard so much.
Mr. Brynjolfsson. Yes.
Mr. Bedell. Do you have any knowledge at all about what has
happened in Great Britain as to why they apparently have put a
prohibition on the irradiation of food?
Mr. Brynjolfsson. Great Britain has produced a great many sci-
entists in this field, but they closed down everyone there about in
1962, meiinly because they felt that they were not really in the food
business and did not need it.
They have then been using it only in the case of hospital patients
and for animal feed, and that is still permitted, but nothing has
been permitted otherwise, principally waiting on the United States
and other countries to clear it for them.
Mr. Bedell. The testimony we had, I thought, indicated that
Great Britain had been permitting irradiation in some instances
and were now prohibiting it.
b that accurate or inaccurate?
Mr. Brynjolfsson. That is a misunderstanding by the man that
testified.
Mr. Bbdeli. This is not the case. They have just never permitted
some of tJiese things and still are not permitting them.
Mr. Brynjolfsson. That is right. That does not mean that the
health authorities there don't thuik that food irradiation is safe.
,y Google
It is just that they do not want to create conhision, I would call
it, where some people still — because they are not well-informed —
still think that it may not be safe, and that is the reason they have
not permitted it.
Mr. Bedell. Do you have anything further?
Thank you very much for your testimony.
Our last panel consists of Mr. Jack RansohofT, Neutron Products,
Inc., of Dickerson, MD, and Mb. Marjorie Hecht, Fusion Enet^
Foundation of Leesburg, VA.
Mr. RansohofT, since you are first on the list, we will have you go
first.
Again, we would ask you to try and hold your testimony to no
more than 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF JACK RANSOHOFF. NEUTRON PRODUCTS, INC^
DICKERSON, MD
Mr. Ransohoff. Thank you very much for inviting me to testify.
1 would like to start out by answering Congressman Brown's
question that he aaked 15 or 20 minutes ago.
1 think there are some things that you can do to make this com-
parison of risks that would be very simple and enlightening. Many
opponents of radiation processing have been critical, have ex-
pressed concern over the haizards of shipping.
It would be a relatively simple matter to compare the hazards of
shipping radioisotopes to radiation processing plants which occurs
very seldom and has had a very good safety record over the yeara
with the frequent shipping of ethylene oxide or ethylene dibromide
or whatever chemical would be used for a comparable purpose.
The active chemicftls that would be used in treating foods instead
of radiation will not simply materialize on the site nor will they be
used without hazard.
I think it would be a very simple matter to compare the SEifety of
transportation and safety in the work place with the shipment and
use of radioactive materials with the shipment and use of toxic
chemicals.
Similarly, one could compare the effect of radiation on the food
with the effect on the food of toxic chemicals that might be used as
an alternative.
In the case of pepper, for example, there is a specification on the
maximum permissable concentration of epichlorohydrin.
Epichlorohydrin does not occur naturally in pepper. It is a reac-
tion product that occurs when you use ethylene oxide to BterilJ2e
pepper or to pasteurize it.
Ajid 80 it goes. There are many comparisons that can be made,
and I think it is an excellent suggestion. I think it is something
that could be done and could be quantified.
lliere has been a great desil of time and effort expended in this
hearing, asking the question as to whether or not there are, in fact,
any new products that are produced by the irradiation of foods.
Without being able to name any, I can fissure you that there are.
The use of ionizing radiation is a very energetic process. It is going
to produce new products. All foods are polymers, and you will get
,y Google
cross linking. You will get chain situations. You will get all kinds
of effects occurring. You can rely on it.
I think that you would do well to avoid the use of the concept of
zero. Zero is a tentative thing, euid zero will, in every case — will
someday be replaced by a number as our ability to measure and
detect improves.
I think you would be well advised to avoid a witch hunt for by-
product chemicals. There will be some. I am sure that some will be
different. There may be some to which people are allergic.
The fact remains that the use of radiation in the processing of
food does not produce large quantities of byproducts, and so far, we
are not aware of any that has caused the FDA to set a specification
on the number of deleterious byproducts that are produced.
So much for the answer to Mr. Brown's question.
We have a couple of comments that we would like to make.
Before making them, I would like to assure you I am not an anti-
nuke. I have been in the nuclear business for nearly 35 years.
My livelihood dei>ends on it. I have devoted my life to it, euid I
am for the use of radiation in every place It occurs.
Neutron Products is the second largest producer of radioactive
sources in the world, and we are one of the larger users of radioEic-
tive sources.
We have two irradiators at Dickerson. I would like to invite you
to come out and look at the operation sometime if you wish.
We are unalterably in favor of labeling. It really doesn't make
any difference what the details are. People have a right to know
whether or not food has been irradiated simply because they want
to know.
Someday, they may not care, but until that day comes, I think
the cause of irradiated food will be well served by requiring label-
ing-
It really doesn't make any difference how small the food product
is. In the case of a papaya or a mango or a grapefruit, the individ-
ual fruit can be labeled.
In the case of asparagus or strawberries or something like that,
it would be a relatively simple matter to package the food and have
a label on the package.
As long as people care, as long as people are interested, we think
they have a right to know whether or not their food has been irra-
diated. And if they aren't advised, then I think you are going to get
suspicion and misinformation, and that will be much worse than
labeling.
So that those people who do not wish to eat irradiated food can
buy some other food that is processed by some other means.
The concept that Government promotion is required or desirable,
I think, is a bad one. We have been irradiating spices in truckload
quantities. The principEil obstacle to the wider irradiation of spices
is simply that many spice processors feel that their needs are well
served by existing processes or past processes, and some spice man-
ufeicturers are working on new processes, not radiation processes
that they believe they will favor.
So, our experience has been that if the regulations permit it, and
if the processes are viable, food irradiation will naturally take its
place.
,y Google
140
It does not need Government intervention. It does not need Gov-
ernment support.
To the contrary, we believe very strongly that the issues become
confused by Government support. We think the cause of food irra-
diation is best served if the Government will serve the role of a dis-
interested regulator that is concerned about food safety, obviously
concerned about food safety, and only concerned about food safety.
Mr. Bedell. I made everybody else hold pretty well to 5 minutes.
What is your time situation, Mr. RansohofP
Mr. Ransohoff. Could I have a couple more minutes?
Mr. Bedell. Without objection.
Mr. Ransohoff. We think that if the Government has two
roles — one as a governmental agency, one as a r^ulator — it would
confuse the public.
We think the public should rely on the Government being a dis-
interested bystander.
In that regard, I would like to say we have — back to shipping for
1 minute — we have been, over the last 20 years, we have made
more than 1,000 shipments of high level radioactive material ship-
ments covering a distance of more than 1 million miles and con-
taining more than 30 million curies of cobalt^60.
We have never had an accident. We have never had a problem.
The rules regarding the shipment of radioactive materials are very
strict.
That doesn't mean there won't be some mistakes, and that
doesn't mean it isn't hazardous, but the record has been pretty
good so far.
In addition, although there have been some accidents that have
been belabored here in the operation of radiation processing plants,
the record overall has been very good.
We have one very, very serious concern with regard to this bill.
Cobalt-€0 is a tough metal. It is corrosion resistant, and if used in
meissive form, it is very resistant to dispersion.
Cobalt 60-sourcea are also made of pellets. Therefore, in the case
of a source failure, you do have cobalt in a dispersible form.
That is the form it was used in the facility in Georgia that every-
boH^y has heard about.
Iliat v/aa the form that was in the cancer therapy source that
became world famous when it v/as stolen from a warehouse in
Juarez.
We think that radioactive sources that contain radioactive mate-
rial in an easily dispersible form should not be used, should not be
encouraged.
Although cesium could be in a form that is dispersion resistant,
cesium chloride is a very soluble, easily dispersible form.
It is being heavily subsidized now, and we think it is a very, very
poor choice. I would like to, at some point, some other time — it will
take much more time than this, and I really would rather do it in
closed session.
I would like to be heard in closed session on the permits of using
cesium. I think it is a very serious mistftke, and I think it could
really discredit the NRG, the DOE, and the Congress.
Thank you.
Mr. Bedell. Thank you, Mr. Ransohoff.
,y Google
Ms. Hecht.
STATEMENT OF MARJORIE MAZEL HECHT, FUSION ENERGY
FOUNDATION, WASHINGTON DC
Ms. Hecht. Gentlemen, I am Marjorie Hecht from the FuBion
Ehiei^ Foundation which is a nonprofit scientific and educational
group with about 20,000 members nationally.
As our name implies, we promote fusion and nuclear energy
technoli^es, in general.
I am very pleased to testify on behalf of this food irradiation leg-
islation.
We would like to recommend the addition of two further points.
First, as I will describe later, electron beam irradiation, which is
a spinoff of the beeim defense prc^am at Lawrence Livermore Na-
tional Laboratory, is ready for immediate development.
Its promotion should be included in the work of the proposed
Joint Operating Commission as well as a program of incentives for
the private development of electron beam irradiation.
This, of course, would immediately obviate many of the objec-
tions we heard here today to the use of nuclear sources, although I
am certainly speaking for the use of nuclear sources, siao.
Second, we would surest as a specific goal of the Joint Operat-
ing Commission an aggressive outreach program to transfer this
tedinology as rapidly as possible to those countries in the develop-
ing sector that are in desperate need of ways to increase the quan-
tity and quality of their food supplies.
1 know many of these countries are interested. They have ap-
proached us for more information on this technology.
Now, I would like to talk also a little bit about the question of
risk, but I am looking at risk totally from the other side.
I look at the risk of not going nuclear. What is the risk of our
not pursuii^ food irradiation technology and advanced technologies
in general, because I think that very often the consequences of
some of the ideas we have heard here today and the opinions we
have heard today are not thought out to their end point, which is
the death of millions of people in the developing sector who need
food, who need industry, and who are simply perishing.
So, today in this country, about 25 percent of our foodstuffs are
lost to sfwilage, and an estimated 50 to 60 percent in some of the
developing countries of food that we ship there, of food that is pro-
duced there, never reaches its intended consumer because of insect
infestation and spoilage.
In terms of grain alone, the amount lost yearly to insects, rats, et
cetera, is 33 million tons of grain. This is enot^h to feed the entire
U.S, population for 1 year.
Seventeen million tons of grain alone would mean the difference
between life and death in Africa today. That is why we estimated it
was an emei^ency prc^am to begin to stop the deaths from starva-
tion there.
So, this 33 million tons that is now going to waste is enough for 2
years to stop starvation and to stop millions of people literally from
dying.
,y Google
142
It is not just human consumption that can benefit from the in-
crease in grain as a result of food irradiation.
If we are to adequately feed the world's population, we need to
increase the amount of quality protein available, and this means
that we need to triple the current amount of feed grains for ani-
mals which is now about 750 million metric tons.
The importance of providing a quality diet throughout the world
cemnot be overemphasized. It is not simply a third world problem.
Tiie result of starvation conditions in Africa is that the continent
today is engulfed in an AIDS epidemic that has already reached
the United States and will begin to devastate this country, especial-
ly in urban and rural poor areas where the diets and living condi-
tions are insufficient.
AIDS — in fact, Africa now is like a laboratory for AIDS, because
people are so malnourished, conditions have deteriorated so much,
and one of the first ways that you stop this process is by increasing
the level of the diet.
We have to do this using all our advanced technol(^es from ge-
netically engineering bacteria that will prevent frost damage —
which has been in the news lately — to food irradiation to increas-
ing the protein content of grain.
Now, I have summarized in my written testimony some of the
reasons that we are supporting this food irradiation technol<%y,
and I think the previous panel dealt with many of the seifety ques-
tions and other things.
What I would like to talk about is some of the objections raised
by the environmentalists. We have studied the extensive reseetrch
on food irradiation over the past three decades, and we have con-
cluded unequivocally that the objections raised by the environmen-
talist lobby are capricious and without substance.
Some of these objections are perhaps raised in good faith by
people who don't know the answers. Others are definitely raised 1^
people who know that they are lying and misleading the public
with their antinuclear prope^anda.
There were a couple of examples — I won't go into detail — but one
person who testifi^ mentioned this material increase of cancer.
Well, that is not true.
The rate of cancer cases has not increased. Cancer is a disease of
the aging. Our society is getting older. People are living longer
therefore, you see more cancer. And if you control for the question
of age, and you control for the people who smoke, why is the only
exception to this?
"riiere is no increase in the rate of cancer. That is one of the big
environmentalist myths. There are others in terms of the nuclear
power industry that I could also go into.
What we are seeing is an extension of the neisty process that has
beaten back civilian nuclear energy in the United States using feaj"
as its weapon.
The environmentalist lobby is trying to convince the population
that advanced technol(^es are dangerous in general, that radi-
ation must be especially dangerous because one can't see it, and
that [>eople are promoting new technologies because these people
are evil and out only to make money for their industry.
Mr. Bedell. Excuse me. What is your time situation?
,y Google
143
Ms. Hbcht. I would say about 2 minutes.
Mr. Bedell. I will give you that.
Ms. Hbcht. To thesie environmentalists, the scientific facts do not
matter. I will give you one quote from the energy project director
from Ralph Nader's antinuclear group. Critical Mass.
This person said:
We haven't had time yet to fully research the issue of irradiated food, but I have
an instinctive n^ative reaction. We oppose on principle the commercialization of
nuclear material — whether it is Three AUle Island or smoke detectors, and I basical'
ly aee this as a way of ftirther legitimizing the weapons business.
Well, if there is any plot involved here, it seems to me it is that
of the environmentalist lobby in its explicit Malthusian outlook
which poses a real threat to the economy and the survival of our
Nation.
These well funded and self-appointed advocates of the people
readily admit that they think the world is overpopulated, that
there are too many people, and that a smaller world would be
beautiful.
Therefore, it is possible that such people have no qualms about
killing off millions of people by restricting the spread of technolo-
gy. Opposition to food irradiation — which could potentially provide
more food quickly to people who are now starving — is just one ex-
ample of the environmentalist behavior that directly leads to
murder.
In a 1982 study that we did at the Fusion Energy Foundation, we
calculated that 115 million people had died unnecessarily, mostly
in the developing sector, as a result of the United States slowing
down the goals of the Atoms for Peace Program smd not spreading
nuclear technology fast enough.
The point is that the introduction of nuclear power, an ad-
vanced technology, enables the economy to grow at a faster rate,
and this increase in the growth rate provides for the increased
health smd well-being of the population.
If those 200 nuclear powerplants scheduled to be built between
1965 and 1980 had been built, the cheaper cost of nuclear energy
and ita large impact on the growth of productivity could have pow-
ered an additional 3 percent growth rate per year.
We haven't specifically modeled food irradiation, but the princi-
ple is the same. You get increasing productivity and you measure
the result in human lives being saved, more people being able to
live better lives.
Now, in terms of the developing sector market, I think that the
delay in commercializing food irradiation here has greatly affected
the rate of the spread of the technolt^y abroad.
There are 28 countries now that have some food irradiation in
process, but once we begin to implement the technology, there will
be a tremendous boom in the developing sector, in particular.
Several countries in the past 3 years have approached us. In fact,
I am meeting with one country tomorrow on how they can use food
irradiation to increase the fish protein for their nation since they
have abundant fish.
Well, I wanted to say a little bit more about electrobeam food ir-
radiation which is, I think — could be called the second generation
,y Google
144
food irradiation technology, the first generation being cobalt and
cesium.
Ironically, we have delayed so long in developing the first gen-
eration technology that the second generation is now ready for
com mercialization.
I am talking about the induction linear accelerator developed as
a spinoff of the Beam Defense Program at Lawrence Livermore Na-
tional Laboratory in California.
This is a small accelerator. It can sit on the top of a large desk.
It has the potential for providing a mass-produced, cheap, mobile,
and efficient source of food processing using electron beams or x
rays created by these electronic beams.
The benefits are tremendous. It fits on a 48-foot^long truck, for
instance. It would cost about |1 million. As you can, I ttoik, easily
imagine, the ability to have something on a truck that could be
transported in poor countries, especially, and go from crop to crop
could really increase the use of this technology immediately.
I think one thing that hasn't been mentioned is the first genera-
tion technology using radionuclide sources would soon prove insuf-
ficient.
If we really had a crash program or even a semicrash program to
develop the technology, we would soon find out that we didn't have
enough cobalt and cesium as radiation sources.
I think the Livermore calculations on this was that if all the
cesium and cobalt available in the world were used to irradiate
food, we would be able to process only 6 ounces per person in the
United States which is hardly enough for a crash pn^am.
That is 6 ounces per day. The legislation before this committee
presents an opportunity to b^in to restore science and technology
to its proper role as a driver for growth in our economy.
An aggressive policy to develop food irradiation will revolutionize
food processing, will put more and better food on American tables
more cheaply.
We will no longer feed 25 percent of our foodstuffs to promote
the growth of insects, bacteria, and fungus.
Equally important, we can export this technology to countries
where it is desperately needed and wanted, whose leaders under-
stand that advanced technolc^es mean more of their peoples' lives
will be saved from disease and starvation so they can be productive
citizens.
Let there be no mistake, these developing nations understand
fully that environmentalist demands cem be mesisured in the
number of deaths these demands will cause.
The developing nations do not want to import, quote, "western
environmentalism." They want to import advanced technology.
By implementing the proposed food irradiation l^^lation, we
can help ensure that science, not superstition and fear, becomes
the basis for decisionmaking on economic policy and that advanced
technology b^ns to turn around the U.S economic decline.
I also want to say in my testimony — I am on the question of la-
beling— that I don't object to using a label, but I think since there
is no residue lefi; in the food that it really is not completely necee-
sary.
oy Google
145
I think that American consumers can be educated that if they
know that there are no bacteria in their food, if they know the food
is clean, they will buy it.
If this joint commission can actually b^n promoting the tech-
nolo^ so people know what it is, 1 think American consumers will
buy uiis food.
One of the things that I would wonder is whether we would then
require natural foods to be labeled as processed with animal dung
or protein content increased by insect eggs.
I really find that some of their objections are quite capricious,
and I would suggest that we also b^n labeling natural foods as to
their true content; peanuts high in aflotoxin, for example, since
natural peemuts are really a menace.
So, I thank you for this opportunity to testify.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Hecht appears at the conclusion
of the hearing.]
Mr. Bedell. Thank you.
Mr. Morrison.
Mr. Morrison. Thsink you, Mr. Chairman.
That is to both of you.
Mr. RansohofT, some earlier witnesses seemed to indicate that
your irradiation industry just ran rampant across the countryside
proliferating and doing all those nasty things that come with the
nuclear era.
You certainly are regulated in some way. I visited your facilities,
and there is no question that someone was watching somewhere
and that you have done a very good job with your responsibility.
Mr. Ransohopf. Thank you.
Mr. Morrison. Can you speak to the level of regulation? You did
comment that the industry was by emd large safe and it probably
would get better.
Mr. Ransohopp. We are heavily regulated, and of course moat of
us feel that we are too heavily regulated, but I think that in terms
of the relative hazards I think in the last 10 years we have found
tiiat the regulatory — whether we are too heavily regulated or not,
the other industries that had previously been considered less haz-
ardous may have become more heavily regulated.
We are getting to be a very heavily regulated society. I think the
methods of regulation could be improved. I think it would be
healthy if it were less adversarial, and it would be healthier if it
were more cooperative. There is no inherent lack of a community
of interest between the r^ulators and the people operating compa-
nies such as ours. We are as interested in good safety practices as
far as our employees and our community are concerned, as the reg-
ulators are, so I think that we are very heavily regulated.
We are fairly effectively r^ulated I think.
As far as proliferation is concerned, of course, I think that is a
good thing. We would like to see more plants in more places. I do
feel that that may not hold true for sources in a dispersal form. I
think that that is a very serious problem, and I would like to get to
that at another time with you, but by and large the industry has
bad a very good safety record, and it is a hazardous business. We
do vrork with hazardous materials. We know it, and in our particu-
lar case, of course, we are not only deedii^ with ionizii^ radiation.
,y Google
146
We are also dealing with chemicals, so we have it both ways, but
we have had a good safety record so far, and I think in general
while there have been some exceptions, the industry has done a
pretty good job.
Mr. Morrison. Would you take just 1 minute, Mr. RansohofT,
and comment on the future supplies of cobalt. Do we have the ca-
pabilities as a nation to produce what we need? Me. Hecht made
comments about the lack of source material, emd I am awEire of
your concerns about cesium and the fact that we are not going to
produce any more, just for financial purposes, under Government
sponsorship.
Mr. Ransohoff. Again I would like to deal with this in closed
session, because it does involve some proprietary information of
ours. But we have been in the business of producing cobalt-60 for
20 years. The problem of the industry has been one of surplus, not
one of shortage, until just a few years ago.
In the summer of 1983, Ontario Hydro had an accident with one
of their power reactors, which reduced the production of cobalt-60
by 6 million curies a year, and that decrease in production created
a shortage for 2 years. That period of shortage is now ended, and I
think we are returning to the problem of glut, and that is a very
serious problem so far as we are concerned.
I mi^ht point out that 6 ounces of food products per da^ per
person in this country is close to 100 million pounds a day, which is
a lot of food to process, and right now we don't see any viable mar-
kets for that, so I think it is a little premature to be worrying
about a shortage of radioactive material.
Mr. Morrison. So the Canadians can hold us up, but at $1.35 a
curie behind us or will the price continue to be in that rsinge?
Mr. Ransohoff. I think $1.35 a curie is a fairly rare event. We
haven't sold much cobalt at $1.35 a curie, small quantities to spo-
radic users. I think you might get that price, and for cancer ther-
apy applications it is more expensive because you have a very high
maintenance requirement and much higher shipping costs, simply
because the number of curies you are shipping is much smaller,
but I think cobalt-60 in the range of $1 to $1.20 a curie is probably
here to stay for quite a while.
We are getting some noises about increases in neutron costs from
Canada, and the price could go somewhat higher, but I think there
are a lot of ways of producing cobalt-60. There is a huge capacity
for producing cobalt^60 as a byproduct of power reactor operations,
and there are a number of surprises coming down the road as far
as supplies of radio isotopes are concerned, so that I think that the
concern about the shortage, while it was real for the past year or
so, has generally been overstated, and I think that we will once
again be back into an era of gracious sufficiency, which is the situ-
ation that we found ourselves in for most of our corporate lives,
and it is one of the reasons that we have put more emphasis re-
cently on use than on production, simply because the market can
become very oversupplied.
Mr. Morrison, "niank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chair-
man.
Mr. Bedell. Thank you. I need to understand about cobalt-60. Is
that something that is produced &om nonrsidioactive material?
,y Google
147
BAr. Ransohofp. Right. Natural cobalt is cobalt-59.
Mr. Bkdell. Yes.
Mr. Ransohoff. We take natural cobalt, encapsulate it in stftin-
less steel. When it is so encapsulated, it becomes a target. Tliat
tar^t is placed in a nuclear jKJwerplant where it absorbs neutrons.
It is not a natural byproduct. It is a deliberate byproduct. After it
has been irradiated for 1 year or 2 or 3 or 4, depending on the reac-
tor, it then has a cobalt-60 content, usually in the range of 5 to 10
percent. That makes it active enough so that it can be economicial-
ly used.
The irradiated target is then shipped to an encapsulation facility,
in our case it comes to Dickerson, where the irradiated target is
placed inside a clean stainless steel capsule, and at that point it is
ready to use. There are very high standards of encapsulation.
TTiere have been veir, very few source failures, even though many
sources have been physically abused, and the sources are shipped
all over the world.
Mr. Bedell. One of the concerns that hfis been indicated is the
problem with the radioactive wastes, so in moving into this area
then, are we creating, first of all, radioactive material, and second,
are we creating a radioactive waste about which we are going to
have to concern ourselves with disposing?
Mr. Ransohoff. It is factual. I think that the level of concern,
the level of appropriate concern, is grossly overstated.
First of all, cobalt-60 only has a half life of about 5 years, so that
over a period of a lifetime, for example, of a person's lifetime, the
activity d^rades to one that is insignificant.
I thmk a lot of the emotional concern on radioactive wastes is
concern over isotopes with very long hedf lives, where they will be
around for thousands of years. Cobalt being a relatively inert
metal, being encapsulated in stainless steel, I think is fairly easy to
manage and store. You are dealing with very small physical quan-
tities of material.
The second fact with regard to cobalt-60
Mr. Bedell. What is the amount of material you are talking
about for a facility to irradiate pork, for example?
Mr. Ransohoff. Well, an irradiator that might have 2 or 3 mil-
lion curies, for example, at a specific activity of 100 curies per
gram would contain 25 kilc^rams of cobalt-60, 25 kilograms of
cobalt, and the useful life of a cobalt-60 source is about 15 or 20
years.
At the end of that period, you will recall when I started this, 1
said that only 5 to 10 percent of the cobalt-59 atoms eire converted
to cobalt-60. To the extent that waste is really a problem, you could
actually reradiate those targets, convert another 5 or 10 percent of
the atoms f^m cobalt^O to cobalt-60 and go through the process
all over again.
For the most part, the cost of waste management or disposal is
not sufficient to make it generally worth the trouble from a quality
assurance standpoint and a reencapsulation standpoint ana from
the standpoint of shipping spent sources. It hasn't been generally
w<»-th the trouble to reradiate those sources.
I think that with the new prices for waste disposal, that is likely
to change, so that all you really have to do to cause people like us
,y Google
148
to recycle cobalt another time or two or three times is just to raise
the price of disposal.
As a practical matter, we have been in business for 20 years, we
could store all of the spent cobalt-60 sources we have produced in a
very small space in the corner of our pool.
We haven t had to do that because most of those sources are still
in use, but the volumes of material are very small. The material is
inert, relatively inert. It is easily encapsulated and easily handled,
and I don't really think that that is a subject of major concern.
Mr. Bedell. You indicated, if I might proceed for another couple
of minutes, you indicated some concern over cesium — is that a
liquid or what is it?
Mr. Ransohoff. Cesium is an alkali earth, and it is probably the
most active, I think it is the most active element in the periodic
table.
It is difficult to put into an inert form. It can be done, but it is
expensive.
Cesium that is separated from weapons waste has been put in its
form of cesium chloride, which is a simple thing do to. It y/aa a con-
venient form for waste storage, for encapsulation for storage, but
cesium chloride is a very soluable salt, soluable to the extent of,
putting it in curies, 70,000 curies per liter, which is a lot of stuff,
and more significantly, cesium is monovalent. It decays into
barium — am I getting ahead of you here?
As a result, as cesium decays, you create a deficiency so you are
actually producing either cesium or barium metal. I have had a
sort of running brouhaha with the Department of Energy on this
subject for several years now, and there is a fairly serious disagree-
ment between us on the wisdom — this is an unfair word, but I can't
think of a better one — the wisdom of deploying cesium capsules.
When I have responded to public interest groups about radiation
processing or about cobalt-60, there is always some genuinely inter-
ested person who asks the question: I understand what you say
about the seifety of these sources and I understand what you say
about the integrity of the capsule, but what happens if a capsule
foils?
The truthful answer to that question is, not much, because cobalt
is so corrosion resistant, and if it is in a massive form, you are
dealii^ with something that is easy to manage.
You are going to have some contamination of the facility. You
are going to have a nuisance. You are going to have an inconven-
ience, but you are not going to have anything that could approach
a public problem.
You simply can't say that about cesium chloride, and although
the waste disposal capsules are rugged, they have a very heavy
wall, they are massive.
You simply can't say anything very comforting in answer to the
question, what happens if one of these sources fails? The true
answer to that question is, you have a very, very serious mess on
your hands.
Mr. Bedell. Is that what happened at the one facility that they
have talked about where there was some contamination of water
supply?
Mr. Ransohoff. That was cobftlt.
,y Google
149
Mr. Bedell. That -was cobalt?
Mr. Ransohoff. That was cobalt in pellet form.
What happened there — I don't know what the details of the acci-
dent were, but they physically damaged the source and broke it.
Tlie pellets came out of the source, and were on the bottom of a
pool.
The pool water was not well maintained, and they got a fair
amount of corrosion of cobalt over the years, surprisingly little as
far as I Eim concerned. The background of that was such that I
think they were very lucky.
Mr. Bedell. They dumped the water then or something?
Mr. Ransohoff. They had contaminated water, and they con-
tracted with a party to clean it up that apparently spread the
water around, so they had contaminated water seeping into the
concrete and things like that, and it was a grand mess.
It did not, at no point did that become a serious public problem,
but in the context — once that company eventually went out of busi-
ness, and then had to deal with the problem of how do you decon-
taminate a facility that has been contaminated.
From the standpoint of returning that facility, that property, to
a pristine condition, they had a pretty serious mess on their hands.
I^m the standpoint of public exposure, I would say the number
of curies of cobtdt-60 that were eibsorbed with the contamination
was only a few curies, so that while it was a mess and a nuisance,
and a costly one, it never became a matter of legitimate public con-
cern, and, m fact, I don't think it was a matter of public concern in
the area.
Mr. Bedell. Ms. Hecht, you indicated that electron beam tech-
nology is really upon us.
Ms. Hecht. Yes.
Mr. Bedell. I would have two or three questions.
First of all, with that technology, do you still have a problem of
contamination of the facility, and so on?
Ms. Hecht. No; you don't. You don't have a nuclear source with
it. You are using an electron accelerator which you turn off when
you are not using it to irradiate food. In other words, with the
cobalt source, when the machine isn't on, you are not irradiating
food. It sits in a pool to protect it, but the electron beam accelera-
tor is turned on and off like a light.
Mr. Bedell. Economically, do you know how costs compare?
Ms. Hecht. Well, looking at the figures from Lawrence Liver-
moor, and it is much cheaper certainly than any chemical fumiga-
tion. They were looking at the raisin crop and the almond crop in
particular. But it also is cheaper than using nuclear sources.
Mr. Bedell. Have you looked into this, Mr. Ransohoff?
Mr. Ransohoff. No; but I am interested in where we can get one
of these accelerators for $1 million and how reliable it is. We have
no etjiical or moral commitment to use radioisotopes instead of ac-
celerators, any time we think that accelerators make more sense.
Mr. Bedell. A radioisotope facility would be more than $1 mil-
lion, wouldn't it?
Mr. Ransohoff. It would depend. The cost of radioisotopes for an
irradiator to process the entire Hawaiian papaya crop would be on
die order of $50,000 to $75,000 for a well-designed system, so that
,y Google
150
the costs of radiation in most of these applications where you
have — most of the applications — you can divide the applications
into two groups, really.
Spices are a relatively low dose, but they use some significant
cobalt-60. The applications are very, very low dose. And the princi-
pal cost in any facility to process irradiated products is going to be
in handling equipment and things like that.
You are dealing with radiation costs that are in the tiny fraction
of 1 cent per pound, so that most of the food applications that have
been cleared or that are up for clearance are very low-dose applica-
tions. And the costa of radiation source is minor compared to the
other costs of a facility.
In the case of medical supplies where your exposures are on the
order of a megarad or more, the cost of radiation is a more s^niii-
cant factor. And there, Bectin-Dickinson has built an accelerator,
has put in an accelerator to process medical supplies. They had a
terrible time getting it started up, but it is my understandmg that
that facility is now oi>erational.
I think that if you are really interested in the comparative eco-
nomics of cobalt-60 and accelerators, it would be worth talking to
them.
Mr. Bedell. Who is that now?
Mr. Ransohopp. Bectin-Dickinson. They have got a commercial
accelerator installed up in Canaan, CT.
Ms. Hecht. May I make a comment?
Mr. Bedell. Yes.
I think our staff should check with them.
Ms. Hecht. The accelerator developed at the Livermoor Labora-
tory works on a slightly different principle, which is why it came
out of the beam defense program. In other words, it is a new type
of accelerator. It is not the same as the accelerators that have been
used for the past several years in food irradiation, and that ex-
plains, I think, why it is cheaper, easier to use, and smaller.
I have papers with me that I would be happy to submit, if you
like, to describe this. And I have pictures of it. They have one dem-
onstration.
Mr. Ransohoff. I would be glad to be enlightened.
Mr. Bedell. I think we would be interested in having that infor-
mation, if you could.
Do you have any further questions, Mr. Morrison?
You indicated you would like to appear before us in closed ses-
sion.
Mr. Ransohoff. Yes; I think there is a bit of a fallacy on the
source materials situation, and we have been contending with this
problem for a long time and have developed an approach to it that
is different, that we think solves the problem of surplus and short-
age, which we have experienced off and on for the past 20 years. It
is the subject of patent applications that are either pending or in
preparation. And I really don't want to be in a position of making
a public disclosure.
I think I can say that the concern about radiation processing
source shortage and the alleged need to distribute cesium sources, I
think, is not well founded, and I would be willing to share it with
,y Google
-151
you. But I really can't do eo under circumstances where it is a
public disclosure.
Mr. Bedell. The problem is that any time you talk to anybody in
Government, as the President would tell you, it is not necessarily a
private conversation. And I think some of us would be willing to
meet with you, but you would have to be aware of the fact that no
matter who you talk to, you can't be positive that that information
•wiO not somehow get out. And I don't think the members of the
committee would want to be responsible for taking any proprietary
information, in view of the fact that if it ever did get out, you
might feel that the committee was responsible.
I am only speaking for myself. Do I understand that you can say
this publicly; that you believe that there is no big shortage of mate-
rial problem, but that you do have some concern over cesium be-
cause of the fact that you think it is somewhat more deuigerous in
terms of contfunination than cobalt-60?
Mr. Ransohoff. Yes.
Mr. Bedell. Can you say those things publicly?
Mr. Ransohoff. 1 think 1 can say publicly and authoritatively
that there is no fundamental reason to be concerned about a long-
term shortage of radiation processing sources. No. 1; and No. 2,
that I think that the use of the Hanford capsules in their present
form is not good public policy.
Mr. Bedell. I think that takes care of our concerns. Thank you
very much for your testimony.
Mr. Ransohoff. Thank you.
Mr. Bedell. We appreciate your being here.
Mr. Morrison. Mr. Chairman, since this is the last panel, I just
want to take a moment to thank you and the staff for putting to-
gether this hearing. We, obviously, have heard both sides of the
issue, and it is a perplexing one. I don't envy the Food and Drug
Administration because the initial decision is theirs. I think this is
a process that is going to go ahead, and let's make sure that it is
done right.
[Whereupon, at 4:25 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned, subject to
the call of the Chair.]
[Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
,y Google
STATEHEKT B»:
UNITED STATES OEPARTHEHT OF AGRICULTURE
AGfllCULTUHAL RESEAUCH SERVICE (ARS)
ANINAL & PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE (APHIS)
FOOD SAFETV I INSPECTION SERVICE (FSIS)
J.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
COMMITTEE ON AGRICJLTURE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENT OPERAriOHS. RESEARCH.
AND FOREIGN AGRICULTURE
,y Google
mr. CiMlnun. Thinl; jou for the opportunity to testify on House bill 696.
provides for "Federil coordfnitlon for the continued developnent and
Operttfng Collision far Food Irrd
through other aeans.' Toddy I
Agriculture (USOA) on H.R. 696.
presanting the history of USDK res
for tht possible iaplenentation
will end alth a discussion of oi
tiMt Irndiite fresli pork. Fir-
ion through the estaDI ishnent of a Joint
diatlon in the Departntnt of Agriculture and
nt to present the position of tne Department of
Then I Hin broaden the discussion by
irch in food irradiation and USDA planning
OH-dose irradiation of fruits. >^ remarks
plans for Implementing inspection at plants
H.R. 696.
USDA supports enactnen
tn the M/s 1 Hill desi
provisions of section i
Incorporate food Irrad
Federal .Heat Inspection Act (FKl
and the Egg Products Inspection
Independent authority to prohibl
irradiation, on a neat, poultry,
been detemined to be safe under
Secretary Nould folio* the studi
MBlnistratlon that the food addlt
Secretary might consider
additive as applied to m
: of H.R, 696. provided sections 3, 4, and 6 dre dnended
;r1be. Section 1 of II,R. 696 anends tiie food additive
109 of the Federal Food. Drug, and Cosmetic Act ( FOCA) t
'adiatlon from a food' a
0, the Poult
t (EPIA),
t the use of i
: Secretary of Agriculture
food add U We, Including
n 409 of tne FDCA. In most cases, the
findings of the Food and Drug
s safe. In a few Instances, however, the
If the reviem found
,y Google
. 696 w
e FDl
le SecreHry of Agi
trrad<at<on on neat, poultrj',
in If the food
ctlon 409. Dur stal
ompltsh this ohjectiye; 1 will
A to change tti« definition of fmdtttton
Ilk. PPIA, and EPIA Should a>M be amended
iire'« eiUtlng outhorlCy to prohibit Che
or egg products If the Secretary deeos It
on process has been deCeniined to be safe
rted anen<)inent5 to section 3 of H.R. 696
the suggested amendments to
Section 4 of H.R. 696
need for ndtlonjl unlforajty In the
rraditton processing, labeling and marketing by prohibiting
r political subdivisions from Imposing requirements that are I
different from those apnlied By or under the FDCA and the Fair
abeling Act (FPLA). Neat and poultry products are eiempt from
of the FDCA to Che eitent they are regvlated under the FMIA an
luded r
i FPLA.
1 under the FMIA. PPIA and
ns. For example, under Se
„GoogIe
of this lecUon Is to Interfere with it
■•rketing of Imdlated products, 'ic wo
Inclusion as Inipproprlate and perhaps
Section 6 of H.R. 696 provides for the
Operating Cooalsslon for Food Irradli
Federal agencies and the general pub1
de«clopient, and deaonstntlon activitle
because the proposed activities i
agencies, and the estabHsMent i
authority to Federal unageinent i
liaplenentatton of scientific devi
In the p«It. coordination of resi
the cQUMercial implenentatton of
Interagency working group on Irr,
Policy Is considering tlie fonNt
the Coaalttee on Interagency RadUtlon «t:
(CIRRPC). which has broader represent!
proposed comtsslon. In light of tl
Joint Operating Comlss'on for Food
The legislation noulit enipawer the pr
data produced by Federal agencies oi
iJSDA'i E. tension Serv
md local regulation of 1
have serious objections t
bllshment within USOA Of a Joint
lOHposed of eight representatives of
coordinate and review all research,
USDA opposes enactment of section 6
being carried out by Federal
ind exchange of information on
io4«fy have been done by an
fice of Science and Technology
on food irradiation under
nd F^licy Coordination
I authority of CIRRPC, a
,y Google
try nai already i
on aould be to educate tne publtc atiout food
education on the safety of food Irradiation
al oiirketing of food. Once the capacity for
ts Is in place, iJSD*. through the Eilension
*ide irifoniatiOTi on Itie sutiject to consumers,
e Coalition for Food Irradiation to educate
lie on the suDJect. Me believe that the food
rmation developed by research programs and
Research ftcti<Uies
USD« has conducted
tlon for more than 30 years.
and 1 negarad for the
of high doses above 1 rnegai
USDA research programs in
Then I hiII turn to our pi,
IJSOA Research on Lqm [Kise
„GoogIe
■dturaCton of fre«h fruits and vegetables and for dtstnfejting foods of insects.
The proposal oould ilM ptrnlt the ui* or Irradlitlon to distnfest spices of
■Icrobes at doses not to eiceed 3 Megarads , or 3.000 kllorads. Ue eipect FDA to
(Slue a final rule on the proposal soon.
For Duny years USOA has recognlied the potential benefits of using low-dose
radiation with cobalt 60 or cesiun 137 as > quarantine treatnent for fruits and
vegetables. In 1964, «e Joined «itn ttie Atonic Energy Conlssion (AEC) to do
the research needed to obtain a uholesone food additive tolerance for papaya.
In 1973, M and tne AEC Submitted a petition supporting the FOA's position that
the use of Ion-dose irradiation it safe.
UI Ch the loss of ethylene dibronide as .a funlgint and the current lacli of
acceptable cnenlcal alternatives, it is becoming more apparent that radiation
treataent of certain conmodUles nay play an Increasingly Important role in
allouing tlieir continued novenent in national and International comerce.
Accordingly, USOA's Agricultural Research Service (ARS) lias eipanded Its
research program in anticipation of an FDA ruling. ARS is concentrating on
selected fruits and detemining the radiation dosage necessary to provide
quarantine security. Insect pests and connodities under Investigation are the
Caribbean fruU fly in mangoes, grapefruits, oranges, and tangerines from
Florida; the Heiican frutt fly in mangoes, grapefruits, oranges, and tangerines
in apples and aaUuts from Washington and California; and the cherry fruit fly
in cherries from Washington. We eipect to complete these projects by the fall
of 1387. Results uf the research can also be used to control pests on
conmcdities from other areas, such as the Caribbean fruit fly In nangoBS from
Haiti and Puerto ^ico, ar the Metitan Fruit fly in mangoes from Central Anerica.
5S-005 O - 86 - 6
,y Google
Mich of USOH't Imdlatton reteirch hti
thit irndUtlon hii definite «dv<nt«9e!
treatatnt or MM>at because {!) It I'
cantlnuout proctll, {Z) It «ntures conpl
funlgants. It leavet no retldue on
fruit by d»l»ylng rlptnlng, unlit*
t«nd to uC(1(r«te ripening, aM (S
envlroment becaus* a Mal1«r raliM* of pe:
prehj rKci t«d fruit crop If Irradiation ati
RaiMrch on radiation treatacnt for the Pll
flies found in Hamllan papaya ms completi
itud
idltl
TXat
;h papa/ai,
'er cheaical fuaigatl
: effict
infeitai
. {*)
ticidtt coul
on, (J) unlike amy
ilongj the shelf life of
heat treatMnt, ahlch
aDuld prodiKi a cleaner
I be applied to the
d fir quarantine treataent.
ranean. Oriental, and aelon fruit
vera! years ago. He will begin
IISOA Beiearch In Hadlin-Dose and HljU-Dese Food Irradiation
Bacterial contaalnatlon of aeat and neat products can be reduced at
Irradiation doies betaeen 100 and 600 Xllorads. Studies are under nay to
deternine optliaun eiposure reginet for. eatending the shelf life of aeat and
poultry, reducing akrablal spoilage, and reducing or ellnlnatlng food- pa Honing
bacteria. Research Is also continuing on the effect of Irradiation on
structure, teitur*. and eniynatie activity witnin food products as well as
chanjci in chenlcal co«pot1tlon at the molecular le«el. Use of Irradiation may
alloM reduction of Che amount of nitrite used for preserving seat.
Sterllliatlon of food alth high dotes of irradiation has b
Mny years by the Oepartnent of Krny and \1SDK. In 19i)0, t
USIM Its programs related to the irradiation of meats, Inc
froH coupleted mrii, fLindt to conplete certain food totico
In progress, and specialized equiirnent.
tl gated for
3,Googlc
cology studies ind suimarles of infonutlon relating to the food
lalogy, and processing were conpleted. This data and Che
lies of precooked Irradiated chicken «ere delivered
US DA research
19S4. FDA Iodic
iropoted u»S of
1 tha
it Hould revteii Che data for Its
in In food preservaClon. Future
3 the relative susceptibility of
radiation on food quality.
vegetables, USD* h
1 several connodit
;^lina1 and Plant Health
schedules based on ARS
■ottc pests. The Departinent
eatment has great potential for
es In International and national
ck of potentially adverse effects on
approved for use on fruits and
Sible to establish treatment
nspectfon Service (APHIS) wuld
? 100-ktlorad 1
,y Google
of dMICttU
cant1il*ritlon ts the constructton o
idlatlon t*cl1Uy nuch the nm » i
cops, the ficUtty ihould b« 1
idfstlon fielllttM. Ut ■!««
gallon rac111ty. For treitBent
d near picking ficllltlei. For
i product), tne ficflity could be In the Jntted St«tet or In the
exporting country. Under our current procedures, USDA aould tpprov* the
treatMnt facility. Further, an APHIS repreiencatlve Muld be on site to
E the treatment. Maintain security of treated products, and certify that
ited at the prescribed dosage.
to none ahead quickly If HW approves the use of lox-dose
dnd (egetables, »n approved treatxent schedule for pspayas
USDA could laplenent lonedlately. More mrk Is reiguired
apples and Minuts for codling ooths and of citrus for
i*s. In addition, before Irradiation is used on a
ndustry needs to be convinced that the process can
work. Htiile lone in Industry have already Invested in javetoplng Irradiation
treitnent, demonstrations are nted«d to tliow even larger groups that Irradiation
is feasible as a quarantine treat«nt.
to control trichinae in pork,
LOD-Oose Irradiation of Porli
Research by UJOA In cooperation nitn the Departnent of Energy has shoim that
radiation nukes trichina parasites In park noninfectious. FDA published i tint
rule on July 22, 198S, approvlnj the use of radiation in doses froa 30 to 100
„GoogIe
trichlnii. USDA Is continuing to
•teat to control other arganlsns a
«s toioplisni.
non-hejl- treats
i food-Mfcty standpoint, sucti
USDA Mirked closely wttn FDA a
f\i\\) support md concur in th
neans of conbating Che )ong-st
getting trichinosis Is low, hu
health concern. The problem h
years.
agency was dereloplnj
ough the r.i$k or
roscopic cysts 1n the stria
including hogs, r
triehlnosii by ea
the parasite Trichlnella spiral is that fom
nuscles of animals. Any oam-blooded mina!
t likely to occur In certain carnivorts,
le prevented by cooking neat properly to kll
The Irradiation of pork at doses of from 3
le so tnat It cannot reproduce in tlie human
Ing Hill be produced to Invade muscle tissue
Ready-to-eat
,y Google
rudf-to-iit pork producti sufriclently, our ragulttlont nquln ttMt thtM
products be treated by heating, freezing, or curing to kill trichinae. On the
ottMr hand, freth pork product} are not routinely treated for trichinae:
Instead, Me rely on public Infarmatlon ca>palgns to educate caniuatrs about the
laportance of cooking rav pork sufficiently to kill trichina*.
JSOA considers FDA's July 22 approval of the Irradiation of fresh pork as
another approach that FSIS, as a public health agency. Bay take in dealing Kith
the risk of hMun trichinosis. Shortly after FOA's action, USOA reciWed a
petition froa Radiation Technology of RackaMy, Hen Jersey, requesting FSIS
approve the use of irradiation for the treatnent of fresh pork. Oi the basis of
that petition, FSIS began:
(1) dBKOloping a final rule adding the Irradiation of fresh pork to the 11st of
— ' food additives found In the Federal seat Inspection regulations [although
the rule Mill be final when published. It will provide for t public coaaent
period after publication)!
(Z) developing Interia guidelines relating to plant operating procedures, the
safety and training of eaployees, sanitation, facilities, quality control
prograas, and labeling; and
(3) preparing a proposed rule Chat Mill outline our specific regulatory
authority and Che direction « propose to take In deneloplng long-term
procedures and policy relating to the regulation of Irradiation. I Mnt to
eaphaslM that the final rule Mhlch is developed as a result of this phase
of rule aaking aayaodify the interia guidelines.
„GoogIe
/^ Morkdble Irrddldtlon Inspection progrdjn should be
first of tne /ear. Tftus, industry Kill be dOle
technology rejsonably quickly and dt t*ie Sdme t
rule-nijUng proceedings. Me have already condu
programs for FSIS persomel , including the insp
be r€spon;IDle for the three plants in Men Jen
owned by Badidtion Technology. The training m
ijnder the guidelines, e»ery irradiation pi,
control progran to FSIS for approval before it n<
iDust describe fully hox each pli
of product and packaging variabi
process control prograifl if the >
Interact olth irradiation d1ffe>
under 30 kilorads or over 100 ki
correctly. E.il
shortly after tne
take advantage of the new
that xe dre going through
ut together by consulting
„GoogIe
(1) the dItUnce of the producti froa the 1
(2) Che pi-oducts' posUlon In n
(}) the Mount of tlae pri>diKts
In addition, the strength of the rid<
Tliereforei qujllty control progrwn hI
so that product* <lMys receive
In addition to FSIS requtreaents
unltitlsn, Irrtdlatlon ric11ltl<
other Federal agencies before a '
radioisotopes In comtercial irradiatoi
Regulatory CoHiltslon (NRC) or In ftgi
Office*. The reguUtloni i*lch defli
requirements for the protection of m
disposal of byproduct luterlalt li ci
Regulations or In the (graement Stati
Malnlstratlon concerning general <rai
Agency concerning tlve di5pos4l of •a:
■111 Horl: closely aitti tliese other Fi
Labelinq of Irradiated for
Products
fawther Important co«ponen
of the 1
and retail labeling of Irr
diated po
labeling, Irradiated produc
ts In co-
clearly labeled as irradia
ed. This
tlon to the tourc*
e eipOMd to the I
0 account for this (trlitlon
Ding facilities, equipiwnt, and
comply with the requlreaents of certain
f Inspection Is Issued. Tic use of
Is governed by either the U.S. Nuclear
t Stat
, by t
rol
; lice
irs and the public and the handling and
lined In Title 10 Of the Cade of Federal
NRC approved Itplenentatlon of this cade.
the Occupational Safety and Health
r safety and the Enviromental Protection
i Other tnan byproduct materials. USDA
rliD guidelines will focus on Mho
products. With regard to oholes
„GoogIe
of dis
ributlon
to prevent t-ie
1«b«li
g. xe **
1 require thjt
10 ths
effect.
Processed med
"secon
on- foods . rwy
tngred
ents. Therefore. * .r
froB 1
radl.ted
food to bear d
irradl
ted. He
.re .«re twt
tMt »
old be so
Insignificant
slderlng the need for processed products oi
I statenent that the Ingredients} have be
0 not rsquire labeling.
id us
■lit require nore precise control of dosage Chin the
products, [rradlation for the sterlllijtlon of nedlc
pa1>«erlzatlan requires only that nlnlnm eiposure ci
contrast, fOod processing Mill require continuous noi
C<rcful1y defined Units of ninlniin and niiilniin eipos
tiaes. A naximun eifiosure dosage for food is needed
coBplUnce as Hell ds to avoid danage that has been obseri
conBodi ties , such as grapefruit. Anlnlnuni eiposure
that regulatory requirements, such as those for quiri
idlation of food
iation of nonfood
ilnUined at a11
regulatory
r trichinae control ,
JopCed as rapldty In CHe UnUed Stat
at 20-50
B I960's. b
,y Google
It lui not been Inpl enented by the U.S. grtXn Industry. The 1*<
iBpleaentatlon of the technology for iiheat Indlcdtet t)ut other
be slow la use Irradtitlon, eipecljlly when cheaper jltemaclrei
available.
In addition to developing iwtnadalogy far use by agricultural Indwltrfes. USH't
proper role In the d*v*1opwnt of i new technology Includes ensuring that a11
safeguards halt been Identified for consuaer protection and product quality.
USOA hI1I continue Its rese«rch efforts and will continue to develop regulatory
prograas and provide technical infomation on irradiation to Industry and
■.i USDA's tesClnony, N
happy CO answer any questions you
. Chalnaan. Ny colle
■ other Haabers ouy h
„GoogIe
Proposed Amsndnsnta to tiha Fedaral Maa-t
Inspection AcC, tJie Poultry Products
luspecUon Act, and tlie Egg Products
Inspection Act
1. Tha Federal Neat Inspection Act is anendad -
(b) in section 1<m)(2)(C) (2^ U.S.C. I601<m)(2)<c)) by inserting
■or has been treated by any food Irradiation process" after "food
additive- ;
<c> in the proviso of section l(m>(2)(D} (21 U.S.C.
1601(b)(3)(d)] by inserting "food irr*diation process, * efter
* food additive ,' ;
(A) in section 1(d)(7) (21 U.S.C. «601(n)(7)) by inserting
Immediately before Uie semicolon ":PEOvlded, That an article vhlch
is not othervise deemed adulterated under this clause shall
nevertheless be deemed adulterated If the use of a food
irradiation process In or on such article, is prohibited by
regulations of Che Secretary"
isertlng " ■ food
2. The poultry Products Inspection Act is aaended -
additj
1 4(g)(2)(C) (21 U.S.C. ) 4S3(g)(2)(C)) by inserting
I been treated by any food irradiation process" after "food
(c) in the proviso of section 4(g](2)D) (21 U.S.C.
f453(g)(2)(D] ) by inserting "foc'd irradiation process," after
"food additive,";
(d) in section 4(g)(7) (21 U.S.C. S4&3(g}(7)) by inserting
imiediately before the semicolon ".'Provided, That an article which
is not othervise deemed adulterated under this clause shall
nevertheless be deemed adulterated if the use of a food
irradiation process, in or on such article, is prohibited by
regulations of the Secretary";
(e) in »ection 4(y) (21 U.S.C. ! 4S3(y)) by inserting "'food
irradiation process'." after "'food additive',".
3. The Egg Product* Inspection Act i* amended - f^""" ,■
„GoogIe
(b) in ••ctlOB «<a)(2>(e) (21 U.i.c. (1033(a)(2)(C)) bf
■or baa twan traatad by any food irradiation proeaae' after
additlva-i
(e) in tba prorlao of aaction 4(a)(2)(D) (21 O.S.C.
fl033(a)(2)(O)) br insarting 'or food irradiation preeaaa,- after
■food additlv*,-,-
(d) in aaetion 4(>)(7} (21 U.S.C. 1033(a)(7)) by Inawting
j] — "'~'-j bafera tha ■■■leolon *:pTOvidad. mat an arCiela tAi^i
la not otbarwlaa daaaad adultaxatad under this cleuaa aball
navaxthalaaa ba daaaad adultaratad if tba uaa of a food
icz-adlatlen procaaa, in or on aueb articla, is prohlbitad bf
rogulationa of tba saeratary" ;
r.r^'
„GoogIe
rum E. luim. n.d., pk.b.
cowissioher
FOOO AK) DAUG AOniNISTitAriON
PUBLCC HEALTH SEHVECE
OEPMTNEirr OF lEALDt AN) HUWH SERVICES
BEFORE nt
SUKOWtTTEE Ctt DCPMITNEIIT OREUTIOMS,
RESEWCN, AW FOREIGN AGRICULTURE
COMIITnE ON KRICUIIURE
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
NovEMEH la. ms
FOR RELEASE MIL* ijl
„GoogIe
fr. OulrMn:
I mIcom Utlt oppertiMltr to dlicuss with tht SiAca*lttM Om
Ktt*lttM of tt» Food «M Drug A^lnUtrttfOH (FM) In tha am of
food IrrMUttOA.
MPGHIUW
Uttit tha UM of IrradUtlon for preiarvlng food ■» cxplorad *s ctrly
•1 1936. food irradlatloa ratcirtii In tha Unttad Statat ttartad In
aartiast tn tha lata 19(0'i. It hm only a ftw yatn latar. In tha
•arty 19H*s, that tha U.$. Comnwant bacva Intamtad la this aaa
procaiiing aathod. M that tiaa tha U.S. tng conductad a faaslblllty
itudy of Irradtitad food «nd, baiad on organolaptlc and biological
taiti. concludad that food irradiation could provlda t rftolatoM,
good-taiting, acofnalcal, and ihair-itabU product for field ratlom;
raduca dapandanca on rafrlyaratlon; and ffraatly raduca food handling
cott* for tha ■illtary,
Thcra MI alto Mbitantial civilian intarast in thli nati tachnologf'
*a part of Pratldant ElMnhoMar'a *Ua« for Pcica* prograa. tha Atoalc
Enargy CoMlIIIon (WC) had M aarly intarait In food Irradiation,
aipaclally at l«t-doi«t for Intact control and ihalf-llf< extantlon of
fruttt and vagatablai. ai Mil at for control of ■IcroorgMiMS In
food.
FM's InvolvtMont In Irradiated foodt ttartad In tha airly 1950't
rfian. In clota cooparitlon Mlth tha >llltary, tha U.S. OtpartMW of
Agrlcultura and Intaraitcd partlat in tha private wctor, tha Agency
luggeitad Hholaiaacneti letting for thaia products. In 1958, Congrctt
patted the Food Addltlvei taandpant to the Federal Food. Drug, and
,y Google
CosaetU Act. This wiendnent required that use of » source of
radiatton to treat food be shonn safe tna that authorUinq reaulat'Ion
be issued before irradiated foods could move in interstate
EFFECTS OF FOOD IRRAOIftTtOM
Before discussing the regulatory action of FOA Involving Irradiated
food, first let ne briefly reviea the technical effects of food
irradiation. (A table listing the technical effects of radiation on
food is attached to my statement as Appendii A.} To a significant
degree the technical effect of radiation on foods is dependent on thr
principal factors:
-- First, the effect of radiation is cunuUttve, Ml 1$ dtrectl>
proportional to the total dose of radiation absorbed by
- Second, the effects of radiation on naterials are d
the complexity of the material Irradiated and the environmental
conditions present during irradiation, such as the temperature,
moisture content or oxygen content.
- Third, the effects of
radiation
ced by 1
■ eiaaple, living material is affecte
mlmate Material; muUlcelt organisms
igle cell organisms; growing organism
Is a function of a type of
i energy level .
more profoundly than
are affected more readily tt
ire affected more readily
,y Google
ttiw donMnt orgtnliai. thuf, IrradlMiofl em affect tprmitln; of
root crops M Im doiif (5-lS kradt). Slatlvly, )w can delay tiM
ripening of frulU Md vegetAlet bcciuM they re itDI 'alive* and
■aturlng.
Iniects a-e affected at Aout lS-100 kradt depending on their ttage
of dmclopMnt (tgg, larvae, adult), ht doiei *o*< im kradt.
■icroorgwtMK a-e stgniffcantly effected.
Finally, the dose required to produce a coawrcially Sterile product
(I.e.. the dose required to produce a one trillion-fold reduction in
pathogenic ■icroorgwiiMs) is <6out Z-* Nrad, depending on the food.
It Is laportant to note that even at these sterllliing doses, enijMes
md viruses art relatively unaffected.
SAFETY ISSUES
The fundaMnta! health concern for safety of foods treated with
ionliing radiation is tuofold:
— First, there Is concern for the possible leng-tera
toKlcologicaT effects of the redlolytlc products forend In
foods as • consequence of this Irradiation process. The degree
of concern is proportional to the Asorbed dose and the
significance of the food in one's diet.
— Second, there is concern Aout the effects of irradiation on
the Bicroblal flora of the food, and on the nutritional quality
of the treated food.
There Is also the basic premise that radiation aust not aike food
radioactive. He now know that this does not happen if radiation
sources trt restricted to those of certain specified energies.
,y Google
W hive knoHi) since the 1950's that * mJot problea with Mfety
e*«1u«tton of 1rr«l1«t«l foodi li« been the difficulty tn estebltshing
the tdenttty, Mount, tnd tMfClty of the ndfolyttc product! forwd In
food by Irrfdlatlon. In the beginning, atteapts were aade to asicii
these products for safety by using traditional anlnal feeding studies.
Tinrwai thought to be the most prayotic approach for cstibllshlng the
safety of irradiated foods In the absence of aore sensitive analytical
■ethods. Because of these concerns. In the fall of 1979, we
established the Bureau of Foods Irradiated Food CoHlttec. consisting
of six Agency scientists. The Coaeltte* was Charged to review the
Agency's practice for evaluating the safety of Irradiated foods and to
rccoMend criteria for safety evaluation according to the current
state-of-the-art knowledge In toxicology, nutrition, and radiation
chealstry. The basic objective of this study was to develop criteria
for assessing Irradiated foods that uould aore rationally establish
safety then traditional aniMi tests and yet assure safety to the saae
degree that is expected for other foods in the Awrican food supply.
The CoMittee concluded that:
— existing data established the safety of foods irradiated below
1 kGy (1D0 krad) and of minor Ingredients, such as spices.
Irradiated at higher levels;
— that the type and aMMjnt of radiolytic products fonaed In foods
Irradiated below I ki^y were such that the Irradiated food was
as safe as the nonirredtated food; and
,y Google
-- that there aould be no stgnlflcant difference in nutrftianal
value of fwMl tmd*aCed under these conditioni.
[ Hill be pleased to submit a copy of the CooiltCee's nport for the
Thus Increased understanding of the eheniitry associated with food
irradiation allMed us to develop and apply appropriate eHteria to
evaluate the safety of foods irradiated under different conditions. In
other Hords, with knonledge of the chenical changes occurring In
Irradiated foods, we can specify safe conditions of use by establishing
the naximn doses of radiation pemftted to be applied to the food.
Thus, at the radiation doses FDA has allowed or proposed, irradiated
food is virtually Indistinguishable froe the equivalent nonirradiated
food, and the types and anounts of radiolytic products fomed are such
as to sake the foods indistinguishable with respect to safety,
nicrobial population and nutritional quality.
REGULHTOBT STATUS
Over the years, beginning in T963, FDA published regulations allowing
the use of radiation for a niafeer of foods. ^ historical list of
approvals and related regulatory actions, on food irradiation is
attached as A4>l>*ndii B. As you >tll notice, we Imv* peraitted the use
of irradiation for the control of insect infestation of wheat and
wheatprodiKts since 19fi3 and the use of irradiation of potatoes for
sprout inhibition since 1964,
„GoogIe
- 6 -
On Karch 27. 1981, the Agtncy publtshtd an Uvtnce Notice of PropoKd
RulMMktng (AHPR) fn the Federtl Bolster setting forth ttw crUerli
for ufety evaluation recooiended by the [rndlatcd Foodt CoqnUtee.
Thti Ml a key first step In thi aAilntstratlve process to establish
new operating criteria for evaluating safety data for irradiated
foods.
After a full analysis of all co—ents to this MPR and follOHing
discussions M4th a wide variety of Industry, university and
IntenwtiofMl scientists, FDA. on February 14, 1984, proposed a rule In
the FedertI Register to perait the use of irradiation for (I) sprout
inhibition and shelf-life extension of frtth fruits and vegetables, Md
for Insect dislnfestatlon of food at doies not to exceed I kGy
(100 l[r<d}; and (Z) for stcrilliation of iplcei at dom not to Bicced
M kfir (1 Hegarad).
Except for spice sterilliitlon. this prepoul did not deal with the
use of radiation for the control of Mlcreorgantsa. such as becterta,
Mids arid yeast In foods, and H did not deal nith parasite control in
■Hts, luch as trichina.
The proposal provided for a eo-day coMtnt period idilch FDA extended
for «n additional 30 days In retponse to leverat requests. Over S.OOO
coMcnti, Many of ahich raised sobttantlal istUM, Mere racelved.
,y Google
[n 198« tM Agency received a cetTtron to mtnH tM food *ddU)««
reguUtions to perntt qmrnt raaittion treataent of por« U control
T-ien^nellj sfl'ralU. * year liter on July 22, 1985, we puBlished in
tfie Fede'jl Register » ftml rule pemittinq this use. During the M-
dty otijectfons oerfoa, w received severdl requests for < M»-ing «d a
suy of th's requldlion. He are cun-etitly evaliMting the requests.
In addition to the approval for pork irradiation, ne have expanded
Che list of the spices and vegetable seasoflings and have aiifiroved the
oie o' irradiation to control insects Bid microbi*' cwitaBination of
dry tniymt preparations.
PUBLIC WWEriESS
Althouqh m^ny uses of irradiation have been deannstrated by science to
be safe, the average consuwr continues to confuse fodd irradiation
Kith the probleas and potential hazards associated vith the use of
Irradiation for weaponry or for poaer generation. In fact, soae nave
suggested that the public's atsconceptlon is so strong that a different
term (sucb as 'pica aave energy") should be used to describe the Ioh
level energy radiation applicable to foods. Clearly greater public
education is needed to infona consuMrs cf all relevant facts about
Irradiation. Many people do not know, for eia>«le, that irradiation
has been used for a niaAer of years in the sterdliation of food
prepared in hospitals to feed patients vlth iaMine deficiency and for
astronauts in the MSA progra* aiUi no Indication of »y haniful
effect. Many also do not ividerstand that the irradiation process does
not produce a radioactive product and, aore iaportantty, that even in
the use of Isotopic sources of loniiing radiation, there is no
generation of nuclear nastes.
,y Google
We «■« pleMCd that Industry hM (nltialcd a public educitlon eTfart
to dMOnstritc to the coniURcr thM tni$ i% a life ind potentitlly
valuable proceji. One has to be careful, *«Kever, that t<w process and
Its potential are not oversold. Food irradiation is a very useful
technology Put only me of several that are iaportant if ae are to
naintiin and, indeed, liaprove our food supply. He have been fortunate
In the United States that *e have not only been blessed iiith an
abundance of food but nith a technological base that has allooed us to
continue to expand our food supply as our population has required.
AIUU.TS1S OF H.H. 696
In >our letter of Invitation you requested that m coiMent on H.ll. 696,
the 'Federal Food Irradiation OevelopMent and Control Act of 198S.*
This legislation contains tM principal sections relevant to this
Agency. First, H.R. 696 rCMOiCs a source of radiation FroM the
definition of a food additive in section ZOl(s) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and CosMtiC Act (the Act) but continues its regulation under the
food additive section (section 409) of the Act by adding it back into
this section as a -food Irradiation process.* Second, the bill
•stMillshes a Joint Operating Coiailssion for Food Irradiation aithin
the Oepartaent of Agriculture, and Includes the Departaient of Health
and Huian Services (HHS) Hithin the MNbershIp of this neo Coaatlssion.
Definitional and Hegulatorj Oianqes
The Food Additives AnendMnt of 1958 specifically included a source of
radiation In the definition of a food additive. The food additive
section of the Act requires preaarket approval before a source of
,y Google
- 9 -
radfit'on ■«)> be used to process food, t.c., the Murce of r«d1at!on
must be detennined to be S4fe by ttw FDA before It can be u&wl on ■
food to be introduced into the narketplKe.
While we are uicertafn as to the objective in H.R. 696 of
rectassifyiiQ a source of radiation froii a food additive CO a 'food
irradiation process,* we have no objection to the change because the
Act as amended would appear to pernlt us to regulate a soupce of
radiation in virtually the s«e aay under the food additive prMirkct
approval section of the Act.
Joint Operating Conwission for Food Irradiation
H.R. 696 creates the Joint Operating Coainisslon for Food Irradiation
Mithtn the Departaent of Agriculture Hith HHS pMnbership. Ue viea the
creation of such a Connission to coordinate IntergovernMental
irradiation activities to be unnecessary. Currently, FDA, the
Department of Agriculture, the Department of COMKrce's National Bureau
of Standards, the Nuclear Regulatory Connission and other Federal
agencies cooperate to resolve mutual concerns and coordinate activities
in this area; this procedure has worked well and ae see no need for
a statutorily created body.
Furthemore, inclusion of HHS on the Joint Operating Connission could
produce potential conflicts because under section 6(c)(7) of H.R. 696,
the Connission would petition FDA under section «09 of the Act to
approve expanded uses for the comnerclal application of food
irradiation. FDA, however, regulates food additives mder a delegation
of authority frtm the Secretary of HHS. Consequently, inclusion of HHS
„GoogIe
on the CoMiUslon vould put the DepirtMcnt tn the anonalout position
of petitioning ftielf to app<'ove new Met of food irredtetion.
Swyy of Position on H.H. 696
He htve no objection to the reel «tificit Ion of a Murce of rMtetfon
fro* thit of 1 food *dd1t1ve to thet of * 'food Irrtdietion process.*
HOMver, M believe th«t it is crucial that the legislative history to
•ccoMpanjr this legislation elaborate on rmrkt already aede lAlch
Indicate that the definitional *id requlitory changes In h.R. 696 In no
My «-e Mant to affect the FM's ibillty to continue to regulate
iMider section 409 of the Act the safety of foods treated vith
radiation. In Introductory 4- w«-lis printed In tl>e Congressional Becord
for January Z4, 198S, Congressaw Ngrrlson, the bill's sponsor, said
that, despite the change in definition so that food Irradiation hIII be
considered a *praccts,* FM will still retain Itt ytnerel autiwrlty to
regelate food Irradlitlon under the smo preaarliet approval process as
■MM exists.
He thinic that the Joint Operating CoMlsslon for Food Irradiation Is
redmdant, causes conflict of Interest probleas for this Agency, and
soae of Its functions could better, Mrc effectively, «id Mre
appropriately be perfoneed by ttie private sector. He urge you to
reconsider the creation Of this CoHiission In the legtsletlon.
Finally, m beve suae technical concerns with the Manner In rfilcb
H.R. 696 aendi the food aMitivet section of the Act end muld be
pleased to wrK with relevant Congressional stiff to resolve these
difficulties. In addition, ae have questions *out the Heanlng and
,y Google
- n -
intent of section 4 of the bttl, mhlcn, mong other thtnqs, moulil
restrict the States fro" iiiposing ddditionel or different requlre«enti
from those established by FOA relating to the irradiation processing of
food, or to the labeling or norJieting of irradiated foods. Our
questions here focus on the meaning of the Mrd "market tng,* which is
not defined In either the bill or the Federal Food, Drug, and Cotaetlc
Act.
COWCIUSION
FDA's ro)e In food Irradiation over the jeers his been to evaluate Us
safety and effectiveness for Us Intended uses. After soaw (0 years of
Investigation m have concluded ttiet, it the levels lAlch we hive
established in our proposals, the process Is safe and effective. It is
now, we believe, the turn of industry «id the private sector to beqln
to utilize this technology and to proceed frm Mhit has been, up to
now, a funda*enta11y saall scale coMwrclal activity, to Us use as an
Important component of our food processing chain. Ue also Mlicve that
the Industry kIII need to continue their public education effort to
dwonstratc to consjaers that federally approved food irradiation Is a
safe wd potentially valuable process. FDA vlll continue to fulfill
Its responsibility by evaluating the safety of the process,
particularly if InfonMtlon Is developed to Justify use at levels
higher than those Nhich have been vproved or proposed thus far.
This concludes nqr stitaMent, W. Chalnaan. If jou or >aur colleagues
have any questions, m oould be glad to respond to theai.
,y Google
Tfcwitc«L tmcn m food
A. Stirlllzatlon* 2.000 ttt 6.000 krtdi (2 to 6 Nrtdi)
I. TMtiir* iMIflcMiwi 700 to l.tvm krtdi _
C. Wcroblil Control 100 to 1,000 kr«ds
(bactorla, fin«i)
0. tntet Control Utt than 100 kr«M
E. MMorotlon Inhibition Ltft thM im krodi
F. Pvottto Control Ltti than 100 krodt
WTE: ■ trradlMinn M practical dott* will not af'act «lr<itas or
,y Google
[RRAOUTED FOOOS
tlon for contro) of tnicct infestitlon
Id r«d1it1on for tprout Inhtbltton of nfiUe
Oec«*iber 1964: FDA approved X-ridlition for Ch« ridldtton preMrvAtion of
July 1966: FDA approved elettron btm radUtion for the control of tnsect
Infettatlon of wheat an<l nheat products.
July 196S: FOA approved Idbeltnq regulrenents for food trceted by
radiation.
October 196B: FOA rescinds the b«con regu1«ttont.
September 10, 1979: Director, Bure
Food Cnntttee to provide a total r
applicable to irradiated foods.
AutuKi, 19B1: FOA offered the opportunity for use of lrr«df«tlon for Insect
dis Infestation during the Celtfornia Hedfly situation based on certain
conditions. Hoaever, no fim furnished evidence of ncetlng these conditions.
Feburary 14, 1984-. Proposed rule published i
proposes a regulation for sprout Inhibition « .
fruits and vegetables, for inject dts Infestation of food, and for
sterilization of spices.
June 19, 1984: FOA onended Iht food additive regulation to provide for the
safe use of a source of aania radiiclon to control Insect Inrestatlon in
garlic powder, onion poiider, and dried spices.
April 18, 198S. FDA expanded tne specific list of dried spices and
vegetable seasoning to Include additional hertis, spices, and
vegetable seasonings, and blends of these seasonings.
June 10, 1985. FDA amended the food additive regulation to provide
for the safe use of a source of ganna radiation to control insect
and microbial infestation In certain dried eni>me preparations.
„GoogIe
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY INSTITUTE
TMLE Of OOMTmTS
Suaaary, Ceneliislona uid IMco^iwndatiofia L
Introdaetion i
tlltrahaiardoiis Prapaniaa of Pood irradiation t
Inadaquaca Raqulatlon - fl
Horkar Safaty 10
,y Google
Hi* EnviceuiBwital roliey Institut* (EPIl itronqly oppoaai
of food Icradiation tachnologiai . Thar* axa aavaral eoopallln?
sever. I types
Crsa acuta
wQTkara . Food Ircadiation facilltiaa, a* anviaionad by Ch* it*
ptoponanca. vill utiliza vary lacga quancicias of intansaLy radioactive
1 in vary small <3uantici«i, can cause death
radiation »yndroiiia. One food ircadiation iaeiliev
liation (acilitiai pose aaciaua contamination naka
lupplies due Co the potential for leaking or ruptured
:ainln? radioactLva louicaa in coclmq pools. Moreover,
ovaming public axpoaures Eras irradiation CacillEias
than tor coimiaccial nuclear power ptanta. Per example,
ear an Irradiation facility are allowed to recieve
Lation exposure yearly (500 millirwnal , than troB
rs 125 mlliremsl .
capsules com
tha faguli
Ragulatory Conmisaion have allouad
ba loeatad m populated areas uhicti
consequences . for axample . a (ood i
„GoogIe
at lavals in •xcbib of EPA ■candards. K variacy of accidanCs hava
occQEwl vlth radloactlva ■onrea* In cha eeoaarclal aactor. SoMtlaaa
cadtau«(*« aourcaa ara mlMply loaC. At ona facility, Radiation
T*cluialogy, In *•> Jaraay. csapaay aaployaaa wara/caa^hc by tha
i; for diipoaal a
B Taeftnology Inc.
of radiation, [n L977. s noElcac at m
(radiation abaorbad doaa) whicli la cioaa Co tha doaa w
ba lattial to iO pareant of iha paopla t
rha uictdant »■■ diractly eauaad 07 a uauaaaBBiic .ui^i^a e« •Liuw
cba aouEoa Co ba ciiaad vith inoparativa intarlocK and aafatv davLeai.
u) violation of licanaa caqulravanta • That tha MBC allowad this
plant CO eoncinua opaiasion -ivan auch a aarioua braach of aafacy
if an axaapla of tiia fadaral govanuiant' waak cagulation of such
a danqacoua induatry.
Icanaad faciXxty.
:ally a
(scLlicy,
found CO b
aaaa radiscaalua
loua. HanfOEd uocK
of dyinq CroB
,y Google
■•T iJtcmt»iSi «roett«c- From ett* ^grijoiii— nm ^m ■fr.r-t.»», ett«
iel»ar ii«Hinn« mduejn uttLOt La -^aiTimML* i— ILin »
, fcaod :-^L*''*t±Qn La apciiaag 3iicl*«r 5Qocdo^T^*
„GoogIe
rioally, H-R.fi)C li a bill tbat abrogatai th* rl^hti of itatai
to prscact tha haalth and aalaty ol ica eltliana. tha propoaad la^ta-
lACioD farblda ataca and local qOTaciuwnta do* ragulatin^ food
LEcadlaeton ladapaadancly aad forbida Chan tram raquiElnq
raqulcad undor
Eadaral la«.
H.K. ifS qett aqatnal i aajor Crand in fadacal l.*i)i*l>Ei.an an
eourt daeiaiona which noe only raalfiia tha right oC atataa to
aieartLia thaic laoa on tHa nuelaar uiduitcy. but alio uidani thai
poHara. Than ia a aiApla caaaoa for tnia. Tha fadaral i;avamnant
naa b*an ahown io an axtanalva racord of Conqraaiional ovaraii^ht
tiaarlnqa. laqal proeaadlnqa and axcuetva tnvaatigaEiona to hava
failad to axcacaiia ita itawardahi; raaponaiblllty o[ pcataeting
Miarleaa etciiana troa nuelaar activltiaa.
UCONHENDATIOKS
In addition to not allowiaq a.R. S9« to bacona Lav, cha Cangra
should taka tha follOHlnq atapa:
anvlroniaantal Uopact atataaanta for a
3 raquir* labalin^ . if t
9 bold-up funda foe ehs conatnietion of food
IrradlatLoD taeilltiaa in cha DOE budqae.
„GoogIe
INTHOOUCTIOK
He. OiaiEiun and lUabari of ch« Subco^ittM . I a Bobait
Uvaiu. □ineeoE of Eb* nuelaar Vaaponi tai tauar Projaec of tka
Envlceaiwfical Policy Instituta (EPIl ■ EVI It < pi^llc IntarMt.
non-pcofit OEqaniiati.oD wigigwl ra^aarch. public adscation, and
public admeaey >• tnay ralata to anvlroiuiantal laioa*. tb*
0 Aartculcuia:
t u pl.aa**d and giaacful Cac tha a
viaus on H.R. SiS , Laqialation.intESduead by Mp. Sidnay Moi
dition. Tha Enviconaancal Policy loaticuca itionjly oppeaa*
ULTIUOAZMICIOUS
I inplieaciona of food Lrradia
1 caquir* Cha ragulai tianiporc of large
f cadioactiva aubitanca co and frsai Ena
■ quantity of cadiocaaluB would Eaquira t
„GoogIe
and replacBOonc of t certain fraction of the radioaceivo »oui
ui OEd«r to maintain a unifora on«E5y fiald due to radioaotiv
d«cay.> Thu». ona food irradiation Caeility cl thii am wou
ln«-l
I.V..I
radioact
iwo uaatai
-- or 10 5 tun
es the total
radioa,
-fTV,
cont.
mt ol
f all qen
erators of
l™-le.«l ..di
oactive wast
ea in tt
le
I for
' f"
daath Cironi acuta radiation syndroma in quantities of a fan cur
ace axpactad to be locatad in densely populated areas, near fc
ijrowinq u;aas and ueportanc witarahads. Trucks haulinc siniilai
Laiga anounta of thii deadly sutiitanca ara expected to pass tti
The effects of chronic exposure to low-levels of lonizinq
radiation to people living near or worfcing in radiation indujt
are now heinq shown in studies to be at least ten times greats
current protection standards aaauna. Therefore, food irradiati
facilities pose not only ultradaiardous rislca Crom aevere acci
but also aiqniCieant risks of latent disease and genetic ham
An inpoetant concern la the potential [or surface oc gcou
contamination due to leaky or ruptured jackets which contain c
tadiosctiue source. Food icradiaeion facilities «ith larne sou
to cool the source in a pool. If the jacket of a source corrod
CesiuB -137 has a Half-Life of 3D years.
58-005 O - B6 - 7
,y Google
•ill t
Jtured by aut)id« mvaatt .
:o tha pool and •vantually
p4rticul>rly larloua concar
iato Ui* outaida watar auf^ly. Thia
foE EadlocaaLuff, vhich haa baan put Ijito a salt fara by 1
Onlllia ladioeobalc ubieh la In a Batallis tern, radioceai
loucea* ara lijipl;
in 1979. Thii
ralativa to comiaccial lua* of radiation
iiariaty of aceidanta hava alraady oeeurad
laaafch cadioaeciva louccaa. Soaatxaai radioanive
loat. Radioactiva lourcaa nava loaabow laakad
inq pianti and tha Mapitala or raaaariA facilitia*
LCiiad pcocaaaia; leak oeeurad at Aaarican Atoaica
. Hhaca an eueragad Sovairior avaatuallu had to
L bcaakdown in radiation oecucad both at tha
Csapany OfficLall lat on tha acata raoulatorv
lai Ra^latory Coi^iaaion (HRCl which liopiy
L( wa* appacanc that thia Caellity poiad
(raquantly Laalcad t
leeatad in a danaaly populatad a
„GoogIe
l^akiog 284,000 curia* of trLtim ?» i
■ about kaarican
' into cb* ctty aawKc ayataa,
■urad 2.S tlnaa abova panii
I In plant! and paopla 11'
rsdloactiv* than
s ceapany lurrandard lt> li<
Lqulda diiactly
id i at ion lavi
todi and cat
ippliaa dua
radiation (i
.e'a dmplnq radloactlva
(ood In Tucaon'a food
iitbla lavala, hlqh
naap tha facility,
s drinking watar
I and abandonad tha
food irradiation arqua th
out that their radioactiv
liar, food irradiation
ha Esal potanelal for contuinating local vatar
aaklng rod* in cooling pools. Itddicionally ,
ai nuat ba faahionad into fomi for us* in
itiaa. On* conpany which handlaa cobalt-€0
aoCarraiaad by tha diacovary of Cobalt-SO
rack! baaida Eha Hautron Product* plant
n. Maryland. Evantually, cha companv wai made
practical by the itate. but only aftar eiciieni livmii
organitad after, laarnlnq nora about this facilitv's
iry. At another facility , Radiation Tachnology tnc.
legally placing cadioactiva aatarials in a dumpatar
.1 non-EadiOBCCiva garbaq*.
„GoogIe
Hr. IWbarc Uaawidsi, occupational Staadarda iruidi Oiiat
I Nuclear K«gulatory Co^iii
paeiooal •xpoauraa at Irradlacloo'
IM >oat danqaroua in Uia radiation
;aui« of tha potaotial
■ of axtamal radiation ohie
E is axuanaly iDportanc t
fadlicKl
'byproduct * induatiy.
Qtal body axpoaui* to
acddaDca!.!./ opanad t
rada < radiation abaorb
natad doi* o( Z
:uE at * facility licanaad by
alaoat Lar^a anou^h to kill 5
icaad ( }aO cad* - u>.. doaa) .
, pactonnad by Dr.
„GoogIe
Enargy DapartMat contractor* havo fou
of dying tram eanear aad non-eancara 1
at fadaral radlacloa aorkan.
1 graatar than axpactad ciaka
alavan additional population
n of radiation
Icradiation intandad to aliainata ona food h
Ira. rtam tha anvironaantal parspactiva, tha c
tarla and viruiaa poaat haalth riiks which daaarva
furthar itudy. Radiation raalalanc nutant* of Saljnonalla hava
baan davalopad by rapaatad IcradiaEion undac laMratory condition*,
and radioTaiiitont itraln* ara alao found In anvironiant* with
hi^h natui-al or artiflciat cadtatlon. a Raporc on food Irradiation
appaarinq In 1983, nota* that davalopoant of radio-raiistanca by
rapaacad Ircadiation 'night poaa a aafaty problam around l*iga-*cala
Irradiation plant*.'*
Thaea aia alao lavaral highly ladiation raaiaeant atcain* of
baccaria found naturally. Whao food irradiation daatcovi othac
baccana. thaaa atrain* aca llkaly ca incraaae. Radiation caaiitanca
at hactaria of Strapioeoeeua Faaeali* or Wicrococcua Radj-odurani
I no pcadtctabli
ittam of radiation
n Bactaris and u
„GoogIe
virus*! u-a ehicietarlacleally hamful.
bactaria and act a* paraaLtai at th* ealluiar and BOlaculaT lavals.
Madlcal (clanc* la practically twlplu
viral laCactiMB. xhidi
h*«* baan lapUeatad In racant
Syitan Daflciancy Syndcoaa (AID
If dl*«aa«a Ilka lusnilrad I
radlaEioB ch
a ublquitoua In natura a
claa. Thay nay aucv
1 food 01 watac. riimani. ani
inain'a Dlaaaaa.
ira Boca raaiitant t
for axtandad parLod
t 1950'* food irradiation tiai baan and conttn
irlly by cna nuclaar waapona bucaauraev of t
1 and the Enorgy B
rch and Davalopnant Adnlnii
lafaty of lEradiatad
i«apon» FY SSbudaac
lals lihe pmton
,y Google
Tba daaira to agcasaivaly pcgooe* food imdiation by tha DOE
■eaaa tron two baaic faetora. Pint, tha nathoda of ^anaratlnq
■ad itorln^ nuelaar waapoaa ladloactiva waacaa hava baan baaed on
■apadiancy and not on concam Cor tha long-tarn fansequtnMl.
^« daaign baaia for DCC'a tiigh-laval radioactiva waata manaqaBant
la in axcaaa of io yaara old and la dangarous and obaolaca.
tha coata required Co socrect tltia vary aarioua problam are
. For exampla. in 1979 ttia National Kcadany oC Sciancaa
aatinatad that the high-level radioactiva vaatei at BaofoEd
could ba aolidiFied in glaaa at a coat of S40 billion. It
clear chat il forced to incemalite the costs of paat niataksa ,
A aa tha Sanfocd waataa. this could aiqnilicantly altar cha
msaic aquation of nuclear ueapona production.
Diataad ot daaling with Ehia problaoi in a reaponaibia manner,
tha raat of aociaty. Thua . by riddinq chemielve* of a large
nuiE of cadiocaaius for food irradiation, cha OOE does not hive
spend nonay to properly stablile this particularly dangerous su
1 prepare ic for indefinite gaologicaL scocaga. Ac-the sane
„GoogIe
undac it* nav p
b* diap«d Ui mil
■ clB* Hhan t
rciallia food Icrutiatlon la cain?
DOE pUn»
io itocKpila plucsniu
r nu«I*ac
ion of rmic
E of ch* aociatv uhila iE icaadCaaEly cafuaat t
rift' 9( tn* tadaci
!or food ic tad lac
„GoogIe
dona on a vary lacge icala, whicn in cums raquicea a major luclca
for imdiaced food*. For ■avaral yaari . polls of Che Amecican
public have con>iit«ntly ahown ttiac ihoppaii aia not intecaated
in buying food if thay know it haa bean irradiated. Thia tactoc
Howevsr, the Reagan admin is ti at ion is no doubt aware of this
foreign aid programs, particular the Agency for International
OBvelopnent. Food Irradiation facilities are being planned Cor
savatal davalopin? nations which lacK avan a minLBial regulatory
occured in the fall of 13S3 in Juarei .Mexico is a clear uaming
of uhac Co expect if Large aoiounEi of cadioactive sources are
distributed to the Third World for food irradiation. The Juarei
aceidant involved the inadvertant grinding up of a radiation
therapy nachme, containing about 400 curias of radiocobalt.
radiological »ptll ever to occur in North America. Scrap yard
contaainatad trucks passed.
million dollar subsidies for 3 technology with no proven history
if nucleac power are any indication, the Congress should
nil die.
,y Google
Hi. Morclion'i bill aould do « nuabar of Chiogi
only Hill allOH toe h*a<ry fadual mubiidiot. but i
■•faty at their citltoni tnm tba food lc»di*tloi
Tha propoaad lagialftton [oibid* *Eat* and local
raqalatiA9 food LxradLatlon 'LndapandanCly and
tivm raqiuiaing ean»im»t labalXng or oUwe coDsumai
not caqulrad iindar (adacai lav.
this bill qoaa againat Uia eonaiitant trand of
•t atcictai than fadural lisita (or alEbocn* i
Muclaac uaata Policy Act of 1982 .111011 qlvai el
• altaa. tha I9t4 raauthariiation of tba Raaouri
and Reeovary Act which qlTea icatai tha povac to c«
tsiie diachanjaa it nuelaar iita*. Additionally, thi
Lnduacry. In California v. U.S. U9B1) acataa tiava
pravant nuclaar pmac plant comtructlon on aconi
SilKuood V KernlcGaa (1*841 , itatai Hava the ri.?!
tn* EorE law* to tapoaa punativa danaqa* on nucli
wliiA not
I vlll prevent
pcotaottoa
thaaa law*
Eti allow acataa
idioaeti«lty.
(acllltlee
,y Google
Thare ii > reason for thi( iBportant trand of ■
ttiaic powara on ttia nuclaac Lnduatcy. It tiai eo dc
of cha fadaral govemmant to carry out irs sCawar<!
protact public tiaaltb and Mtaty tron nuelaai acti
Herriaon bill ia Haraly anothar attaapt by the fad
program to ravaraa thia trand.
tha failure
p obligationa to
„GoogIe
I H. TDCKIK* Mm scant ALVARBI"
PSOKSSO HBCULATIOMS
cm
IltRASIATIOK IH TBE PKODOCTION, PROCESSING,
JWD BAHDLING OP FOOD
FDA DOCKET HO. 81K-D004
IU7 le, 13B4
■■EnvlionaenCal Policy Institute
218 D Street. s.E.
Hashlnqton. D.C. 10003
(2011 S«4-2«00
,y Google
CoMants on Propoaad SagiilaCtona on IicadtaCion
In tiM PtodueClon, Procaaalng, and Bandllng
of Pood, PDJL Dockat Ro. ai>)-oaa4'
nmtoDOCTioii
Tha tollovlng coaaanta ara praaantad Jointly by Katblean n.
Tuckai, Piaaidant of tha Eaalth and Energy Inatltuta, and Bobait
Uvatet, DlractoT of tba Huelaac Powac and waapooa Ptojact of cba
Envtconaantal Policy Inatltuta.
Tha Haaltb and Bnaegy Inatituca Is a non-pcoftt public
Intetaat organliaclon oltb a manbarahlp of around S.OOO. Poundad
in 197S, tha Baalth and Energy Inatltuta angagaa in reaaacch.
education, and tzalnlng. It has • aclentific advlaoiy board vlth
axpart In both tha ptiydcal and biological ictencea aa wall aa
savaral pbyaiciana. It proaotes public policies ohlch piotect
tha anvironaant and enhance huaan health.
The Envlionmencal Policy Institute (EPI) Is a ncn-piofit,
public Interest organization engaged in research, public
education, litigation and lobbying. tPI influencas national
policy on energy and tha anvltonnant by anticipating and
cesponding to envUonnental. threats of local, national and
Incarnacional significance. EPI la a nationally ceapected source
of infotnatlon used not only by local citizen oiganiiatlons but
also by govarnnsnt. industry, labor and tne nedla. EPI helps
cUiians influence policiaa affecting thalr dally lives by
Intoning thaa irben and bow thatr vlens can b« nost affectively
voiced in Hashlngton. EPI forges natlonsl consensus on public
pollelaa by building winning coalitions that ara aconoalcally,
politically, and gang laph lea lly dlmsa.
,y Google
Bumtatj ant Concluslona
Food S«t«ty
Craaibllltr
Th* D8M liholeioaanasa* Stud;..
Ictddtation and Mlatoiln
RadUtlon-Baalatant 0i9anlBu...
Inducad RadloactlTltr
Radlolytic Fcoducta
Envlionaental I^iacca
Hazards of Oparation
Workac Saf aty
Padaral Sa^ulatory Capacity
AlEecnaEiae Eo IcradlaElon
Consuaec Laballnq
FooEDOEea
„GoogIe
I. smiMAHT hon pErnnME>m*TTntia
■11 lions
sufli
•uitabli
tadioli
slgniCK
'•I tHcnty-five yaara of res*)
[ tax dollacs ap*nt on daveloplnq
ivt, ch«r* «r* dltCurbinq ■ciintifli
:l«e lalaClva to food aafaty. Obai
)n of gcaina and v«getabl*a stimul.
aflat
Inogenlc ctian EDB (according
atlvta. Tho production of fi
ptoducts In irradiated food appei
spring effects In animal feedj
ley that food liradlatli
of bactaila and viiusas
ty. Also li^roparly Bonj
could Induce radioactivity
:ted the Acwy'a ceseatc
! possible adverse health
j-Tesc), a company wh
eh and tana of
lood Irradiation a* a
ndtnqa and najoi
I that gaiuta
production of
related to
ng studies. The
ligniflcant prablei
torad and callbtaced
irradiated pocM
1 m 1983 were
,y Google
ccMivicted of pKttotmlng fraodolant »»tetj [eavaicb for Indnscry
•od 9o*ernBaiit. Hoce cecantly, t«««atcb aapec«ls*d by tb« D8M
■nggcBti advata* oftapcinq attaeta to anlaal* tad
ga^aa- Irradiated chlckan.
Tba iBplicatlona of food irradiation tecbooloqlaa od public
baaltb and tba envlronaent could ba quit* acriaua, particularly
froB rjn— B sourcas. Tbe Enargy Oapartaanc, vblch ia tba largaat
•obaldliar of food Iccadiation. ii Hoiting to undarcot all otbat
■odaa by leaalog eaaiiai-137 aoureaa at 10 canta pat cuila.
:tin9 tba aacltat rata of SI. 00 a curia for otbcr gaaaa
1. In all likallbood there could ba a quantuB Jmp in tba
■ of highly dangcroua radioactive by-producta noring on
D.S. higbvaya far uaa near population eantara and food growing
reaa. There are plans to build a Bawailan food irradiator ri^t
c tbe Honolulu International Airport. One food irradiation
facility using a 3 aillion curie radiocaaiun source could hava a
radiation througb-pot every 5 years of ISO, 000 curies going in
and out of the plant. This is about 5 tisas greater than the
lotal volue of low-level radioactive wastes generated in 1981 in
tbe dnited States froa all sources. This is a particularly
critical problen in the absence of affective regulation by the
Huclear aegulatory CCBBission, the Dcpartaent of TrinsportaCion.
„GoogIe
[ tbi* probl«n bas pcoapttd over 200 local cosaunltles
to iBpoae bane or reBtrletiona on nucleic cargo Ccanaportaclon In
daflanc* of fadecal pcaanptlon.
Tba r«cocd of itaapj
CO be dealced. NuBecoi
been cepocted whece soi
children in public, uni
accidentally ai
Hldoapcead
track of the
Hban alllioR]
.nq track of radiation aoucceB leave* aucb
Incidanta over tbe paat few years have
L>ply *Io*t,* or ware found by
ip metal, and uhece oftaite
product faciliciea [eiultad in
he federal government cannot keap
tbe U.S., what can «a expect
led to the conaaccial sector?
Thare alao appaar to be non-cadioloqical toxic pvoblaaa
aaaociaced vlth Cbe irradiation induaciy. At leaat one
irradiator. Radiation Technology Inc. of Hew Jeraey. aaincaina
toiic waace duap dealgnated by the EPA Co undergo reaadial act
under the Superfund Prograa.
Occupational expoaurea at irradiation facilities are
considered by tbe tfBC staff to be Che aost hazardous in the
radiation by-product induatry. There have been several
overexposures involving gaaiw sources such aa those proposed to
be used for food irradiation. Moreover, abnormally high cancer
sortality now being observed aaong federal radiation workers
„GoogIe
ircenc atandatda a
The us* ol
countcle* poaei
sone 400 c
ganm aouccea foe food Irradiation ii> davaloplng
even noie aerloua probleBS lelatlva to baaXCh and
inesaad by vhac apjenee naqatina deenad to b« tbe
:al Bccldant ever to occur In Hortb ABeiica. when
at cadlocobalt wete ground Into aciap aetal and
a.s.
I. EnvironaenCal Impact SCatenent
We leconnend that an envlronaental impact statement be filed
before further action is taken on the ptopoaed regulations. The
environmental inpacc statement should include an evaluation of:
a; Impact of increased circulation of the gaxma-source
radlolsocopea (cobaIc-50 and ce9ium-137) to be used
in proposed food Lcradiation facilities, Including
transportation and jltimate disposal.
B) Potential impact of increased aflatoiin production
due to food Irradiation.
„GoogIe
. impact' on bacteria In food oc I
t du« to opacatlon of food iiri
faclliCiaB, Including sutant bacteda.
0) Potential inpect on vlius«* In food and the
I. R*-«valuation of federal regulatory capacity t
safe functioninq of food iicadiatlon facilities ar
safety of tbc woclc force.
i be labeled I
rent cequireoent that all
L foods whose constltuanta
For over twenty-five years the federal government,
rincipally though the U.S. Arsy Quarteinsster Corps, has
ited food. According to Sanford Millet, the food safety
PDA, in ■ speech before the Research and Devclopner
(a pcivate gcoup which processes food for the
Apiil 2. liSi, in Chicago, only three studies done
! past 25 years by the army, involving steriliiing doses
„GoogIe
CO ■••», Baat fDIL'B critaila foi aceaptabla i***areh.
all tbraa studiea ataov highly quaationabla tindlnqa. Studlaa ■
!•«••[ do*«* ara also quaationabla.
Oaapita tha fact that appioilaataly S80 >llllon haa b*«n
Invaatad by tha O.S. Ln food Icradlatlon lasaaich. 1/ thai* aia
atlll aany unraaolvad queatloni aOaut Che safety of iciadlatad
food. The (ecent pu pcopoeal to allon food Iriadlation at lar-
eli up to 100. QOO radH waa accoapanied by a pteas leleaaa quoElng
BBS Secrataiy Hacgiret H. decider's stateaane that 'Thirty yaara
of rasaarcb on the Ucidiation process have shotrn that the pro-
posed levela of liradiation are lafe and nutrltloua.* 2/
Beclilac'B atacaaant la balng challenged by scientists acioaa the
country.
□c. John 'i
Deans 'involving
and concludes tha
fonad Mlthin the
•afaty. Further!
study required ci
lan, Piofeasor Eotritus of Nadical Physics at
Califocnia at BeiKeley, points out that 'safe-
lo risk. .. unable to cause/tcouble oe danage.'
. ouc ignocance about the unidentified cheaicala
Iciadlated foods prevents a declaration of its
ice. Gofaan atates, *tbe Kind of epideBlologic
find out whether or not a diet of irradiated
' (or poasibly decrease) the frequency of cancer
!B inong huaans simply has not been done.' 3/
„GoogIe
Di. GaOi9* L. TtlCiCh of Ronrell PilK Hi
noting tha ccaatlon at fraa ladleali In food
out that daHaga to DKA by free radicals li oi
■echanlsaa of carcinogani
including aolaeulaa altai
human dlat outualgba by
D[. H. H. Ibser Of
Sacraaento is also conci
cbac ani dent if led radio]
■ ingla eioti<
cbcoaoaoaai i
■olecule*
Ha auggaata t
:ad by fcaa radical
icial Inatituta,
:iadlatlan, points
of the pcopoaad
. ch« [iska of
1 tha
;he California State OnlveEaity at.
id about cancar. Be states. *Tha fact
,c producta are present In liradiatad
ma la not particularly reassuring If
.ay ba capable of causing carcinogenic
' i/
Dt. Geraldlne OetMan. Radla
Brown Qnlversity, also baliewes t
'totic oc carctnoganic nolaculea.
Lon and Blosafety Officar at
ic tccadiation can produce
Slnca th* exact affects or
huaans of the irradiation and the cbeaical char
fruits and vegetables cannot ba deteimined. aha
labelling of irradiated food products. 1/
Dr. Jessica Guravj
Onlverslty of Chicago t
! DepBEtment of Biology at
The safety of foodstuffs t
itudy 11980). The long-term effects
lave not been fully addressed; Curth*
„GoogIe
I hsva iMan ovaclookad.* £/
Tha ccadlbllity of Ch«
litadlatlon affact* !■ an lapoi
■tudiai on food aaCt
Laboratocles, Inc. UBT) , a Eii
fraudulant raaaacch. LaaC yaai
of defiat]din9 the joveinaant ii
govarmienC uncovaiad auch prol
analyaas. pcnaatuci aaatha of
unaanltary laboratory condlti<
auppieaalon of unfavorable fli
entlflc caaaaicb on food
•Inca Mny of tha
eonductad by Industrial Blo-taac
ed of perfotnlnq
clala war* found guilcy
othai druga. Tha
.luce Co conduct routine
luaanda of lodanca frca
f«ulty cacocd keeping, and
llnga. 1/
On October T, 1977, the Army declared cho out of thca*
■1 feeding atudiea in default — both beld by IBT. IBT held
racta toCalling More than SS million to conduct anioal
arK. Tha aray loat around S4
t9 and 6 year* of feeding study
feeding studies on beef, b
Billion on theie defaulted
. fl/
According to a report of the GAO iasued Septi
and entitled THE DEPftSTHEHT OF TBE Aim:' S FOOD
FBOGIUUI—IS IT WORTS COUTINDINO?: 3/
,y Google
A noBbac of nawapapac actlclat, Btai
capoctad sarioua dcficlanciaa In IBT' a ti
Tbasa dlacloaucaa vara basad on PDA's Inv
Tha daticlanciaa rapoited Included fallui
taati vhicb IBT rapoited as dona; Inpiopi
''- false and Incoaplate cepoitlng of eeat re
aninala repoiCed aa aacrlllced tbat sate
pooc quality taatlng.
tin? in July 19T<,
istlng piactices.
aaCl9«tlon of IBT.
e CO do laboratory
I lecoidkaaplng;
suits, including
The Amy finally identified slnllar pcobleas with IBT's
peifoiaance on the beef contract about a yaar latai at a acetlng
The amy dtac
held Ji
Calandi
IncoB plate diaclosure of
■tudiaa.* A Surgeon Oanai
President of IBT, Dr. Joseph C.
ed 'Biasing record*, unallowable
ting protocol, poor quality work, and
.nfornation on tfaa progieaa of the
1 official detetnined chat the
deficiencies after the June meeting.
tiona of testing protocol and poor
:iflc techniqua* and ju<
. Ul/
IBT President Calandta
investigator of the 1965 ati
of irradiated atiawbanlea.
■ppla
ited as the principal
I and paaii fad separately
albino rats. Dr. Calendra waa indict
convicted IBT officials, but due to <
severed hia caae by declaring a nisti
feeding acudlea on iiiadiated papayai
apparently the studies underlying thi
.ed along with the three
ipen heart surgery the Judge
lal. IBT also conducted
\ ru safety claims for the
,y Google
ri«w diainlestation cvgul
raplicated bf a responal
The FQA appcoved bi
back In 19«3, bue thay i
exanlnlng underlying rei
peclcion to serve icradi
•ffecta produced in anij
. 11/ !«•[• these atudlea
leaccb antlty? Do we want to plac
tiny petition to sciva liradlacad bacon
I the approval In 196S after
I conjunction with a later Army
1. They found significant adverse
irradiated food, and major
deficiencies In the conduct of 3one eipeiiments. These adverse
affect* Included decreases In survivinq weaned young for animals
fed irradiated food, and those who ate food Boce highly
Irradiatad showed greater loaaes of surviving weaned young. 12/
Following this setback, the Congceaaional Joint
Conclttee on Kcomlc Eneigy held haaiings and requested that the
army provide Critical source data on aninals fed irradiated pork
To the surprise of the connittse. army researchers claimed chat
The only remaining government -sponsored animal feeding
iCudlea are now being administered by the OSDA. Although their
long awaited *wholesoBenes3 study* has not been publically
released, we have obtained it. and the findings are not
encouraging.
,y Google
. t)8U H
iltoiing the rnainlnq anlnal
feadlns conCiact bali
invasClqat* irtadiati
Coxicologlcal atudiai
labotatoiy dl«c
ThaCBAlly pioca«t<
chicken, and 5) GJ
cerainacad pcesati
The pioblea oeucEi
actrlbuted to
about the lonq tei
In atudiea
•chad 111 ad tecninai
reduced foe
the highest Ineidanci
Hany ot the lesl
Stat lit leal analyaes
gaaaa fed gcoup, and
In the qanti
lesion was i
by Baltech Scii
I chickan. nia
evaliucad five
ol qcoup) I 21 PtOIl
:tonal and
I chicken (control), 3)
Cobalt-SO Irradiated
en (contccl)
irradiated c
y due to excessive sMitallCy anong pupa.
■.zomB all diet groups, and the causa was
in falluia. Othec studies lalse questions
ifety of gaoaia-lciradlated chicken. U/
« fad teat dlata before birth to death or
satvival of both aaies vas significantly
gamaa Irradiated food, and that group had
of sevaial tiuMcs a*Mng thoaa analytad.
ilch occurred Infrequently ( foE which
:ould not ba paifoiBed) weia found la the
in inciaased rate of death anongat fenalas
>up vhlch could r
: be linked t
Hala dogs fed the ga^a-li radiated chicken diet tiaci
ilfieantly lower body weights through adulthood than
the frozen control diet, although the control dogs t
„GoogIe
conaldarad obaa*. The faaalea fed tbe ga^M-lnadiatad dlat had
qiaatec t«candity tb«n ioqm on ochct di«t*. U/
An unaxplalned aignlflcanE taduetton In tlia prodaction of
offapclng In culCur«« of fiult flla* [«4[*d on ooMU-lrcadiatad
cblckan occuiced. Tbay tiled adding vltamlna to the
gaau-liiadtated chicken and chan9ln9 Che baaal BedluB, but the
caaulcln? dccctaae in off>p[ing of the gaana-fed qroup peiaisted.
A dose reaponae pattern occurred with hlgfaec concenciattons of
gaaaa-licadiated chicken pcoducing fexer otfapcing. If/
Donald H. Tbayer, chief of the food safety laboratory at the
Aqrlealtucal Etaseacch Sacvtca of the U.S. Depacnent of A^iicul-
euca, concludes that *t«o of the studies. . .bad soae poaaible ad-
verse findings which will require careful conaidecation before
the piocesa can ti* declared safe.* 12/
IrtadftlBB and Che Stinulation of AflflEarln Production
According to the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA)
carcinogenic group, aflatoxin Is 1000 Ci>c) nore potent a
carcinogen than CDB. Aflatoiin occurs in nature, specifically in
hunld areaa and tropical countries in fungus spores on grain* and
veqetablea. Its effects on public health are considered
„GoogIe
sl9)lfle«iit. Tb« Food and Agilcultut* and tba Korld Baalth
OiganliMlonB at tb« nnttad Hatlons conaldir aflatoKln to b* a
■ajor contributor to llvac cancar in tha Tbird Natld.
According to a raport of tha FAO/HBO, *nany yeacs of
casaatch had nov tavaalad a aufClcltnt asount of facta about t
public baaltb problasa of aflatoxina, eapaclally with cagacd t
tta«i[ aaaoclatlona witb llvct cancer, to warrant control
■aaauraa. * JJ/ Incraasad aflacoxin pioductlon follovlng
irradiation (100 lilo-rads) of funqal aporaa found on foods va
tint Eapocted in 1973. 19
In a Bctlea of atudiea piAllatiad In 1976 and
[osearcbeta fioa tha Hatlonal Institute of Hutrit:
Indian Coancll on Magical 'Scaaarch, It «aa found
irradiation of wheat at different dose levels up
abovad a do ae-de pendent susceptibility to aflatox;
and) (b) irradiation aay enhance aflatoxlns by nui
■pore calls or by altering or incceaainq Eatty ac
food. Tb«v also found that, at doses tecosaended
CftO/HBO/IAU CoBaitcee. irradiation stinulaced af
production In not only wheat but also coin (31. ti:
150 KllDtads
,n production
itinq fungus
1 nillat
16C1) , potatoes (74t)
and onion*
ly, since
the 1950s many propon
enta of food
ave cited
the lole itcadiation
could play 1
„GoogIe
world ban9*c> partlcolarly In ThUd Kocld eaantclaa. Wl«taxia
ptodnetlon la an aran motm sarioua problaa In hot and htstd
cilaataa found In Kany !«•• davalopad naciona.
irradiation iotandad to aliiinata ona food haiacd say
intanaifr othaia. Sal»an*lla atraina Infaatlng ofalckan and tiab
can b« klllad with radiation, bat botullaa atialaa that aurTtT*
bave Laas coapatttion for groatb. nie aota lealatant botullaa
atraina can auiciply apr* eapidly, and alnca otbar aieroocqaniaas
tbat >ake apoillng food ^all bad are daatroyad b; radiation,
danqaroua flab or cbtckan could appear to b« baralaaa. 21/
An axtraaaly iapoctant anvironaaatal aapact involvaa tha
creation at naw or radiation raaiatant bactarla tbtoagh food
tiradiation. Radiation realacant autanta of Salaonalla have ba«n
developed by repeated irradtation under laboratory condition*,
and radio- real atant atraina are alao found in envlronnenta Hith
hiqh natural or artificial radiation. 23/ A laport appearing in
1983 notaa tbat develocsent of radio- laaiatance by repeated
Irradiation *>igbt poae a aafety proble« around large-acale
Irradiation planta." 2J/
Tbere are alao aaveral highly radiation realatant atraina of
bacteria found naturally. Hhen food irradiation destroya other
„GoogIe
bkctarla. Ums* atialna at* llkaly to lacrais*. Radiation
CMlataaca oC bactarU such aa afr«WM.M-rp« f.»e«Hff oe
^icropficem ratHndurana ■[• o( concarn. Ho g*Mral culas can ba
glTan ainca tbara la no pradletabla pattain of ladiatlon
taalataaca. 2k/
IRilla acBi* bactarla say ba naatial or banaficlal to boBana,
vlcuaaa ai* cbaiaetaclatlcally banaful. Viruaaa aia aaallti tban
baccatii. and ace aa paraaitaa at tha callulai and aolacular
lavalB. Hadlcal acianc* la practically halpleaa againat vital
Ittfactlona, which hava baan Implicated In recant n«« diaaaaas
Ilka AIDS and La^ionnalraa dlaaaaa. According to Graci at. al.
In FREseKVATIOK OP FOOD Vt lOmitNG RADIATIOHi 22/
VlEuaaa ara of apaclal algnlflcanca In cadlatton
biology In loaat thraa laapacts:
1. Viral pacho^ens are ubiquitous In natuia.
Of iood-bocne vliuses la erar praaant and bui
taken nc-o dccounc In any food pcocaaalng.
!• Viruses ar« hi a cula conaldarably moce lei^
[adlation than alttaar bacteria oi bacteilal
1. Viiusea bave been historically the focua of
sciantlfic invaatlgation in radiation biology.
pclBacily baeauaa of thail extieaa itructural
ainpllclty.
Vlcuaas nay survive foe aitandad pacloda of tlD* once
water, and hunanai aniaali, oi insects aay act as car
vliuaas that occur in food products are easily Inactl
„GoogIe
coiiTcattoaal liaat ptoccaalng. Bat
radiation of food la Mat llkaly t
taaparataraa. 21/
ii«t all feoda «ra cookcdt and
ocGor at low ot fraaslng
Tba aallac tha call cba moia radiation caaiatant It is, bat
laalacanea aay vary by aa nicb aa can-fold, IndiactlBltuta
icradiation of vltuaaa >igtat produca potentially haimtul autants
ot viruaaa. 22/
Tba bBiacda of naw oc autanc viiuaaa and bactacla aboald ba
addraaaad la an anvlronDancal lafact aeataaiant bafora fucthai
food Ircadlaclon la aacbotlied.
f tt iiadiMet)«?
Tha Baaltb and Sunn 5
arricea praaa release whlcb annoonced
pcopoaad noH lagalatlon
a cagarding food irradiation
stated:
. Irradiation leavaa no i
•aidae in food, tt does not
aake foo<]
loactlva, not do«* it poaa any cadloactlvLCy danqac
o tbe
aoMc.* 2fl/ Ptaauaably,
tbe pcaaa release did not i
tend to
lude all lavala of food
irradiation as Incapable of
roduclnq
lation in food, ilnca th
• 1980 fOft -Becowanaaeions
or
luating tba safaty of Ir
radiated Fooda' states tbat
« photon
rgy of 10 HaV la near tba ■iniaun lavel legulied to
ndac.
aionuclidaa.* 23/ Thua,
iicadlatad food can baeoaa r
dloactlv
n tcaatad In paitiela accalaratoca undat certain con
Itions.
„GoogIe
Thai* appaacs .to ba a thraibold batvaan S and 10 MV at
wblch food can ba randared radloactlva fcoa radiation pcoeaaalng.
Utboagfa tha Intarnaclonal Atoalc Bnaigy Agancy In tbalc Codas
latatnatlonal cIbIb that 10 MeV is Cha thraihoLd level, Giaat
Britain doaa not agraa and ha« sat thatt Halt at 9 H«V. Tbe FDA
in thaic proposed lala sat tha liait at 5 HeV for i-cay machinaa
and 10 Kav foe alactcon accaleiators. 30
tudlation can tM induced In foods by blgh energy paiticlei
■blch B[« produced by llnaai accalecitoia. Fhotoneutcon
raactiona are tha doainant aource of Induced cadioactivity.
According to B. L. Backer. 'The thiaahold energy for photoneuti
reactions is typically about 11 NeV for II
dacieaalng to about 7 MeV for the heavii
noticeable fluctuation froa el*K«nt to eleaant. ...'U/ Mien tbe ^
high anecgy pactieles pcoduced by lineat
atoas in the food, tbey can dislodge aeuti
the atoas. The dislodged nuclei can sbool
Mill be SlOtH
substantial
ladloact iv«
treatment,
and becom sodlua-ll
id down enough to be capturei
ig atca unstable and cadloact
it are noca likely to becoae :
selt content, foe exaaple hei
after food irradiation for tJ
Sodiua or (alt In pork can el
iccelecBtora strike the
the nuclei of
I aoae of tben
Food* wich B high
idiOBCtive. Foods with
iBcon, Bight be nore
:(t week folloving
en extra neutron
: with B half-life
haiard for food
3,Googlc
bandlac*. According Co on* itudy, ■€■• tiotopaa iriilcli can bccoM*
actlvacad by radiation trestaant have balt-llvaa aa long as 6
aonttiB {i.e. I aarcoiy) . 32/
in ordar to aake conatiuctioo of iiiadlacion tacllttica koc*
•conoaical. It haa been auggaated that food Irradiators also b«
used tor other purpoaaa, sach as the aterllliatian of aedlcal
equipnent. If aterilizlng medical equiEManC requires > capacity
atxjv* 10 nev, these facilities will present s potential for
accidental overaxpoaure. The rate of incieaae for Induced
radioactivity haa been studied becauae it is believed possible
that the energy Bight drift during a routine food irradiation
process for at least • traction of tb* tlBe food is eipossd. 33/
Freaumably. the proposed food irradiation levels of lOD.OOO
cads for fruits, vegetables, and grains would not create any
substantial Induced radiation. Other uaes of food irradiation
being studied by FOK and urged by equipment producers night raise
RaiilnlyHf; PrnHiirtq
Radiation processing of fooda causas chenlcal changes in the
food. Ionizing radiation Corns free radicals, which are unstable
and very reactive chealcally. Host tree radicals are short-lived
intermediates, Coming more stable molecules within a few
„GoogIe
nlnutea. Tbase nt^ moleculcB ace called cadlalytlc pcoducta
(XF's). Scientists ate debating the types of cadiolyClc product
created. The 1960 FDA Report states that 'cadlolysl* data
available In the scientific litciatuce are Insufficient to
coapletely catalog the identity and quantity of each RP formed 1
any pactlculac Itcadiatcd food...* 34/
The FDK assessment concludes that acme fraction of Che
ladiolytic products are unique to the Iccadiated food, and tecna
then unique cadlolytle products (ORP's). The amount of water in
a given food affects the cadlolytic products, and ladiolysis
yield! ace believed to increase linearly with absorbed doae.
Thus, repeated radiations would ba expected to increase the toti
ladiolytic produces.
Dr. Charles Hercitt has prepared a report in which he
that there are no 'unique' radiolytic products. 12/
FCA researchers concluded, 'Certainly some DBP's will C
formed which are structurally atypical of parent food molecules.
Such ORP's may be free radical coupling products of liquid and
erived radicals, forming various coupling compounds,
nd cross-linked products. The FDA states in Che Faderi
*FDA does not believe that a substance that is a
omponent of food is necessarily nontoxic' Even if no
e Identified in a particular food, RP'a formed might
„GoogIe
In a papat eiti«4 *Basic effects of iftdlatien oa Food
■attac* ■- eiobtacAt of Cba lastlenta «f •tofbyalcs MMd ttat
fors«14abr4* baa baas obaacrad aftai liradiattoa of cacba^dratai
vhac* ozr^aa ■■• (Eaaaat. Ba notad chat tba daagat oC pcodsciag
cytotoxic aatatAucaa Ifka ■alondialdati'da matmM to bo ali^tly
bl^oi la carbolirdratao. U/ Pocozid* foc»atlOB can b* anotbat
pcoblao, aad tbo bl^»f cbo »elotar« ceatont, tba qroatar ttaa
paroitd* foraatioo. 11/ Banxoa* can ba fonad In irtadtatod
baat. Iriadlatad aaata can also prodnca bydiocacbooa. caibmijla
tajdalqrdaa and kaeoDoal . aiid solfu oKpoDnda (cacbonrl aalflda,
dlaatbrl dlsBlfida, dlaaC^l aalfida, atbaaa tblol and br*»goo
■oXtida). a/ Tboa* volatlla pcodacta can ba tracad alttor to
tat «i (cotain, aod tb«r "* raaponatbla tor ttao a^Hotet
onplaasant odoca canaad by ladlaclan. tcoad pcofMCOd fcoa
ircadlaeod wbaat float had toctoaaad prcidiao ia tba ciosc tbac
caoaad off-flarora and odoca. «p/
•adlatloa doatcora vltaolna, •spoclally vitMla X and ita
pcacotaot, caroteoa. vltaata B ttactioaa, vitaMla C, and vit^ia
E. ladiaelon doaa not atop oatdatiT* laactioes that laad to
rancidity In aeat. potatry aod flab, aot aBavBatic [ooctioaa la
tboBo (ooda. U/
SadlattoD ptocaaatnq of poiatooa for sproot inbibltiOD
taCToaaoa tba aanaltlvlty of tba tnbara to fuagal attack and
ebatafor* to cotting. tntarnal biomilnq can occot wieb oniona
3,Googlc
•nd garlic fti^oscd Co cadi,
and pe*l nactoala in fiulci
toaatoaa. ClCrua Irulca
Otmtg*, and thay are noi<
apota on Che paallnQt aftei
Florida and Califocnla
tbe cttcua pcoducts ba eic.
. Radiation can caus« call death
• paachaa. cberilea, grapea, and
th«r aansltive to radiation
y to bcuiae or to develop daiK
auiant. Conaequantly, both the
lowers' aaaociBtion* asked tbat
.uded from the list of foods approved
for i
■ 12/
III. gHTTBOmiRllTM. IMPKfTH
The preferred mode of food Irradiation by the U.S.
government is by gaama sources, principally cobalt'$0 and
cealiun-137. This is because of the historic push by the Acontc
Energy Comnisaion, and now the DOE, to find ways to sake aoney
out of theic enocmous volumes of radioactive ut
The Doe la planning to leoae their cesiua-
cents a curie — while coBDerctal supplies of t
Dainly froa Canada ace selling for about SI. 00 a curie.
Moreover. DOE Is offering to develop tianspotcation cas>:s. ar
building a major cesium irradiator in Hlaai ohicb will house
about 1 to 3 million curies. They are also working to build
aobil* lEcadiators which will travel through farm areas to
proooce food irradiation by demonstrations. With the biggest
stake in food irradiation, the DOE is spending about $15.6
„GoogIe
■Ullon In FT 1985 dicactly and Mvaial ■illloa lMIlr*etl.r t» f«t
tbali ladlMctiv* «4*t«s out into tha csMMrcldl Mctor. la/"
DOB ba« lapacatad about 90 alllloo cntiaa of e*sloR~137 and
has convvctad It Into a clocida (oc>. Than tbar ara
ancapaolatln^ tbi« cadlocaalua tor as* in food IttadlMion. All
of th« isdiocaalua ptaparad to data is at tha Bantocd PIutonitM
Hocka in Washington atata. Bowarai. OOE hsa plans to sapatata
cadioceslun at tha Savannah Rivat Plant naar Alkan, South
Carolina.
If ladiolaotapea ace ua
iccadiation, thaca will ba ■
danqaroua cadioactiva aateci
located near population cant
Foe axaaplai a single food 1
have about 1 to 3 ■llllon cu
thcongh-pue tequiiad to main
coBpanaate foe dacay Icasiun
:uB ]iBp in tba iBounts of
jvlng on tha higbifayB and baing
Id aaloc food growing araas.
ition facility la czpacted to
If cadlocaBlua is usad. tba
I unlfoea anacgy field to
)a* a haif-iifa of about 30
yeacs) , foi
the facility «
uld be
s nuch aa 4S0.0OO curies
five ya.c*.
In 19S1, all
oucces
ncludin, th. goy.cn.ant
ganarated o
nly 94,000 cuci
■ of lot
*-laval radioactive waste
„GoogIe
33
Anoth«r problas aasociAtad with i«dloc*«liui 1« tbse Ita
chloiida torn ii solublt In watat. Ttii* pose* significant
pcoblaaa tot It* itacag*. Thca* cadlolsotopia ara acored in
cooling tanks. n«]r ara vary tbaraally bat, ao watac nuat b*
thiough the cooling tanks on a eootlnuoua basia. If th« jackc
•connd tba cadlocaslun are defecttra oc corcoda, than tfaa
cadloceslun will dissolve and potentially contaiDlnate public
and/or offalte Hatec supplies.
Tcanapoctlng hundreds of mllllona
tadlocesium or tadlocobalt
to Btatas and local jurlsdlctiona. So
local govetments have laposad bana or
cargo transport bacauaa of the growing
govarnaant's Inability to protect
cargo. ^/ Tba Transportation Departaant, for exanp]
than ZO Inspactots in the country for all hazardoua
sblfBants. OOS'a shipping casks which ara being devi
radloeaslun transport have not been teated undaj
conditions. Truck drivers and handlers are not
measured for radiation exposure.
federj
iiardouB
Hoped foi
istic
,y Google
MtmiB OP ORBATIOIU
aMjUoMtrttw «Mrr*«
■Adlo«cti*e •ODicas Cot food liradiatots c«ta« apvcial
3 tbc 9cnaial pabltc and the •ml[onB*at. UiUtk*
■acbina* which can ba tmiwd mt and olf wban ladiaciaa la nacdad,
ladtoaclive >oiiroea like Cobalt-CO and CaaiD>-137 tmlt 9a^aa
ladiation ceatiOMeaalj . Canaequantly, these sources [aqair*
[Dund Lbe clock sbieldinq and surveillance. Ctitica of pioposaja
: food iiiadlation peine ant that Umm
:al baiaids becanae £hey could be released
c dsa to tranaportioq accldancs oc to
'aidoigbt duping* wbeo their asefulloess has passed.
riet7 of accidents have already occntcad nith aadieal or
•laply lost. A cylinder of ladioactivc ttitiua fall of:
delixecy truck in Knokvillei Tennessee, in tbe
11/ ft passerby cacovarad a container of iiidiiiB-192 thai
ick in ^OHDey, California, in Hay of 19S2. Ij
n; part of a cadiograpbic ca>era with Iridii
th« back of a tr'jck in Oil Cicy, Pennsylvania,
,ckad It jp, thinking that it Has a 'pluaoing tool
•e. roitunately. be discovered its t
f of a
If 19C
t fall
off
A cylir
dar
91 lal
H82.
A
,■ and
ra b«f
re
! opened it. 12/
„GoogIe
Nat all loaa«s have occurrad on th* higtnraya. On NorcBber
, 1981, radioactlv* iodine being tianaported Eron St. Loula,
ci, to Boaton, HABSacIiuaetta, via Aaecican Aidlnea waa
llicoveied alaaing. U/ Two cannistera containing cadioactlve
B-19] Cell off of A truck transporting tbaa fcon Jersey
n Septenbcr 22, 1980, tn what an EPA apokaswooan deactlb«d
aoBCvhat loutine traffic accident.* Bowevec routine,
autboilties veie initially unable to locate them, although Chey
were eventually found intact. 13/
Febiuacy 6, 1984. Ttie j
ahipDsnt Eroa a Chicago
Cancel Institute in Fredei
tbe oatecial could be ban
in clotbing pockets m
five cbanicala used for gi
FftOBphoroua-3Z. The
ag«[B dtseoveced acven vials of liquid radioi
wn across a muddy field In Fiiifax County on
patt of a ten vial
: destined fo]
Authoi:
the National
ties Btaeed that
[dous if handled Inpioperly <
:he vials contained
le of D-cell
The teen-agecs iccogniied the c
Buddy labels, bo they contacted Tali
County policy Infotaed the boy* that
repoccs fron juvenilca. Inveatigati
begin until one of the boys' fathers
County police. The
Che police could not act on
in by the autbotlties did not
called the police, neither
,y Google
fit* nor b*«ltb officials acre abl* to Ioc»c« the tkza* t^lladcn
Mill BlaalAg cb« n*tt day. 31/ tb* lAddaMC illaRnta* CM
ptoM*^ o< alBSio9 :idicict;T< BBtcriAl: 1) Mat It it's nsnr
fo^id? 1} Ast U local ■..~:ho:i:ie£ ar* noc p««p«r»< to oofa
vitb anc* radio«cttT* «Mr9*nci«a7 if !»•■• bora had aot baan
paraiataot, aot area aaven of tha Tlal* would h««« ba««
[«co*«rad. SI/
Aaodici ^ull boy ma not ao locky. Ba fo^id a cobalt-CO
•oDEC* in a Heiloo dnap, and caciied tbe aotuca hoaa Nbata it
aat oa a AalC Irradlattnq hla onsaapectlDf tt»iXj. Tha o^aarkad
•oocca ««aQtoall7 lad to tha daatha of tha ahole f ^ulr ah* livad
itf tAa booo, inclading ■ graoteothar, a slstar, and « anttavE. U/
pcoeaaaiag plant* and th« boapicala or taaoaccfa eacilitlca wbeca
tb«r ara naad. Cki Dec^Uiar 5, 19B1. foor gallon Jaqn eoataialng
rsdicacr^TF tcltlia laakad onto tb« aldawalk ootaida of tba John
■opkina Boapltal to lUryland. SJ/ Oo Fabcnarr 2> 1913. foot
caaaiateta of caaiiB-137 natc found daatcoywd in a aarahoaaa fira
at Dooqlaa. Aiiiona. Tba oaalim-13T mdonbtadly bacaaa aitbocna,
alBoa tha flia also Inrolvad vaEiou cfacnlcal axploalona. U/
Tba bait pablictiad ptoceisinq plant leak occnrrad at
Mwrlcan Atonica in Yncaon, ArinMa. obara an ovtraged governor
ovaoCaally had to send in the national GoaEd to diapoaa of
„GoogIe
abandoned cadioactivt t
plant wa* on* of 17,000
isotope* in the United 5i
ladloactive watch dial]
dangerouB nature of tc:
plant was located neat
u> In 1979. 3j/ nie hnerican Atomic*
llities licensed to handle radioactive
ate*. The plant uaed tilcluo Eo make
would glov in the dark. Despite the
a radioactive form of hydrogen, the
a day care center, a potato chip
tchen toe the Tucson public school
The plant's location meant that Che frequently leaked
ritluB ended up In the food served to 40,000 school childri
I 1978 alone the plant admitted leaking 2S4,000
ritiun gas Into the iCmosphere. Utec a sumrpac of cevelacidna
x)ut American Atomics dumping radioactive liquids directly Into
le city sewer syates, food m Tuscon's school kitchi
assured 2.S cises above the permissible radlati
idlation levels in plants and people near Ameri
i 20 t
1 EPA drlnkinc
! and abandon*
<Uivecnor Bruce Babbitt of Arizona described the tm
Atonies disaster as *a complete failure of regulation, '
used emergency powers to seize the abandoned tritium ar
It for burial as radioactive waste. In addition to the
disposal costs, the taxpayers had to pick up the bills
„GoogIe
coo eaaumlamfa ta tst, and Bcaa r**idamca ao* Caca ■« iMCKaamt
rUk dC a*ci>i !■ tb* (Dtoxa. SZ/ »U* trltlw U nvt M»d («e
food iriadlatloa, tba ■■>• •9*Bci«« c*«pon>iC>:c toe =sai[olllaq
tcitl^ faellltlM vtll b* cftaigad nitfe coauolllBg j ii-ware*
food iEradlatocs. If ra^Blatory [•aavEOas var* tao iaadaqaata at
coo eemstemimi to pollca tba Mmmtleaa AtamXem plaac ttafsn It
bacna • aatioaai acsadai. vUl tbay ptavaat sladlac CtaKM fm
food i([«diatoiiT
FlopooaaCa of food irtadtatloo axgna tliac 'tt caa'C ^tTT"
b«[«.* tb«r poiac oat that tha j m i cooteaa (aitbac cobBlt-4*
or eaal>a-137) ara cooeaload is toda, and caoaot aacapa ts faaaa
•r llqalda «• tba ctltl^ at taacicaa Atones. Bat tba
ladtoaetlT* soaccas aoMt ba faataiooad lata food ircadlatiOA
•qnlCMoat, and aaa of tb* plaata abicb baadlas cabait-«o bas
alraady baas tmoimt^ti by eba diacovacy of cobalfc-«tt on tba
(«llt«*d tiacka baalda tba KaattOD Pcodncta plaat la rmal
Hekaraan, aacrlaod. In bacwibac of 1)U. Kbaa aalgbbora of tta*
plaM dlscoracad tbat ebay livod io a ladloactiva oalqfatotbood.
tbajr ocvnliad to b«v« tba plant doaad dovn. Raaidobts laacnad
tbat tbar ai« allOKad to ba aipoaad to twaoty tlaaa aota
fadiatlon anaoaily tiom tba Oickaccon plant tbaa (to* a aacloat
poaac taactoi vadat catEant fadacal ataAdacda.
Haca^ant inalda oqalfaaBC doaa not candaE faaaa aoutcoa
aafa fioa fuctbai accldtota or raloaaaa, Ao old cabcac tbacapy
„GoogIe
■■chin* containing an •■tlaaead 490 cotlaa of Cobalt-eO In M>ia
tban eooo Mtcal pallats waa cut opan in Nasleo in lata lfB3.
Pallata wfia aubaaquantly acattarad along roaAt^a la JUnlcOi
•altad Into acrap ataali oc ataply loat. ael«ne« aagailna
dtaciibad tt)« accldant aa 'ptobably tha wocat aplll of
ladioactlva aatatial avai In aoctb AMilca.* 19/ At leaat 300
paopla lecaivad algniflcant doaaa of gaaaia cadlation langlog tiom
1 to SO caa, including foui oockais obo got potentially lethal
dosea to tbo «hola body. Scrap natal contaainatad witb ttaa
cobalt-fiO was faahionad into ataal support loda Coc conatiuctton,
candaring around 30 houaaa In Hailco and aavacal soia In tha
Soutbwaat a.S. [adloactiva, Tabla baaaa that war* abippad all
acioaa tha Dnltad Stataa gave off ladiativa caadlnga and bad to
Tha iiiadlBtion davica caaponalbla foi tbla havoc case fcoa
tha Picker COBpany of Cleveland (now owned by Advanced Medical
Syatesa) which was sold to tha Natbodlat Soapltal In Lubbock,
Taiaa. Bacausa thin aodal aC cancer therapy aquiiaant developed
■echanical and sciuctuial problens. the copany had a policy of
not [«fucbishlng it. Although the conpany would have leaoved the
source, sent it to a low-level radiation diuip. and aciappad
non- radioactive parts for a fee which beglna at $2,000. the na-
chine was sold to a Heilcen clinic through an i-cay equlpaent
COBpany. The Bachine waa novae used, and eventually it ended up
on a pick up truck, where It was cut open enroute to a junk-
yard . 53/
,y Google
tba radiation coat^laatxoa «as aeelAiKallr ilmemwmtmi «kM
a track 'catryiaf aapfoct roda aaBafaetDEad fi^ «f al
concaatoaccd vltb aatal fia tba JiBhyazd aat aCf aa ataiB aa a
BBlqac radiation anaar at tba Lon Uaoa btioaal LabacaUrr ia
■aa Razleo. trantBallr, iMrtcsa odidals tracad tka Oofealt-CI
ta tka alla^adlf acolan cancar tbaracr aacUA*. daa*-^ aCfacta
vara far frca adaqnata, alnoa a *bot* pick-np tr«Ek, left farftad
on tba otkar aida of cba Uo Cranda £e^ B1 Mao, tk^a, atill
Clipped 6i*9er coDncara at ■ dlatanca of 300 yarda actoaa tba
■atat. aOTaral aaaka aftat tba problca ma CKst discoavrad. St/
A ataUar kiad of an accldant «lth food iriadlatioa ji— i aoorca
aqDigaaot coold load to alailar eanaaquaneaa aad iiiikaEaaad
oontaalaation elut la dtfficmt or lapaaalbl* to elaan op. Ibo
tact Chat tba cancec tbarapy aactiia* anffatad trcM *aacbBiiical
and atrocttual problaaa* £1/ aa^qaata that food irradiatioa
aqolgaaat al^t alao eaffec froa aodi problaaa. lb* canear
Cbacanr aacblna «aa aptaraotly aold witbovt raqsiring an nltiaata
dlapoaal plan, and payaaQt foe cbc plan, aa part of tb* patcbaa*
prica. Borikr catrola beb not aquipped with radiation aanaora,
•o aaar radioactive ablpMnta of contaalnated ateal entetad tbla
coaatry bafoie tbc accident «■■ dlaco^arad. Bot all of tba
alsalnq cobalt-CO ma racovarad, and aany of tboae aipoaad to
radiation did not cacaivc proper aedlcal car*.
Socb accidtnta arc not eonfinad to foi«i9> conntriaa A
fooBdrr in AuDorn, Raw Tork. dllcoTarcd that tha iiei> aoltea ataal
„GoogIe
coalnq out of Ita lucnac* vaa cadio«ctl«* in Pabroary of IMS. A
Ma* loik BaalCb Oapactaant InTaatigation coocladad that about 25
cuiiaa ot cobalt-SO had baan includad In tba aciap for aalclog.
HO ona loacnad wbara tba cobalt-tio cam* tcom, but tbanica to
Horkara wbo diacovaiad •naathing acong with a ataal tbicknaaa
gauga tbat lad to tba dlacovaty of tba radioactive aateclal, nona
ot tba contaalnatad aatal latt tba plant, a/
nt« pioblon* citad above did not occur at
plants, but at sites with by-product mateciala
cadioactiva laotopes. Batveen January I and Dtcaabac it 19S3i
the Nuclaac Hagulatoty COBBlasion (HtiC) took aacali
enfaieaaent action aqainat by-pioduct llcensea In 2S caaaa due to
secloua vloiationa ot license cequiceaenta. a/ A 50 Millicucle
caaiuB-13T souces was lost oi stolen froa a hospl
cesiaa-137 toaccea weie left in unlocked abtelds i
caits at the aaaa hoapital. Badloactiira trasb waa .
sanitary landfill by another hospital. Tba dRC att
problms requiring enfoiceoent action to three coBa<
read and understand the conditiar
2} Fiiluie to train esiployeea in the condltiona of the
licenaedi including the radietion safety pioceduies the
are incorporated into the license.
3) Failure to control operations including failure of
licenae enployeea to follow approved radiation safety
procedures.
„GoogIe
If llcanae holdara' staff don't rud th« licanMa oi fait to
ttalD aaployaas in facllltlas bandllaq ralatinty laall aaoimtB
of radloactlv* souicas, will lacgai faclllciaa n«otsMrllr >>•
opacatad In a aafai >aniiai7
Tfaa accidant potential of latqa-acala icradiatoca aca not
Inaiqnlficant. A aajoc exploalon at a grain elavatoc adjacant to
an iiiadiator could cauaa ■ biaacb In the contaliaant of an
Iciadlator. Fraquantly. gcsin •laratoii auffac eiploalona and
Food piocaaaing facilities can be axpacted to sttcact
patnlclDUB little creatures like eackioachas. Cockioadie* can,
ptoKida an additional nachanlaB of tranapoirting radioactive
Batarlais. according to a lapoct in tbe DeceBbac.1983 Issue of
tbe Haalfh PhyiiifTn .TniirTml. Autbar Harold HazcuB reported tbat
over a peciad of several years safety surveys of reseaicti labs at
the Albeit einstein Collage of Hedlclne of Yesbiva Dntversity in
the Beam, Hew York, revealed radioactive cockroacbea. In tbe
spring of 19S3. lab Horkers discovered coach excreta with a counl
rate of 250,000 cmp. Several hours later an adult roach which
eaitted 300.000 cpa was captured. £2/ (Releaae rates of SOO cpa
are allowed in the nuclear Industry.)
Answers to troubling questions will not be reassuring if
they are based upon what has happened In the past. Can the
„GoogIe
■ouicva b* lott? Can th* souicaa b* laleaiad accidentally? Mill
bandlaii naat tbe required blqh atandcrda of care? will aouccea
be the subject of aidnlght dunplng?
n (HRC) staff considers
adlatlon Industry the noat
. In 1977 a woiKst at
ly aecidantally openad th« dooi
rce was exposed. teceiTtn? a
Die Riicltai Regulatory Coi
occupational eipoauies In the
dangerous in the 'by-product* I
Radiation Technology in H^ Jei
to tht radiation chanber when i
22] ten dose. This exposure li
serious health danag*. The incident Has directly caused by tbe
nanagenent decision to allow tbe source to be raised with
inopsiative Interlock and aafety devices. In violation of license
requirenents. SS/
In court litigation between Radiation Technology, headed by
Dr. Hartln Kelt, and the HRC, a variety of violations of ttRC
regulations were recited. Fool water becane radioactive when a
pencil containing cabalt-60 developed a loosened andeap,
(Fresiaably a similar accident could occur in a food irradiator.)
Radioactive materials were illegally placed in a dunpster
for disposal as nonradioactive garbage. Access baiciecs were not
set up to prevent accidental entry into high radiation areas, and
„GoogIe
radiation arcaf w«ca noC propvcly poatad. £2/ Badtatlon
Taehnoloqy la ceiponiibl* for a batatdoa* wast* alta In KeckMiay,
Haw Jaiaay, and la on EPA' • Snpacfund Hat. £fl/
mc cacoida reveal alailac probleaa at other placas.
Radlogiapheca at a flald *ite unauccaaaf ully attiMptad to
retclcv* a dlaconnectad 47 curies l(ldlu>-192 aoutca tioa tlia
[sdioqrapble device guide tuba. They called in a conaultant ttem
tbe bone office wbo cane out and failed to start vltb a cadlation
sucvay. He shook tbe guide tube, disconnected the device, and
catcieved Ehe source. In the process, he 90t an eatlnatad
■asslve cadlation doae to the finger and thumb of between S50 and
1100 cnu.
Vt. fPERAL BBCimWIRT CAMCtTV
llor><ir Binniiur«
OS&A standards would apply to worker exposure to rsdlation
at electron bean or x-ray bean food irradiation facilities (19
CFR 1910. 9S) . These sEandarda are slailar to those that would
apply to gasoa source equlpnent regulated by tbe HSC. (10 CPR
Part 201 Unfortunately, OSBA doe* not appear to posses* adequate
radiation aonitorlng equlpnent oc personnel to pecfora frequent
safety inspections. Annual exposures Units for workers should
not exceed 5 reus, nie whole body dose expected to be letbal to
half those so exposed lies soaewhere between 300 and BOO ren.
„GoogIe
Tba proposed [agulitloni ulll alloH food axpoiuos up to 100,000
iaa«, so tb* potential foi ovacaxposur* la obvlou*.
An mtc oCfictal vlalttng an Irradiation facility in anotbac
country narcovly aacapad an oraiaxposura. tba aquifsant had «
light which vould indicate when It waa optratlng. Since no
opaiatoi waa pceaent and tba light waa not on, ha wa* uigad to
calta a took inatda. Naraally cautloua, the official tequaated
prior aonttoElng before entry. Mhen tbay returned with the
■onltoilng equi[Bant, they found the opeiatar [aplaclng the light
bulb which would have warned thca that the equlpMne waa actually
generating radiation. The perfection asauaed In tbaorf doea not
alwaya natch tba reality of equiEsant biealcdoiina and hisan
jUctiinit Sourgpf
Hhlle the Ft»'a National Center for Devicea and Radiological
Health seta reporting requirements for the manufactuceis of
products which are Intended to produce x-ir radiation, machines
which generate electrons are not specifically Hated In the
regulations (21 CFB Part 1002). (Aia election generators
included in the x-iay definition In practice or covered under
other Eegulationa?) Tbaae regulations address standards for the
original aale of equiinent. They do not provide for regular
Inapectlon of such equlpaenc. or for ra-avaluation of the
„GoogIe
•qolEBCBC if tt La aorad oc [asold. It accidBBCal lattaUwt
occoccaacaa are brtn^t te tba atUBCtcM of tka — afal I ■■■ .
ebc7 Boac be reported eo m. Tbe eqiilpBeac ovaaca da aeC in
to bare an^ oUljatios to ceporc acddental radtatloa occ^reac
«• caa laafiae sttoatiooa ia vhicb egnlf—t otnM* BaMM te
Eelactaat to report acddeata for fear of bad poUicm ot
liability (or d
T&e re^olatioca addresa special ceqaireaenta for proAccea
tibieti Bight dltplay agin^ effect!, bot cbcf do aot aa^qeat aof
provtatani abicti wanlit require ratireaent of sach eqoi^eat HtaaD
it! oaeCol life baa eapiced. Raniif actnrec* and dealers are onlf
raqaircd co preearrc records for 5 yeara, altboaqb tt i* ^nite
pEOOable ebat eipenaive food irradiation ((iaipBeitt vill be
expected to laat longer tban 5 ycaci aad tiiat cqaiiaeBC failures
Bigbt oat be apparent befatc five yeara.
■ IniauM :j^*1« nf Trjtnit^
n» ta not pcopoaibq aay ceqoit^Mnt that equiEBVit
opecatori poaaeaa even Biniaai training ta 'tadiation health
^ysici. dostaetiy, worker safety, aad ptopat EecDtd keepisf. *
We consider ttiia Catlore Co set at least ainiaia ccataiaq
criteria totally trreapoasibla. Mchin* sources of electron
teama or i-caya Deed biqbly trained operators, and operators lor
all food irradiation equl[Befit Bust be Utotrledegable about these
„GoogIe
iBiocB if thay «t« to anauc* tha safety of Cha workplace and t
food product. Under the piopaaed ccqulatlons, a Spantib-spaali
irint HOckar could legally be placed in cbacge of food
radiation aquiiaent witb English Inatructlona. NhiJ
: laplylng tbat food pcoceasors will be so ircaspont
n it ta vital tbat federal regulations do not encoi
Liceaponslbility by ignoring the obvious need to cequi
of personnel. After all, aspects of the Thiee Mile It
ant in 1979 were attcibuted to Inadequate opecatc
ernore, the NHC has juat noted that Che ■failuce
enployees in the condition* of the license, including t
tion safety procedures" led to enforceoent actions
cadiograptiy and nedical lie
*lt>i-n»titfea To Irradiation
oxygen dcpi
used succc!
If fruits and gj
on alone for soae fooi^s. i
aafully Co fumigate stored grain
. two years and has been used effi
Che early 1970s. Car'bon dioiidi
ige bins, displacing the oxygen wl
The grain nust be held in thi
jsent is apparently an econoa.
radiation for insect
light be acconplished by
:hc O.S.A.
C02 s
,y Google
■ ;ac4 a^f:*^-!*, suit a ^sccss. Z' 7c»ii -mti* «^
7oo4 LCi«A:.aC!ec :« • jcooas w^^ ^m ^lan £kB food «
„GoogIe
Ch* food. Mhen Conqccaa (•qulod th« laballn^'of litadlat«d
foods. It waa mora conctrnad with Inforning th* public than
aclcntlfic Bceucacy in wording, whathac ic'a an addltlv* or a
proeeaa, the fact tbat food waa trradiatad ahould ba cQUunicatad
to tb* public.
t othar food procaaaes which reqi
itlon of allk. The lab*] la lequj
It readily obvious to th« conaunai
kept in the freezer lectlon of the gcocaiy s
can datetaine that the food la fEoien. Tba
■ill not be avidant froB storage aita at the
consuaec haa a (Ighc to know how food baing put
tiaatad. The existing labeling cequlceaent
to determine how food haa been pteeecved. ju
requlieoenEE enable consunecs to detecnine w
Bdditlvea ace placed in food. He oppose the
alislnate consisoci labeling Coi triadlatcd foods.
re labeling, such
sd bacauB* that
Food a which havt
Che
The PDA haa echoed t
111 falsely th
labeled. If there are
idiatlon Induatcy argument tha
> food la radioactive if the t
neis who ait confused oc
linfocsed, keeping a food process secie
„GoogIe
K 9^n kDsTccs ccBlJ coocciTatlj BCCM. Mat cce
feed yuj «it± fO's £avc airti t^a pcAlic cadis
t -.M-»'r^ l£ :k =t« ;«tiirm«i»U^Sj oC m :e ici
,y Google
Eiflc aipacts ■!• pialainq food Iccadlatlon Hhila
cionlnq it. An International Atoalc Energy Aganey
la cited by the PDA regarding food safety and
[•coBMndlng no labeling, Tbm nandata oC cha IAEA is the
pcoaujtion of radiation technology, not tbe protection of the
environnent or the ptoaotion of public baalch. Conauneca have
the tight to detecBlne which experts they trust regarding the
safety of Iriadiated foods.
nit FDA Should not dlSBls* the Congressional aandate to
label irradiated foods at the retail level. The FDA should not
adopt scae eupheaiaK designed to hide the tact of Ionising
radiation, but should retain existing labeling requlraaent*.
„GoogIe
TCCEER-ILLVIUIEI COFUtENTS KHmOTES
X/ Inteiviev of Be. EA<aid Joacphson by K. H. Tnckar at
iia«aacbus«tta Institute of Tacbnoloqy tn BoatOBr Haas, on
4-25-1984.
2/ Bulth ( Buan Sarrtcva pcasa releaa*: BBS BEKS {Feb. 14,
fl.D. , 'iDvltad Coaaaoti
Docket Ho. 0111-0004 (F«
U/ Tcitaeb, GMOtgt L. 'Ccanenta on Dockat taiR-0004.'
1/ Ibs«[. H.H. , 'COBBcrts ceijaidinq FDA's proposad new
legulationa fat coBseccial food irradiation," FDA Docket Ro.
alS-OO04 (Apiil J, 1984).
1/ Cetcman, Geraldine. 'Coanenta regarding Docket Ro. Slff-0004*
(April 10, 19841-
6/ Guievitch, Jesaica, 'Connants regarding FOA Docket Bo.
8m-0004- (March 12, 19B41 .
2/ m* lORK TIKES, p. 1 [Oct. 22, 19S3), and HAEBUKTOH POST, p.
A7 (Oct. 22, 19B3) .
B/ SAO. Th> n^piirnwiir nf rh> Arny'ii Pnod Trradtation
Prn^r^— m rt Wnrth Cnntlnuino? PSAO-TS-l 46 .13-1 5 {Sept.
29, 197 8) .
12/ Thayer, Donald H. fjiiiwury nf Supporting DocmnfnEa far
Hhf.l...n>ni>n..iiii Sumn-s nf Pfi>cnnk>ri JRnivm* Inarf i giit>d1
rhlrk*n Products in Vapiuni Sfalfd rnntainers EipnBfd Ee Doaea
nf Tnniiina Hadiafinn fijfficn-nt to Achi^gr ■Comi-rcifll
■;r->i-illtv' D.s. Dept, o£ Agriculture (Harch 19, 1984).
U/ Id at 12-22.
ti/ Id (t 23-25.
15/ Id.
U Id at «».
,y Google
'JJ/ Codax Allnatiiius Coanlsiion, FAO/NHO, REPORT OF TBE Z3RD
SESSION or IBB BZECDTIVE COMMITTEE OF TBE CODBX ALIHENTARtDS
COmiSSIOH— 1978, Onitad Katlon* (1373) .
12/ Ballerun «t. al. •V»* of Conu Irradiation to Pravtnt
Aflitoxin Product J
2a/ Fryadaiahinl, E. i
of GaM>a- irradiation (
in Hhtat,'
Faraaltlcua
PryadarBhir
Foods* 1* S
21/ E
Topula, P. S., 'Effects of Graded Dosaa
in Pioductlon by AspecgilluB
17 CasBCt- TnTlrnl. SOS (1979) and
'Aflatoiin Production on Irradiated
197«) .
. 5ti<
19B3).
ited: Londoi
22/ Gr«ci. HicboK
Action of Had]
Edward S. 4 Martin 5.
lOHUIliG AADIATIOH, Vo',
167 (1981) .
Pres«cvati<
Kteuier, Ed. FSBBIIHG AND IRRADIATICM OF FISH Fisblng Neva
Durvood B. Rowley, i Aklia Hatauyaaa. The
on on Bacteria and viruses' In Josephson,
Eda. PRESERVATIOH OF FOOD BY
cue Praaa : Boca Raton, Floclda
2i/ Bhlemann, D.A.E. 'Fu
of Pood* In Eliaa, P.
in FOOD IRRADIATION I
22/ Op. eit. 31, Cieei at
26/ Id at 203-204.
22/ Id at 306-308.
28/ Op. cit. 2.
are Piospacta for Radiation Pioeesaing
. t A. J. Cohan (Eds) RECENT. ADVANCES
331 {19831 .
Foods — Final Hapoct' (July, 1980).
' Becker, B. L. 'Absence of
Ellas. P. 5. 4 A. J. Cohen
IRRADIATION Elsevier BlOD
Induced Radioactivity in Foods'
(Eds. I RECENT ADVANCES IN FOOD
idical Press 285 (15B3) .
,y Google
ii/ Op. clt. » I
2i/ 49 n 3714 (r*b. 14, l)a4) .
12/ Qlubcact. a. *B«*le Eftacta of Radiation on Food ■•Ccct'
lAfA, rOOO PIESOVXTICni BT IBaUIATiaa, II VoIibM IAU.:
vi«nna 3 (1»T8),
is/ JUtial Exccaeta ttd. , Ca—tnta
Starilliaelon of Ictadiatcd Pc»
13, 19S4) .
n □. Caiuidiiia f
i2/ Id and op. clt. 2«, EblacikUUl at 341.
ii/ Saarlnqa on a.S. 349«i D*paitB«Dt of Inacgy tatioBal
SacorlCy aad mlitary Appllcatlooa of Voclaar Bnacq;
Aotuorlzatlon Act of 19a4 b«foic th* Piocuivnant and military
NDClaar Syacana Sobcoats. of th* Bouac Coaui. on Anad
SacTlcaa, 9Sth Cong. 1st Saaa. (Haccb 1(2, 19S31 .
U/ HOCLCAR mtL, 'BadloactKr* Tcanapoit Rula* Pcolifacata' •
U/ Th* Susquahanna Alllanca. P. 0. Boi 249. Lavisbut^, PA 17837
la/ HO NUCLEAR DOfS, S91 Na«a. Ave, CaMbcidga, KA 02139 (Jan.
USl).
U/ HASBinCTOH POST, SapC. 22, 19flO.
U/ "ASaiNGTOII POST. B-1 fFcb. 7, 19S4) .
,y Google
.. Lao. ntadiati'on au«cd In Modern Industry* PT«*«nt«d
«t tba Joiia Fogarty Haaodal, AFSA and DC Public Baalth
AaaoclatioD IT (April 2«, 19CT).
, Baivay. Hoiaan SoIobohi Robatt
Blaanoi Haltaca, KILLING OUR OHN DelacocC
190-193 U9B2I.
Ptaaai Hn York
5f Id.
52/ Id.
54/ Id "t 11S2-1154.
fill/ Id.
£1/ Id at 11S3.
fii/ Id at 1154.
62/ NBC, *IE Infoeaatlon Koclca No. S4-27i Rtcant Serious
vlolatloHB of HRC Requicvnants by Hadical Licensee!' 5SIHS No.:
S83VIH 84-27 (April 17, 19S4) and NBC, 'IE InforMtlon Notice
Ho, 84-25: Recent ScriOuB Violation* of NBC Bequicnenta by
RadioqrBpliv Licensees* SIRS Ho. 6835/tH B4-:S (April le, 19S4) .
fii/ Id.
, nUREC-O
: V. sadi.
TniTB ANHCAL REPORT
ogy, Inc. S19 F. Supp. 12G« (HJ,
,y Google
HEALTH A ENERGY INSmUTE
;3tMB«gtwMiBA.wM,NJ»5uit»5(»»W«»hingtorsO.C-M0(eu.SA»W»nn«PCa)i43.|IP0
■•htf tdd ta tlic HM nJ lAlch ** Un pivndcf ce tlita Hbcoadnia. Ih
n^tfsUT nqDOt tkM Umh CiMiaf to ■■<■ fut af lU* tiMlu
Ite Icaltk m* It*BO Isnltn* I* • — irmtit, f>lie iicanac
tte "fMcafkl tlia.' »< ika limit h
1 ti<cKi4 la ttivltflat • aatlHT >Bw:if T j' i
^kl^lif rv^zlrW tc fuvSacr ■ yil^ la » •« UrillM hvlad \t -flHl^
„GoogIe
f OllfocrJ* It IUt1(, ■
Bt ■ f.CllltJ ■!« tlM
« flinrcl bin I
♦rtilm to Via
TWi to 3nt* of m\ . CrtHltt
» would bt approKlBicelj ttarei tlB
-* -Coatrett, tbe Depart
a T. UtaMi, Ultra, Tb* 5el*sc«*, lb* Rh
, Hufcti 5, IM5.
c: IBctet No. ilN-OOM Jm« 19, I9«l.
« of R*prft«*Dtatlv«ft| 9Bcb Contruftr Hare'
„GoogIe
Tax 4sll*r* ihsuld aot >» uHd is Mtatdlc* li
IK to«4* rntat Hpoulva ind twguln (thicc untnllutlsa at tlw I«a4
latTllHitleD *T*t*m. Tu dollxra cju In apcat ■«« bIhIt to kU fnacs
nitud ef iiKdlBU In tb< tacilen mukct.
■ «M cntzuu nun UGsa
t food tTutcd vlth li
looUltH r.dl
thelt food li
uKllJi.''°Bl
b the ,UI« =( Oregon .od fl.rKDt «. cm.id.ila»
require that Irndlicid foodi ^ libeled.
lindlatln 1
I alHHt eooAmlxii «
klverdtlei icmu Uil> iwtlBB ban
-edlered foodi until apr* !■ kanm utout
« alTbsdj daBcmtntkd such fsablea*
1 quilltr In tooit ililch an
i cueer nnltlas tiam Htlat
„GoogIe
t. Cnatlia of an ckoilnll Is ch( tooi, called 'ndlDlrttc
rcadocu,* ky tiM ISBlilai pncua.
5. IneicaHd rldi d food palHmliii uuHd bj the nilitln nit.
darlni tlH imdlat
uiu*4 ^ pl*st
« of di
rer*e populatlpc of »i1dk
.Ion of ndlD«ctlve «■
<ed to dManlBi th* o
nndlM that apiwind Co (upport saftc;. N«t tbi
■tadlM tiihlch mpportfd tilttjt *aeflel(nt. 7 ^
I > ItlltlH.
OtItM Hut
mint
iMlItKd U
ronltit na "bHuflcl
CDUldond ud I'll preK* hm
•tudy reaiHIi. 31 ■dnm ■tod]'
■OTbcaa* be foimd 60 adrereo atody
itril, ud aa Imeflclal r
1 boBiflctal. For e
raadiB, Final Report of Ibe Task Cni^
BB Imdlaud FDodi, Ifcll 9, IMI.
„GoogIe
_««■ Im uilaicni t> elaUs It ttm
eUUin, -csHlueiid Is Indli. cMldm ttt fntUf Iciadlnid ■but
44valapcd Mood ■boonAlJllcB (polyploid -ccLIt ■■codaLrd vltk -canccf
.luetle tUaiic aban fid Irridlatid chicken- Tlui ctodT fmad tbn tnic
nic* fed ilril Imdlitrd cUcka b^ ktcb tlH* fan effcfclBi ckn
UisH fid ilKmllr rcDCUHd eklckcs. DdhU b> najn g( tlw Bapactam
of JwriculiuT* enscldand tUi tlaiiat mlMi^tt. ■>! mrEbj sf tnnliu'
loWKlgJtlOB-
ityalolB, '[T^oiBiitlc Siullii ef ItostCTi Fid rrwhlj Inadlattd
IrradlJLAd Stcrlllitd CMckca ^ ttw Eo-UcUied >ac*i«iTi Tut In
OtolBtbllt HiljSDglKir.' Flul Kcpoit. Crmr-racc (UKI>-17-7t-C-<M7,
■utelEud CD ch« D.S. mr Mdlui Ruarck nd nnvlofacat rii»«iiiT. f
Betrtck, Trwlmek, l» 0<o»«li.i S. 19T9)
,y Google
t. m 696 (hDuld not be paiacd Ibcb 1».
5. iaj food Di fpDd ]Btxedlent that b» bi« iTTidlitd vltl
ndlitloB (boold )>• clHily Ubelid te tbe couwcr ■* tiqulrcd b<
58-005 O - B6 > 9
,y Google
Food Irradiation: An FDA Report
by AUs T. Spihcr. )i.
If^kt Mtriil q| ioGlita) wtoBM m ImJ pme- |h»l muMrf wftrttn^md tM w* »^<iin
■do, DM tipaiimid work okh imfiMd fscA bn i — '■ ^ ~- -ill
AHBtetftnanidBi^aeuiqiMlDMcaea- fcmKiMl ■» iTTT ■ipnit - [-ii ililimi
h(ttiHli9a(A>pnpiiicd>i>t. at JO.T fMot k ««M« *ih^ IOIh «kia «_-
TWFagdintDncAaiidiihinikBlimpoBiIWdir |«rt rt* tfa mlmth •» tm mtm^ut fcL T>.
dn«Hbc dB prtfa frsn bnalul lod •dulttnud vdub ga ikt MS ■cpr^JruiiJ Ix^ ik—l •
f 2t.Tpml ta i^^w^^t Htfc
iliKWalybnidMnadAdStiwAaintealtaaa itii if [ mi fti»ni Ttt J "tuff lL^|iiiil"
Act. Coapw piBtlJiJ lUftfef IB 19)1 Am ■ teoi k M 15 funm << di* dM «jA ai paA fcurlMil m D
k« Ik pniAH (FDA PAnu, Utf IMT).
OAMi akt bv«riUt Kliaa oa hii pOhkm lot irrsA' DCfkndi « 5,5t BCfurwk. TIm h
All pmnit fJiMiM pncndnf at caoHd tacn. On
A(nh1ud>ii>b|rFtMefind>npRHatd (1b- eoattfalai • ronM pact Iddncj « W
dydiai II loMEkil KiBbiiab al uimd bidl^ kM ki^ AS Bd kndUud « l-W
ta aoiaik U kndtaicd hBd, Mid (1) auinr diA- tinrm, ■ dcFW^ga k da budf wi%la at *■ g«-
citadH k Ai *H nw d da cqicriBCM ■« w^ « nsoncd At It dm itHr bkA. Ai «d^
teiptdudcaadacHd. ol Ai ^ 90^ n II. U Vonal ks Ah A« at
bkMkaiwaaBadaiiphyaaaeibsAoldKIHIfeedi )1.1 [iriial dnoa k «
tiiin liiiiliiliil 11 iBj MM id llaii liiili It aiiimli bmAm af lawWin I'VI
(n—Bh), l.T» ipcmdh or S.H a»|»di. Rau fed eaalnl dki <nsUWi« U p
wt «w caai^fc^ bacoa kndMid >iA ■ S.M 4. Oat mk «( aite U Att caatikk( 1040 av
BittuaddiHCBabk<d-iAAt<nii>aai[«cpeitioa ccal ton Md fendtaaad M S Jl ■■««* aii»4
Imdiihd M 0; 1.T1, aai I Jl Miuadi nUUKd 1 la a«nf> •■ M pnol ka alia I MaA, lad U>
ll.M rnaal d»wkHnM« voacd joaat bi ymat hn 11 A» tad at II awaAa Aai dM ii^*
oMit AM imnliki KkndiMcd tacga i^ o^r- A Hcsad ank d nica aa Aa dUl Aatd 1.4 pip-
M At iIki (d frnAud taa> imtiidia.ilitnu S.D<«ioadkti aflUbUBf » pooai tatea h^
,y Google
K pEliUM » FDA. FDA bM KolTrf DO ImJuuin fOteit^al a
diu la dRw wkobB gr BM ibt cbcmial diuia p»- cuntontd idBA dHBlu Ik
4gad ta tind br Iht Blud ndbdoB Ima f-d n* lUctcMnd tsiBMiiHlB nu
con) hu ba Asm u be ■ iifc pnctB. On dit
^ , , , . wr htBd, ila FB* KieiidKi m IM ia ■ poriMsB
WlKfl Miin Buinbcri of Ininiali ve lord in tdueilx U coodvdc llw til CdddilkMl df pnecBkl by {mdil-
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
WALIH « IMHMT MmiUlI
336 fill !■! 1 1 liMWHi *wnu«. N.L *&»■« 5M ■ Wo^inawn, D.C V002 U.SA »W»on« 002) 5*3-1 070
CoWlt 1« • toii(ta. ■Unr-oUca uiilllc sl^n alch ■
' -Cotelt-^O 1* ■ ndlowEm lascsiM of cnbilc ilch a (t<
Lf-Uti fn ■ ndlHctlT* tjale»« U ch* tU* Is vtaleh hal.
OUT ptiTttcil biKllta. ShliLlliit at uvtcil tacbu si lud oc uncaJ. ftel ot
■coocrflta la ivcaiaary eg protect [wapie irou j«^b radiatloB. B4tj radiatloa li
partlculata ra<ll«tIoa coopoaad of 3ub-tt«alc fiUctraaa which kra not aa hlfhl;
Uaat 1 quutac loch ol aluBinua li raifuirad to atop II Hmnnr Elia aBia
tualtti bauTd to huMiu froa b*c* ladUllim Kcuri whaa Li lati loaid* tba 1m1t.
lata •atttan Ilka eDbilt-60 cu (ai Inaiila tba bodr thnsu|h iiha food .ud nateT
Ooea iDllda tha todr. b*u--*Klccan esasuuly tn
namd tba ibaU-UU
tbanpT Hcblaaa iia« 5,000 u lO.OOC curlei of cak«li-M, yrayoxJ toot
Imdliioci coull camula X Co lOOtlHi aon ndlOKCli* cnbslcW (banHa
UO.OOO a^ 1,000,000 eurUa). Nb« eobali-M uMd la iba D.S. U rnduc*< U
Nuelaar RxulatDiT CoKUalai <NICI oaai • cr«a^ar facui of .0009* Ul Ck*
ibiDT-pcloii -of calult iTom the »tl. Otbac ■elmclfiG Rndlis ban naiauW
chat tBU factor d«ii<caujlr uulacnilnacea Iha ciik. t kb^t br I.E. Ikual
nudr br H.C- Ci^^c (1^7:) tomi tha Eslloalii itualar laetan f« Iba adlbl>
pani at tha lollcwlllt pl^nti: oati— .OIJ. radllhaa— .0^1, ciimci — .01
(IndiBia, cIm mc i'
Bdpldlr dlvldlsK calls ai* hlfhlT luaeapilbla cs radluloa ^ — |- That t*
cKllB aiM tivtdlat nan npldlr, and cb* —bCfD aid (atua k
„GoogIe
B*C«MBK. tt
'. e=sr. "% U=x3b ■
,y Google
wAuH « iNBtQY MSinun
atfcfc^ld<i<«mA.wiufcN.t«SuiWi06»W«lwiB>on.O,CW002U.S>.»W«n»(a(Bli«3-107iO
cmni-i3T TUT »m
Ca>tia it ■ (lliar-ablUi Mfc. MllMbl* alaant of iM tUall MUl tnup
■ich u ats^e uia^iir of 53 md u jcoUe Miihc of 1^2.9. 1 Culi^l37 U •
ndlaaetlH iaacop* af ciatia vlch u -icikIc hh oiabec of U7. Cailw-lIT la
a ftaalDS product croatod ^ ouclaar tiiilDalDsi or ouclui reactora.
k half Ufa tar * ndlouclx laoiopc ii ch> lIh in •Uch teU of U*
ndlaclOD li Ttlaaa*!. lod cbi tialf-Uft tor -ccUua-lJ? ±t 30.3 ;Mn. 3 That
aaana that li JO. yurl. lialf of tlia rufj; of i:«mt;B-iJ7 vlU ba nlcaaad, aad
la a&Bthai 30. t"ci tialf of ihi rnalnlot fofrgr vlLl ba ralaaaad. aad as as.
Coalia-137 La cocaldarcd Jukccoui foe JOD yean.
UtIbi cijaua. k sara 7T alcrocuclia <• alcTO curie ia sua all-Uascb of a
aria) at Insaactd caaluB-lJT njj. raaulc ia I doa* co tUa obola l»dT af 10 nd*
la cb* flnt 7*Br. S (l doaa of lOr u ntu cha -Iciaa allmil tor •erkan aad.
2S clBaa tba dOM allomd (at iba laaarKl pukUc ttrm tlw iwlaar fiMl cTda.)
RadloactLva laocopaa caa [loaeaacnia la cha food chau. Caalua-UT la
cbaalcallT -ilMllar zo pocaaaiua and vlll jpraad ctiraughauc zti^ loft cisauoa of
Lba ^Kidlai of fiah, Tild -uid daaaatic: anloalj and himana AnlnalA aad paopla
Ukalj CO lodi* la ■aaela, tlw *fl«*s, tbo U*ac or otD*r pirti of chi tiadT 7
capaul-ca. ADOCbar M.i ■llllos
1' Ihtatara Vmi fallatlata QlctlaaaTT, pp.l«3 ( X8 (MTT).
Z V. ttodlae. ttadlsaecln CoataBtiiatlea. Hi <I«71).
3 lUd.
* J. ScallHB i I. Daw. Uoik la DaBiacmia ca Tour Oaalcll, 1*7 (1973).
3 ?. ttodlaa. Of. dc. I at 161.
6 Ibid, at Sft-lf.
7 IMd. at 1M-I«9.
,y Google
t tm,tv. t.c^.l«T BwUt. mA H.t-r« Irittotl-.
,y Google
„GoogIe
•i rnOJKT MTONUnOMM. en NUtriRE D-MtUOUTUN DC a
7^p="^"roi»uTk)WALHiOjea'ji|^HaD'of p^ ^'--
B*>llh uid Eatrfy Inatiiuta
238 UtxacDultna Av« HE.
Suit* io»:_
. Wuhioftou, DC 20(102
DMT Hi** Tuckar,
Mt ipolotlta for tb« dtUj' in raplylag la your li
I un afraid jou ma; pcrhapa bMvm mlaunderalood Dr WtU*> cominaDt raftrdiiif
aa Expert CammiRca Raport on tba Indian tcudj joa quota is your latter.
N-o ancb raport azliU. but Ihara la a raport by Ibe 19K'. Joint f AO/USA/WBO
-' . Expart Commltta* on Food Irradiation.- on tba aalaty ol Irradlatad nbaat amoof -
, - .^-!, otbarJrndlBtad tooda and by tlu 1980 Joint Hipart Commlttaa on Pood Im--
'' ' diallon which (It* foU tozlcologlcal clairanca' to tba procaaa at food Irradlatioa-
up to an a*(ra.g»' nt^lmum ibiorbad do*a of 1 Maiarad > In theaa dacialoni -
. tb* Ejipart Coaunlllaai did take inlo'conaidaratloa all arailabla data lacludiaf
tbot* or BbaaJcaram and S«d«alTan
On* of tha raaiona tor Iba Expart Committae oot lo coDald*r Ch« atudy ralavant
'.. . w»a lb* curlouB abianc* of any polyploidy in tba control ehildran althoufh tbara
'f ' -la a' wall- known Ihcldanca'of tbli finding up to 4% in tba £*Q*ral popuUtlOEL"* ^■^''^
.'. * "^'lo tiod"proc*MlnBpr*cU.
- .', hu ii*v*r b**n carrlad oi
. . ~ aoa* rtlivBDt papara but
- - .-claim' or' dlaclalm •Imilar flndlngi in animal azparlm*ni*.. Overiill ihoaa atui
, '-'i- wWcSbaV* baan carrlad out aailafao tori ly itao* aa awidanca to aupporlai^
% . ,- niiH>g«nic pr ehromaaomal affacia of irradlatad wbamt. fraahly traatad or no
■■.'^■-.. r,l»i">'j^'.»lll,flnd thaka commanta.TuafuU-:^: -.•.,'..
Y- Bbt Dr. m»^ fXii: ,
I A «^"il"a"tidy*wlth'a
largar
num
aro
f ehildi-an--"';'-
1 tha i
:ao
atuefain«
■tudlaa
rata
d. which aUhtr
„GoogIe
HrddUU-SOO 007. A. P
Daar Dr Tuektr.
rh«nk you for your l«tt«r drawlnfl our Kttmctoli to
■ova r«ni«rli« •bout th« BClontlfic integrity "ith r«3«rd to
• tudy on Icrafilated -he«t In undernournhed chlldrep, which
you hLva Bdd^flHad to Dr Bhaakaram of our inscltutF.
doni regarding
iited whaat. It
imdiaced vhsat
irredlal
roposal uaa mad* by iha Qcpartmant ei Atc-raje Dwrgy.
• irradiation aa « mathod of praservition of whaat
hen thl -rfa referred -to Us -Uo liail prspa»«d that aom*
;o be uniler^ali*.-., elt>ou5>i * larso number of -tuiiej
iitaSllshad iSe Rifely of lrr»di.at«d wt-eer because of
t af «o" wheraaa in iha x-raSl-tlor-Bl Indian dleta
tutaa «Bou; -Jo-aos of tosil diet Secar.dly. all
£lai vt:» done with rradicad uhaat vhicSi uta atorsd
the' country! u« wore concernaa'wi-h she ooaiioiliij
_ __ .^ __n9 Irradiattd whaa Senci vo
vaatad tha atudlaa to ba conduc^td vSth ralhly rrsdicai v^eit
•1(0 to aitabllah thalr aaiaty Thirdly wa eon ie: Vr.o pea*--
bll -ty of :ha Imdlatad vhai; aithougJi isM« ftund afe la
^oal-ihy veil ^ouriihe^ -TT^'.z-irr ^ -^-Irfeit II! toxic affast iTi
undernourished and mnl- : . r: .■..■ t - -.^a -ho reoresent a larja
itudiea to r
e- evaluate the laf
-y of
rradiited vheat under tha
,ud;a» were tharafcre planned
and carrlad
rradia;«i whae- unt^er
dietary and
Feeding of i
nutritional condltl
"',?'"
"vi'ih^iilshia-karwM'a
par-- cf thes
n ilght of publ:.ahed data
M, did noc ^
f atif
-ZM 3f ••dins Irradiated
wheat to --he
-or. a i-aat atnorrsaliry
uaa tBsarvFi
;ran, w* Mr7B)=at»d the
■•tudy for^ e-
-ran war* put on the noraal
t- jach »t-jd;e 1:1, for the
laJU'^^'cie
{polyjloldy
would raBult Hou
that w)ien fraihly
-ed wheat wa» fed. polyploidy
„GoogIe
K i= ^5»ir ?g-:g»J J
-:i *:» -^!i=3 i» '«
,y Google
mUL IZFOKT
SraluatlOQ of cha !iiui|«alclt7 of Imdlittd Scarllliad
CUeluB b7 eh* Sax-Uskad Haeaialva Uthal Ksi
In Dra»ophil« aalmowf r
CoDCr«eC JuaD 17-76-C-6IK7
. Amr Kadlcal ita««at:h ted Davalopouic C
SCIII)--T, Fort Datrlsli
Fndarlek, Hi-r/ltaA U701
>*
ST
Salcaeh Sci>:
itifli
S*r-Hi«i
1. lae
3301 "-■-—"
iikdlieii,
'.'iaco
niis 13 :
r07
Jan« IS, 1979
,y Google
rou uvlaa of chlcku aut, Iduelfi^ u K, IT, CIH, a^ ELE,
Aloof with naiativ* and poalelTa esattala, mra vraluaead for ■icasanlc
actlTlCT a^leylai OratOBhlli a«lM»og««ft la ebs lax-Uokad cacaaalT*
laclMl taae. Tba four la^laa of ehlekan aaac uara dataratnad eo ba
DOD-sucaianle In tha caac. Tha -poilclTa eoacrol coacalalnt 100 p^ crlm
(l,3-<llbc()Bapiap7l)?luaphac* giva a ilgnlflcanc poalclva caapooaa In Iba
caat.
laducad ptoducdon of afffpTln( la cultural raacad oo Irrsdlacad
chlekao uaa obiarvad. 1 doaa raiponsa affacc waa ptoduead Hltti guna
Irradlacad «ad froiaD eonciol chlckan saae. Sotaal productloa of
offaprlni could hoc ba affactad by ehaalias zb» baaal ladlua, addlat
vlEaalna, or ualag a dlffarml Isc of (aaoa Irradlatad cUekao aaac.
„GoogIe
m
Th> taiulti ir* BhouD ia Tibl.t 10* (page 40 > and (ummarliad Id
labia 10b (pajc All- The addition of tha vlcsnla lupptaBaDC froa Bio-
Sarv, lac. ac 1.31 coBceatratiao did nac luccaaaa cha numbar of offaprlsi
produead la culcuraa eoasalDlat gaou Irradlacad or froian codctsI
ehlekaa oaac. Bouavar, tha addlcloo ol cha vlcanla supplanaac rcducad
Kirtalltr o( tha paiecc Droaoohlla In cha nagatlva coacrol and In boch
tha Ccozin and gusia irradiacad chicken diet groupi.
Baaad on tba data l
following concluilaoB ar
t natc gachatad In ?
uacrantcd .
( ctila itudy cha
The production of Drogophlla offiprlnt in culcuras eontalnlnt
coQCalnlDg (;aicn coacrol chicken aaac ol la thoaa wlcbouC
chicken. The above findings vera cacslicenc in the tuo pio-
ductlon loci of gamu ircadiaced chicken chat uere
baaal nedlun.
clon of Ptoaophila offapring
r by adding a vlcanln
culture
containing gamma liradiaced and frozen control chic
The highar the concantiatlon of chicken meat in ch<
fever offspring that uara produced. The greatest effect
oecurrad in cha sadla coacslning gsimiii ircadiaced chicken.
„GoogIe
Paatlclda EvaluiUoa Sactloa
^^"^^^ y^.^..^-.
lobart H. UiaaUa. FhD
Olractor, I*chiile>l Sarrlcaa
TioTiah M. Thouoa
DlraccoT, Slal«|ieal SarrlcM
bjF tad lat 3*lt*ch Sclaatlfle SarrlcH, Inc.
„GoogIe
■mter of Oro«<nilill« Offtprlai In
Oolcuxaa CaatJtatat c!ia Tout Chlelua
Mms St^ln OT.R «at Mlfbt)
(•■atlva Control
(m chlckaa aaat)
Ttoiaa Caacrol Qilekas
IbaxaBllj Frocuaod Cblekon
HIS (t 100 n^ loaitlva
CsaEEOl Coo ehlekas 3«&c)
UaeccoB IrraiUatad CUelus
CiiBa IrtadiMod ChldcM
Toul Smbar
of aWOTrlaa
U.251
Avaiata Buabar
of Offlprtai
17
720. (
12
7,320
132.7
ir
«.m
40*.«
u
].U»
1C*.9
23
3.U0
1M.0
U
1.3»
57.1
„GoogIe
!to. Parent
7 D*yi
Culcure *5
Tocal
Farctnc HotztlLcy
So. Offsprlst >fcac
Oil cur* n
Culturi 43
Cultuca ^S
Total
A«a. No. Offipriag/
Frotaa
Sima
r-.— .
Control
Irradlatad
Irradtacad
Haiatlv*
Chlckan
CblekaD
Prod. 3
Ptod. 3
Prod. 2
!lo Chickan
U.t 29
Lot 7
toe 9
„GoogIe
lis ■■ •
i ■■ ■
m -- -
Hi"
iw
1;
111
"=— " ss=5«s I
m
£!}U|
■e > r ..
„Googlc
Uaiihc
Ea.
lan CoatTo
10
6U.i
29
C«BH IrradUcad
Chlckan
Prod. }. lot 7
ntii:lon of Chlcltan - 5S -Ac
P»r«aE Motcallty iZ)
So. Dan CO M«c-4ri:7
Av«, So. Offivtiag/Cjlture
10
498. i
atr.tion of Oiilcn - 25Z -■.
So. Dan to ^Ucarl:7
Ava. So. Ofijprlaa/Culcur.
t --.ijhc
13.6
U
430.9
31.2
U
sa.e
ncr.tlon of CMckan - 37.51
Picenc -ortiUty C:)
Av*. Mo. Offspri3}/C^l:urt
.-.t ■-•eij
^
Tascad
32.3
12
Z4.6
QtriWan a; Ch±ilt*n - jCS Ve
?»r«n: »)rc»ll:7 C)
Mo. D*y. :o a.:url=y
Av«. NO, Offsprisg/Colture
t: ■-■•ighc
10.8
13
366.6
sz.o
u
S.6
Sa^aClvB
CJOETOI
incr.iion of Chieluo - OS
Faruic Sotialliya)
So. 0*7. to Matu=i:7
Av*. Sa. Oifx|irl3|/'C^:'jT<
S
10
6«0
•
„GoogIe
HEALTH & ENERGY INSTITUTE
n. N.;.- Su-fjOt* wetfiinyon. DC KMCJU.S..
Docktt* Kuiasariant Erancn (BFF-334)
rood ttii Dcug Adolniitntion
ROOB «-«:, 5«00 Flihaci Lam
Mclivlll*, RD 2DIS7
cormMnc period tot
iHacj h*» not b»n adaquataly addcaatad Oy a^tCac
at Radiation lactinology. Inc. RTI '■ Food Additiv*
(«M 3T8S1 atacaa that -ebanqaa in OHA (froa iccadia
will induca OHk rapiif MchAAisna lo nany mitationa
only b* taaporacy.' ^4* Z Ttiia ia niilaading ic
Icradiatian of fooda stmulatai p oduction of DBiatdoua
cbamleala lucM ai atlacoitns and vac ens i ta-radieal
coapgnda. ealying on ona r*p«ir :q cauntarac;' tn«
of licadiation ij faliacioui The aadendun to ilii.
ay Haucy sllvacaan (Au;. 16, ISES) ineludai ioim Mai,e
aeianca on tha Siolofietl •fftctt of ::«a-:adLi:al>.
- Mcauaa congiaaa haa tiaao in racau during :n*
■ajoricy of tha eonoant paciod, it haa not oaan poiiibl* :□
Aiva sufficlant dabata and invaatiqacion of tfla coniaquancai
iibly kill ::i.
- Radiation Tachnology, :nc. ii on :n* f.-gnly ■•
lii: ol conipaniaa Known ai sup*:;und naitrdoui -asta
A coapany tbac ■ai,ntB:ina a toxic naata dunp and nai =
finad by bocn :tit NRC and :h* acata o! Haw Ja:iay :a:
violaeionj o; tnait opacating p«cbi: should not Ba an
witii cttt laCaty of ouc food is«« ancloaad. ) .
„GoogIe
- :::»dL.i
or, wi::
rvt:v« -.1,* ■_[
-..'.[ o:-.*;iOi,.t
fcs ;:,s:
h. il.d or: rn»
pt«wiou
•tiling >
■Pprov»l of
£ S.n£oid .-.i;
M.y 9, 1994, p
pr»s»nt»ii oy P
t:.di.tion or
tion of th« t
.]or tl.ficitn
■c Dttoc. en*
-T.:. to ]uit
comrien on dqt
for iccidution
vid«nc«
i;y
- Fin»lly.
th* [>«p*
j...,^=!„,.=
"^idt:.:r''
b*
consid^c^d. B*
ochnolooy viH
lllvVl^
•p»rtm«Bt of "
impr»»iion w
n.rgy pronot.
=ru
r»«ponaibili:y to ptot«et out food
a mixaiva Buildup of nuelaic xscliei
^nvolvid w{
cnosi «g.nc
prodicij cr
h thB proceclion of our food a
■1 wfiicn build nu=l»«r w«»pon»
', th« rOA snoiild inwe«ti9«t«
ntco;i«d itudm «nd not ra«rtl
n« «»pons iMnufec^ucBrs to -u
rii!>M:»t.»ip"th.
/iiJ-ii^^
„GoogIe
Coalition for Altemalivea in Nutrition and Healthcare. Inc.
PO. Bon B-12
iiiUKt^ oi lUhtte J. F
.MMNnUlnKt, be. iOIMWI. I Md i OKtacd ^ Miftitte ad
Dk iuuesj ixonui axcMi ts ui (1 tat a^ ujcOfiAuA liHitMt Mc union
luuU [<j jml umtiotiOir I«a tWnrM HiKOnl bn MiafuK rtdnicii^^ Inc.,
^tSCnil "VltltoMl iHt « iHCuUlMl OntUlKMX D( iluttlttq JBdt, |M MT
otBiCfcii oj >■( ot^Mtm ORl/n ngMUH 4gUli incur ' '
W
(M
i^'Vunwii nr f i< % uOtiMt t^nlCi^ lidiaUai TwlHD&iw't rtnc ttaMaiif I
" ..'-rAOvn 1. Km OK <M W EM •uAltfMl MiU iMu te <BfS«R«f
»,ii«<><os« J- (..< t. MBit ftiuy4Aiii(aic«^jtet(lr AcwOMhI .
^£
ir rrj Jill ffiTJnfirm ftr onMiitM
Air Alt iRjHBUai te ofe foU oj tfe fiMic Imtuigt- « ocnil. 'I
(hgndiiq Ac UiiIlu tB KftBU w^fV i^ f«< iiaaliaaim paeutiiis, iv *i(Ui«
' (1 lAif oiCy 'S Utidifi iwMiid A hwdU iBti4t ail lU On umuibi; M aBw
Mtmutd « bt dtfuiinC-r (MgoaUy Ml ii— wiiml tUiu mt. ^lOtHlUl
etllatmiteimxteMK^tpMitUkvtotulim, (47 >au vfwtBf «« H kmi
nBt catigniai - «rf aiC!! i wanal A wnntf u(c^ nit (Bso aoAn qiiu<i»
lAdcur rid intrwif fm ^fmii fn ■ tVjnUMf rrf llriflft t llwm fTMltHI
„GoogIe
5tUt rwAn tuUttOu ftw w a (sCitiam fn OS ^CMUittiM pucut <:£i(i «tf UtIAv lot Ik
4ViJMdr I* a Utta lUtf JUy ». lUS fa Uittim TtOnitt^ Ut. tB^BU.- f.&I.S., JA AuidM
ItMte nu tttOli MtOuM, Ac RM ^ wvtatf t« SMWit Wibttn A) antJilM laid iimiMtai m
aUUliM, IttUM^MdBQCanrtawHMiE'omr'ttiiiagt' U(fii« wqnJuant m th gKmik
ant a» 'aUUbit' auU iWy bt oMUuidimlikiiM A> «k imocu otI wt »j av uiHaaJut •atm.'
toOiHiatte ^ «4ui«td tylsrteta « « t)l>( Ml w thuCif imaiiatlaii aOag aUfi At lutoi s( wA
M, ly tlHl fcUlou n» <oK Ota <M » ted tMkliiKtOT u^dtUMit h m/ (CM* nj *«i*t n, IMS
ft Pt. a«t£ at (OH. I uW 4 One •ou 9<di6iu iH iwaiUaUiiii iMu inl «idt tM£M ft Ac MuiC
a, (AotfaA teui u -Un^iud beAaUi* mI Imt^Cbal tai^iItU^ ttmiO. luU^ Haf. Pt. 6ffl uM
pt. GM^ hull oj noKiiH i^ ftnf Kif (MX UUUva, IfF-JW, Ceiftit ^ S^ely «d i^tiUed MiA^tte,
a oMKn ■« quuCun lAtdi ta duf w fiit (eOra ibOd OMn 10. tfK. Pt. taiU mUi >i tH « im*
In uKBlimv I uniU UIk tD u^uut Hat w* int AvuoMc ummcA it int. - at <aUa» (»«£• (cfsn
ON 9SUMIMIIC awuleu Ati i««us. In «tlt«^i*w I m^MfjiMv uifiut Ac HK to hUMh Ut picMnt
inmwU ai Ac icedt iiCm^ i«^a«1 jn Ac ImI iiapilati» pwocM.
Aut. ftejcun JtaaAoR 8. tHnC A., HlP., 7)k IMueu^^ oi rau IMtiBC 8m^ tvt. ai RMWrt&c
Ffn a FW* MwQ, N.I;., Cehnu^mc* i^ Ac FD^ T amt Id i mmiif m Ac diti rmwiirfu aoiUb
ttgnuUns Ac fcttibU 'uMjuf gnc^ tjjeca oj Ijaadattd jml.' 1 inc boiIiikI i Mulct »f nveu
ibcutbuig dwmC teA«( iAiliu in mtt m ■»« iiiine jaUaa tifiu H iMmiiatid Joodi. He dwtmt
toAof tttt dtOiia jraiOHUy na«ik,Nid oooUc cticca >AlfA iw wioUw Ao^ & te dc A 11^^
«4 am Lwc fcanc, Q>6«fcit. ftto WWJm Acj« p»«« Imwuri «faa«fii ISnctffai hmiMMUfta
WKMaUtwaHaaaifumift Ak eqoNutt ft ftxAaan&Xllwfi iwu ib liwWelMvE^a
•fc wt*i» ««j te«ft «uMi«M «iA Ac ajBM,^
•tfArtHtt... t*«cy»Btf» aAc< fumUfltftw K^mOii ikuiatlpm In, SiOBtamL temaiic art t«i!ai»i
^;Ah(i unUuinMUMRaMlm 4j4M«Mi«mtHUIiAi^bM«at W - - -'
a tQMOil Ja Ac Hit, J. Mdiit. SM. IM(. IM. «t Hi. S. «MU ^ «« ■«
li^tMt ((A«t mianiim, Umia. fed a—^wlfafBl .ifliBne. IhK mt Act a .
,y Google
renKW OF oneRM J mrtma »
Dlvt Df Ml SlCMntAM IHP»CI
rood Uditl** P
rf.ien csnnin*
(iclainthi In po
Ut.OK«. i^j^t,^^ SMF-ojiC
■1
;^,-
^
k Birtwro 3. 'Ml
'■-
. Iat»et
Sk)
[ion
„Googlc
r]\C]NC OF hO SICM
r, aK]7B9 -as s.jMMt
n Itehnologv, Jnc.
1 Ktpott (CIAF.) unDer 21 CFR
3 in the EIAR intj in
■ubjict food loaitite hII
jirt the oftMritiw er «
Of&srii.e-il 3' I^trg.. Tnt ^ucI^•r
s iMCb ti cabaU-«D '
ial!-60 .ill -osl li.
Or^eiKier 2t. l»Bt, ino
jUiCorLeo Itor :in»at
22, JSBS;, .Men »oulo nan JurJBQ.clion o.er
colyn O»tiom», 3»nu«r)
?-i'n-;i':iHr:H;n:s:;.';:St
;:^''"
U !1Q CFR
Protection Ic
[lOdi^'iu]'*
ferrous .uK.
;":rss;;i;;.;':i;L^;;;
ru
„GoogIe
R>eiochrBi>ie dyad nylen doilBctara sr* Bide Trnt Jaslnatad plastic
*r>ccta coaled or iBprtgnttcd olth cither ]cuco-triphenrlBttr>ir« dvaa or
other radiAtlon aanaltiva dye* (KrtiugMin, et al., im). Iwenty-aavon
1 (one) tm pifce* of this a«terjil tre.uteil during ttctt irrtdiitlon
trcatnant. (til iitiKitcs that 1.30D ca' oF tSt ■atfrlil will bt mad
Ridi
olylic produc-.a (RPa) rormeO by
^onatiluent. or
the food. Ifw Division of Chwiitry »no Physic* (DCm) hat deterr-Inad
tnat only Ion concent rat ion* of HPa an formed in pork irraCiatefl at
dosea of 30 to lOD Krads, and that these levcla oF RPt ire not a «ittcr
for concern in thia Inatance (DCH memoranOiw of Auouit IB, ISBft). The
Division of Toiicolofv (01). relying on DCH'i finding, alao haa
conclufcd that the RPa Torined at the propoaad doaaa of radiation fill
n^t b* • problas (DT nanorandua of Cctobet 11, IVM).
1 tnrpugh e.cretion folio
cnvlronnient (antironr.er.til letela will pro:.a&i> b
of both OZH and DT, we cofclude that F.Pi hJII not
in; hug.an conaimptioo
table conaaquenee of irradiating footfe, yet the
Hit ano/or oroanjairia "-ith Increeae'ii pathcaenicitv
t for the following three reta'ona;
■alection for autatcd erganiasa over nonautated
e) ehangea in DM will induce WA regair fctchanlana ao i.an) autatioof
will on]) be tempc-iry ( Ingran and Farliet, 1977).
In a review of the acicntiric literature concerning food irradiation,
Hoeael :J9E3} could not find any reporta of Increaaed pathogenicity of
Kicrobes due to linglt doaei of irridlation, loaa of detaminative
traita above the apaciea level, or ctiangea in the Bicrobill coHii^itlas
■hicti alloMad pathogana to proliferate beyond what would occur with
other processM uaed to treat food.
„GoogIe
., R.D. 3.rr»t, t.». Dlejnlk. 19B!. DoiiMtry. Jn. C.S.
CRC Press, Inc.! Boo Ratorv, riDrlda. pp 2CZ-2M.
,y Google
iBTww Of ttnane > ROtana n o *«, ii. f«s CJf'***''^ "T^ —
-^ DEfART'lINT or HEALTH t.HUMA\S£RVICES "^ »J»c "M» fcwtt
Memorandum
I E'llueKen Srtncn. HFF-lSi
1 E«»l«»tfpn Br.nen (HF
'■aij^
>■ aorc tnan IS
ti*r>itiDn' If th« ttltlnj, en
r(0 icceptibli but kit toae
Ing Klin inttrprttatlon of tut
ti«Bln*tlon thijr a^ptirtd ts k<
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
(f.ti.1 iD»Uelos
(teeing f.igh
oni. Seconal
i July, iseo fii>
Mi<_^xj-j^
(30
Bis/kg of r«iJ1oly
f thtjt unlquf r'
eniniB to the tol
on of tneii riato
t1
lyt
?oi
oy Itttina rtqulr
;:s
n^o
11( including »1
iosriB")' »nd til
ngo
nch (HFF.)Jt) (long <■
11"
4»S^
J
ec: K'F-ISe (KekoSH. «org»nroth, eielttrs. Hittin. Hilri,
HfF.IOi (Duntd.'sruu), HFFOsi (Tikejuehl), Hrr-15?
[Flimiii. fe.irBl), HfF-IDO
,y Google
RrtJiation Teclinolofiv, Inc.
,y Google
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
»> iffteti el I
Cr^*v' /^
,y Google
hiuMn, t.S., Ariviniltk
etHcici teilcel. U.
h»«h«, P.S., Arivlnijti
• end »t<[lDIi> In k'Kc
rlekton. U.H. , and Eabe
11-13S.
tsnirtf. A., uilleci, M.
il:*ch Sc^fctlfK Sirvi
llii, P.S. IfSO. Leot
TTHiifi riih. I. Mg
• IltoloH »<l loi-.I€vHT
IJ.v.Uffli. 1976. C,n
■E. J. Ctntt. Crtal. IB
mltltulntt in CKO eitt
Fsed
■T, k.S.. (n
w. i»i;
!T0. Pi
. D.N. . jDd Miidi
Tgileol. U([. J
■ of f..<!lD|
S3> 34«<
lanciilOD
Bisl. Ill
Lack of
y:>.^-^
\j^^ «-«^^t3 A«~o^^W .
„GoogIe
FiUl'Ji'ICn' Hi) '..V. li, I5i5
Effecis of feeding irradiated wheat to
malnourished children'
jc/,.
lijlr ind mcihodi
■Jinp ,nL-lj.'.fl|( .flJ
,y Google
kts. 1977. MicroDiDlogy of rood Pasteuriiad bv
. »ct. MlMntirli «iii. 123-iaS.
. Jarret, l.». Olejnifc. 19B2. Do.iwtrj. Jn. E.S.
Ptterson. Cos. fr**ervitiori of TooO by lomiing
»t. Inc., 80C( fKton, rierida. pp 2C2-20*.
Tne Kictobiogieil Sifety of Itriaiatca fooo. «riri««
of MicrobiDlogic*! Nature Inherent of FdoO* Irr*ill*t«
> iaK[:r. Cooei MiHntariui CwHiation. rW/MHD
,y Google
■^ DIPART'lINT Of HIALTK *. HUMAN SERVICES
!(, IMi (Jji**^^^ "T^^^^
#
Memorandum
1 Brtnch, HFF-1S6
1 6roup for the RtiFttx of To«ltoloa)f
sugh: Chief,
FODd Additivtt evi1u*tion Brtncn [HF
1 S, far dtyt l«i
■prttation of tni
lontfl attDvt. StuC
tn«j avptirid ts D
,y Google
„GoogIe
. •■r^U-.r^i/T:,. CI..,,...
,y Google
Rrtfiidtion Tecnnolotfv, Inc.
•*->'?
ould only bt
,y Google
„GoogIe
r!i- rr
„GoogIe
o--.- e ■-'-
„GoogIe
KIFEKE1KES
v.s. :»". siudui >
Int. J. U«Ul. 1
It. Bid. :s> jc:-
UT7. Uck el
tichitk, n.x
■ut4ItC!ieit
J7-101.
19)6. 9
yo.
\^US ^Wtcl^ Aewo^x+^^W .
„GoogIe
\smcii r-^ '-.v. '*. "*5
Effects of feeding irradiated wheat to
malnourished children'
^
jsjy.
, k; i: h \0 l\l.A WHO .i!.,-.i
„GoogIe
rHE*T TO MAlNOUMaHED
iiwd in bull jnd phyiohfaoohiriaiB |PHA> al Iba ■iilg^B. Al
«nr^\<pij< '««>' «' '>»»■'• to 0.1 B< «< U Bc/IOI
r.^T'ttlliM •>i<iHl«>">"-D""iHllw«>.r«o(»i€«j«MHlii
Jicn who li;id rtcelved ftcihly imdiiitd
31. •i(>'int numbtn a( polyploid ccIIiwck
„GoogIe
cclli were 3lw considttfd. iJ>c mcin in>
of loul abnoimal cilli ii 4 and b -a
fndini weie 1.2 ind 3.8%. re;p«ct>v.
Krci up jiKf wiiMiiwal iifihtimdiiKO whi. ,1,,
hex numhci ol' pofyploid and abnoimjl li;II. :ijJ
fiwt d«CIC>»d contid<tsbl)' ll the end of 16 u^vk.
> of and b) ihe 24ih week ill jbnormil ctlK hjd
. In ciimpleiEly diuppeaitd. In children whu hjj
Kceivfd iht tioitd irradilicd wheal. Ihe mn
dence ol' dermile polyploid celli wu 07^ ji j
i:^
s»=^,
^
r
u-j"-
'^'i
■^ V
„GoogIe
S&z.
> ••'J
■'s ^-iO^
fo^.
^^
„GoogIe
> (P < 001). Ln none of iht li mocuHd *iih ih» piestnce oi polypluiil icil,
imw uridmiuion ihai of polyploid celli induced t>y ihe ingcsii.t
chililidi wiih rcipid lochiuTTiDiomal i,ifji«l oi a sporjdk phenomcTu. «;i,m
pios.«i.%cly 1
111 g..;lujl])'d,i
I. They Hunk Oi Sli^r.i Oij""'
,y Google
„GoogIe
■ TESTIUOW OF CATHERJtf J fWUfCVJCH PH> Mw. It, IMS
,vT. J monT. (iiou, 198;. VOL. 42. xo 5. 559-563
&^'
SHORT COMMUNJ CATIONS
Non-iaduclion of dominant lethal mutations in mice fed
'{sinma-irradiaied glucose
i- IrtANJU BALA VARNIA, S. DEVAKI NANDAN. K P. R-AOind M.
P SANJEEVA RAO
e Dtpiruntnl of Ctntlia, Owntna Univcnil)'. H>^irmbid-$00 007. Ind.i.
T- {ftiitn.id22 April 1983; inmd 17 Junt 19S2: aicrpltd S July 19g7)
Xi, Istroduction^
\i The (pplicition ef ic
ipmponcnu hu come in I
;pBniblt ge:niie hmrdi i
liaiion foT the pretcrviiion of food and food
on wiih the idteniernuclcir nehneloa%'rThg
itith iht coniumpiion of iiT»di«itd foodt *tr«
wiih pUnu <N»MriJtn »nd Swiinin»ihui 1«8, S»'»mi
'«f a;. 196Z. Holiier tl at. 1965]. btCKrw (Molin and Ehnnberf 1964, Dupuy and
rt'icii 1966), Dreiophito (Chopri 1965, Rinch.rt »rKl R.ny 1965, Schubert 1969)
^jn^mice^touiichen-DiLhnicnefii;. 1970 Kopylovdu/. 197I).Thesenoioxidtyof
tK:gai ■olutioni eipoied to ionizing ridiiiioni ini fint reported bi' Ehrenberg
^1960), who obMr\ed ■ high frequency of chlorophyll muiitlont in the Mj
^cierMion of barley (ccdi expoied to irndiited glucoie. SubteauentlV. 'othtr
function inplantaai
5(1950), who ob»ei
it Ignore reported devi»
^ ifier treatment wh irridnted tugar tolutic
Sdiuben IVbU, KtslVlh and biwunmaihan 1971)"^y■^ anS'Rta {IVTT] r^orled
tat L-radiaiad lugir lolutioni weremuugenic lowardi Salmamlta lypkimu-rium, but
ion mutagenic in ho!i-mediaied aiuy with mice a* the mammalian hoai. From the
i>^liblc lite.iture it ii not pouible to ittivc at concluiioni with regard to the
uiugenic riik to man from irradiated cvbohydratea. "Dm prcicnt inveatigation wat
Ddertakeo to evaluate the mutagetiichy of It radiated glucoic by (be docninanl lethal
Est ID male mioc. ,'
>_ Material* sod metboda
; D-glucosc (anhydroui) obtiirtcd from M/* Saiabhai Cbcmicalt, Baroda, India
«i uied. Irradiation of ghicoK powder wa* carried out in polythene bagi in the
EC of air at room tcmpcfBlurc (25 ± 1*C) tiling a **Co gamma aowrcc (Bhabha
earch Centre, Bombay) at a doie rate »r5< to SSCyAnia- The doiei were
id by fcrroui aulphatc dmimcliT. In all the rapcTHnenn laiMteaii-brad Swiil
t. In ihort-tetm atudh< fradtty im*^m» ifmctm waa tMd wM 100 and
^DOO Cy doac level* while in the len(-M(m Hudin, t«M ■«* of •Kpcrinwnta were
' d out with (i) frcahly itndUted ghKoe* (300. 1000; 30000 and 50000 Cy) and
Q norcd irradiated glucoae (glucoae wn liiadiawd widi 200, 3000; 20000 and
„GoogIe
M Nct*livc control group of mice fed on nock laboniory nliofi (Ombtn!
(() Conltol groupofmicc fedonunirt>di«icd|)ucxi*einHl(litianui
(Coning 2)-
(c) Tcngroupsofmicc fed irrM)i>ledelucoK(200. 7000, 20D00ot 50000^
U Eqtfimemlal fottduTt
For the dion-tcmn inidiet, male mice aged S-10 weekiwcrtadmininncd^
2 ml ofunirrMliited/irradiatedglucOie<10pciccnt) for 7daii. Following tn
e»ch m»le «■»( e«g«d with two femilei of the «»me nf»in. The fenulet mre le
by b«h fonilci at w«k1)' intertill. Thii (equeniial nuiing wu ci
wecki to ctubliih the ipecific wniitivir)- during tpermatogencHi (OaUiei|'S
DiMinno 1960, Epitcin il at 1972). The fcmatet were ucnficed on the 16A^^
preuimptivc miling and their uterine conienu wen exuninol for live md K
■mpUnutJom. I . \^j
In the long-lerm nudie*. two icu of cxperimenu were conducted. la orh
mice of 4-S wcektof tge were given orilly 2mlof iior«d imduted glucoie laliitj
(10 per cent) umiinuouily for 8 wecki. Afiei tmlmeni, each mate •k-ai caged «ii
two fcmalciof the tame drain which were replaced at weekly intervalt for 1 wJtf
The pregnant femalei wereucrificed on the 16th day ofprnumpiive mating end 4
uterine conienu were examitted for live and dead implantatioi
lethality wn anetied in teimi of pre- and poit- implantation lethality
implantation leihilir;- wii determined on the baiii of comparintu ef UZ
implantation ntei bctw-een control and treated grtnipi whereat poR-implanaaW
lethality wai calculated in termi of per cent dead implanti in reliiioa to MtA
implantationi and also dead implanll per pregnant fenule. The revuha aajif
Haiinicalt; anilvfed by applying tquare-iool (rantformaiion on the dead impliaS
pet female for carrying out analyn of variance, and the 'i-ieat* (Snedcov a^
Cocharan 1967). For total implaniaiion ratct, analyiii of variance and 'Z'tttay^lt
canied out. Further, (be per cent dead implanti over total inqilantationi ^j:
ttatiiticalh' malyied uiing the Oii-aquare teat of :
3. Rasolls and dtacusaioa
T^le 1 diowt total implantation and lurt-it-al raiet with freihly i
gluooac in dtc ihort-mm ciudics. It ii clear fr«n the data d>ai there ■
Mgnificant Jifferencet in total implantation and aurv i\-al raiet betM-een """"J fi||
tJOM grow* rt 4r» ol the wgelt ff^»^>>.ti,.. hpth poH-meiotic and meioeic »»«Wk
.rT^iiimiing.iri ^
The rmihi obtained in the long-tennatudiei with fre»hlyirT»diaiedgh>coieM»j
Hand irradiated glucoK abo revealed no ^-ariaticn in total implantaiicn v>d nrriaK
•qmbamcn emtiol and treated graupa (uble 2 and 3). '-'
Thcdaia from thepreientim'ciiigation clearly indiaiethe inability of irradius
luctwe <o induce dowtinam lethal mutation* •tthei by ihcart- or loog-tenti b*d^-
„GoogIe
6;
? S
III
SESS
■Hi
SSS5
-
^
55;^'
s
?
55fs
ZJ
s = ss
Hi
csss
^
????
o
!j
55i5
?
^tSI
t^
SSES
;*
11?
gRRS
Jil
3^??
s
i
^
;i;l
f
iHS
ii
5:s;;
111
££ = :;
lid
se:??
s
1
s
s;sa
_
SE52
t-
Ii
as^s
"• s-
Ms
mt
;
m
;£??
i
s
rrIS
1
tsss
(3
P
Si^PK
ii
5??8
1
' j
I
„GoogIe
III
Hid
»»o.»
o
"
sss|
p
= ISS
Si
S5JS
:-■=
■Mt
SE2S
m
??;?
1
Ij
u%i
P
t e
£*
■ 1^
ret
J 11
t,„»o.
t;
sss^
1
ii
-,--5
I i-
S.ld
?»a-iF
s
-
s;:; = g
«
s5lS
ti
J5;5
t-S
; =~
Etc
= v"^
s^???
U-. t-
c =r£?
1
'-*-
1
H
SEpI
u
ij
?i:S£
■;
t
S
„GoogIe
Sfiar! tomrnvrikeliora 563
foinm'itet on Aiomic Encrj^-, 19(iS) ind chtomoiomi] ibcmiiont in ms and
i„|(X (Schuben 1969). The i«alii of ih* preieni itudy are comparable with tht
^,«I1C« of muugtnic eflrcij of irraduTed fpodt itponed by olhen inveiiigaiori
,^n>ind»lishan «( a! 1975, Ch.uhui « o/. 1975, Rrddi ti al 1977).
On contrar)-. Aiyar and Bio (1977) irporiid ■ doM-dcpcndenimoeaKof reverte
^on'io'"'" ■SDJino™//o Of ftrmuj-iiim u.ih irtadmed sugai uluiiont. Howtvei, ihiy
(jilrd to thow any mutagenic cflcci v.i\'h irradiated lugar aolutiont in the hott-
p^iatcd aisiy with mici ii the mammalian hoit. T7>e absence of muiagenicity of
,rT«di*led lug»r loluiiom in higher animali wai preiuirwd to be due lo rapid
jfioMfi cation and /oilicrelion of the ndiolylic products of iUBariolut>oni(DerIiiI.
]«&9, Aiyai and Rao 1977). The ibKHci of mutagenic effects of inadiaied elucoie
.Jiwned in the present study mav also be eipliined on the above lines,
I li ma> be concluded from the resalit obulned in the present tiudy that
/irradiaied glucose it incapable of inducing dominani lethal mutations in micc.Theae
fitifer^'a (ions are of considerable importance since ri brings forth hinher c^Hdenccin
ujppon of the lafeti' of irradiated foods for human consumption.
^IckDOwledgnieiilx
Theauthoriiregraieful to Bhabhi Aiomic Research Ccnlre. Bombay. India, for
Lmdli providing the irradiation facilities. Thanks are due loDt. J. S. Murthy for his
\>lp in the tulisiical analysis of Ihe dau and Professor O. S. Fteddi for providing
:h.ih*s, P. S., AniMVDUCSHAS. M.. Aii-m. A S., Mid Svnd«*«. K... 197S, WComiJ.
Toiual.. !3, ^33.
:hohia, V, L., 1965. A-olKir, Linul., 208. 699.
[»uA. K.. An.*,, A S. and S«iki>«!.t,, A.. 1969. RaJioi. fl«.. 37. 101.
3i TV-,. P., and Uici«Ti. M., 1966. Rudiai Boi.. 6. 499.
f:iiHc^aEi>c. L., 19oO, Abhanil. Dtui. AtoJ. Wui. Brrlin IMtJ) t. 1».
[ifTTEiK. S. 5 . Bus. U'.. Arnold. E . md BiSHor. Y.. 1971. ToiUet. AppI Pharmaal.. 23,
1S8.
loLSTTH. R. D,. Sl-cm, M., and Syt^.W), F. C, 196S, Kawt. Lnd. 2M, 850,
I"|vtCo>ii>iittizon Atomic E^-EacY,Congtell of the United Sutes, 1968, SuOii^Feod
IrraAeiim fW.shington. D.C; U.S. Govemmem Printing OfT.™), p. 110.
■inv,^. P. C. «id S»*MiVATH«v. M. S.. 1971, ReJ^i Bal., 11, 253,
^■.iVLOv, V, A., Oijpov*. I, N,. and Kliik. A, M,. 1973, RaJidialotiyc. 12, SB.
>1-'Li\. N., and EHatvacHC, L.. 1964, /ni. J. Raiiial B<oI.. 1. 223.
>l<>i-rKCHL^.-D«HMEN. M., Moi-rscHU>. I., and EHnF>-'BD>c, L., 1970, Jni J. RoAai Btel..
It. 101.
'.•HR.j.s. A. T., and S>.,."i>«th.k, M. S., 1958, /iii<m J. Cmi.. I«, 220,
I.MiEae. E. F,. and DiMivvo, R, L,. 1960. Inl. J Raiial Bttl., 2. 196.
*'iini, O, S,. Rroov. P. P.. EacvEZta. D N,.andN*iDL',N, V., 1977.iw. J.itfldio(.flio(„31,
SB9.
«'M«,«T. R, R., and R*-m. F J,. 196S. GrwiiVi. S2, 1119.
-luatiri. J:. 1969. SnW, ICW///1A Or/., 41, 873,
'Miiiroa. C, W.. and Cdch •r>n, W. C, 1967. S<aiiaiial mtikaJi. Sixth edition (Cikuita^
Oxford Uni'crsii) Prc» and IBK Publishing Company) p, 419.
•-"11-i^TMA.N, M. S.. CHo^a*. V, L., and Bhaskahus, S.. 1962, Radial Rn.. 16, 182.
,y Google
F«0/l*WWHO|OIKI tX^DO COMMITm. IMI. T«hn Rtp
LoHA-N, H.. VooOD. S.. .nd Blok, J,. 19J0. BoAoi R«.. 4Z, 437. . ^
Lico>iniM>t.C., md BiiowN. W. O. 1973. y fsckJ Sn. 31, 971. .
Prrnts. T.. and H-wn, C. 1967, ^ biol Chrm.. M7, 1 566. T
Pmskvi, A. C. Bkl-uktse^x S. A., 5HLel^. V. N.. vid DoLrs. P. 1.. i^'i. Ht* Emir^
Chrm (USSJt). 9, 206. ' ~"
ScHEia, H., 1970, A<ufwr R«,. 43, 11; 1971, 5i^*<. 23, 2J9 3
TON Sonntm;. C, Bid TMohs. E., 1970. Z Nea.rf. (6), 2S, 1*0S. . ~-
vo^ SONNTAC. C, DiZDAiioCLi;. M., *nd Schllti-Fikihlisde. D.. 1976, Z. Kaunf.^^j,
8S7.
ioh'.TAC, C. 19S0. .^rft' CorkiV* Chrm.BMhtm.yj.T. "^
m. L.. TON SoNh^AC. C, and Schllte-Fudhliv-de. D.. 1976. In. J. Rodiai A«i m
MS ^
MotcKfar ,4ip.tu, •dite^
,y Google
CoaUtion for Mtmatttm In Nutrition and HtaMKorm
(CANAH)
P.O. Bm B-ti
H.FA I495S
MEMuriM urn nxsssiie or rooo iippinve mmete<
USHTIM AfPLIUrim TO KOO
IMCU OF SCIENCE iTUf SBtJHAt
viAtatiB,! i>j (lit food, Onug, uif Cojmfic *!(, uhI
J>S»iiiiitnow (If wrirjow
Tkt Buuu 01 .'ciuu Juncttoiii «t)uit FW by •utuia tecai«i«iKio»i a Iht Coiw^
bi^MU on tiutnut i£gu£ifot« «((<*). rlit tccoinuilatiaiii iM dciiutil jlso con-
eliu^nu on [liU iapptUd tiy pctKuxtfi uul oiliciii, data nuaifatid ^ Hit teitntiltc
UUtAtuft, lud OiU jtxtvitlil hit tkt BuMau. SiKcl FBH uiuut ^vitult alt df «lic
dtt* Ut-.'.X, it *itt ul) atmltubCv ipa* data mppUtil dy ofhttl. riui Ji a •ujaK
tMitljui to (■« luMuiti and cD«c6iiio»i lAieli M ^i tiUitttd tt duw jtoo (Ki'rfcfa.
nilUOhS COMfWl B8>HCH
rtc PtUtiaiu CsHftaC euncA IFCBI Ji (numtit^ inBotitihti (ot /te HHUiaut ij
FM at^tiat <t^nd b# Hit faad AiUitlnii imtmlmtAl oj rlil ll 4«t of «U Ftdeut
Food, 0*119, «( CoMK«ic *c/l. eicli *»(jid«ri( (j(a6J(t(iti i t^n/tat aiut «| i«to-
<Kduj lot Ae Mt ol food oddirimi in ct en oni jeed.
rkc eaUs'^itt of iKtaiou iaedidti dlttet ajUUtiuU ta joiid, melajiiij Mttt^It,
rta iMoetttui o| iMd uUit^ue fittitiBiu IwoEvci Ae jot(Aa6i3 CMtidtutLiiu 1
iwriiiduiirfaw4M
,y Google
Coalition for Aftcmatfucf In NuHtion and HtaMKorm
(CANAH)
POBmB-lZ
■- - n.Pti lt9iS
t. rte pwponaU t\ BttUioiux o( Me luiituee mutt p^midt laUitUUe
data to tiipptKt the netuvif unetiutsa gf "(e^ lo* Me Wftttet^M.
rill tiudu Df pfggj <i gn tlie pe«i«(Oru«.
aif^ffvc uKdu r
le tfiKovta, (lie
ejjecfiut. Seuiue tijttu it (etatiue, *> , _ ,
be luthdiiiul Oua tKit Htiicli <i tutgiubty neceiiaity ta aeem^Uili
the inttiufid tjjtct.
gl tkt Qat*iLttiau.i'i li^iiatixM at
icui thai lu luu deteUHiiedi
(1 KtAfuAtd in tki ijitiAtit gj Hlef*, Ac UMuiit
I Bfe Mu Mitt luioubly Mctttity tg necgnpUtt
tht uttuiWd t*^tieal g« ottan (ecbUuI tiject. (FM beUevti
tlut tlu etftct iluHn tkMU be tetetul diuett^ to tke (h<I ate.)
). tk< iililitive lui agt Me* iIumi t« be it uneef p««Aiee«. IK> U
<( It ii -tg M tddti to uunt )(eiJ, uu uuiugu «te4 wt Iwui
Me e*<ntf. ud dttie it wt ceit*evtt iiit* Me td^te ptf^cti a^
tkt fud-Mgducuig uiaet nktn Me t»d it tetted dy u iMt^ieet
wtfcM gf eiltfuete luiitivity. iiubtiihii in Me tejutactei.
t«t«im*ii o( iketf tiit, <Ji r>»i:'((. wy 1>< Me tjitf uwtt gf rieituyO^ uufeee
.«.(... ........ .. ,. .... ..., ^rjLi(<i', g) , (uiit. rkt peeieKtetun gl Mc
actual dttua jf u^i-ayutu n uti-taetce^t
,y Google
Coalition /or Attcmatiiws In Nutrition and Htaltiican
(CAN AH)
PO. BiK B-12
uJuiuUt tide tUuti iiajr scum <i&i<i« mUk tia dui*U (tfcctt
^lUUianAt mik lA mfUtien, bactui«Caiv, ud uiUotton eJiui-
iiHy auf be ucettoty to ewttuii^ tueik jacto«i «t (oit oj v^tu^u, dcuuttd
diitttabiUtif. indattA udiaactiuUii, and dvugu in Oit uAite sj Ac bacttxial
tu.W(
01 CW"
j a<9URri mtif be
""*
Km_
JMW.
FOOP CHMISfRl.
r>ie ^dditi-/ib and litAt^imtKl^tiofi iMfttk it CDncf^td vt-
itCatiitg to titt poiiibltitii oj tilt p/iBductioii o( indueti
diattil tatgU, uMitthtf tin tai^tC (i nu j9Sd intvuSti .
■i^iHg 9>U»ii( onCy (iicJi(uitat(v tipoitit. Tki SuncK cr
^Hoduud by I xucCui tURt jountiiin witUn (lit itim 01
jHoduud uAtn ucUed o^ mtattiblt ofom tc/utit to tki.
Otiiiitian of Ifp Mnemf
rill 4.S Mud dnit KDLiU f)iM be tte Ff 0 uittue jM Ct. hafuMim.. rPit (eoat»t
*ii ippuufly IteuCiied ptoiliict wa<t rxfUniii danatd at 1
rtguiiirt lAicli upoii toils i"cub«(iBii uMu JaueiSte co*
juw su^. fen uamplt, an inwdiitid inaiiMt (exid jgi
ACiiM iLiua C[ialfUn^<l>»fiMliiiinfOiii<M
„GoogIe
CoaAtlon/br AftcmatftM* in NuMtfon and HMfthcon
(CANAHi
mB-I2
)»p(Me(* tJjtcfi.'L. . _, . ,^_
feafutiwmi. uuU ndu^sutty coutc u uttnaty kundnu um^UImu
uiUlant mUttiaiu atgU du«ute Mc'i
'"'ilti"' ''<««<'»■<
ipaiUst 111 (lie iiiuU at jtiHtt liy f^it iHMg-fi«9u/ui«1 nay bt
ihiiAt iM 4 ii»V(td «o4i« ■■» Jw( bi ttujiUied. tattuiAt at ianatl
HKilUit., t^ek II taiAt OK aiii\ my (ait to itntap. AUt, guwM uri
,__._ . ^^^ (i^ j__^ -iM(>-o»9*fUwrt « iwn-|Ko(wr,<ir typu of CI.
4IUUI. lUlkau^li tht iiiclu
DrilK in cutttiH ttiiUiu at micwo^gnUtn tMd can bt leaimptitl^il mtif
b|r uptAttil luft-dduf ilaid ai OtMaiatisn, ■Hcu-olgan^mi al At
illiilUtis* plant fny bccoH ttiiituit (o tti fetiut Ijfx^d o* nuHttion
by (hi Mgctii 9j miaiAt ttttUia:
k tUii taiMd (J tU dttrKaUiai of .ifl*u«t OihliiteKi, s/tmiMiiia oiiM-
giwtk 6y M(kDgtiuc otgruuint xtfli gtii(t« 'tuttftwu. Miii lay k
■uAmiI » it^fKf iiitttuci. Etuuic at (he iluuce o( u^M<U£n
Jua %«tiiHit lUdiuC "iMo-idita in «« (Hoduet, Mdugiu lodl ■• CI.
toftit^ww. lAich aijU hint lutkituid tlii itKadittief inouil, iHy fuii
*ut uny iiflidfy utf wM ruuiunr ptalHtiitiiiii.
A Q— I umB anXwi ]to *« n»i<ai» n^Omf
,y Google
Coo/ltion for Aftcmatf ua In Nutrition and HtaHheare
(CANAH)
PO. B« B-lt
<gaiut>M uifA jifjLttt Ktii
(MctT^rUi
Bicffl,« (.j f
■.odiict, piUtDgui
-Sluft U thi p
luck 11 C(. befutiiiMi. i*ic* ■iaW ^v
itlmfio^^n P41IU1
■aif gum mU uttii upiilCy
^^Kum
»m( plofiiJifl
Ij ttt ijwtei ffj C£. bofutiiua.. uifiic*
u4 » uliiitt'oi
Chax v^UaUut all jowi, Mt pteiu^ « fhi woik
/ jSltoMH^
^ ,htti-ui
Dwt tim «ot
rti tnOaiiVi ta guH uuf
p«i4« «. ttta( (oi«. .
gj bd^tti- »it( «iie i|
ttoftat o( *(it Moiiiic^ ii wl tiaidlu ccn-
noffdj. riif. linet ui( fupeudiut a
b( c(efli(» ipeciji
and liqiAli cctiwtUd tt
ik«((-tiie oj (III pioiiact
rtaf (ow-Aiit itwdiafioii
uU in I iu>^
MihAblt product,
wf fluU tkc pigiluiM tut
bc H«/M d
1 a ptKiilabtt
itu.
Oi p^ticaUi «.«e*. (0
W a «. 6,ft.t«« ,.« E
^ fjttoiy pwdutt
[II Xiojtt iMutyt itafc
it Mgw/i- <
g\la( BiirtM o( jiid
P^=tla=(i.
ruJnpufuifytii: a'ygaru.tr. thu. Oil. tatuiaxilot.
luaJtd aiOi tht outqtoMh of Ct. bttuUjlaM typM
/ «sw ffut iA mtt iiih OI
it ntt tnuuial joi (Ik ouJqitatth sj «« otomim and rti cwcdict^n
sj t(» toxin, riit D-» potintial of tht iUk j((i* t«i(J, ij mavit'
bin CiUiigh fut mtgvufli oj tlit sigu/t*.
„GoogIe
Coalition for Attematiutt In Nutrition and Healthcare
(CANAH)
t>. jot cmUtut, ^aatUy, OMl ctiutiaC is^tg teJA catpttiiiaii,
4. di^tttibititii nj ji/, oKhtlmdvUt, and fitett^ ta^pantutt sj i
jiigd. and Ml suuCobiUty ij tkt pttintiat hictaiiaU uugy
ft^ij^.. a
■MUicMl lowituuti. e[>r«], ud
L ?uati«iei aj jot
mtHiaUoni) ind luxjei titiiiitiiBn.
«tt<ual< niMlal con/Mi ... gj ™,ie,
abnui iiudiituin cljtc^t or (hcii eitiwUttt lo jit, onfy .rifonOi eaiUtn.
itabiUtii, itt fluatitii oiuf ititntiat j(U(y ictrf caipoiitioii, pioieiii (lu^
rte iMIPftihieit^ oj (»( loud liflut uy (M( potixtiat (oi Sow i.» dit mi*
). PtUtiant wail inzLidi lAumpUtl Ivalimtian o* *lie lijiitjiaiiict
4JU>«tiiMn(iiC jouiiiui Ldiich lijnat o poitibCc oifuiiti ijjul. Ai
tiwipd of this tU-aht bt (kl lifjotf a( a jiwiin^ oi a itgiUJtean.
-in .(kt liuM cutidwiima oUdan acJinitii H md itaii (HodutW i,
oi ffct contriMptioB oj III ituiUattif di«. Kmi ttvjald On, it-iiou
fKtt luch oijffwMioB iji ttt adiuct of ax^ iiieutiin ti( Ui M.
ikie tt tkl lajl uic oi tht josd in tlit iuaan Uttax^ H it M.
(iunee, « iluuU (i*(iti not bi (epoWeii « fht ptfifion, rn, £i
itfwi/cil UIm wiiM coirtnl, t( iSduU be ttpfcUntd. F<n emmpt,
petition CDnU tiptiti" that tuck dn ejjic^ ii a nowot o« wi/K r
A Gra^ivM CodMon Air dM FTHdoni gf Obm
„GoogIe
CoatWon for Attcmatfiwt In Nutrition and Htaltheart
(CAN AH)
F.O. Boa S-I^
B.M JMS3
Ihi «uu(u>ii at iUeu
ittdi^ Ituify uliiig gvivl UvtU oj I
touU lit iuJjiEf«t. A c™ptweii(«i| auttUiin
g( tti (ood i( (*e poinl of auins (juxi^uf ifougt (iait ^i cuapiulilc
t« tAot si tht tkiHiaCti) ineettitil iocd it flu time (incr Ij it It
^CJUOHdbtt t0 ufr fu qutition^ It fthmU be itAiaidbfc to ttptct iw
S. rht ittutd gj uiwf luMiig Itttt in uUcA <ut1(Mi»u((y ampUtt
•uttisKt at jed uc tnw^teu cited ii cviilbici fuit tticte Itu bttx
flo iflfuuut ill until itiowt Mtue sj «« iitadinttd joarf. ffit Oiu^iion
touul III tiiwptt sj tkii («((«(( ill fte lepmt oj JtMiiij iduiUi ^u*-
pottlMn iiii^ncd to tut mmjtijiiat ida^iucy n) iiuiUMid cifui jtui(.
n« upe^ixtxti wit » uti, jgii lAtch uUonii C il at ttttntinti (He
«tk»l Mcti a* jBiUyi h^ iiuit uitwin C, Ant Mimi dictt eoxtiiiicil K
ptnttut i'uiuid nMiw Itoxlie; CIim iiMdi egntaint aitt^Jitc vitoix C.
IjbatMtOi fawte. Aiu mic (titers puifa^ MitI bt tw> ti
vt(u UUIc ucipt in (o>
*j/M WC ptaiOtA idtru^Ji HiMiou muclci in Mppnt aj ujtJy ^ sne tUitian.
It (ouiuf rtat fui rtui g«-tliit< sj (kf* hcu uttvoiU ts Ckc |aad miJw B«i»iite»-
ntUH, uid i«tii tfcm tc^utc tttdiu IKU iniaCucil. jI ten ij tlit anticUi ••■•
««[» dcfmtie Mu"-" — "- — "— . -» ^..... — -! ,..°.._..j ,..j i..
•KututA. 4m tkt Mit ti iturfio^td jaaili PTC ii eanuutit ib«u/ <kt lubtU. tarm-tw.
m CmMm M *■ Am<m (f OhW
,y Google
CoaHtlon /or AftcmaUvei in NuMtion and Haalthean
(CANAHi
( Hat oalltid ai-iti iittmcit g( f^lty (ntttnttUn sf taxicit^ <laU, iKctaAJja
I. Tn -onv Oitllnctt, n vt\, dtjuu^i taUt i|(cc( lau sbictMd u UM.
tUttA thU (liu( wcif •» (H^ cjiiett fhaf e«i(d he ittacjiUcd aUk
X. la «tlu* -J'tfuui WuHfniud (((><=' "i tbtuwtd u Me fX tout.
4 r.-Iic Utttt kit Mo rkt(«>^l (l< IMH Bluui S|
ij (W •tu4;ifH (tnu. I fn\i i\i m fit<ir.<i((« K^Hlieu^ liUfuiet* bt
«>« (««Bri<>ti«l Mlt
0Mlf<M4 h
iw*- >*« nr<t.wi <^»<M (ii«i .■ mV-tutf Mtmiiiat >i'uf«tf. tnwatei
,y Google
sdd
Coalition /or Altcmatiues (n Nutrition and Healtheare
(CANAHi
n tki «t^U Oat M( sbmiunaiu Huujitcd lutAu iAi^,
■uiui ifc^ci DEui \ititt»j«/jl, o\ ntpeattrl ii jii m DrE un [litewiiiu. "uui
^utitian went luuuit ovm (Jit jodd in lutjf^i u«(^( (Mit oticiuW/oni tu
UgM OK (lie (fjecd oj
It eUvLnstient ij MigU gaJi,
tiiKt tiny i»^( (D tfKcijic neat sj ii((adi. t jottiwi-iiF gj ilUi uBili •iigli(
il not 6t obivtviA uith thi moat oUtAiiatisni ei i«ijW
■---ijic MUi oj i((adi. * iottoui-iip Bj i"^ ""' ■
A expUU nmt oi (tit ctlu.li (oiic tjjte^i i
•Uta Ham ant Joorf (o Mo(kii. *t(kough (dii l«u» (ili« i iMiowitt ploc(i«, a(
ttt ^tuKt tim tktKt it iiiniijttijirf timnltdgl oj (Jit tJi(.«i oj itudiafioii gii
imKi-iiiiiat faodt to auiiai tucli a (Hacttci. F« enw-ptl, ont lanittu aj (im( s"-"
Oi (Ml ilit(eteit( caitt e( tlit tamtiit -till btluut iiHntntCtf undi^ (ht iniFutnee oJ
■ $i\/ui dan sj ud«/uw. rKi (liiPitaii of Co™«icta( Fiilititti indicadj ((«( (lit
ti« Jiili loMan, MugW ui rfi(("tAt boiiitt o( u»(t., itio Bji(( itipond imviutttn
to i(«iin(trit. LtHni uil oungti teast dijJeitBttil («■«!( iHadiitioB. rkt om-
poiit^fl « tfc( jtiK (w ampin an i«(ii"M(t» [Uji«e«( beujin oi tin-iion-
Miidit caiuUtliiti te unit (tijitioit btAauiol (o iiudiat/oii. It isttwia tl«( tKi
tUteti inductd in (kt jDail ait not «cuiaiit(/ (*t iuk. oiui atm ate lof "tctn-
MitjF iioii-tei^t. In u^u gj tJitii imdiiuj. inttapotatim o( dutt uith lawit wasine
0f eofljUcitee u (i taitcntirgtcat Jiautil it dijjiuitt at tUi (iK.
■tU, till itctia
autMightil (he
*i»fMMi tie sjiHiemopoLiKicn <pp»oach
obieiuatiani >ttis «^ in It4t by OaCsita tad Levutax tliat petaiti
itiou vitauji C, TKit man Ulii a ladict siiiBte cbitwiLtiiin, but
:i ii*ia iiKft ttituj imadiatetl (cadt ait ijagt ot wti iigtccttd it.
■•"'•■'-- -'-•n. rhtu uptiimntt «e« tOMlucftd by taw cmm-
■ed State*. So, ut «tt tliiAfc about (ke «(e a(
dlu utfti u^taauii E ta be 4MI, we ate ist excouRtet:
t vitc eut iwti^eiit eljceti •aheii mc ate toeUJig at
(tut tattei^v.
„GoogIe
Coatltlon forAltewatioes In Nutrition and Healthcare
(CANAH)
tXtatmvtt dale KtlMlilAtiTlg lilt I Ud t'
iupxacCiatt^ Wgk dtm mk teitiUiei.
Btktt cmcbturi -^licl
tliiiti liiict .iaeotviA^ i/idunin K dtptitien.
*Bi)Mei peobfBJi. ttiKiUd by .'ittwuiu rtjn ii rtt mfagtiiJc [((eet ol
9M a»» am
k oii^^cittv Md ct
"pHatfu
((<( at a((
tUpli m fHOCMl^ «) tu ij UK
mUistnii tjjicd. riUi « iLiiptet is
ttttii U toskiAg fm tiitt ij A«u •>»#
« <««dia(ed iu«Blt tl (lut <«« p«*i« tit
ind mkat t^pii of pusiiilii m ^uc *<c
91 dc u* luuc any 4-ntMbtl nt S-miriiii-ittatiicif
s/tsa&m
1 i(Liil!((B9 ttu tnic tliicti 9j ajatoi^ bul itatntd aJ elattuat
on«i. ttts BtgM luiK iiitiiM (kt UMH viptxtuit (ifidiJig oi X«ia-
am -at itUiiiaUsli/.
PWttCBl* ait M« b
■iif Iwue an ade^ua
III tlic Aui{| picjun
tuMi ditta.
tins '^fit
okiU, und
pttkotoqi
Ht tiUd
j||
1-iDJM a
me «td (o (ook 3/ ituiul tyituii
laMtjicM out MWBd (m *ait»
I vaugh ttft to ^Mi« tijittjicdjif
It mi )» "P (e I0»
-agaMilt,
yoaca.
ctansta t
ti inta digtttUiti tillutatt.
m «t( at
D tocia
ntA.
a<.^tog«
(Mte inio
Utii. da nat tliiot « hauc uid
it. riit «tafca(<fej oj im( oj
cuoui tkaii tin aliiitat dlgvutatian
t «it„ iMpaxtint. A m-^hUie ditl
uI ptDptc de tat tat b<ta( liXisu.
'J« iitf t
'it Mut'i
M Coataan /or Af FrHriDtn s/ Oi
„GoogIe
Coalition for AlUmattvea In Nutrition and Healthcare
(CANAH)
Muii Hi tilt ti4iu4fiiKn<» in a ptlitiimlK tn dtnanltiati tht mUlUiamt lijcty
mi idv^aac^ nj u i^Mdiuiii jouii (inU lUMt iptcijiiii in (lie 11*7 FM deamuit
Ml itilt valid tmii, CBKilqutiUtif, luuiH baiicntUl unJuuiged [ict Appudci II,
pip. Jl-I)l Niw "r»M- MilM^ im tte lojtty (mdiaUoB (o Oit. mfilUiml ad^-
tuuy sj liiadiitid isad, ii coitiZiurf (n ^t tcction, utuUnICy cnua/ aj a
tlatHlaUHK 01 UfBittfDn sj dii 1467 dffuititfil.
la tkc Iftr poUey t«UcMii«. luetU^Hl tuaUty mi ttiUtd tt luctiuU Ac ioltof
I. uJCuta unttAt, itabiUtf, and pkytjebg^utc avo^tai^IUy,
I. fat uHlaitt, quaU^K and U4Utul jaMy aoU eMpgiition,
3. pMtti* 9uaUtv,
the ahiuu aj aH^^-nedibvUMt,
Ml alittiiet oj touc dtgtadatltii pwduatt gj udiitiDn-tuuUZvc wiiiju/t
■Jul mtnUiotal adjiuuti [jot uoivlt, autitjiUHii, ita*cJi, uuttiiitm,
lUtiiiaUt untetciuai, EITA), ud
rktit coBfiMie (0 6t MgMdid at an^np^intr. jitfoi. (d* •iatMtia«at jicn
Uti mitk
I«o«,cW
■ 1 «ili«*u»i-lMi«iyi jiuf«itn(i oM iood idjiincU it mimMtit a Mrtu
joi ttxlc
tagtail laAtt (hu aatitltla-at IvHtn.
rw- . «ifl6e» oi .tuU« aa fde W«tio« uMliti a( vicaiujtt. pis/tin
. iatud
iiisd
tiiiiation. rftti it"it«ui(i|, Iioukuia, dtptnit tot city upon He naCut i
titiKu Hi the jaod lyiteo, but ado ok n ««>bM oj CDftMoftafcle iactoii
abluct oi ffiygtn ta ttt pwAiEt liwiaj iwsdiatlai.
ii-ind-jitid. Pait(=u(ai KtuiriPn i<iouU b« (ocuurf on uttuKii «
Mil e, uitMiid C, ui(i.in B-f!, (luaiUa, and uttamin B-S, 'ttkoiijk
id tittiitiAt nu/ttenti mit m( te linanA, Wit ajotiMiittorted
^ becauii of fubUtktA itudiu flmt duvmtutt toiiti in UiAdiAttd
„GoogIe
CoaftHon/or Aftemdtfues In Nutrition andHealAcart
PO But B-12
■kit poUctf Hte itplictt, Ktitaiatia* aj a Ubitt mittii
tin H tkti' ■■ ■■
f«ro« nil lawpuriwi of rwrifmuAi. orrrwy rras
tilt «u6Uc, MUh lupeet ts tht tsjUy aj iKtadiAttd insdl, iHy ci
obte «eilituce iii Me piU o| Mc eonumtA.
•uCattauifortitFi—itmtlOHlet
,y Google
nited Fresh Fiurt and
■getaMe Association
TESHMONY OP
THE UNrreo FRESH FRUtT AND VEGBTABLB ASSOaATION
U^ HouM at RcpioenMlivM
NoMmbei la, im5
On Food Iindui
^reienled by.
J. Richaid Ones, Jr.
Ciafet Bioihen I^ckinc Company
Wabasso, Floiiili
ChiitKian, Covcinmeni Relaiions Co
United Freth Fiuii and Vefetable /
Alcxindiia, Viifinia
„GoogIe
Ml. ChaliBBR, HeabciB of the SubcOMittee, I ■■ Rlcbard Cravva
of Giav** Bcothai* Packing Coapany In NBbaaao, Florida. Hg
9row and ship cltiua pioducta both doaeatlcally and ovaraeaa
undac tha naae of Indian Rlvar Clttua Salaa.
[ also »■ tb* Cbalrian of the Govecnaent Relations COMaittee
and past ambei of the Board of Dliectoca of the Dnlted Fteah
lit and Vegetable
loclatlon foe the ftei
:lude gcoweca/ablppei
countries. Dnlted aeal
produce connerclally bi
atlon. Dnlted Is the national tiad*
produce industry. The I,5DD aeaibets
HholesaleiB, retailers and affiliated
I Dnlted Statea and tMnty-on«
: handle eighty paictnt of tba fieab
ketad in the Dnlted States.
On behalf of Dnlted, it la a pleasure for ae to tsatlfy before
the Eubcoaalttee today on the Issue of food Iriadlatlon.
United fully auppoits the developaent and research of food
liiadiatlon as one poaalblc altetnatlve to soae poat-harvest
treataenta of fresh produce. Although not a [Mnacea for
treating all ffcsh produce coaaoditleB, iiradlatlon doe* offer
the poaslbllity of iaproving the trade and aaritatlnq potential
of fiesb produce.
The produce Industry has been severely haaperad In aeeting
foreign quarantine regulations vlth the cancellation by the
Envlronaental Protection Agency of Ethylene Dlbroalde (EDB) , a
post hatveat fualgant used to dlslnfest certain coaaodltles.
Because of the cancellation of this laportant tnalgant, tba
„GoogIe
pcoduc* Induatiy la Intareatad In the lapcovad laport and
■ipoct i^tanttal iiradlatlon offara to pcoduca. In particular
papaya, wngoa. and applas, aaong otbaca. Although tha
Induatiy la alao inteiaat*d in iccadlattng citiua> further
laaaacch and devaloiaant ta neadad to dataralna the coccact
doaage without Injuring tba product.
In Kuguat 19BS, Dnttad conducted a autvay of a portion of tba
BBBtMrahlp on tba potential use of food Itradiatton by the
freah produca Induatry. Although all teapondanta agreed that
food iiiadiation would eventually Iwpact the produce Induatryi
tbat iBpact will not be ttaadlata. Aa ana MeNbai raapondad,
'After iMi the pobllci bacoaie batter iaforBad, food irradiation
Hill be a part of our every day Uvea, and tha agricultural and
produce Indnatriaa will change radically.*
Thera are atlll aany hardlea to overcoae before food
Irradiation will be coaBaiclally uaed by the freah fruit and
vegetable induatty. Soaa of theae arei achieving appcoptiata
doae levela for dlsinfaatation and aarketabllltyt aconoailc
vtabilltyi handling and dlatdbutlon procedureai and tba aoat
lapoitanti the education of conauera and the food Induatry.
Dnlted baa undertaken aevaral activltiea over the paat couple
ot yeara to help educate our aeabera. Aftlclea on food
trraditton have been publiahad in our trade Mgatina, OOTUMK;
watkehopa on food Irradiation have been beld during our annual
convantLoni and Dnltad baa dlettibatad white papara on food
iiradiatioB to the Maberablp.
,y Google
On the subject of the succesEful use ot Itiadlatlon, Dnitad'a
suivey ivspondants wcr* pilnarlly concerned about consmei
acceptance o( Irradiated pioduce. Beeauae of th* neceaalty Eoc
conauaet education on iiradiatlon, snited was one of the
[oundin9 Deobeis ot the Coalition (or food Irradiation. Tbia
coalition of food qroupa ha* been lecogniied aa a credible
•ource for infoiaation on irradiation and is conducting
activities to inforn the pteaa, goveriwent officials and the
general public.
I nov would like to conment Epeclflcally on H. R. G9G, the
'Federal Food Irradiation Developaent and Control Act of 19B5i*
introduced by Con9re«saan Sid Horiiaon. United cOMcnds Hr.
Morrison for taking the initiative In the D.S. Congress to
bring this issue to the forefront. Bis Interest and efforts
have been a great asset in investigating the potential for food
irradiation.
United supports the develofaent of a 'Joint Operating
CoMBlssion' as described In B.R. CM. H* nust ensure that the
federal governnent'a research activities are coordinated to
avoid duplication of efforts and to fill any holes. Although
United does not Hish to see the disruption of the inportant
research activities of the Departaent of Energy, the U.S.
Departnent of Agriculture nust play a leading role In the
developaent of food Irradiation, since food irradiation is an
agr tcultural Issue.
„GoogIe
Dnited believes th
t th« J
Int Operating cmnlsGlon will ensu
that USM haa the
eaoiirc
, both Inforaatlonal and financial
to reaearch food i
ladiatl
n's affects on hundreds of pioduct
and to develop app
oprlate
quarantine piotocala. It la vital
that all Involved
qencies
cooperate and coordinate their
activltl*! to asai
t In thlB goal.
The Joint Operating Conaiasion also Is needed to assist in the
education of the general public. Mthough the coalition for
Food Irradiation and other groups are already working toward
this end, the federal goveinaient can play a vital role to
coBplenent and expand these efforts by educating not Just
consuaers but also the agricultural industry.
The final and Boat iapottant issue t wish to address today ia
that of labeling irradiated produce at the retail level.
Although B.R. fit changes the definition of food irradiation
fron an additive to a proceaa, the bill retains PDA's authority
to regulate it as an additive. That Beans that FM has the
authority to require mandatory labeling of Irradiated produce
at retail.
He reallie that label
caused PDA to nove s]
freezing or canning,
been Irradiated. Th<
on the part of soae <
produce has
ng la a very senaltlve laaue and has
«ly on flnallilng regulation*. Unlike
person cannot tell If *a coBBOdlty has
ie produce industry understands the interei
consuBers who nay want to know that their
radiated. Handatory labeling, however, wi:
„GoogIe
not ptovlde the necasBary education about the proces*. Even
thouqh the food Industry it undectaliing proqiBM to Infoca the
general public about iitadiatlon, there 1b a great concern In
the produce Industry that labeling will unneceasarily frighten
consuecs froa purchasing Irradiated produce.
There ate several very practical probleaa that prohibit the
accurate labeling of produce at the retail levclt including the
inherent quality of the perishability of produce, apace
liHitatlons, Blsbrandlng, and enforcesent. Becaua* of its
perishability, produce arrives at a retail eatabllshBent on a
dally basts with several shtpaenta arriving in any on* day.
The frequency of ahipaents >Bkca It difficult to segregate
loads In the back rooa. the increased consider desMnd for
fresh produce must be balanced by the waount of apac* in the
produce depaitaent. The Manager continually faces p(oble*« in
utilising United space. Be auat constantly change displays
depending on how auch of a coaaodlty Is sold and hoa auch is
Several suggestions have been Bade aa to how Irradtatad produce
aay be labeled. One option offered ia to place a sticker on
each piece. Certainly there are aacblnes which placa stickers
on such coaaodlties as oranges, avocados, pspaya or bananas.
It is not feaslbla, Irawaver, to place sttckaia on individual
aushtooas, brusssl sprouts, asparagus stalks, and ^ny other
„GoogIe
ADOthar snqqeation li to place the shipping c
appropriate labeling in vle« of the borer. The aaount of space
that would be taken op by the (hipping containeia would
■everely liait the aaount of produce that would be offered for
•ale, indirectly Incresainq the coat of the produce to the
consuaer. The aeas apace available foi produce, the leaa
produce is sold. IMtaileis would need to Increase prices to
■alntsin profitability and would not be able t
deaand for Increased selection.
Placing signs or cards in the proiialty of the Irradiated
coaBodlty la a third suggestion. Because produce aanagcre
constantly change the arrangeaent of the produce departacnt. It
would be eitreaely difficult to ensure that the sign is In the
of an
space. This easily coDJ
Itea In your local grocer
d lead to aisbrandlng of the
you have looked for the price
store and It is soaetiaes
difficult to locate. Maintaining pricing Inforaatlon in the
produce departaent 1b a diffict
burdens produce aanagera have t
It task and eieaplil
Lth signing.
There are several potentls
be required to be labeled,
their hands. They pick It up,
unlforaity in color and In soi
ndlng dangeta ahould produce
Consuaers purchase produce with
t for ripeness, look for
cases aaell it. If there ate
two bins of apples for eiaaple, one irradiated and one n
irradiated, there is nothing to prevent the consuaer fro
picking up an apple froa the Irradiated bin and als
„GoogIe
putting it back down In the non- irradiated bin. Hie retail
eatablisbaent could be held legally liable tai Biabrandlns even
though conttol !• ctNPpletely out of theii bands.
Another potential pioblea could •>iat with ptodaoe clerk*
unknowingly coabinlng ahlpaente of iicadlated and
adiated produce. Kisbianding could occut In haate to
D stock levels and In the confuaion o£ shipaenta
Ing thoiughout the day.
ny law ot regulation to be effective, it auBt ba
«able. Labeling of produce at the retail level la not
;eable. Although FM regulate* food additives, they aust
•n state agencies to enforce those regulatloas at retail,
ieally state agencies have been Ineffective enfoicesent
ir*s for the federsi goveinvent because of a lack of aanpowei.
Because of a lack of cnforccaent capability on the pait of PDA,
ind the unfalrneBG of putting retailers into situations wbere
annot control possible alsbranding, Dnlted urgea that
i96 be aaended to eie>pt irradiated frulta and vegetablea
mandatory labeling at retail.
natead, Dnlted reco»end* that irradiated produce be regulated
like other produce which has received a post-harvest
leataent by requiring labeling of the shining containers.
tion 40311) of the Food, Drug and Cosaetlc Act, raw
igricultural couoditiea which have been treated with a post
laivest pesticide, *aust have the shipping container of such
„GoogIe
cMwodity beac labelin9 which daclaia* th« presence of auch
cbealcal In or on such coaaodlty and the Cunctlon of sueb
chMlcal....*
DnlCed reco»enda that Section 3(c)(1) ID) of H.R. £96 be
aaended by Inaertinq the folloalngi
(111) adding after 'and the TeasonB
thecetoie' the additional sentence
^ElDvidlog b»»££> t^eie liradiatlon is
used on rav agricultural cOBBOditlea in
place of a post haivest pesticide any
labeling regulationB «111 be conslatcnt
with section 403(1) of the Food, Drug and
Coatnetlc Act (21 U5C 343(1)*; and
ftn inherent piotection In labeling of the shipping containers
will be prevention of re- irradiating the coanodity, inaaring
that the produce has been tceated within the safety ll>its
established by the FDA. In addition, PDA and the appropriate
atate agencies will be able to enforce these regulations in the
packing houses oi: irradiation facilities. Dnlted urge* the
SubcoBBlttee to >ake this aaenAaent to enauie enforceability of
possible regalationa.
Thank you again for inviting >e to testify. I would be happy to
answer any questions you aay have.
„GoogIe
NATIONAL PORK
:s MOINES. IOWA 503oe« PH. sis/3S3-zeae
nSTINOMY SUWITTEO TO
SUBCOmiTTEE OM OEPAKIKNT OPERATIOMS.
MSEAItCN. AND FOREIGN AGRlCULTlHtE
OF THE COmlHEE OM AGRICULTURE
OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
NOVEMBER IS. 1905
PRESENTED BT
DR. C. 0. VAN HOUKLING
NPPC STAFF CONSULTANT
,y Google
opporcunicy co appear and ceacify celatme to our position on
iccadiacion pcocesBing at food, specifically porl!. Ine NPPC
reprssenis virtually all porK producers and cneir families nationwide.
Our pomacy mission is to ennance tne porn pcodjcera opportunity for a
In 1982 SPPC delegates passed a resolution pledging an all-out effort
to solve tne ptoDlem of tticnmosis in pork. Subsequently, a national
tasn force was namea. Several government, industry. and
organizational representatives were named to serve. At tneic Eirst
neetLngi tney cnose Tricnina Safe Pork Task Force as tneir name, and
as tneir goal, a 100 percent retail pocit supply safe from tne threat
It is not a major poOlic nealtn pcoOlera. NPPC
numan suffering tnat does occur needs to be
tricninosis. A percentage of tne population does not eat porK Beca
of tne potential tnreat of tne disease. Over 35 percent of i
OC tne fear of trictiinosis.
,y Google
tti«y consider tnis undesirable. Add co cms cne face tnat tti* longer
coaking ac rilgnec cempeca Cures reduces tne flavor oC pork and chereby
reduces ics pa lacaoi 1 iT;y. Tbis is also conficmad by cne response of
40 to 50 percent of tne consumers surveyed wno felt tnat pork i« drier
Admittedly, tne actual impact of tEicninosis on pork consuinption is
diCCicult to assess because conclusive evidence at tnis point is
virtually impossible to obtain. Tne researcn figures just presented
do suggest tnat tne total elimination of tnis parasite in tne pork
supply mignt significantly increase porK consumption and ttierefore,
tne profitability of pork production,
developing mecnods in addition to irradiation wntcn would result in a
cooking, curing or processing, and freeiing.
„GoogIe
Ttie USOOE, in coopscation wicn USDA,
diacion at a dose of 15 - 30 krads toe ine
inella spiralis in pork. Studios using
different cuts of infected pock snowed tnac there is no variaOility In
tne cadio-senaitivity of the trictiina in differenc muscles,
irradiation is effective regardless of whetner tne wtiole carcass or
ground pork are irradiated, Tne data clearly indtcaCas tHac 3U krads
market waignt nogs witn acceptable uniformity, and tnat sucn a dose
can provide a suOstantial margin of safety fcr numan consumption.
roqcassed up to 21 days, tne difference noted Between tne irradi
na non- 1 rradiated pork became less, indicating tne potential
„GoogIe
doss nc
t alle
ct tn
populat
o.s .dv
ers-ly
Dr. Hon*
Id Eng
1. tn.
Service
(FSIS)
>a.d
Hiacons
n, -ftl
tood
of food
includi
ng nom
I=od ,r
cad.at
on .a
3 and C
ring-
m»conc»pcions-
assoc
r>c ju.i;
(icatio
n toe
I ttradiaci
9 Pood Ssfaty inapactl
iKing. Tne najor dLff«
IPPC also caoparacad wltn tna UiiDOE on a major sconoiiic faaaibility
itudy involving Lrradlaced porN. Tnac study anticipacsd at Isast a
:wo percent incraasa in donestic dvroand and fully a one-tnicd inccease
in foreign demand for tricntna-sat* porK. Tnasa Lncreassd parcencage*
Anoinar icudy conducted Cy a staff econoaist ac USOA's Econoalc
Rasaarcn sarvica placed tn* cost o£ cncninosis and coxoplaaaoals fzea
parK at Decveen $216.5 and $319.2 nlllLoa annually. Low dOie
One of tne major obstacles to food Irradiation In tna U.S. i* tne
,y Google
knowlsdga conaumars in the U.S. had about Irradiation and how
:hsy ragardad cna pcocedura, NPPC, with tna cooperation of tn« USDOE,
conducted a national survey at conauners, Tne study snowed tnat
IC 40 percent of tne rospondonta nad a major concern for food
dlatlon. HOMavec, this figuco needs to be put into aooa
perspective. A greater niinber expressed a najor concern Cor every one
espondents nad a major concern for cnentcal spray? uaed on some
:a and vagacablea tnat they eat; 50 percent expressed a najor
irn foe the eLsK oC becoming ill from diseases In or carried by
they eat; 43 percent ware greatly concerned by preservatives tnat
lelng used in scne at tne Eoods tnsy now eat; and 47 percent were
Is before they eat It. I am Including tor the record a copy of
ne NPPC publication Consuming Topics, volume 2, number S, which
convinced cnac any irradiated product nuac be labeled. The reasons
ludei (11 Che consumera cignt to Know, and (2) the belief thsc
commodities. In order to realize tnis advantage, the product must be
processed product.
Beyond cne issue irradiation is tne question of labeling tor trichina
saCety. As seated before cne HPPC is In the procsaa of developing ■
petition Cor tne approval oC tne ELISA teacing aethod. That petition
will probably aak Cor a label indicating that Che product nas been.
„GoogIe
.ad for tricnlnA. far irradiated products, ttia laMl ahould eoav*y
masaage chat the product is ceicnlna ■■£a. TnacaCor*. Ctia
leslion nas Deen made tnae trie Latwl utiltia aoaa discinectva logo
.eating that the product la trlcnina aata wLcnouc using tna wort
cnina.* Ttiis could cnan be Intagratad into axiatlno indusccy and
irnmanc consuner aducation pcograns ao tliat consuB«ca would raalli*
: tnay can anjoy tna new pom witnout overcooding it.
lOloqy Dy tna U.S. pork packing
ree factors. Tnasa includa cna
ica oC tna cacnnology, and tna
justry will Oe basad upon at ,
It savings btougnt aQout by tna elinination oC tna naad to follow
pensive, regulatad processing procedures to render processed pork
NPPC would like to conoent upon tne proposed legislation HR 6«.
Tne legislation proposes to cnanga consideration ot irradiation fcoa
an additive to a process. He tnink tnat tne proposal is constructive
legislation, but our concern is tnat approval of ttie process isignc ba
case, very little would probably Be accompl isned.
for tne record i
! Cast PublL.
read a paragrapn fron tnis lumnary.
1 food production. Both pll
„GoogIe
and anlnalt, tna •ourcaa ol Human food, raealva radiation, not only In
tti* vlilbla canga. but also In CHa Infca-rad and ultra-violat rangaa.
IccadiBClon ol food - produces by cna alaccco-aagnat Ic radiation
produced by cadlo-acti va cobalt cc caalua (gannia radiation) can ba
usad to rid toods of bactarla and otnar «lcEO-organla>i tnat causa
•poilaga or diaaasa aa wall aa to dlslntait foods of Inaeeta and othac
undasicabla organ isns.
Tna cnamieal cnanges producsd in foods even by nigh starliilng doaaa
of gaiBiaa radiation ace ninor. Tha co>pounda produced alchar aca
Identical ulcn naturally occurring compounda In tcesn foods or are
producad In amounts snallar tnat those produced when toads are
processed using conventional, well astabllsnad aietnods lucn aa
cooKlng. In more tRan 25 yaara of studies with Irradlatad foods, no
narraful affect has ever been Identified as due to cne irradiation of
Tna food Additive Anendmant of 1958 to tha federal Food, Drug, and
Coaaetic Act, defined radiation as a food additive. Ttits definition
nas nad various innibitory effects on tna use of food irradiation in
tne past and nore are envisioned tor tna future. Radiation is a torn
of energy, not a macetlai substance. Tnus, radiation is net a food
additive, and tne definition is scientifically erraneoua.
NPPC naa a concern in regard to eatablianing tne Joint Operating
Coaiaiaaion tor food irradiation. It consideration of irradiation
issues Dy agencies would Da datarred to tne comnlssion, or postponed
because of tne coamission'a raspona ibl 1 ity In tnta area, tne entire
„GoogIe
progcan could be •«¥«£• ly Hand t capped. Alcnougft, HPPC ge**tly
coanandi tna sponsors of tnls lagLslatlon for davalopaent at a aolld
caaaaren snd consunar adueatton appEoscn co Iccadiatlon, ■• ara
■oaewnsi concacnad abouc ctia fotnatlon of a new Buraaucraey Chat algltt
■arva co actually catard advancananc In this impoEtant (laid that
nolda so Hucn proatsa tor the U.S. pork Industry. It sppaacs tn«t
taa BOmancum building in tnls country to utlllia tna irradiation
pEocaas nay make this Comnisslon obsolete before it gats astabllanad.
ncluding section 5 dealing witn Lasting
Coc Food Irradiation legislation. He
g pacagrapns U, 12, 13 in Section 2
a Section S. It inara is a problem tliat
ould favor doing that wltn saparste
of Nuclei
,r Bypcoduci
:, Mai
would al
so favor «
,1.«.
Finding a
nd Purpose!
.as.
needs to
be sddre.
3sed
leglslati
on.
HPPC sine
:orely appr
ac.a
considara
tion by toi
s au
„GoogIe
CONSUMER
ATTTTUDES cm FOOD
IRRADIATION
L.
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
Food ;
Irradi
• til
H.R.
B98
Before t
he
tee on Dep.r
Ope
end Forei
en Ag
Coomittee
on Ag
riei
U.S. House o
f Rep,
reie
Graham, Executive Vice President or Public Affairs, of the
Natfonal Food Processors Association (KFPA) and I am pleased to
have this opportunity to testify before your subcomni t tee
regardine the potential for a new food processing technoiogir.
irradiation. NFPA is a scientifically and technically based
trade association that represents nearly 600 companies including
most of the major food processing companies In the United
States. Our member companies pack processed trulls, vegetables,
nwats, fish and specialty products Including canned, frozen,
aseptic, dehydrated, pickled and other preserved food items.
iRcloded In our membership are companies that manufacture
packaging and processing equipment, or provide supplies and
services to the food processing industry.
ground have made our interest almost automatic in the potential
of irradiation either as one step in the processing of food or as
■the" process before retail sale to the consumer. NFPA has
always been in the forefront of technological development In food
matters and irradiation is just another logical area to explore.
„GoogIe
On February 14, 19S4 FDA published a long awaited proposal
on the use of radiation in the processing of food products. That
proposal when final would permit low level irradiation of fresh
fruits and vegetables. Such a process would inhibit sprouting
and increase shelf life in fresh fruits and vegetables, would
records available for FDA inspection.
The most controversial issue raised by the FDA proposal
deals with labeling. The major concern of the food processing
industry has been that any labeling of Irradiated food products
might be viewed by the consumer as a warning. This Is another
reason NFPA wishes to stress that the government as well as the
food processing Industry must develop programs to educate the
consumer as to what irradiation really does and what the benefits
is our understanding that FDA's final regulation will
that packaged fruits and vegetables include the statement
d with radiation" on the label. Unpaekaged fruits and
!S will either have to have each piece labeled or the
ion displayed by labeling a bulk container or use of a
(ign stating the product has been treated with irradia-
coatings have been applied and for processed foods sold
i wi thout packagi ng.
1 groups have reconmended that the United States allow
the logo that already has became a recognised symbol
„GoogIe
ally. But FDA has said that use of the logo In this
Id have to be used with the statement 'treat«d with
tor at least two years in order to educate the general
radiation" tor at least
public.
FDA has already app
Trichinel la spiral
■ill require label
Is eonsidarinK pet
Irradiation of chicken t<
FDA has been entrem.
le use ot Irradiation to com
s In pork carcasses and fresh cuts of poi
ng. USDA's Food Safety and Inspection 3i
tioning the FDA to approve high-dose
trol Salmonella.
autious in movinR to approve ii
stion ot food. The FDA and members of Congress have received
nany oomnents expressing concern that irradiation of food may ni
be safe. Based on government and private tests conducted now fi
more than three decades we believe these concerns to be
unfounded. However, such concerns show that there Is a need foi
the government to give more visible support for food irradiatloi
and perhaps even more important, the government must take a roll
in the education of the consumer. Such educational efforts by
the industry alone could be perceived by the consumer as self
serving.
Within the past decade I
registrations of a significai
pesticides. With expanded at
cancelled or suspended the
r of valuable and widely used
sting of pesticides and
stry, food producers are
likely to be faced with additional losses of importan
in the future. Moreover, the comprehensive premarket testing
requirements imposed under the 1972 amenihients to the Federal
!ide$
,y Google
Inseetieiile, Fungicide Mil Rodcntieidc Act (PIFRA) ha«a tubstan-
tially increatad the time end expense, and eorratpondlngtjr
reduced the incantlvas, for davalopment «t new paatleidei tor
minor use crops which are most of the crops produced by our
Although HFPA believes that Judicious use of pastleidce will
continue to be essential to production of eeonwnleal and who le-
ome food, these recent developments demonstrate the need for
ncreased efforts by both governnent and private Industry to
develop safe and effective nonchemical pest controls. NFPA and
ts members believe that irradiation is one of the most promising
Iternatives to pesticides.
All new food processes were questioned extensively by con-
umers before acceptance and widespread use. Canning, treeiing,
aateur [cat Ion, microwavlng were new technologies whose safety
nd efficiency were questioned. Consimer acceptance of irradi-
ted food will also be an evolutionary process. We believe that
rradlatlon, on the basis of FDA approval and increasing use,
ill, like earlier processing technology, ultimately be viewed as
egislation currently before this subcomni t tee. This is H.R. S9fi
ntroduced by Rep. Sid Morrison (R-Wash.) on January 24, 198S.
'bis legislation contains express findings providing important
ecognitlon that food irradiation is a process much like canning
freezing, that irradiation is a valuable alternative to many
„GoogIe
peitl«id«i, and that public undaritandlng of Irradiation la
•saantial to elimlnata unfounded tear and suiplelon.
AltliouKh H.R. 696 amends lectlon 409 of tli* Food, Druf, and
Cemetie Act (the Aet) so tliat Irradiation ii defined aa a food
proeesa rather than a food additive the bill alio contains a long
tariea of ameniknenti to section 409 separately littint Irradia-
tion in eaeh instance tn which the term "food additive*
appears. Although our understanding Is that there is no inten-
tion of malcing any substantive change In section 409 except to
highlight that Irradiation Is not the some as other food addi-
tives, the lengthy amendmanti to that section are cunbersotne and
could create contusion or lead to misinterpretation. If the
purpose is to have PDA continue regulating irradiation as It it
ware an additive although the bill changes the definition to a
process, it would be simpler to leave section 409 untouched
particularly since section :01(s) of The Aet defines -food addi-
tive' to include "any source of radiation intended tor any such
The Morrison bill would actually add a paragraph tbb) to
lectlon 201(s) that would define "food Irradiation process' in
detail. Our suggestion would be simply to amend the current
lai(s) by adding 'any source of irradiation' following the use of
the word "substance' and deleting 'end including any source of
radiation intended for any such use' at the end of the first
parenthetical phrase.
,y Google
Amcndad 201(5) trould read:
The term "food additive' means any aubstane* and
any aource of Irradiation the Intended use of wbleh
results or may rea*onably be expected to remit,
directly or indirectly. In Its becoming a component
or otherwiie affecting the characteris tiet of any
food (including any substance tnd any source of
i r-B^djat ion intended for use In producing, manu-
facturing, packing, processing, preparing, treat-
ing, packaging, transporting, or holding food;} and
-t-neiadt'ng-anT-saBree-ef-radi-atfOR-fR^eiided-fep-eity
diat Ion Is not generally recognized, among experts
qualified by scientific training and experience to
evaluate its safety, as having been adequately
shown through scientific procedures (or. In th«
case of a substance and any source of irradiation
used in tood prior to January I, I9sa, through
either scientific procedures or experience based on
eonvnon use In food) to be safe under the conditions
of its intended use, except that such term does not
Include —
Despite the fact that the Morrison bill really does not
er current FDA regulatory power over food irradiation, we
• red, that to
,y Google
believe that it would provide a valuable mechanism to promote
irradiation research and development and to foster greatly needed
consumer education. This laglslation would also promote rational
and consistent use ot Tood Irradiation and reduce unwarranted
burdens on connerce by preempting state and locsl food irradia-
tion regulations dirferent than or in addition to those imposed
by PDA.
However we are concerned that one o( the 'Findings and
tnrpaias" listed under section 2 might be misunderstood to Imply
that additional research is required to ensure that irradiation
is a safe food process. As we and other witnesses have stated
there has already been extensive research and testing
denwnstr.ating that this process is sate.
An area of real concern to the food processing industry is
the negative reaction by the consianer to anything that may be
connected with nuclear power. For this reason we question the
appropriateness of section S of H.R. S96 in what is supposed to
be legislation to promote a new food processing technology.
Scetion i deals solely with the "Leasing of Nuclear Byproduct
Material for Food Irradiation" and we do not believe it belongs
in this bill. For the same reason we believe paragraphs (11),
(12) and (13) should be omitted from section 2, "Findings and
(11) there Is an acute shortage of United States
source material required for food Irradiation
process and current supplies ere unable to meet
projected dcmandi
„GoogIe
{ID the Federal Government owns byproduct
back to the United States Treasury through the
lease of irradiation source materials to private
and public agencies;"
The main reason for any delay in the advancement of irradia-
tion as a food process technology will be the lack of consumer
acceptance. For this reason we believe that any legislation that
may be necessary to ensure proper handling of "source materials"
The American Medical Association, the World Health
Organization and the American Council on Science and Health have
already endorsed irradiation as a safe food process. The
especially for patients on inmunosuppressi ve drugs who are
required to have a diet free of microbiologic contamination.
Finally, as I have stated we as an association have more
than a passing interest in food irradiation. We are presently
working with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) on a cooperative
agreement which would provide us a cesium agricultural oontnodi-
ties irradiator (CACI) which would be built next to our food
research laboratory i n Ca t i forni a. Our present laboratory
facilities in California, Seattle and Washington, D.C. enable us
to do research in all types of food processing and packaging. An
irradiation facility next to our California laboratory would
„GoogIe
enable us to study the [nteraetion between different types of
or irradiation and freezinE-
DOE involvement in this project is part of the Byproducts
Utilization Program which has the goal of developing and encour-
■ting eonnereial use ot DOE byproducts such as Cesium 13T. This
dononstrat ion project was created by Congress as an ideal way to
assess the feasibility of this type of technology transfer. DOE
has said that the use of radiation to treat foodstuffs would
and could do much to reduce postharvest losses of foods, increase
inlernational trade potential, and eliminate health-threatening
microorganisms in food.
We have not signed a final agreement with DOE but we are
participating in food irradiation research.
,y Google
■anCed by Barry C. Husaaui, D.V.H., Pb.D.
TestiDony on a. R. €96
House kgricultuie CoBBitteo
the opportunity to present testimony today on the potential benefit
I am the Executive Vice President
:ific Affai
The Coal I
s Assoi
St the greatest obstacle to widespread commercial use of food
radiation was the uncertainty regarding consuffler acceptance of
> process. Surveys have shown that without some explanation of
i process, consumers initially display feat and mistrust upon
linfotmalion has been communicated to the consuming public about
JuBtry fought to remedy these problems by disseminating more
lanced and credible information to the public.
in support of this
the formation of i
include food comps
impbell Soup, General
„GoogIe
packaginq canpaniea such as DuPont and spice interests like
HcComlck. In addition, tcade associationi representing moit
major food industry groups are members of the Coalition. Without
question, the Coalition foe Food Itradiation represents the most
industry in suppott of a food preservation technique.
of ways ia chich irradiation technology could be employed by the
food industry. The fcesh fruit and vegetable and spice industries
could use irradiation as an alternative to chemicals and pesticides
to treat and disinfest ccops. The meat and poultry industries
that cause disease. And the proceased food industry could employ
the technology to sterlliie packaging materials or combine the
h other processes to develop new, nutritious, shelf-
Consumers will be able to buy products that stay fresher longer,
since the process can extend the shelf-life of some foods by
preventing sprouting, retarding mold and killing many spoilage
bacteria. Despite existing health and safety standards and warn
bacteria such as Salmonella and parasites such as Trichinella
of food irradiation could substantially reduce these risks and
cnake the food supply safer. Irradiation can also open new expoi
jnarkets for U.S. food commodttiea, expanding cocnmercial oppor-
tunities Cor American farmers and food processors.
„GoogIe
will allow many food items that now spoil quickly to be treated
and shipped to needy countries or to be grown, irradiated and
stored In the countries themselves. This Is especially significant
for countries in which refrigeration is not commonly available,
such as those in Africa.
The Coalition believes that the safety concerns associated
with toad Lrrddiatton technology at levels now being considered
by FDA have more than adequately been put to rest. In the over
thirty years during which food irradiation has been studied, con-
■ Irradiation does not make foods radioactive, since the
energy travels through the food without leaving any residues or
food, and the changes in food resulting from low-level irradiation
are too minute to affect the safety of the food product;
■ Irradiation does not significantly affect the nutritional
It is important to recogniie that the food industry is con-
servative by nature, unwilling to jeopardize its relationship of
trust with consumers by employing a controversial new technology.
However, leaders of the food industry are viewing food irradiation
as a safe, beneficial and economical technology whose tine has
come. The thirty plus companies and trade aasociationa that
„GoogIe
in the hope that much oC the nisinfocmation beinq circulated on
food irradiation can be countered, and the negative image of the
technology can be dispelled.
Hhile the Coalition is not a lobby group, it does support
legislation or regulatory initiatives that serve to promote Che
ccooercial growth of food irradiation. While l will leave it up
of Representative Sid Honison's bill, H. R. 696, on behalf of
the Coalition 1 would liKe Co voice support for the overall inte
A copy of the Coalition's position paper on food irradiatic
has been submitted to the subcomoittee for the record. I thank
you for this opportunity to testify, and I would be happy Co ant
any questions you might have.
„GoogIe
IC(>AUTIO> r«r
= F<MH>
IRRADUTN>> «.««-«
V rood Irradlatlsn Now?
« Papfli on Food IriAdlAti
n foe Food it[*dlaclan
Tod»y th«te !■ gto-m.n-i int«»t by tl
;c»*rnHnt and comuhii In th* uu >
kill n«aful InwcC*. pctvint dU»>.
ctinoloqlta hava b**n aiound for toe* thin 50 yur«, only
cantly hAV* th«y tMcoa* coat tfftctiv* and qalncd -pcoaln«n
oducti and public htAlth*
„GoogIe
n FooJ licJdlation
Growing public concecn ov*i
tion ccchnologici. Publicl
n Icom potan dally dongtioui
ncr EfA) Hcthyl
u(P*i:c*d ai
cep«BCed dipping of -coBDoditi
Iicadlatlon c*f*ci to th* xpoa^ie of suDacancfs U> [(dlint oc light
tMigy. M* aliMdy uie «ltani enscgy in food ptapaiatton. Both
bCBlllng and baKlnq tie pcoccsses cnat use inEiscad tadlatlon. and
■Icrcwava* *[■ >i»*d t»ct*aainily In coMinq.
[radiating Cood i
laClay liandlad o
„GoogIe
ound In irtivatf fLouCf
■tad ulch fooda.
r hoipltil p«ci«n
I U.S. i»e«ne ippllc*
■dlatioo o( any toot e
,y Google
58005 0-86-12
,y Google
Hill Irradiation c:
cclctonal quality of tb« uuud
process s not of mufficicnt Intenalt
typ« o( radiant anen
■itln? or (rylng).
,y Google
eCticienc nch
ything don
ppoied to thecwl pcixmilnfll , the nu
bon noted.
Jifli/* tailed about lood iccwJUtion only ii »n
[■■tMnC. But food lrc*cJUtlon ott.rs a nuiibai
spotl<9> vlthout
,y Google
Vtn9 fote* betllnd inestn.tLoral jicc.ptance of irridUtion U lt«
li petcent ol ch» world B rarvBSC Is no. loot to spoll.q* and -»«
bscdnti.nr [.taidlnq spoUaqc licAdi.clQn .iIL jllow luny food
Ui>t BOW ipoil qulcXly to ba Coatad and afiippBd to n«idy countrl
e »» tlM, iicadiation Mill open n>w »patc luckEtH tor O.S. Coo
dltl(s, eipsndinq coiimBccial opportunities for mecican fatiHi* u
pEOCHIOII. Por «ilanptt- Japan wl Tiot alloa apples tO b* tapOct
B they ice tieated for cimling nQt^ ince EEB ii no longac ui
splrall* found In •
roposed By the
d poisoning and pacHlCel tn«t •:
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
I COALITION for
= FOOD
- IRRADIATION mo'^v..
NEWS
0 COHSWIIK POBUC,
b*n*(lti by kMptnf
Ui« coalition f« r<
Csilltlaa aiptaaaad
d*tlnltl«a of food :
pcMtnt lait, to ■ pi
caMin tl)* auUioilty
■Utbougb toed
It la llkaly to ba
TCaaarvatlOB BaUiot
qoallcy pcodueti,*
mtm II — Pood tiradlattoa offoto eoaaiwia ■aay
fooda fcaalm lonjat and aiktag fooda aafat to aat,
•od IiiadlaClon told Congraa* today.
:ii[a tlia Subcoaalttaa on MpactBant Opacattona,
I a^rloiiltura of tk« Bouaa Hfrleultaia Ooaalttao, Cha
,ta aappetc foe la^lalatiOD tliat WMld Aaaga tba
idlattoo fioa aa addltlva, a* It 1* daflaad undai
oeaaa. Iba rood and Kug MUaiatTatloB (nw) Mnld
:egulaCi Inadlatad producta,
atlon u a alngla pcoeaaa baa giaat potantlal,
ltd aeca fiaquantly in coablnatlon with ottaac
[ly Huataan, aiacvtiva vlca pcastdant toe
c affai
BldoocganlBBa,
t th*
latloi
B la a pcaaarTatloa >«thod that uaaa focu of ladlaot
an ba qua raya or i-cayi — light wavaa of
a abla to paaatiata fooda and food pack aging
y dlaiupting call coaponanta, thua killlnq baiMiil
acta and othai aouieaa of food contaBlmtlen uttkout
„GoogIe
Coalition IM F
Bctabl* c«ldut>.
A Mjoc pcw*n advantagi of (aed IcndUtlon It chat thi pioeau
pw kcip Cood* CcvBbac long*!. Iciadlitid itctwiMEClga, tot aia^li,
Bin In good condition toe thiae Co tout WMh*, a* oppoatd to
alao Bakaa (soda aatoc to aat by dattfoyinq
• tood polaonlng and paiaaltaa t
caa and food-boina dUaaa* hata
dcaplta ■ilatln? haalth and aatcCy it
■ainlnga to conaupcca about pcofiai tood handling,' aaid Hgai
haalth haiacda aucti aa toioplaaaoala, tdchlnoala and aalaoii
a yaac, pai
countclea in Xtt:
J waat*. By aubatantially catardtnq
Y lood ttaa that no* apoll quiclily
ly countrlaa or to ba grown, licadli
naalvaa. ihia la atpcclally alfntf
aa, Inadlatien can opan now aipott aatl
indlnq ewatclal opportunltUa toe lw*i
on to calaaaa a final ciiling to alloH fi
■ and vagatablaa. Food ircadlatlOD la i
„GoogIe
CHllCian («
ua*d In t£* U.S. I hirinq bMB ippcwad to aa* oa poik utd to dtatrsr
baraCul plctoba* Id apleaa. Inhibit iprontlng la potato**, and tiMt toot
toe hoipital patlMt* with liMjn* *yatM dlaoidari. ABaclean aatcsoaata
•at Hat and poultry pcaaarvad br Icradlatloii. Iba AMtlean Mdtcal
MaociatlOD baa alae anderaad tba oa* o( food litadtattoa.
•Food Irradiation la a tadinol09y vhoaa tlM baa CBH,* aald
NDaraan. *it la a banaflelal aaana o( pcocoaalng food* and alioald b*
tiaatad a* aucti undac fadaial law.'
Via OsalltlOD tor rood Ircadlation «• foraad in January IMS to
coaltcloD la coapoaod ot oirar 30 coapanloa and aaaociatlona tioa tba food
Indnatiy.
„GoogIe
357
L ASSOCUTION
Subco^ilttca on Dcpanacdt Opcraclona,
Retcanh sod Forrlgn Agriculture
Co^lcCec on Agriculture
Ualtad States Houac of Rcpraacotatlvx
Fraacnted by
A. Harold Lublo, M
of Food I
lloTMb*c IB, 19B5
ChalTBaa and Hmbars of the Cn^lttae;
A. Harold Lubln, M.D. . and I as Dtractor of ttw DapartHeot
I. Hutiltton, and Faraonal Hulcb of Cba Jtaarlcan Hadlcal
Acco^anylng ae la Thoaaa Wolff of the AKA'a Departaent of
Leglalatlon. The AHA appivclatea Cbe invltatloD to teatify today
ng B.R. 696, the Federal Food Irradiation Devalopaent and Control
1985.
R. 696 itould aaend tha Federal Food, Drug, and CoaMtlc Act to
I food Irradiation aa a 'proceaa* under the Act. Currently, food
Deluded under the Act'a definition of 'food additive.'
rradlatlon proceas' would b« daftoad aa ■ food trvacaent in which
E energy la applied to food to Inhibit or deatroy bacteria and
icrooiganlaaa lAIch ceuae apollag*, to Inhibit aproutlng, to
„GoogIe
- 2 -
racsTd th* po(t-b*Tvi(t Tlpeoloa of food, aod to laproT* eh* food's
fuDCEloml proponlM. Ttaa Pood and Dni| Idalolaeracloa vouU ncala lea
anthoTltT to ragulata food Irradiation aod do atata oc political
aubdiTlalon would ba allownl to aatabllah aii7 food Irradiation
taqulTaaant iihlch la 'In addition to or dlffannt tram" any FOA
H.B. 696 alao would craata a Jolnc Opaiaclng Co^aalon for Food
radiation within tha Dapartaant of Alrleultara. tba Pii— luliin woold
coapoaed of eight ■■■ban Including rapmiantatlvaa of aavan
vanaant agoaclaa and ono person rapraaantlng tha Intaraaca of tba
naral public. Itw Coaalaalon vonld coordinate end ravlaw all faderal
aaarch, devaloiaent, and d^wmatratlon actlvltlea tvlaclng to food
r radiation and celiac t
Irradiation produced by
would eoordloate Inforaal
concarnlng food
private crganlrat
ta InraaCBtnc b; prl
ind eonaolldata tba data coDcamloi food
'adaral aganclea. In addition, tha Ce^alaalon
[anal aichange and aduca Clonal actlvlclaa
in with appropriate federal ■gancles. atatea,
tha general public. The Co^daalon would alao
vata coapaDla* In tba developaant and
ippllcatlon of food Irradiation and atteapt to foater greater public
ng of Che proceea of food irradiation. Finally, tba
Co^ilaalon could pad don tha FM to expend the acope of ratulatloa
allowlot for co^erclal application of food Irradiation.
The MA auppotta B,S. 6H. Meny rnan of IncarnaCIonal axperlaaca
here d^wnacrated that fooda Irradlacad at larala of up to 10 UlograTa
(1,000 Ulorada} era aafa to eat. In fact. In 1980, the Joint bpert
,y Google
rood*, oponaorBd by the Food
hclooo, tha
1 Baalth Oc|aDliacioD
Id coBOdlty up to an
Qo toilcologlcal
rablologlcal
sited Hatlooa
t asctadlng 10
Co^tccc oa tha Uholcaoaaaeaa of Irradlatad Poo
and ««ilciilcuca Organluclon (FU) of the United
iDternatlonal Atislc Bnetgy ^encT, and the Horl
<HBO), coocluded that 'the trtadtatlon of anjr fa
averall avarate doi* of 10 kCr (1,000 Ulorada)
baaard' aod '.. .Intcoducei no apeclal mitritlona
probleaa.' The Codex AllBcntarlua Co^d.aaloc, ■
orgaoltatlOB under the auaplcaa of the WBO and the t
uocoBdtttoBal cleareDca for fooda Irradiated a
kCr (1,000 kllorada).
Food Irradiation leama no raaldue la food. Noreovec, lAll* food
Irrndlaclon doe* cause alight chealcal and phfaleal cbaosoa In food,
theae cbaosea aro no aaro algnlflcant than tha changea that occur fn»
other aceeptod food proeaaita anch •■ bolllnt or fteailng. Over 30 jrears
of atnd7 ualng aopblltlcated analytical technlqnaa to aacattalB abat
unique radlolytlc producta (UIFa) ■>; bo fotaad In Irradiated food have
failed to detect the production of any DIFa of toilcologlcal concern.
Food Irradiation producea no algnlflcant reduction la the nutritional
quolltr of food. In addition. It ha* a anaber of lapottant potential
•ppllcatlona. Food irradiation la effective In kllllnt Che
■Icroorgaoliaa that eauaa food •pollai*. Tha*, food Irradiation could
extend the Btotage life of ouaaroua perlahable food* thoreb]' iDCnaaloi
the pTodocclTlcy of D.3. food proceaalnt and dlatrlbutlon and opening aa¥
export opportunlclea. . Thaao factor* are votT algnlfleaat alnee a
conaldarabl* aaount of tha world'a food supply I* loat each year through
„GoogIe
- * -
rood Irradlatlan maj also ba ■ vtsbl* aIt*rMtl*a, !■ tba
p(i*t-lur**aE dlalnf •atatloo af fnlta aod i
whlcb haaltb coacatsa ha*a baan ralaad. MaraovcT, tt Bar b* •fCacclM !■
coatrolllng trlcbloaa la (raab poik and aalaoaatla In rad naata, panltty
and (lab.
In our Tlaa (anal ofdctal radaaalflcatlaa af (and 1— ^*"*— U
lapottant la taiaa o( pabllc accaptaaca o( cba (act that faad Imttatlaa
la ■ aafa procaaa, not a potantlall; bawarfaaa (oad addltl*a. It t»
lavonant to nata chat food inadlatlon doaa ant naka tha iiradlfd faad
radlaacttvn alaca It la dooa at aaaricr lavala nail baloa tkaaa iialTad
ts tndaca TadloacllTlcy Ba batlava It la appivfclata, haaaiaait that tkn
btU nonld aat altelMta tba nt'a MtkMity ta racalata (aad
InadlattOB. Ilda wBold aifar t
Tba IH I
tot load lKa«Utlon. Tha riiMlaatnn maid paifan tha vital trlan <
cgoidlnatliS raaaalch caocaivlas toad irradladoB that carraai'ly In
fratwaarail aaaa« aaay (adatal afaaclao. Iha rii^Mlaa naaU nlaa hana
tha lapart^ faaetlon of pcaaaclac pahllc ■aiinlMdln lad atumati
a< (and Imdlaclua. Ihla WBitld mIiII lafanAat tkn patllc a< tkn aa«
paeantlnl bannftta »t food Irradlatlsa
eoncaann maul tin tka paaaaaa.
far tha CoBtaaton Eo haM tha aatkBdey ta paClUan tkn ttk U It
baUavaa dwE dka i.Mamil anUcadan »t (aa« Irtadta**— aknaU k
,y Google
H* also auppoit th«
lad local lava that an
raqulmcnt* coBCcrnlot fwid
on la cha bill that iiould praaapt acatc
or dlffaraat fim tha FDA'*
idtatlon. Ha belleva that tha rafulatioa
food IrradlatloQ aboul^ ba aoifoi
tbrauibout c
I councrr In ordar t
t that tha naclonwlde Barkatlnt of lend]
.acoaalatcot or coofllctln) acato and local ■<
ha ilU raeognlaaa that quaatlooa auat
Latad food la not lapadod by
, ba addraaaad c
ucatlonal afforti by tha
■hathar food Irradiation olll ba a e
eoHBarelal applleaclooa. Horaovar,
food tnduBcry, the lOTaciaant, and haal
balp anaurc widaapTcad conaua
Irradiation. Bowaver, m bal
iHportaot flrat atap In proaotlng tba uaa of tba proBlalni tachiuilo)y of
food Irndtatlon. Ha aapport aarl; adoption of thla la|lalatlon.
Kr. Qiatraan, tha MIA appnclataa jont Invitation to taactfy bafon
tha CoBBlttaa and aeanda mad; to work itlth tou eoncarnlnt thla l>partant
-affaci
Idltloi
iDce of tba uaa of food
anactaaat of H.B. G96 la
„GoogIe
NCSFI
Nation*! Coalition to Slop Food Irrmdimllon
PtMA*: <4*9t MN-CSFI P.O. Boa SS-MW. San ttui
TESTIMCmy FOR THE PUBLIC RECORO DH H.R. GSe.-TTDEIWL FOOD IRIUIDIA-
TION DEVELOPMENT AKD CONTROL ACT OF 1985," BEFORE THE HOUSE AGRI-
CULTURE SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS, RESEARCH AND FOR-
, NOVEMBER IB, 19BS, ROOM 1102, LOHGHORTH BOUSE
, D.C. J0515.
HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS, RESEARCH » FOREIGN
AGRICULTURE
ROOM 1301
LOHGWORTH HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20S15
THE HONORABLE BERKELEY BEDELL AND DISTIHGUSIHED REPRESENTATIVES,
Good morning. My name is Denis Mosgofian. I an an occupB-
tional health instructor to the Graphic ComunicBtionG Industry,
and am a fine arts and industrial photolithographer by trade.
I am here today temtifying on behalf of the NATIOMAL COALITION
TO STOP FOOD IRRADIATION, of which 1 am co-founder and director.
It is our viev that H.R. i
First, H.R.
£96 -s asaer
ion th
t -irradiation
of food...
Is
ocogniied by
internation
1 authorities and the
Department of
H«a
th and Human
ServiceE as
safe and wholesome' if
neither proof
of
ground
latlon.
1 recently,
bendectin,
halidimide,
sulfjt
E and asbestos
as safe and
who
esome. It i
important to note
that what is iP
terna tional
ne body is n
tional to a
other.
and local to ot
hers. We
•re
impressed by
proofs of safety, and not by reference to
aut
orities. At
this point
here i
no firm proof
of safety.
The second
lawed presumption
n which H.R. 6S
6 sits is
"irradiatio
is a proce
like cooking
n a micro-
wav
oven, bolli
g or freeii
g.- T
is could not b«
further
fro
the troth,
zing and mic
Gamma radia
owaving are
ion is
ioniiina energj
; boiling,
frc
radiation
ind
disrupts-tKe-iTect
target tissues
radical chemistry,
mical bonds,
and
unique radiolytic produc
iiing gamma rad
coo
ingj it does
not replace
it. C
unma radiation'
unique
rad
olytic produ
dded to the varied ha
ards of
coo
ing, and will increase t
y in our society. Moreov
e total toxic load people must
r, it
B unknown what
the cooking
rradiat«d foods will produce. But gamna Icrad
ation is
def
nitely not ■
like cooking
„GoogIe
He must keep in mind the method by which gamma radiaCic
kills, by molecular disruption and free radical chemistry, i
order to appreciate its distinction from other food treatmer
It is vhat ioniiing radiation does that matters. H.R. 696
glosses this over.
Gamma irradiation adds adulterative compounds to food
that Congress adopted the 1958 Additives Amendment to the Fc
Drug and Cosmetic Act, and explicitly included food irradiat
in the food additive classification. K.R. 696 seeks to void
that Congressional intent by falsely declaring gamiBa radiati
The
egiBlative
B. 696 of changing
ood
irradioti
tive" clas
remove ir
radiated foo
from FDA
sting
Its and labeling obliga
ions stipula
ted by
he 1958
the FDft wit^
s foun
a tion
npetiis to CO
Making pro
fidentally
ess throug
continue the
the Federa
etail-
label Rul
ReSTsT
—
irTr-696
t of the picture wh
pretend in
otherwise.
In t
arms Of "pro
ess"( bak
ng, boiling
freezing) there
safety revi
3 to low ac
d foods
for
acidity, a
d except as
to poor ta
it at ion for
microbacterial
contamina
ion. How c
n any responsible legi
lator endorse
the insti
utionalizin
of this c
sual procedi.
re for
oniiing
radiation? This Is what H.R. 69
asks you tc
do.
The
aurden of food safety r
•ponsiblity
rests w
th the
govermnen
bility in Administrati
e food Bcru
iny and
siroultan-
eously li
nit citiien
eview by p
ecludlnq state and
ocal elected
officials
from eatabl
Bhing more
stringent ec
ae establish
d by the proposed Joint
Operat
ng
Commissio
for Food
rradiation
H.R. 696
ails by
omission
to spell out a single
otection, and in th
legislati
3n seeks remc
val of existing protec
ions by
Changing
food irradiation to a
•process".
We n
3te that H.R
696 ignor
s the 1968 T
DA ban
an irradia-
tion of pork and it«
indinos of
sicnificant
adverse
effects
on reprod
ction, mortality, weight depressio
pituitary
on of antinutrient
factor.
It appear
Buling'au
to us from
the FDA pe
functory July 22, 1
thoriiing ir
pork, that
„GoogIe
increaHed aflatoxin production after gamma irradiation , ahould
give each of you reason to want more definitive infor»«tioii thmn
■elf-servlng Industry hyperbole and explanations why each negative
finding 1b BoBiehow not applicable.
With respect to the ■internstional author > t ie« * , a Japaneae
doctor, TakahaE Kosei, re-analyied the toxicological data
used by the Joint Coimuttee of FAO/IAEA/MHO and found that
unconditional acceptance of irradiation of potatoes, onions,
wheat and rice was not supportecj.
Dr. Takshashi KoBei also concluded that'the theoretical
approval on the safety of all kinds of food irradiated at a dose
of up to 1,000,000 rads was not supported either from the view
point of radio-chenical studies on food stuffs as a complex
system, or from the experimental results." His report "cast
grave doubts on the reliability of scientific activities of
international organizations such as FAQ, IAEA, and KHO.*
It appears to ut H.tt. 696 is designed to promote the
Department of Energy By-Products Utilization Program proposal
tor nuclear waste [lanagenent. This pragram is the prcaK>tlng of
a socially acceptable Industry vhich will require the building
of thousands of warehouses for AfMriCa'S nuclear waste.
Food irradiation depends upon a network of food Irradiating
plant*. These are proposed to each house 3 000,000 curies of
radioactive CESIUH -137(from -weapons i power waste and -CoBalT-BO,
H.R. e96'a passage is needed to «peri the door for this pra^iram.
As you can s«e, this program for food irradiating facilities
will promote the widespread proliferation of radlosctiv*
waste. This will increaae the likelihood of irreversible
radioactive contamination of our comiunitics and highway* from
Inevitable human error and accident, mlacalculatlon and negli-
Hc need only recall the accident at the International
NutronlcB plant in Dover. New Jersey, the tritium leaks which
contaminated the Tucson, Arizona school district kltchenlAmerlcan
Atomics) , and the worker eicpBsure through management error
and decition. Radiation Technology, Dockaway. Neu Jersey, to
get a glimpse of the pandora's box of nuclear horrors U.K. 696
opens. B.R 69i further opens the door for the unloading of
America's rad oactive waste onto developing nations where it
nay be presumed env ronmental and occupational regulations and
enforcement are leas stringent than here in the tlSk. To
launch the food Irradiation industry, such pro iferatlon of
rad-waste is required. Yet it Is by no means necessary to
quality food production, and poses a planetary contaalnation
threat second only to nuclear war.
„GoogIe
Only a full technology nssc
review of the ultra-hazardous fc
offer us ■ fim beqinning point
consequences of launching food i
the effects uill be irrevocable.
1 urge you to rei«
of thousands of oiemberH and supportc
itions of the katiohal coalition to
STOP FOOD IRRADIATION, I uish to thank you for this opportunity
to present testimony on a natter of grave importance to ua all.
ReEB«Ttfully, /~\ y
REFERENCES :
21 CPR Part 179, Irradiation in the Production, Processing,
and Handling of Food, FDA, Pinal Rule
Alan T. Spihsi, Ji., Food Irradiation: An PDA Report,
FDA Papers, October 1968.
C. Bhukaran, H.D., and G. Eadaaivan, K.Ec. H.B., B.S., H.Sc.
Effects of feeding irradiated wheat to nalnourished
children. National Institute of Nutrition, Indian Council of
Hedical Research, Hyderabad-S00007 , India, An. J. Clin. Nutr. 28, 1975
A.F. Schindler, A.H. Abadie and R.E. Simpson
Enhanced Aflatoxin Production by Aspergillus flavus and
Asperfillus parasiticus after Ganna Irradiation of the Spore
Inoculum, Journal of Food Protection, Vol. 43, Jan 1980
Takahashi Kosei , M.D., Irradiation of the Food He Eat,
A Hew Danger, Awpo, Vol. IS, No. 2, 1983, attached.
(Attachments follow:)
,y Google
BARBARA BOXER
ClImigreeB of tl]E ^ntteb JStatn
^uw of ^pnwntBtinM
JEatlfinBtiin, pM. 20319
,y Google
Bnited ^tatts SSam
nr. Abe Sprinaock
521 south 5th Street MS
San Joae, Califomi* 95112
Dear Hr. Spriniock,
Thank you foi your neteags about the Food and Drug AdniniBtxation'a
food additive!
has been introduced ~ S. 288 in the Senate and B.n. 696 in the
vould alloH food manufacturers and food pcoceEsoia to use cadiatio
to kill insects in fruits and vegetables and to extend the shelf-
life of specific spices and vegetable seBBoninge. The proposed
„GoogIe
COAUnOH TO STOP FOOD DtHADIATIOll - LBOISLA'nVB AMALTaW
Hie Pedanl PM>d bnOaUoa DmriopoMfit and CsatMl Aet et IMS
H.R.Mt Md 8.ltt
TH» classic loophole legislation, submitted In the House by Congressnian Sid Morrlswi
(R- Washington) and in the Senate tv Senator SUde Gorton (R-Hashlngton), propoaasi
I. to change the basic definitions in the Food Additives Ammendment of 1958 as dted
in srusc 5 311(*) (Section 101), by ramovinc the phrue 'totd Indndlng any Mar«* of
radiation intended for any w^ um" as follow*:
(s) llw term "food additive" means any substance tha IntoHlad use of
which retults or may reasonably be expected to result, directly or Infireetly, In
its becoming a component or otherwise affecting the characteristics of any food
{Including any substance Intended tor um In producing, manufacturing, packing,
processing, preparing, treating, packaging, transporting, or holding food; awl
bielwdiag any seoree ef radtaUew Intended §«t taf aw^ <fi If weh substance is
not generally reco^ized, amof^ experts quallfiad and e]cperienee to evaluate Its
safety, as having been adequately shown through scientific procedures (or, in the
case of a substance used in food prior to January 1, 19S>, through either
scientific procedures or experience based on common use in food) to be safe
under the conditions of its IntMided uset except that such term does not
Include— ,
(1) a pesticide chenileal In or on a raw agricultural commodity; or
(1) A pesticide chemical to
used in the production, storage, i
commodity; or
(3) a color additive; or
(4) any substance used In accordance with a sanction or approval
granted prior to September 6, 19SB, pursuant to this chapter, the I^ultry
Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 451 ftnd the following} or the Meat
Inspection Act of March 4, 1907, as amended and extended;
(E) food irradiation preccM. INOTE: These changes wiu remove
irradiated 'food' from the rigorous scientific scrutiny, testing requirements,
and labeling obligations stipulated by the Food Additives Ammendment of
1958, and provide the F.D.A- with a foundation and the impetus to confi-
dently continue their no-retail-label Rule Makii^ process through the
Federal Register.)
,y Google
to mU a new denmtion for food irradiation aa a process In 21 USC S 3Il[x> (Sec-
tion 101), as follows:
(■) TIM term food inMBatiaa fiveeu* mccn • food treatiMat in wMA
e Infertatioa ill food, to inMUt
or daatror iMeteria and other mienotfanitiM wMA amonK other Mngf cause
food to tfoO or nuke the food inirtirie*oin*i to biMUt sproutinK, to retard the
poatharrart rfpenbv of fooib, and to Improve the food^ fUnettonal propertlea.
to chance the procediirei tor obtaining an exemption in 21 USC S 348(tM(l) and (i)
(Sectioo tas), as toUowsi
Section MS. Food additives and Pood Insdlatkn Procoaa— Unsafe food additives
and food Irradtetion |«iii las exertion for conformity with eiemptlon or regula-
tion
(a) A food additive or food irradiatloa proeeas shall, with retpect to any
particular use or intended use of such additives, or process, be deemed to be
unaafe for the purpoaei of the appUeation of clause (Mc) or elauM (T) of saetion
341(a) of this Utia. unless—
(1) there i* in effect, and it and its use or intended use are in eon-
formfty with, a regulatiMt iaued under tiiit saetion pretcrlblng the condl'
tions under which such additive or prnraM may be tafaly used.
Whila *uoh a regulation relating to a food additive or food Irradiation proeeM is
in effect, a food shall not, by reason of bearing or containing such an adiUtlve or
having baan treated by such a [i as in aeoordance with the regulation, be
eontidarad adulterated within the meaning of clause (1) of section 343(a) of this
title.
its; description
(b) (1] Any person may with respect to any Intended use of a food addi-
tive, or food irradiatlan pmeess Tile with the Secretary a petition proposing
the issuance of a regulation prescribing the conditions under wtileh such
additive may be safely used.
(1) ' Such petition shall, in addition to any explanatory or supporting
data, contain—
(A) the name and all pertinent information concerning such food
additive, or the aource of the food irradiation process, including for
*udi additive, where available, its chemical Identity and composition:
(B) a statement of the conditions of the proposed use of such addi-
tive, or the propaaed procedures and metho<b for conducting the food
ItrBdiation process including aU directions, recommendations, and SUg-
„GoogIe
Psod trrsdiatton aar alao ba ■ vtabl* Blcanatlva, 1> thm
poac-lumac dlalnfaacatloa of fmlca aad vafaCaUaa, to poatldd— abOMt
which b«altb coBcaraa havo baan ralaad. Ilor«o««i, It aar ba •ffaecl** la
coattolllDg trlchloaa Id Iraab pork aod aalaooatla ta tai aaata, poaltty
and flab.
Id our *la« foiaal official raclaaaifleatloa of food IrrsdtatlOB la
iapoitaoc tn caias of public accaptaaca of cba fact tbat food IrradlatlAa
la ■ aafa pncaaa. Dot a potanclall; haaardooa food addltlia. It la
iBpoTtaDt to aota cbat food IrtadiatioD doaa not aaka tha Irradtatad food
radloactlTa alDca Ic la dona at Boart)r lavala vail balov tboaa raqnlrad
to iDduco radioactlTll:} Ho ballaro It ta ^pTopiIata, bn— war. tkat tba
bill would Dot allalData tba fU'a aatborltr to tatnlata toad
IrradlatloD. Hila would oftar to tba public aaanraaea of coatlaaad
pretactloD,
Tba MA aupporta tba aatabllateaat of tba Jolot Oparatlac Coaalaalea
for food Irradiation, Tba CcaalaaloD would parfoia ths vital fsoctloa of
caordtnaEInt raaaarcb concanilDt food trradlaClon Cbat cnrraaClT la
fraiaantad aaODi aan; fadoial asaDclai. Tha Co^ilaaloB wmld alao ha««
tha iBportant fuDctloD of proaotlDi public undarataadlDi aad accaptaaca
of food IrradlatloD. Hila would aatall tnfoTalng tba public of tba aany
pocanclal baaaflta of food Irradiation and addraaalD* aar uoaatraDtod
concaraa lasardloi tba procaaa. Flnallr, wa balla«a It la approprlata
for tha Co^aaloD to bawa tha autborlty to patlcloD tba fU If It
ballavaa tbat tba camarclal application of food 1
„GoogIe
■ad local law* thai
ef food IrradlatJ
InconalataDt c
The M* n
wbathar food Irrad:
food Indus tiT,
Iwlp aosura nil
IrTadlacion.
iBportant fli
food lTTadlatl<
Hr. Cbalnan,
cha Coaaltcaa and
cha ptovlaloi
tha
laspi
B tba bill that would praaapc acata
dlffarant froa cha FDA'a
,ng food Irradiation. W* ballava Chac tha ngulatlou
ihould ba ualfotB throughout Cha countrr In ordar to
inwlda Barkaclng of Irradlacad food la not iapadad bj
.IcCInt atata and local goveroaanc raqalrounta.
quaatlona nuac still ba addraaaad coneamlnt
Ion Hill ba a cost-effaetlva procaaa for aoaa
Honovac, additional aducatlonat afforta b? tha
Mnc, and haalth profaaaloaala aar ba naadad to
MiMar aceaptanca of tba uaa of food
ballava tlut anactaaot of B.K. 696 li ao
ip In proBDCIng tha uaa of cha prtmlalni tacbnoloiT of
Ha aupport aarlr adoption of chla laglalatlon.
ba Mi apptaclataa foor Inirltatloo Co caatlf? bafora
tanda rand; to work «lcb you concatnlng thla laportanc
JHS/eab
2230p
,y Google
NCSFI
Nationml Coflilion (o Slop Food Irradiation
Phan*: (4191 MN-CSF< w.O. Btm Sfl-OaBS, tan Fianciuo, C« •41S»
TESTIMONY FOB THE PUBLIC RECORD ON K .R. eSe.'FEDERU. FOOD IXKXDIA-
TION DEVELOPMENT AND CONTROL ACT OF 1985," BEFORE THE HOUSE AGRI-
CULTURE SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS, RESEARCH AND FOR-
EIGN AGRICULTURE. NOVEMBER IS, 1985, ROOM 1302, LOHCHORm ROUSE
OFFICE BUILDING, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515.
BOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE OH DEPARTHEHT OPERATIONS, RESEARCH ( FOREIGN
AGRICULTURE
ROOM IJOl
LOHGWORTH HOUSE OFPICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON, D.C. IDSIS
THE HONORABLE BERKELEY BEDELL AND DISTINGUSIHED REPRESENTATIVES,
Good morriing. My nan^e is Denis Hosgofitn. 1 an an occupa-
tional health instructor to the Graphic Communications Industry,
and an a fine arts and industrial photolithographar by trade.
I am here today testifying on behalf of the NATIONAL COALITION
TO STOP FOOD IRRADIATION, of which I an co-founder and director.
It ia our v
ew that H
R. 696 is a deeply flawed place of
legi
Elation. It
la flaw«d
In Its premises, aasunpelon* and Intent
Pint, B.R.
ese'B a>s<
rtion that 'irradiatien of food...
is recognized by
nal authorities and the Departaisnt of
Health and Hunan
Services
B safe and wholesome is neither proof
of i
t« safety no
aufficier
t grounds for this legislation.
Unti
1 recently.
nternatio
al authorities and BHS recognlisd
DE5.
bendectin.
halidinid
, sulfites and asbestos as safe and
wholesome, it 1
importan
to note that what Is international
to one body is n
another, and local to Others. We
are
inpresaed by
proofs of
safety, and not by referance to
auth
oricies. At
this poin
there is no firm proof of safety.
The second
iBwed pre
umption on which R.R. 696 sits Is
that
ess, much like cooking in a micro-
oven, boili
g^or'free
ing.* This could not be further
from
the truth. Gamma rad
ting and microwavinq a
Btion IS lo^iizino enerqv boiling.
free
indi
disrupts the electron survicture cf target tissues
and
through free
radical c
emistry, creates new chemical bonds.
and
ytic prod
cts. loniiina oamma radiation precedes
COOK
i"g>.^'^ does
not repla
e it. Gairma radiation's unique
radi
ts will be
added to the varied hazards of
ing, and^will increase
the total toxic load people must
ety. More
uer, It IS unknown what the cooking
of :
rradiated foods will produce. But gamma irradiation i*
„GoogIe
we must keep in mind the method by which c
s, by molecular diiruption and free radical
T to appreciate its distinction rrom other
E what ionizing radiation does that matter;
Cancna irradiation adds adulterative compounds
that Congress adopted the 195E Additives Amendment
Drug and Cosmetic Act, and explicitly included fooc
in the food additive classification. H.R. 696 see)i
that Congressional intent by falaely declaring gaum
intent in H.R. 696 of changing food
litive" classification to process is to
)a from FDA riaotoas Ecrut ny, testing
tlina abliqations stipulated by the 195B
label Rule Making
U.b. '696 seeks to
pretending otherwi
? their
■all-
• the FDA out of
1 Begit
ling, freezing) thers
1 no FDA safety review,
:idity,and except as to poor sanitation for pierDbacterial
iw can any responsible legislator endorse
zing of this casual procedi
: H.R.
1 to d
n of food safety reiponsiblii
from establiahinq more strn
f established by the propose
for Food Irradiation. H.l
). 696 fail
H.R. 696 Ignores the 1968 FDA ban on irradit
Its findings of significant adverse effects
nortality, weight depression, reduced red
increased cataracts, testicular tumors,
tias and production of antinutrient factor.
Erom the FDA perfunctory July 22, 19B5 Pinal
? irradiation of pork, that the FDA has chost
i own 1966 findings.
„GoogIe
ignificont findinoB
ished children ted i
~ . aiiould
give each of you leason to want more definitive information than
■elf'serving industry hyperbole and explanations why each negative
finding is sonehou not applicable.
With respect to the "international authorities", a Japanese
doctor, Tak.ahdEi Kosei re-analyzed the toxicological data
used by the Joint Corrmittee of FAO/IAEA/WHO and found that
unconditionaJ, acceptance of irradiation of potatoes, onions,
wheat and rice was not supported.
Dr. Takahashi Koaei alio concluded that'the theoretical
approval on the lafety of all kinds of food irradiated at a dose
of up to 1,000,000 rads was not supported either from the view
point of radio -cheniical. studies on food stuffs as a complex
ayatem, or from the experimental results," His report "Cast
grave doubts on the reliability of scientific activities of
international organizations such as FAD IAEA, and HHO."
It appears to ua H.R. 696 is deaigned to promote the
Department of Energy By-ProductE Utililatlon Program proposal
for nuclear waste management. This program is the promoting of
a socially acceptablfl industry which vill require the building
of thousands of warehouses for America's nuclear waste.
Food irradiation depands upon a network of food irradiating
plants. These are proposed to each house i 000,000 curias of
radioactive CESIUM -137(froin weapons i power waste and COBALT-GO.
H.R. e96'B passage is needed to open the doot for this program.
As you can see, this program for food irradiating facilities
will promote the widespread proliferation of radioactive
waste. This will Increaae the likelihood of irreversible
radioactive contamination of our coramunities and highways from
Inevitable human error and accident, miscalculation and negll-
He need only recall the accident at the International
New Jersey, the tritium leaks which
\rizona school district k tchentAmerican
and decision. Radiation Technology, Rockaway, New Jersey, to
get a glimpse of the pandora's box of nuclear horrors H.R, 696
opens. U.K. 696 further opens the door for the unloading of
America's radioactive waste onto developing nations where it
may be presumed environmental and occupational regulations and
enforcement are less strinaent than here in the USA. To
launch the food irradiation industry, such proliferation of
rad-waate Is required. Vet it is by no means necessary to
quality food production, and poses a planetary contamination
threat second only to nuclear war.
„GoogIe
n beq:
hnology asses!
be irrevocable,
danqerous in its
On behalf of the t
of all the members orgs
STOP FOOD IRRADIATION,
to present testimony or
IS of thousands of members and supporters
izations of the NATIONAL COALITION TO
wish to thank you for this opportunity
I natter of grave inportance to ua all.
iU^y'^ /?Zii£ftfC^C~
4>Mn^
ENCLOSURES
REFERENCES :
ID !1 CFR Part 179> Irradiation in the Production, PTOcessing,
and Handling of Food, FDA, Final Rule
12) Alan T. Spiher, Jr., Food Irradiation: An FDA Report,
FDA Papers, October 19EB.
(3) C. Bhaskaram, M.D. , and G. Sadaslvan, H.Sc, M.B., B.S.. M.Sc.
Effects of feeding irradiated wheat to malnourished
children. National Institute of Nutrition, Indian Council of
Medical Research, Hyderabad-SOOQQT, India, An.J.Clin.Hutr. 28, 19TS
(4) A.F. Schindlor, A.N. Abadie and H.E. Simpson
Enhanced Aflatoxin Production by Aspergillui flavus and
Asperfillus parasiticus after Ganna Irradiation of the Spore
Inoculum, Journal of Food Protection, Vol. 41, Jan 19B0
(5) Takahashi Kosei, H.D., Irradiation of the Food We
A New Danger, Anpo, Vol. 15, Ho.
, 1963, attached.
(Attachments follow:)
„GoogIe
BARBARA BOXES
(dDtigrcH of tf{e ^niteb ^States
^Duae of ^prtuntolilin
n. ^.C. JOSIS
,y Google
Bnited States jSenate
Novaabec 4, 19BS
1 South 5th Street
D Jome. Cilifomia
■ndacd* applied to
of the Delar
:s would require, would leava
expanBioo of the approved
K proposed to perm
irradiated food
„GoogIe
O STOP FOOD IRRADIATION - LBOBLAIIVB AMALJOt
1H» clonic loophole legislation, submitted in the House by Congretsmui Sid Morrisw
(R-Washin^on) and in the Senate by Senator Slade Gorton (R-Wuhlnclon), propoaes:
1. to change the basic definitions in the Pood Additives Ammendmcnl of ItSI as eitei
in truscSSZKs) (Section 101), by removinK the phrase -tad IndndinK any MW«t ol
raiBBtion Intended for any sueh ibs" a> foUoirt:
(s) The term Tood additive" means any substance the intended use oT
which results or may reasonably Im expected to result, directly or indirectly. In
its becoming a component or otherwtie affecting the characteristics of any food
(including any substance intended for use in producing, manufacturing, packing,
processing, preparing, Creating, packaging, transporting, or holding food; anil
not generally recognized, among experts qualified and experience to evaluate its
safety, as having been adequately shown through scientific procedures (or, in the
ease of a substance used in food prior to January 1, 19SB, ttvough either
scientific procedures or experience tiased on common use in food) to be safe
under the conditions of its intended use; except that sueh term does not
include —
(1) a pesticide ctkemleal jn oron a raw agricultural commo<nty; or
(2> A pesticide chemical to
used in the production, storage, i
commodity; or
(3) a color additive; or
(4) any substance used in accordance with a sanction or approval
granted priOT to Septeml>er S, 19SB, pursuant to this ctiapter, the Poultry
Products Inspection Act (11 U.S.C. 451 «nd the following! or the Meat
InspecticH) Act of March 4, 190T, as amended and extended;
(6) food irradiation process. (NOTE: These changes will remove
irradiated 'food' from the rigorous scientific scrutiny, testing requirements,
and labeling obligations stipulated by the Food Additives Ammendment of
19S8, and provide the P.D,A. with a foundation and the Impetus to confi-
dently continue their no-retail-tabel Rule Making process tllrough the
Federal Register.)
„GoogIe
to add s new definition for rood imiliBtion u a procen In It USC S 311<x) {Sec-
tion 101), u toUows:
n piutam' BeaM a food tnatnrant in wideli
Inaiflit ■NTCr b mUed to raw av^iadtval eomMOditkB, proeeMwi fooA, or
•tiMr fooA to destror Um orgatlMiM iMtii eaoM Infaatation in foo^ to inMUt
or deatrar baeteria and other nlerooitaninna wMeh amonc other tldnp eaUK
food to ifna or Make the food mwlNdeaonM, to InhMt ifroiiting, to retard the
poatlHweat ripanlng of food*, and to inptove the f ood^ functlonat pnpertics.
to change the proeadure* for obtaining an exemption in II USC S KMaHd) and (i)
(Section 409), as toUowsi
(a) A food additive or food irr«<ttatton process thall, with reipeet to any
particular uw or intended use of such additives, or proeeaa, be deemed to t>e
unsafe for the purpoaes of the application of clause (3KC) or elauaa (T) of Motion
341(a) of this title, unless—
(2) Utere Is in effect, and it and its use or Intended use are In con-
formi^ witit, a regulation issued under this section prascrlMng the condi-
tion* under whieh such additive or pioeeai may ba safety used.
While such a regulation relating to a food additive or food Irradlatioa ptoccai Is
in effect, a food shall not, by reason of bearing or containing such an additive or
having bean treated t>y lueh a procev in aooordance with the regulation, ba
conaiderad adulterated within the meaning of clause (1) of aeetlon 342(a> of this
tiUe.
(b) (1) Any person may with respect to any intended use of a food addi-
tive, or food Irradiation proeeaa file with the Secretary a petition pro{>osing
the issuance of a regulation prescribing the conditions under which such
additive may be safely used.
It) ' Such petition shall. In addition to any explanatory or supporting
(A) the name and all pertinent information concerning such food
additive, or the aouree of the food Irradiation process, including for
audi additive, where available, its chemical identity and composition:
(B) a statement of the conditions of the proposed use of such addi-
tive, or the proposed procedures and methocb for conducting tlw food
irradiation procen including all directions, recommendations, and sug-
„GoogIe
CC) all r«I«vant data bearing on tha pliyiical or oUter taohnlcal
effect such additive ti Intandad to produce, and Uw quantity of lueh
additive required to produce auch effect;
(D1 a doeription of practlcBble methods for determining the quan-
tity of such additive En or on food, and any substance Cormed In or on
food, because of its use; and
(E) full reports of investlEationa made with respect to the safety
for use of such additive, er praeeaa, including full information as to tTie
methods and control ujed In conducting sueh Inveatlgationa lefl^ Um
level of the propoeed food InaAatliMi proceaa ii«« alree^r bean reocf-
nired to be nte by the Seeretaty. (NOTE: Thii sets the ttage for the
arbitrary use of administrative fiat by the F.D.A.'s 'Rule Hairing
(3) Upon request of the Secretary, the petitioner shall tumlsh for, in
tiM esse of a food addUve, it the petitioner is not the manufacturer of such
additive, the petiliMter shall have the manufacturer of sueh additive furnish
{without disclosure to tite petftioner) a full description ot the methods used
in, and the facilities and controls used for food iiradiatian pwa— or the
production ot such additive.
(4) Upon request of the Secretary, the petitioner shall furnish samples
of the food additive Involved, or articles used as components tliereof, and of
the Food In or on which the additive Is propoeed to be used or, In the case of
food Irradiation process, soeli faif onaetian as the Seeretary requetts.
i(TOval or denial of petition; time tor issuance of orders; evaluation ot data;
Etors
fc) (I) The Secretary shall"
(A) by order establish a regulation (whether or not In accord with
that proposed by the petitioner) prescribing with req>ect to one of more
proposed uses of the food additive or food irradiation proeoa Involved,
the conditions Under which such additive or process may be safely used
(Including, but not limited to, specifications as to the particular food or
classes of food In or In which such additive or process may be used, the
niBxlmum quantity which may be used or permitted to remain In or on
such food, the marmer In which such additive or process may be added
to or used In or on such food, and any directions or other labeUng or
packaging requirements for such additive or process deemed necessary
by him to assure the safety of such use), and shaU notify the petitioner
or such order and the reasons for such action; or
„GoogIe
(1) tlw order required by paragraph (1) (A) or (B) ol this wUectlon
ttmU be iHued within ninety dayi after the date of [iUnf of the petition,
except thel the Seeretuy may (prior to tueh ninetieth day), by written
notice to the petitioner, extend luch nlnety-diy period to KtOti time (not
more tlian one Iwncfred and eighty daye after the date of tiling ot the
peiltton) as the Secretary deems neeenary to enable him to itudy and
investigate the petitiotk
(A) taOs to ettablUh that the propoaed tae of the food additive or
food IrrwHatioo puiiwi. under the conditions of loe to be speeified in
the reguIaUon wiU be M(ei Provided. That no additive er peoccM shall
be deemed to be safe If It Is found to Induce ceneer when ingested by
man or animal, or it It 1* found, after tests which are Bppropriate tor
the evaluation of the safety or food additives er fa«d Irradiation pro-
etm, to Iftdiwe cancer in man or animal, eicepl that this provlao shall
not app^ with reject to the use of a subetanee a* an Ingredient of food
tor animals Mhich are raised for food production. It the Secretary finds
(0 tlwt, under the conditions ot use and feeding speeKled D) proposed
labeling and reasonsbly certain to be followed in pnetlcei sudi additive
er pi mil— wm not adversely affect the animal* for which euoh feed is
Intended, and (11) that no residue of the additive er proeeM irlU be found
(by methods of examination prescribed or approved by tite Secretary by
r^ulatlons, which regulations shall not be *id>]eat to eubeectloni It) end
<g} of this aeotton) in any edible portion of such animal after slaughter
or in any food yielded by or derived from the Uving animal; or
<tt shows that the pcopoeed use of the addlUve or praoeas wouk)
promote deeeptkm ot the oonsumer In violation of this cheater or would
otharwise result in adulteretlon or In miabrandliig of food within the
meaning of tbb chapter. (NOTE: Foods exposed to gamma or ionizing
radiation wlil^ are sold to retail consumer* either unannounced or
unlabeled are deceiving the eonsumersj
(4) If, In the Judgment ot the Secretary, based upon a fair evaluation
of the data before him, a tolerance limitation Is required in order to assure
that the preposed use of an additive or procees will be safe, tiM Secretary —
(A) shall not fix such tolerance limitation at a level h^her than he
tinds to be reasonably required to accomplish tiM physical or other
technical effect tor which such additive or process b intended) end
(B) shall not establish a regulation for such proposed use If he
finds upon a fair evaluation ot the data before him that such data do
not establish that su^ use would accomplish the Intended physical or
other technical effect. [NOTE; Itiere Is certainly sufficient data
available to show thai irradiation of food does not produce the intended
physical or other technical effect J
„GoogIe
(S) h determining, for the purposes of this section, whether • propiwed
use ot s tood additive is safe, the Secretary shall consider amoiv other
reievsnt factors—
(B) the cumulative effect of such additive In the diet of man or
animals, taking into aecowit any ehemieally or pharmaetdoflcally
related substance or substances In such diet; and
(C) safety factors which In the oplnton ot experts qualified by
scientmc training and experience to evaluate the safety of tood addi-
tives are generally recognized •* appropriate for the use ot animal
experimentation data.
(d) The Secretary may at any lime, upon his own Initiative, propose the
issuance ot a regulation prescribing, with respect to any particular use <>f a food
additive or food irradiation process, the conditions under which such additive or
proeesa may be Mfely used, and the reasons therefor,. After the thirtieth day
following pubUealion of such a proposal, the Secretary may by order establish a
regulation based upon the proposal.
Exemptions for Investigational use
(I) Without regard to subsections (b) to {h), Inciinlve, of this section, the
Secretary shall by regulation provide for exempting from the requirements of
this section any food additive or food Irradation [iiiii i^ and any food bearing or
contalidng such additive or treated by such proeess Intended solely Tor investiga-
tional use by qualified expert* when in his opinion such exemption li consistent
with the public health.
June 35, 1983, c. STS, section 409, as added Sept. 6, 19S8, Pub.L. BS-929, sec-
tion 4, It Stat. 17B5, and amended June 29, 19GD, Pub.L. BS-54E, section 2, 74
Stat. 155; Oct. 10. I9«2, Pub.L. 87-781, Title I, section 104(tXl], 76 Stat. 78S.
Domestic distribution; license; price limits lions.
to change the Intent ot the provisions of the law governing use of nuclear by-product
materials In 42 USC S 2111 as follows:
No person may transfer or receive In Interstate commerce, manufacture,
produce, transfer, acquire, own, possess, import, or export any byproduct male-
rial, except to the extent authorized by this section or by section 1112 of this
title. The Commission is authorized to issue general or specific licenses to
applicants seeking to use byproduct material for research or development pui^
poses, tor medical therapy, industrial uies, agricultural uses, or such other useful
applications as may be developed. The Commission may distribute, sell, loan, or
„GoogIe
with or without c
hoirfded. howCTT, llMt, for byproduct material to be distributed by ttw Com-
miMlaa for a diarga, the CommlnlMi ih*l] ectablisb prieei on weh equitable
battt aa. In the opMon of the Commiailon, (a) will provide reaionable eompena-
«■>■•, 0>) wm not dtooooragB llM iiniamwrilal a
development of Murew of t^ftl of weh mat
tkn, (e) win anoowage raiearch and development, and Ml win eneoirase eom-
■eretal aCpOMtSeDa of bnrodDCt Material aa deltoad in aeetloa J 1^1), pvUcn-
laitr aa a aoore* food irrttdtatkn ffcewi. In diitributlng tueh tnaterial, the
Commladon ahall give preference to applicsnti profxwing to use such meterial tn
the conduct of raiearch and development, in commerdal appbcatlons of food
itiadUtka laiiiiM. or in medical tliwapv. Ucenacca of the Commission may
distribute byproduct material only to applicants therefor who are ticented by the
Commisrion to receive such byproduct material. The Commission shall not per-
mit the didrtbution of any by|voduct material to any licensee, and shall recall or
order the recall of any diitributed material from any licensee, wlw is not
equipped to Bbeerve or who fails to observe such safety standards to protect
health ■■ may be eetaUished by the Commission or who uses such material in
Tic^tlon of law or regulation of the Commission or in a memer other than as
discloaad in the eppUcatlon therefor or approved by the Commission. The Com-
mission is Butliorlaed to aataMsh classes of byproduct material and to exempt
certain rlewni er quantities of material or kinds of uses or users from the
requirement* for a Ueenw set forth in this section when it makes a finding that
the exemptkn ttf Mwh elaitei or quantities of meterial or kInA of uses or umt*
win not eoMstltute an onreaaoooble risk to the common defense and security and
to the health and safety of the putdlc. [NOTE: IHIs working Icgalizet Food
bretttatlon a* a fMmal Qovemment progrem J
to teglUmize and tnetitutlonallse the U.S. Deportment of Energy^ nuclear weepons
Or-Product Utilization Program es a means of linking the t«e of redloeetive waste*
to the irradiation of our food by private companies — thi* is Food Fascism;
to grease the ridA for the commereialltation of Food Irradietioni
to use taxpayer money to create and tuttaln the Joint Operating Commission for
Food Irradition within the Department of Agriculture and to mandate this
Commlsslan to ^cll* Food Irradiation to the American public.
„GoogIe
AmPi. V,t IX- M.. 1 t*)»i
Irradiation of the Food We Eat
A New Danger -
by Takahashi Koset
Tin appUailgn gf Curim-c^ WndtaUBii wch-
nkiHa fef tht pniaradon of food vu lavatf- mmimmiyf ^|iium ■■■ ihhj «■ ■■■■la*
^■d HtH dn S»iid World Wii by dit US imttmy MA Bh blip of hi < W
Afny. iki Awnlc Ewi^ Ar>H7 o'' 'he UniM miMial iiidyik. Ike natot *boU
- MIoriheSsriillMon. B« eondleO^ « - ^ -■
by Uii 'Rcaiieh Cmup on hnrut AppHaUon
>if AlimiE CiKtiir'' An I9C7 md lindlilkin sf
puiiiun <ni ckand la I9T2. At pitMnt pouiott
vc ihc iMly hndUttd rond >hlch ii kM on ibi
nitrUi in Iifan. UMwih kntitlplin n Imdl- " 'ii it Ti | [ li i llilif Ij ifl niii .
ittd iMnin. whnt. rk« nd onn(c ha ilitttly Foodt
beta uaJkibI.
tlaiiii»ff,'ib«tkllitkonndHuviilHiirciy I. kmKtnd reman
ul undlatcd fuoik. The foHoHiiti iliKuuiDa it UM
mull ordwaiiliat'liMlrMi of rhc dill nbioinfd Tht ^gnirx vhtdi MtpM flnl Um Irndt
' -■'-'■ « o( Ih. iiiHi uT powan In IMI w Ihijaital UnloL
irkt iiMdi FoUmrtni Ibia Um USA. aid. Csidl. to 1964
mon roodi. dand ihU Uchiih|iii rof tin WiMiIh dT Dw
iwfifiartcd iitrDiiLint of polauxL Ka««iiir, ns bdMitria^
w uint 111 irridiiiita nxm, rnc irue puini or ballon of frfidlilcd poUloa mi ptrromicd in
WK i>9tn il ihal die icpttiti auJd ikm deKci Ihnc la^anniltHi wUI aow.
K jijiHkiiaupectioriindiaicdfiicnliaidilicn- Btovnin tl il (19J9X UMnnltjr o(Mkiii^.
„GoogIe
of putaiDB ki On rood h a factm. Thijr itas ob-
«wl ■ I^Ur U^ innriUy nU oT lln Onl
■EMiMtafl inritr ItT m lindMtd potiton.
n.<«)iufbuicd*Mi*»|n
1M9 ■■■ Jctei CaMbM
Tcdurtdl ItepOfI Ho. 4». In T47l'i dncUil
Rbml OcM ■« pytMml by Kopykw d d. In-
Hiiuit a< BMotkil thy** USSR. Ii wa^d An
w icM-mnd oT potatoes ouilt irfUiki ■ A«
bran of imdbUo* tuMi IO;00a ntf. tidvi ilwi
roc ■ dtrUta pntod baron bndliM roo* vtn
H^plkd rot Hlml npfrimnt oi homn con-
In IifHir. dH Sdnca nd Toctnoko' Afmcy .
MKlod dM itndte « bad limtlirlf h I9C7. Ii
1971 da mull of nnte W faiUUIkB ar^nul-
ta| of potKan by bndbliH 1M ndl tp lo ■
__ t- 'i ^
«™ lOKj
Tim (Hpin Mn pobUdwd crfltdilnf diilr
paper dutint I9T3-1975. *i Rnl Lniiuky (19T2).
Ko-moidi Labamariu la Caiuli, itiidltd ttiit
probltm by dK Kquol oT IRP Hid npotUd «p-
im daiL HoHCMT. Kc«din| lu ihc panmir
cmwiHinialiiH rrom Kupylor, l^irinAy aau-
inliad Ihc nliKI >idi NaOH mlulinn bifon \u
TIM Mnl ComiyilM tnluiad ■)■■ nport-
nMM nportod by Undi al ■! In dn dBcumnt
(l97T)aidUi . . . ..
(1) Cnvdi <m ifmmt In ill mile |iaupi
■Ion potalDM whtihir or not Imdliud nd
vTCinalB tlMD poliloB bndliKd il M «id
nliom » Ihi bwK moo- of mi«n iflci idinin-
(3) Oiju. «igKl
'b>ctiot tilncli nr pM«oa m<lf nrl— an.
mcntoliUd ch.
nti hd on pa
Z),tw CI il (I97J(, Iniiiuu or Nutrition
when I decrcH
USSR, nudkd die dominml klhil lot In mice »
oiKlni Ihc ntncl obliined rmm pouiou itond
1 manthi iricr iiruDilkin ind obulned ) iH|>tlH
■null TbM. Ihc IDiic nibitincc -ndlou^ln"
Foltowini uch ■
round h. Kopylm cl il .n Ihc cilncl of Tndily
in the document. It
lupl In the ontki or
ui|ci nlcud lo rcedlni 01
„GoogIe
iMiMwiraTs
indiiil minil la Ai bMd Inclofairflnafth-
dfml of ImdliM mliat. la ■ Micta< OMUal,
M*rH»MrkMdBi.li
uftUHt trw diijiii oi UK oripnai laiM. ttpmr hdJi— df bntia lad fchiiaa la tfn
gT^iMatiMnuineBdiiiHulHilBiiilUiidw don •>( 7IjinO nd, M kmun af MRioM cdb
of IS^.nd wd *M mi* dow'orvn^ilon ' - ' <ninili| iii llii iiillliiii if
■i^l Ml b« naridntd vg rpr hwaai CDnumi^ faidbii ■■ ImdMad Mnal, ai lacMai ti daad-
ifaa. «li^ tfit oriilHl diu ■«< kB^KUd aHi kdidqp la Ml rfin taJat aa hndbi-
diiHoufhlir. lacnw la Ihi Mi|M af tin hm. ad -taat, ■ ■duadaa h aiHtac al piM oh la
diynid (bad. ifhw. (ad ibis sid *cnut la tta wot at an, mttcmat at ikiamaiammttbti-
Awad iBiyiHMiany mryohtn. S«li ■ r>ci laud cab li hacB^M aT in ' ji M an k-
matta tlut ImdJiud pouioa iflKi ■ Mik. lidawd abnl mi tkal *■■' (floctt m d*-
iwii of oiiMi. •apictelly <!■ hanaaaal ntir pndHl «■ dM danllBa at Nonp ifar Inadkit
' 'hlary qnloa. ' kn.
tbt Mphirie nriittoa la tin awim *m olili- Willi (^^ la dia fafw af 11* iii mt
M lar ■baamal IMIopalhala(icil Hadlaii wlB Sadntna, Om Mai CandtM iUMd dHt aa
be iHideniuod ■ > acondwy irTKI of dK iITki- hi 1* polyplBMr m ■« nkn sliaal naad
td hvnmnil enln. Tat I] laatkl iltei biadbdaa m Md ad ao
EjtnJf laptodimtflii midln In urtwah hid fitMnm tn 9mtt W *■> la fndka, riata
BBibaofMliilBMiRivilorkiinUgaorcaakeil bradiiud slinili analr Hvad to ta^n dna
lindnKd paUKKt. IrmtaiiM of poWen il > I] vveki. Hawiat. nii hd oi aliaa) Mafai I]
idMcuriJ^XIOiMldiouldiiu) be Kccpitd B Bfc Mtki aftn kn«illoa for 6 Mifa AoMd *di(U
|MiiwabytlitJoliiiCianniiuainl9T6. p*r can rf pnlyplBld ^ id dw iMkan «w
Whcii ■ vw s( dH liwdi iht kndliiiaa sT nr«riiiK
■iBdi OS deaicd yay taitt. ia Ua USA la I9&). Tm piftn irtddi nepM dM ctnnnona la-
lad in Caaadi and In dx Svriai Uatoi ta \W>. jufy due to Itndbad wtinl ant puUWiad rraai
bBllhtiekabMBMtkidBniklbaiiai lathe USA Aa Bhiblu Aloadc RcMKcfc Cnlia la hOi ta
Md Cmdi, Bid ao iarndinikia fiiMi Mw Sunci IVT6 wd 1977. Cgatnry la Oati conduilon.
Uaun. Tlie JnaH Cumndiie* cmdadeiJ the ■■■ ■ ilpiincm kxRaa oT potndidd caNi la iha
prudKl ufHfiiliga fix dHjiiirpaB oTdllfairNiliai GMip tt it Ttea^ h dil9v^(pnililB IBp«
jliHuiifnunirndkliandKieiin KCY|IOUI»- etnl ptw wheal 7S pn anl) nd Ikl vaap ff
nJoi lO.DOOnJIin lUTA. ri>ni>>«ni Lhe i«nl- 11-12 • W IO)iwndencyi>rinHaeeliipiilypWd
51
,y Google
til mimali anl in lUe Urn (ipgriiMnl
llun the Mhcn. Thcfttutt. iIk KnRiK|r of In-
■Tcjtf uf pulypJiHd cclh h Uie bunc-marrow or
nu ftd an imiUaUil wlial (in KH iniinli] mifhl
HtJifTiciiIiUMtile.
CIsukH'i papci in IVTT ihun a ItixkiKr oT
a( ahty ipptonl for huma con-
tUib M il. A* Niltiml ImUluw of ItalUi of
Jipin. rabMwl ■ Rpoil « tht srrKli ckT lindl-
iicJ abeiiiii ikieafDHiMlaMarnriin I HO. In
knduUaa <« *l«Md. Dm mI^I at Itit oni-
hmi IfHi im ^ of body aVichO Aao^ i ripiltl-
ani deciua bi iht flm md in ibc Hcend pnan-
IHin. bw m kiauii In Iht (tiini pHHIIon. TIh
ciMiuacy uf wcti Qriphiiic mponM in Iht pH>
ytu of 1 intfMiiin inai In nonnnntd in lim
dnuufl iIbi rtiinuiHiaiilinltlihsirdniidlliig
In IMO uT Uh luinl C
12 of iiradiallon of oninni
Um III* purpmt uf iiiiiilnliQ|ip«uuiinf. Willi 1 nun-
in<un> 4w tfl' i ;.000 wl. Thu roUoMd Uh con-
■iiiiiaui KxtplnKt in I9T6. Tubi ti ■! In Jipui
imJiauil aminL The urlici Dsuinnci orduLli
or dtfcUrtnn cfTif u on
la Join( CennltM but
ttii (o nict nvR IK
hiiiuptiholoiial di*
npfwiiietian. Tilt di
la humn hedih," Tin Ktull of auJyih of JifHii'
Ht ihia u lUKd tbon oouM ■
ctptmet of Dfliuiti imdltltd nc
IS.DOD nd acctpu
•lioer 7.100 nd.
4. Irndltlial Ria
Tht Jolnl Csmmillit esndudid llu i
auonal tatfUna af iiiMHIian of riot M
at lOOMO ltd In 19(0. roOowIni Ihi
■unpunct In I9T6. Tebi at ■! In Jtpm (IMO)
itpartad Um Aocl-ttin ttudia an moaluri. R*-
hilvt orpn wti^u of Iht Ihrrald fliml. hnii
■id lull of mlmib led wi IniiUiitd rio Acl ■«■*
ripiincwidy iDwtf ihu ilioM of moaktyt IWJ oa
imirndiaittf rkt. ThU dtcniH bi Mt«tl oipM
w Hdudid freni Hm tniiutlan of tht lolni
Cumndiitt. bt«B> or iha Iomi body mI^i bi
Iht poup ol munktya r«d on aniindliltd rtci
ihan Uui oT ttic conirol ^onp IM on tha lUndard
m or Iht iki dial mi ohialntd
by tht nodilkiUon oT Ihii of a lundvd dial la
laliinH: iddlUon of powdcrtd brown riet 40 ftr
am, itduclien uf Huur from ]] peiani lo II per
eaal. cllmliulian af 10 fir eonl coin, 10 fit ctnl
of birliy poiKltr md 5 pti eint of hi (ni ric* Im^.
A» Iha piciimlnuy nudy wn nol pcrformcil le at
10 prov* Ihe nulrilionai iqulvaltniry of Iha tvro
Undi of dial. Iha dirfertnca in body Mlfhl ba-
tmten tha froup at monlieyi M on (lea ditt and
Ihoae M an a itindard dial nd|hl be dua lo the
dirrtrtnca bi nulHlMoilcmckncyof Ihi tM Aau.
The ibon-dtcd tnalyilt nveili ihal Ihin la no
reaon lo eonildet Iha bodvjMl|hl of nonktyi
hn
of nlallva aifan M«kl bt-
tvei
in monkey) fad
Ihui
of ll» efTecI .
,r ixMllmd lie). Tl>a ,
.«<ihy chanie.
In itlttlic Bjan hI^i
Uh
tendency aflncr
tuilnthcptluiUry|luil
lind
lh«
bpitncuildecit.
iKinllulhyioidtltndini
„GoogIe
■hakidnMaai of Ir
1969. in6 m4 ina la *• ■
(Wh inwii «f mimttt M nn (tec bnl
on. S ■■< 10 knd k obuiutli.
The dirbinc* taiMu inimiltaiid
ndisied «ci v<Mpi iMm m *t dtw ■
RbWil artdlOr In ftowfc^ Tha loull
b)r celnh 60 r« pracmlion had ban ptifamtd
ftimlly by Iht US Ainy and Ihi Brill* Ataniic
Emv Camntaiaa. vlU Iha Fuod lad Dm
Admiiiouilkia el Dm USA, ihnaid k 1969 il '
Uun or axpaitmaalM aiMvKa kiWHd tin US
Antrf to hHiIiAiv Itt ■pptl^lhM Tor pamiiiMM
lu (u ihaad with Iha imdlallon of caaiHd kan ei
U wiMliI ba itfiuL
Tha Fuod nd Dni* AdmlflianUaii kuiiud
Ihal iIh laaiBflt of Imdialad Inaaa lo nu had
teen ruHuMd by awktJ mJiKlkn oflha itabil-
■ly or Uia onvrini uT Um aalnab. •amllm* 73
ICB niiUnt wwlnicka uf a Rilucllim at body
■i(i(hi Mia obaancd ii nparimanit wjih dufi. In
a unniioc my Itie danlad nnkiKauf ptlulliry
Tht aimbaf uf eaunlrtai wlildi bad pl«i fat
tuid Imdlallai ammWd lo TS in 1969, bul II
Jarcaf in 19 bi 1971, afWr 10 yarn. Allci Uiii
lo Eurof*. lahcit Iha fuDowint Inwinailaiial
<>r|»m>Eia>u icHd ai actit* pfotmnon of thii
lidisiqiic: Food aid Atricullvnl Oi^nballua
iFAOk lnunialiona| Atonic Enarfy Ageacy
(IAEA) nd Worid Halih dtwluilan (WHO). A
Ju.ni FACVIAKA/WHO EJipcd CommliiM on ibi
,y Google
AmhIi; llut B Tree hydraiy nilicari (OH), hydrO'
pn iioml (H). hydiiUd declran md u on. The
Mhcf ii ■ KriB of ortnk radlali produced by
dlRci aniai of <nidl>llon on the convonenu or
liMd Ml by Miitct iCKIion Uitowih OH. H Mid
hjidnHd ckcuon Is Owi. Diaaliid axy|«i rnim
Ihtnlbn ihe Anolwd cngipii In Ihc Fend win be
coaBuMdKiyixMily.
Hydnny ndleib (HO) •bilncl hydioftn
sivM fraa cvboi^dnisKi bondi In tllphillc
umipo—Ji udi H ifaiihali, arbohydritn. arbo-
lylK aci4>.(>icn.tldeliyilc>,1uioni(,(iTdna iddi
nc. In M caci Ac pntduet of the loctlon It n
nTfuic fis ndlcal. The hjFdriled i ' '
h H ^l.n1lRI. pl,-
■KaiL Mc. Hydrain »oaw (H) m pruduced lo ■
itlilMly lao vMd ailheirndlailBnarwini.bul
n buMb in rilpliaUc conpoundi
na trom ihlol.
bill CM ataaXiMk npidly is biulphMct. vll>>b>|
dM frS bnl tan -S Hid HS-. Whh pnielni IhelT
of unie otpnlc nu^Hki nuy be utrtcMntly
kmi-livcd fof Ihtm to Innifcr cncrpr loMhim —
ihen iinoeiUtBMoruiiiiawiiH. ThtMiadicd
■ptcki mey fliully diHppcv by mednt wlib eech
oiJier bi complu chtmial rk^ou. Ania*| ihtii
ndlochcmlol iludin ll nH^t b* oouwixthy Itui
bi drild, itndbied producu. pidi m dried milk
md iureh. ^idiolyiic producu btdudlnf rm
ndlceli CM b« ikucled loni iriei the line of li-
■•dUIWn (Ehi*nb*rt. i9S7X Studbii on AeK
prindpla sT ndlochemlol iiKtloiii by pinleuler
iMiud ndkili mud by AJ. S<«lla«. •« *>II
lecnmbie tlM cilUal cundiulat by foil rrrttiMn
■I nu)ot food cORiponuu:
(I) Protein (W.U. Utbiin): Althou|li much
nhublc InfORniUon ll inllible on Die rHiiillaa
I eitnpoliUnf nieh nndfev ■>> <*■ ImdI-
praubw In food. There any be kmr-
■noni the rediolytle pfsducu ol lU cam-
Mded
0) CHbshydnie (J-H. Deuphki): Alihw^ H
h teiy Is dletlnpiWi betwHn the eslld utu end
■oliitlon In rlw «■ of pyre n^ln, » l« ■"■*
tan » (iB ru) «llh food ilufh Hd npublu. Fai
■beie mienf^ Hlnpslaliaa riiMi pue Hi|ln M
findimm oUt ilmyi be dUTkidL
W V
nudteihi
» (P.P. 1
r been biiolotd ki ldMU^Ifl| Uie de-
linenlly recopiad Ihil Vlludn E ta die noi
reiUitlan-Hnillln of (he raUohiMe elUniiin:
•iMIil vlumln B <• (he moil ndkdiWIe at 111
&H.-..Hlly .itpnk ndlab « rutmed hy Indl-
nibble on Uic redbilon uabUily oT i ^n ean.
fil Milnm U..ouEh Oil, »ll «d H n well .1 by
piiund m 1 fuiid producl m allempl may be nnic
Jire« ecii.-. O.F"fc fit. ndlcsb nuy iborKl
IB eilrepolele the deie obUlned fna, nwIlM wlUi
h>di>W!" ><«» '"^ otpnic nwtecuht, reu1lln|
model lyiunu Lo the niiuni food lyium. Any
hydniei. Orpnic n.Bcilt ere eWt to ■lueh Ihem-
^« lo d«hl. b«nd., but Ihc ret. b no.ni.l1y
duptei uemlnily »pparl Iha foewoid by P.
low.
Billipnd Mid ProF J.F. Diehl: "Wiik m IniprB.
Orpnic ndlcib ae nully of ledudni opjMI-
Hy end nay ndiKt <niMt coullluenu. They reKt
diemlilry of pun lubiluicBI b nUbble. itumpU
will. «ypn and piodnct . peiojilde ndtcd. ThU
pitdtellon of ndixlonnnduced dientii in com-
plax rooditulTi. ere bued « Mmi unceriiin »-
„GoogIe
I. piUc. AiHoci, papriki **< rW"
puhlidiion of tba bcok om nation dvmlttry.
■W condiakM of Ihi Jaint FAOflAEA/WHO Hal
Ihe ifmliatini ot nr food ammwiliy up la m
oxr^l iKnp dw «r id KGY (1.000.000 imI)
ptcKoli no loscolofiat hBud. iniiil W ba«l
gn luim unariila uoimpUal wJ BiJ lo bi ui-
MHihy of ih> iiiihorliy aid mpoMiblUiir of the
InHniiildad O^niiiiiaiu.
of rood irndtiMd il ■ dOB h mull a If rO- I/lOO
itf 10 KCV kt «|i*flmcntil lAiinli aU nnlliH
■■ lulnourixhtd (huninl diildrtn. Tlim Tieti
|ii<x*d Uh MinlUliiUv of »<• ippom of Iht
ikH sf 10 KCV iMi only ihcottikilly. bul lUo
A dim bI' qvenkiuiici on ihc p
M clurfloa indinaHEfilii|of irmlBt
■ni ki IMI lo ita MtnlMry of H
:iiminjli« on AUik EatiB et ■
di*r«« or Imdiiilai Tor pouum la IM
Ita gnloat hi IHS foi Ihi porpoM ofaiHq
faif uddiii«riii4iai,IVHiraidid '
Tor ditkifRtlon ta II — "
cobilt'40 pmou Irn
Uw rood hduilry ia luhr. I
CiMdi Mpud Uh dniw* of tod *iM kiddock
niku mi ninipnpiRd ml ta lAEA'ldail i^
mtucud tlH ytrfi of iJiw ww to (lumim ft—
HCOulKd.
FAI»UN>n
^ (uhI foe nivkciini puipian, gsljr lot up«-
lluli: TtHMkiitliTofHlrittitBallnnld*!
bi iiT fAEA. fw un-tenki and dmd fi^n hi
I9T9. (« niki) u MrndiM la IIWO. Tot onioiB
*1 and ipkci durini I9t2.
Fmu: Tht Dtroitumii of Cftnl PmwiUaa
it Iha Iwtnaiiml candtiiiod llul Imdllliaa of
Auilnlia: Tbt Fooil Adn
Hknilon vn ghmt lo Ebt Ifradltlkin of fntAn
bnmpt, hoi Ehit vn itoi tpprrnvd by Iht Nilkin-
JUndird tot Pircodlud
■ ftoitmt. 8y ludi ■ HiHmcnt Aulialit
' ' :n diilinpt IliLcd in
aolr. tlw di— t
bi (Ih ill of lAI
WniCtninny: Tht HhiUiTOfYoulh. Fondly
■nd Iteilih iniRnd ihti i* Wot CeimiDr ■>>*
iuntiini Hnditlisn of food nd Iht tWndalkHi of
Foodi ifcB LRittd wen fofUddtn by bw. Tht ib-
Brhed do« of tn*dlitliiii of food Aoidd no)
twnil 10 ltd. Al pnnni Ihtn it nopoitibAiiy
uf luDH«ii( ihit In. Furihtr. ihi Ftdnd Ri-
,y Google
r..^*i mcui r« kinpiuli wa, H.|>r4*<) b, >he
lirMl. Dultaiu nuy Ilio bcl«n| la (tUl |>Dup. but
llH int<Mi lo iIb <|utlii»niKC mi no) sbilinMl.
iwnlil IK «llv.
numbefiirroedtuiiu.
Iluniiiy: Tlw Miniitty af llc>rih cwintmed
]) Amoni l)u i9ro«litttTii|rinltilcl(aiiiiM,
ui ijanHM lu 6 r«Hl ilniu liticd m ilie duit of
lAliA. Tlicy lUu uUl ll»l up lu Uul liinc [htrc
hill been ni> pcrnunwi |i»n>li In fotse tix tv>i ii-
1) TtH rood ilcim for <irtiich ikiiinci ml
irinud bf Uie lupil numb*, of counlna Hit
poiiloci. Biiani ind piUc. Iritdiiud poliloHHt
"-?.'•.-".«?"?■
Jipan (IJ.OOO'lO.aW I«ifyt») mil USSR (1
ly of Ariculluit ind Fiih-
1910 inJ fur iniii|« & lupiyi in I9S0 idiliUon-
bwlcd ricE in 1979. The jciidlili
{USSRK euUnuy pnpariil Bi^i {USSR). ehKlus
(USSR). ihiUou (FiuM). nunfBi (Souih Aftki),
•nd Hgnfuy.
llcMd the dur«a r« •*«>< md polllMt IHttd
by IAEA.
Untdbyih.l'AlJA.i.<.Au<r>l
Finally in Jipin. itiidiiud potaicci ocn
4tll Ciowp: * couBlriei i
ac«td and h« b«n iDid <» <l« Buikil tinct
iqlMluwmi dun art nu iltni ornuvcincnl of
paiiini dniBK* Tof irndliled ohIdiu In the Min-
annrmtd Or »' fP" pul
hlry .irileilili.Binlraiy id IIk IAEA llil.
5p>ln. Bulnm (nd Uni(u>r.
Fiuni Dulgitii, SF»in. U.IC. U>i.|u>y ind USSR.
AiMiit to toot llcm> ol
ni> inlwti <m iibtiincd. Howtvet, » ZiylBi, Ihi
twenty law Mn laduitiUib
SiHicI Uniinrin ilit natuiiKptlbllilied bylAEA.
iha pipii wa Htd fof illfhniiliiuiiin of (lu
dtaana foi txfttimHtil indin frgm Ihii for
priciini Hppir lo the (t«r)l pvMk. Tla prhm
ititui >if uthei counliin mt Mllmaied fnin the
■ill piuTlifcd by the IAEA. Ilie total ileiii. Ihui
inihe woildia l9lll-l91l2.iisliu<Hi in the ubie
ri'RH ilie Kulyiii nf the dais in lie Table, llie
he nolevonby.
Fvrlbei Ptoblena end Conduiion
Ilie iboie inelriii n>e>lcd ihicc Impantm
a. USSR.iheTfclheilind
ic Republk ur South
58-005 O - 86 -
,y Google
f.r.n9t.itn
BHunliiH H moil !■ DkhLl.F.:' Paod IndlMlaB. bML rv« O*^
LEA Ml wKincr) br it-.ifi-ns.int
IThki FHuIlribl D>«iM<ii mtOfFOOD AOIVn.«S: Wtatmum¥-
MixiiiM irnJkit»l ■— >' ■•n'iw^ >'«<. Pm* MM|r IML MM
iTm H*m IB 14 (°>" "^ *" TaHiaial RafoM N»40«.l>n|
(KCAl
IM / CfM. Mk, 11:130-131. 1*11
IniMidl. L.E. AkniH. ai>. •nil Uuim. r,lL:
al Ouiifn in RkiM n«Biw4ni«lM(d Milan.
(Uio. r.l iM Ca)>«.lUJIMkUI^ a
AmsHtJim-OtfmMltm raft. Itn
Imdlud FMMM* isr li«llli« or tpraMw,
ftwFM for M«Mm'«/ (TMMft P.1M-MT.
Konkn, V.A. Oi»ni. LR mt KmM, AJL:
TIK MM^iyc mmt tf Hiliwii INai Cmmv-
bndiHid PaOla IWat (f tki m CMk 1 1Wt
H)n.lWMMba|k l3(4k51«-»l.lVn
LrHady. H.V. mt wmam, U.A^ Miim^t
-HnhnikH mf m AlDplwfc bUMt TiM <^h^
■ndiM*<l PotHoii. fiCmmn. TmHttl„\S:ia-
,y Google
BY ANNE W(TTE GARLAND
T\e newest problem on the food front /^o )
^L Wimiiig You Cati't Siv It. Y(ni Can't Thsle H bul ybu May Eal n Vji
,y Google
Jii,.
n<l<IIS)SnTe<uy H»
iriM— AvahwA hwhiK the UR^ hunil
MnTwiungdiralli
WthFiaMynrfnnflim
ntfitnwlhrmilyiin'llalRltDiiiIni
•iiwnlmiitlinhrT
*■ Hul, ih.' iimih !«.■
,y Google
(S)
PiVfVIHtn Afmcy n>
iwiud pcfficy Iniuiuie
iKiKun, n'l unlikd)' Ui
(Kk aw iiHl S Zaay Tha lisilaua
lortakes
[ie IVpvmivlU nf AgriCUHure, Ur HHK. ' l^Irmtlm-^H'iiyaiitiim^brt*
,y Google
MQNTmy MANET
Can You Tell Which
Has Been Irradiated?
„GoogIe
The Safety Of Food Irradiation
Travel ft^jj
WIuiDooTlifa
ra^-^i!Sgia
,y Google
m
c-ariai
The Politics Of Food Inadiatioa
«£S^^^5 *«Jy»^—"
;??ji2:S'.':i".™
BABIES REVOLT!!
IKEFMDWN-. ^5D<», THE HEM MOM
Ey=i5==
.^-J±2r~^ir
==—■--.«£
„GoogIe
Tlie Safety Of Food Imdiadon
Are Food IrndutiooPbati Safe? ^sSsSC'.^tt =-7r*'^^^^^^5
,y Google
The Ptolitks Of Food Irxadiatioii
=—=-■!?.;
^sz^s.
=i^::;3i'ii=
Jiisr*"*''"
-~iSs^-=
br'-^tt-TT
?--"■==--
r=£S:;=3:
r.'™/li;SS.3dsc'-^-
Bst-'irtKiEr;
n.t:£=£'£
&££:=»==
=i==?.f3
/UTJSr-jsit:
~rB: .,
*V4
ssi-ssisss
^^
l®lt
A History Of Food Irradiatum
„GoogIe
Pending Food Irradiation Legislation
a^erv.
LOli'S
Vo#SWaGBI> •"«" y
RepalR ^:Z~\r
„GoogIe
liNIVKIISm' OP CAI.II-'ORNIA. I]
Kr. Paul T. Ubusi, BUtor
The Sciences
Hm Nht Vorfc KodHBy of Sciaioea
IVoBut SixtY-Thinl Street
New YOck, NY lOOZl
DMT Hr. Libssali
Boitairiijig Bananas - Eoffilng Zkxx^ini hbb written, I believe, with the
intentian of prcnrldlng readara with timely and balanced infiumtun
npnUng the pcnsible uoea of ^miia radiation to extend the ahelf life
of food. Uifonunately, exonples relating to tba postharvset life of
fiuita and yi-qitatilwi ven inacsurBte, miBlaading or totally wron;.
I can only believe Hut the authors vere uriting in a flaU (poetharvest
dieaaaea of fiuita and ve^etableil in which Uvy have little knowladqe.
FM ecBifile, the authors eminent upon the anay of chanlcals that nl^t
be a{>plled after harvest to oranges. They later stata that 'if dmopd
safe by the FEA and thai widely luied by the food Industry, iiradlatlcn
could CT^lace the frngicidea an) Insecticides mw sprayed on fruita and
vegetables. " It would be nice to be able to reduce our dependence i^xn
fungicides, llawg^tr, there is utterly no possibility that gannn ta-
diaticn, as we rcw use it, could possibly replace Omgicides. Insti>.il,
there is cmsiderable evidence to indicate that certain diseases of
harvestnl citrus fruits would be more active after irradiaticn. Pa-
diation-lnduced cellular injury and the onset of senescence causes a
reductl^i in the nonnal level of the ujiiiiuli^''s disease resistance.
The late Dr. Bbard Haxle and I concentrated on studies of the use of
ganna radiation to control postharvest diseases of fiulta and veoc?tabUs
for 10 ynan (1963-1973) with suf^nrt froa the Atonic Bwrqy rnrniiaslon,
Ite founl that in citrus fruits, a dose of ZOO kiads was required to
delay disease develofiiient by the pathogens Pcnlclllijn diqltJtOTi, P.
Italian, or Geotrirfma candldua. Diseases caused by ftltarnarTa
altetnaria or Diplodia natalensis were often worse in irradini-'r] than in
nnn- IrrDdiated citrus fruiis. Partly Ch.it was so bpcause dw fmlts
calyx was weakened by Irradiation to permit entrancf into the fruit at
Citrus fruits could not tolerate the ZOO krad dcse required for nininal
supplession of disease fungi. After 200 krads and subsequent holding
periods equivalait to the time required for transportation and market-
ing, the oranges (tiavel and Valencia t exhibited the following: the
albedo was atnooially soft, the fnilt surface was often pitted, and the
taste and arcaa ueie noticeably dltferait than unirradiated contmls.
laims irradiated before storaqe to reduce disease during storage
suffered such won rot than the ncn-icradiated controls. Injury ves
„GoogIe
r»3teH nftcr storsga in fruits irradiated with an little .is 35 krads anJ
sovete injury was fcund in fruits that had been irradiated at 50 krada
or higher. Further, citrus fruits are chilling sensitive and are
<Jaraaed at refrigerated trwpecatures well above freezing. Irradiat^'il
fniit clearly exhibited Increased sosceptiljilil-y to the Jarnaging efferfn
of diilling injury.
A search of the liternture of the past 25 years wiuld have, at a rnini-
nuE, alerted the aixthors that plant scientists had discm-ered seriooa
pi-cblans with irradiation. Hatton, «t al,, recently reported that as
little as 60 krads caused excessive injury in ths form of scald and rind
breahdcNn of gr^cfiulc. Injury classed as Koderate occurred aC 15 and
30 krads but the authors judged those fruits to be acceptable. fT.T.
Hatton. R.H. CuUwdge, L.A. Usse, P.M. Flale, D.H. Spaldiin, D. von
Hideguth, and V. Oww. 1994. Phytotoxic respcrrsea of Florida grape-
fruit to low-dose irradiaticn. J. Aicr. Soc. Hort. Scl. 109(5I:S07-
eioi.
The authors also wtote 'Irradiation could reduce spoilage which nou
ruins an estimatad 25 to 30% of the wcorld's food supply. It uculd
extend ahelf life of products for weeks. Increasing the length of tim
food could be stored or transported and still taste fresh, irtiile de-
creasing the need for many of the chanical preservatives now used tor
this purpose.' It is doubtful that any fresh (living) ccrsnodity's shelf
life voild be increased more than a tew days by using irradiation to
control rot organisns.
Ousting the authors further, 'Irradiation la desirable not only because
Its effects are so lasting but because it 'cold-processes' food. T>ds
means that the garnna ray txnluidwnt heats the food oily slightly,
(Biniadzing adverse changes in color, qxtor, flavor, texture, and nutri-
tional value. Thus, the technique is superior to both canning and
freeiing, which often leave food mishy, rubbery, or inealy." As a matter
of fact, changes in color, odor, flavor, and texture are gsierally vt^t
nno does corplain about after fruits or vegetables are irradiated at
doses that even minimally si^^press poatharveBt pathogens. As for
destruction of vitanin C.
Further en the authors said 'the industry began to envision strawterrins
on fruit stands rensining bright red and firm for weeks.' As a matter
of fact, our experience shoind that shelf life extention, fmn sifipn
ing Botrytis cineraa, varied fran essentially nothing to as high <
days. On average, however, there was generally an e ' "
days. Seme strawberry cultlvars uould not tolerate
Koel F. Soiner
lecturer and Postharves
University of Califomi
„GoogIe
Irradiation As A Possible Quarantine
TroatmenI For Fresh Fruits And Vegetables
Gamma irradialion has been highly publicized as an "avallatile"
alternative to EDB lumigalion. In this report, the auUiors stale these
stories are overly optunistk: tor many reasons.
^■■nhin Mili'hi-ll
■nrnl of l>uini>li>|.''
hIIv »r Ciiliriiiniii.
luvH.CA!l5(ilCi
. 1'hi^ McriMnraiHun n ^^^ =^^
niOHnniiti uf cth.vlL'nr d[1iniiniili- u
ininF at pouilik- Imihh hazurdri hi
CHid Itatr tht iiuhnlii wiihnul a al _ ._ . ...
•alufMtmyqaamniuTiiTaUnnii fiir ' :.ininu radkiiu-n hiu hnn hjihly lARf.*! finiuirHlinlniHvr nnil •'iim
nvnl Dl a ntw inrmiilnii An nlln livr lu Ki»l fiiinijiuliuik L-umm ir r-mui M Diivb- *n Uw «»■ i>f r^olh.
nuln* M EliB w mrthri bnanulf Inm ■• ruricd lij- o rnml HlA lun M nlmt Uv iliHr Nfr ..I -nni.
rMBI. llnfi>nunalrl>. MIt » n fumi. ann<«ui»mrm •if inuni lu dlov "nJ vmMalA'.L Ilk' i.iHh.«. .■(..u
fniitnand ninHiiUn. HunliiT. MIt IlkCviinrnA.Kiirliur.iiiiinith^ piimi|N>l <• di-i'rinripiil lnn'>ii|:;i
huabnlonirnli'UHlbKiiiMiir '<>n.ii<li'Mrihallj>'tiilliuM;i;'4>a»ii ukk in thr~nudl>'> 0<np:inr<>i
^>iiinUthn<hhliuiinl>.Anildiiipfr wfr.rflmivv.nimiiiniriiliiTnuncTii KliiiliB>iinU'.i'cli%n>efnidku;-<iiin
nvinnHH l<i|it.' )>r>ii>iHiil HI ill
„GoogIe
Ih'ihi'iJiririirrH^ii'oic
While pesi studies do
suggest a potential use of
gamma radiaKon tor insect
control, a number ot
considerations dictate
extreme caution.
. m'.i'i <-..ininiiniv iii\ij>.i( Some expressions ol
irllni mK-ni.»(!aiiBni>. t>ir ladiation injury can be
jsiinniiiiiiiiHinBiutHiri ■' observed only days or
; !^"X%l?.i^5u.u"h "eeks aller the irradialion.
inmaHin-iiiJuunitu.iui'h EHects ol radiation-
noTfruiuuivfpiiiMn'.ilu induced alterations ol
■mm »Mior (o dcaiiiii us semi -permeable
iroih.Mnny(»n«com|msini: membranes can
.■fn«ni.n.fruii.hnH-cii*.i" sometimes be seen, as
m»c in tthykmr fvulu-
rnar in Ihe rMpimtim rtir ftil imirrvlliiliu H""' ■'i''""
-B iitadiMicin ind tlul innwiv h Min«l M hp n iimimii pi
„GoogIe
•■llln^lU■■•nJvpuOhl■r^Tsl ALIhrliniturpn-[1;ir;ili.i
nt hrnliMTvnliii Ihil arill In
inndHt<i»uiinnnnur»l<«rTd'i"«i The fear that ratJialion (fOrtl u.uMlR^i..Hnaiiiaii».K|iH^...-
M riuuu E> iir^i.iiivi ihr KiijiH *ia""na fay irradialioo from lii«dMrtli;ii(iin»i.TaMf«m«
P<Ti ..r |K»l»i.-m ;inil ihr I»m nir isotopes mighl be induced ""■ "' " *>''"■ "* ""■""■y «™>ri ■h'l
hHh iniKini Hi h,' Mm»»r»F. ihi. in fruits and vegetables "iiiMJ-.f™in.idvpjni.i*..>Kii-
irr^H.i..<.m»iKiw-,r.(.»iVHl appears to be enttrely v«TJiZ^lJLTI«fc!K «I!Ir Tl
pn.,i-iih.«.«nit„,«. »,««■„,*, groundless. >a.i.iMk«'»Tiiw..(. «*j. «T».i -i
,y Google
ItixiMli.n xwn* >
It. il Kill )■■ nwMiul Ihiu Nilisnii^ iht nlnnHy iiiv>>nant hiiiii II*' mulik' !■> iMMhr I'li^i
tf4V liplipiiHiil liir |iullKi<dlw 4nrl i4uii(l|ii>Mlliirirniili:ll<irmMKmiilUii' MIhiiUhiih ItfH nHOHi-ii
ililiullHiEilM: the vimimh typr* nf nf«nt of phytulttfirtly npt-fk-nnd cimir In vhk-h p qwi
nulaMswwinwriiniiklbeniiiiiiTil. Iiv fiuiUi and vniHiililn. atHMUiMl irqiiinw d
UsrlDlhemiumMdeiirilKCBlibiF firmninivivsrinn.'MHnyurihr ii( aU flniiu inid ww
nLihDrtaniJlamlinHa»4Ty.ntrf>iiti-]v nmiH iif WmdLuiiin cnntinvr If llv nhiiipid iMUiidp thr A
Li<n<mlun7Tiirin«vlii>i'ii«iiilfln.-quiiT niriLiiiff vf niA in um'. Jhp iiiHufnii Ih^l ilrhhinil ii luiv l<ii
nh !i liiindtiiq.'. ll LH mit iTrtnin IlkH cnnlinw l» dmi\ niMnlkiiii iiC hm-. 1li:ir'tiraili;i»>>p«»lHin
»iMinf:|Killrfuil1|l4li1Hil]i4i^ilK1it;i- lbi-l:Hililvinuiillx'nHunl]iini<iLii:ilrlv (■■^(■l:iFUiH'M-|k4.iliiirr.4
Vinimiim-mtximKm du^s- The «ncfiatorwHldlH'iitiliudton)AC- llt^iuilniptrxifnnifty
ui>(iBanfl InwtrliniiiKnfilnuatr hy fbr M hum ■ diiv fv SSi day* ■ tiilwf ihi- npU.il invni
dcimniniil liy thr n-nnflBmliiMi iiT yenTr UnfwtunniFly. hDriinihoRt] iKmrTi-ifi thiK- mmlii Ih'
■nd dcrwily nf ihp ppitfurt unif iU hivhry venobJt In c|unni]ty durinif finiULNV In :■ ITTWK.
Current Herbicide Label Status
For Deciduous Fruit
„GoogIe
NCSFI
National Coeliiion to Slop Food Irradiaiion
P.O. Box S9-048S. San- Franelico, CA V4I9S
„GoogIe
100.00
,y Google
n( C. botullnu
> hiiard. Hone
f *• ..11.- >.
t of th* Blcio
c>Ulot how ■
ChaliB>t> >«t*t
,y Google
piDbibly Hill not h>
csBiid*r fttlttoat, ■
.bl< CO...;.:!.! l«plJ
»'•••. providing ippc
to fill in wMt H. th
product. A^i ,e, in
„GoogIe
>SS *s p*rt or I
I infoiiBH la
HI linillul«
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
b, l.»
,y Google
4J^<^
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
I'NIVKHSIIT OF CAni'llllNIA. IIAVIS
Hr. Paul T. LUwssl, Editor
Itw 5cien:ei
the Hew York Acaday of Sciancas
TM> Eut SiMy-'ttdxd Stmt
HBU VOrk, N¥ 10021
Dear Mr. Ubaaal;
Bdibarding Bananaa - Xappinj Zucchini waa urlttsi. I balima. Kith the
intentlcn of prcwiding readera with tlnaly and balanced infianutlcn
regaiding the posalbla uaea of giama radiation to extend th> ihalf Ufa
of food. Unfartunatelyi exoiplea lelating to the poatharveat lif* of
fiuita and vegetables ware inaccurate, alaleading or totally uroiq.
I can only balieirs tliat the authors were writing in a field (poadiarvaat
diseasesof fruits and vegetablcE) In uhidi they have little Jcnovlodi]*.
For exaaple, the autJiori ctmrent upon the array of ciianicals that nl^E
be appliol after harvest to oranges. 7hey later state that *if dannpd
safe by the FDA and then widely u.ied by the fcx:d industry, irradiation
cculd replace the fungicides and insaotlcides now sprayed on fruits anj
vegetables. ' It wiuld be nice to be able to reduce our dependence open
fungicides. HcMcver, there is utterly no possibility that ganm ra-
diation, as ue rou use it, could possibly replace fungicides. Instc^l,
there is considerable evidence to indictite that certain diseases of
harvested citzua fruits uould be more active aftar Irradiaticn. Pa-
diation-inducttd cellular injury and the onset of senoacence causes a
reduction in the nomal level of the connodity's disease resistance.
ITie late Dr. Eduaid Haxie and I concentrated on stujies of the use of
gnmia radiation to control poEtharvest diseases of fruits and vegetables
for 10 years (I9G}-I973) with at^^xirt froii the Atonic bieigy Ccnnission.
Ms found that in cltru* fruits, a doaa of 200 lurads was required to
delay disease dsvelcpMnt by the pathogens Penlcilliijn digitatajn, P.
italtan, or CeotrldMa canJidna. Diseasai caused by hlternarTa
alternaria or Diplodia natalenmis were often worse in irradiated than in
nm- irradiated cttnia fniits. Partly thnt wss so because the fruit*
calyx was weakened by irradiation to permit entrance into the fruit at
the Stan end.
Citrus fruits could not tolerate the 200 kiad dose required for minimi
suppresBim of disease ftingi. After 200 krada and siAaequent holding
periods ei^valent to the tine required for tranaportaticn and mariwb-
ii^, the orangea {Navel and Valencia) exhibited the following: the
albedo was ahnonnally aoft, the fruit surface vo* often pitted, and the
taste and arara were noticeably different than unirradiated ccotmla.
Loicns irradiated before storage to reduce disease during storage
suffered nudi mre rot than the non-irradiated control*. Injury waa
„GoogIe
Hr. P.T. I,Ibassl -2- Huxh S, IWS
noted after storage in fruits Irradiated with an little as 2S kcad* wd
severe iAJury was found in fniits that had been irradiated at 50 1zMl«
or higher. F\ii:ther. citrus fruits are iMllinq sensitive and ar«
d-'CHHFd at refrigerated tnifieratures well above fleeting. Irraillatcil
fruit clearly exhibited increased susceptUsility to the donaging effartii
of drilling injury.
A s?arc^ of the liCerflture of the past 25 years Hculd haw, at a nini-
lun, alerted the authors that plant scientists had discovered ■oritus
pi-cfclans with irradiation. Hattcn, «t al., recoitly reportfld tiMt aa
little as £0 krads caused excessive Injury in the fora of scald and rind
breayiam of grapefruit. InTUiy classed as nodarato oct^uired at 15 and
10 krads but the authors judged those buits to ba acceptable. rr.T,
Hatton, R.H. CuUiedge, L.A. Rissa. P.M. Hale, D.H. Spalding, D. vcn
wideguth, and V. Oie<. 1984. Fhytotaxic cespcnses of Florida grape-
fruit to lew-dose irradiation. J. Mner. Soc. Ifcart. Sci. 109(5) :HIT-
eioi.
ITie authors also vrote 'irradiation cculd reAice spoilage uhlcb now
lulns an estimated 25 to 301 of the world's food sundy. It wuld
ejctend shelf life of products for weeks. Increasing the loigth of tine
fcod could be stored or transported and still tasts fiesh, khile dF-
creasing the need for many cf the dMRilcal preservatives now used for
this purpose." It is doubtful that any fre^ Hiving) comiadlty's ihalf
life i«vld be increased more than a few days by using irradiation to
central rot organiSB,
Quoting the authors fuitlieT, 'Irradiation is desirable not only because
its effects are so lasting but because it 'cold-processes' food. ITiis
means that the gsnra ray bodiarThient heats Che food mly slightly,
' nintRiiilng adverse changes in colcr, odor, flavor, texture, and nutri-
tional value. Thus, the technique is superUs to both canning and
freezing, which often leave food mishy, rubbery, or nesly." As a matter
of fact, changes in color, ottor, flavor, and teicture are generally what
me does ccrcplain about after fruits or vegetables are irradiated at
.... As for
Further on the authors said *tlie industry began to envision streiAierrlna
cn ftuit Btanls renalnlng bright red and firm for we)is.* As a mttnr
of fact, our experience shcMsd that shelf life extenticn, fmn sifipress-
ing Botjytls clnerea, varied trcn essentially nothing to as hi^ as R
daysl ok average, hcMever, tltere was generally an extension of 3 or 4
days. Sane strawberry cultlvars would not tolerate the 200 )ccadt at
all.
Noel F. Senmer
t«cturer and Postlucvest Pathologist
Univarslty of Califomia, Oovla
„GoogIe
Infeasibility bt irraaiaiing rresn rruiis ana vegetamcs
E.C. &hlK, ft. F. Sommci and F. C. MtlchelJ
Uniltrsiiy ofCaUfornla. Darii
n. frmlucU looiiloM "IB lUppid by ir
dincrry wtl nor rfliibly drlenDinrd, imibiliDa untfn flctuAl ud lu
darITT «f iwSutun diftiibuUDii aim liiipiiiciili wtrc naluilcd by (•»
c prDdvct uciHd hifhlir wriibke, ptnoni, >Q tntll 5 H men y
amionuV. ^l*chid«i| tJLponiK of the loknnu
i4A IriHporl Ind niajkclblf. Our nfi lectin
fmlbdity gf iindiilint kidc
SO EipenmcnUI Food Itmtiilof
ce wnliinini Ihf pinducl- and
It Flicti (IS. 11) ti
Ddily >Kt D«l liktly 1
:td«, ^tenbtfritl. Eterinini lolertbl* dDH4
MfUrini. prkhrt. dlfTicuti btcauit pitbirvttt
•(flild bulSlonttHmptnttiRiwen rottnliil for canntnlil i
rijthdv but HR lypkil of annnMiciil loknu doKt of 100 Km
pniiticn Tni dupncBU ol uri»benni «K«ti»( fctnii to baiy c
luclid by denkpHM tot IS diyi » 1«C. Wilk
I 1 by miiHie Hri.b.inn. locb i diKy i«y bi Vt»t
HOHTSCICHCe. vol. 6<}). lUNE 1971
,y Google
illaUir nducid IMh Jboh Rfritcrali
"Hg^*; ■) H at pUnic
<hc tail; C) unhiUy Iniiu
IT ircUckt. cg(ru4 ti
Itiiicd SUIti only ia CiIifcH
I10IITSCU1KX.VOL. «(]). JUNE 1911
,y Google
DErARTMENIOF HEALTH fL HI
Hi, Ann Alberta
Box 51B]
Santo Cruz, CA 93063
Re! F85-3805*
r*rar*ne*d abov*. In iihleh yeu aak * nunbar or
ta a list of all food
B In the US I
. Delghton'a dlatr:
I potcntiKl problai
ting food
cone* m Ins
„GoogIe
'•ge 2 - Ms. Ann Alberts
Plnslly, regirdlng labelling.
spply onljr to a food that has
Division of Pood and
Color Additives, HPP-330
Center for Safety and
Applied Nutrition
,y Google
413
SIERRA CLUB MARIN GROUP
: Koolqu* larwl
I an Bure you will tw pltessd to Jcucnr that tbe Eieoutlve
and ccasemtlOD CiuDlttaaa of the Sao Franolioo Bay
Cbaptar, Slarra Club, bava qiprovad a tao-part raaolutloo,
Mlab I aunuariEC B* toUoaa:
1. To urga tta* National Club to taka a jwaltloD tbat no
gasaa ^.iraUation of food produBta bs paniltted until
fuTtbar and adequata raaaaraJt has bsan eomplatad,
Z. To UTSi looal JUTladtBtlooB to paaa ordinacsaa
raqutring Ibat all gamma-irradiatad food be slearly
>o labelled or cotiead at point of aale.
If you refer to tbl* astioD b«aratul to dlatingulah tba
1^ parta. Tba firit InvolTt* tba national liaua on vblob
tbe Cbapter aanoot tak* tba loJltiatlv* Id aatabliiblng
« polloj, Tba seaond ti a loaal aaltar tltblo the parrlaa
of tbe Ciisptar, I.s., for tbe B^ ^rea.
^please eall ne.
7 Ore at Roed
raiif ax CI 94930
FT oflhinklnt ffmankM ti n> liffi-fiv* —Alberi Braitm j
58-005 0-86-14
,y Google
„Googlc
tie
*ri*a raoLONOd) mainiox or tMABUtsD r<M«»-
~ A. I. Litlu ■■««. a. ITH*( ' .irOC«U.«|-Hl-NU-M:«ll.MZ.Bl«^nj
op^. ifclMw. J)
■XVaBlIltMTAL MITHOO
fl>iaihai^ta^dMil>rrrHW>MIMHJ>-LllBnd|. nanlialpvp IncatHdtoa bndkMla^u-
It.i-Ula'**. TtiBligalxfiroiif 4|iivtron<«nk*rt HiuunldlH. TM pninr ol ikiu riu (hh
uaaalTraupluMliiaalOttHIUdTluHi, MlalmjrfBt
HUl'Ml aiotofU I MidlUlu, VoL N. Ms. J. ff. *M-»I.* F*
•■.«JZ-,^_. ^Hjs MSTER1AL IiaV Ct:
, ■;:.te:cteO ev copitrisht l^«
.TLE17 U.S. cocr-
»DT-4N«/ Tt/ tlit>-*a*tr7.«^l*iryntm riMllU^ Cei*HU>iia
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
H. r. KiKiliUl. H. S. Mma. tp« r. E, rrUdnav Tta, Trae, ]
C. M. HiXm, u£ 1. Kamtmi, Tmi,rrae., a, ItU (IKK.
C, E. PsIUfil ml. Toat R»., IJ in [IWI).
L ),1l^li*y, t.C. Boa. taa 1. K. Botm, rtd.rtiK., H, IMf |IM«I.
„GoogIe
>tl>^ 4o« d( U-Ut Ul°c>d>, -<i it.< f».l ti™
,y Google
rcaplAiB {Fig. 1). SparsBloivalA, i
all! at tk<i« tidulu Mr*
.1 Hjai, CI
usU k> dUCtnluIihwI.
iBBiH f*«dint Htcfc
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
FOOD
COALITION TO
STOP FOOD IRRADIATION
IRRADIATION
IN BRITAIN
TON,V WEBB
9
£2.50
THE LONDON
FOOD
COMMISSION
PROMOTIONS LTD
„GoogIe
FOOD IRRADIATION IN BRITAIN ?
LoDilan Food Coaalxion Proa
P.O. Boi 291
London NS IDU
0I-M3 578!
© Tony W«hb.
,y Google
11 w*T IS ropp iiutiUH*TiMiT
USEE OF FOOD
'WF»OVEMEKT'
WHOLES OHEHESS 0
VITAMINS
FOOD QUALITV
IRHADIATIOK AND ADDITIVES
MICROeiOLOCICAL HAZARDS
■DwiBC WTM miuTiciw
ACCEnABLE MSKt
MEU RECULATIONST
DESIGN LIMITS FOR IRRADIATION PLAHT
Eoiiwines or roop imlamatiow
CONSlfHER
IS roop iMiAimTioii
■ECOLATIOII AM) WOWTOllWC OF rOOD IMACUtlOir
10) MFBKEHCis AWD ransEt munwc
,y Google
12 IimUHlUCTlOW
n (aich the •iciptlDii
c of iTTadiiod Eoodi - food ^uilitr.
[•dialed load*.
,^.
„GoogIe
In the VS. Ii
lr«dy In ust
tlieHh*rc.
Th> cl<
d ^"se ^tUe'tt
It. 19M .fte
:!>• in the
of the t.
Et,.». (29)
:hen 21 counir
its hivt per
■ itced itc.
.ii.tlon
„GoogIe
iHhllhishlliilhi
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
!l planl. ndloa
cl(i cil1*d loni. Abov* thil
behgvloui Bt li%
,y Google
h«ptt.l
,y Google
:[lv> (aureo) thiough tht Irradlai
e ilio Ciclllticj for w>f>ltorlr(( li
teplng rccordi.
Lilncd It [he isurce of Imdlitlon
:lflc>tion of ch< doxi glvtn
Isn cell, (Kd [h< (Itlni of Che
c pich or tt» food through CM cell
,y Google
MDIOMTIR FOOD!
■ properly eanlrollad, food (bould
„GoogIe
low enough lo I
«;";;.".'.'.;r.;i!
:",'
■ yt ol
;;".,
nd 1.33
IV >
i Cj*i
lu- 134
•;:5 ;■;;::!£
/:.•
ir»
•■'">
°"ir
i mU*x
energy i« helou Che 10 KeV Ihreihold.
>eful rat Irndlicing ih> gurrece (■[
tilo Cr.y (kC/).
,y Google
UmCIMTIOM -I
as uhral Jnd tie* or in t*« C***^**-* *"
b. kiii.d. ,.„■.„». '~-^'£a:
volulng gat atoiige ot <>tZ-«£>HR/ir>^
rhli mlghi he laporonc In /uJt^Kie*' tiMnlk
chicken or fiih. arWt^fui^u^
,y Google
I,6e^^fits
•inly ttjJl.^aX'^.
iHMDveHen or roc»
■YII
Url"l"loI "nu»b.
■I°oV
lEpro.e.eni of bikli
lo<s of biking qua
n( »r
mdatilvo irr turr*ntly jitil to Incrsit* (he bjlk, and tht a l*tU f'*"-^ '
Viler ind .ir conteTii of tt,t .t.nditd whlir 1d.[. ¥«itc cm Of,,aMl U^&ti.
(?) wtille thi> hflt 0I1UJDU& benefice 10 th« large baking Mrmi * , j,i. -
It i. . .aictr of opinion uhclh.i ihla le>d> ><> *o lapra»«<nt -^ IVkJt Amk
ir br.ad dusUty. 07)(7T) ^.C " -/^iSII^
lrr.dl...d b.rUy can if>c»a» yield during «ltlng by 71 - a /^/fc^? tfrtl
f.c. of inter,,! to the bre-lng Ind-.try. lrradI„Io„ can be /fi^ ^t —^
u>ed to ■age- .pint. OB) and Irradiated grape, yield .ore ,j^ ^ W^^
Julc. when p.ot«sed - poMlbly beneficing the fruit ]ul« and ^^,W^«^
non.°cVn''V"u^.'d '« ^^^7-ixld"."«'^Ml"MV^Vpu
cbemicalj uiid for cMi purpo.e in procecced and prapaied tt-J. 1^"^
r.''„.. ...d., ,. .......1,.., ..J ...I ..h,.„,., '^^^^^
Joint enpitt eoMlttee sf the HHO/MO/1
HholcioBC before ir radlic'ion. There ar
,y Google
„GoogIe
lZ.H W*» IMWPIATIOW SWET
FOOD VTCIEMC A
The tllttct ol ItridlBElon on loai dcicrlbid iba** h* tttar*-
cd aa dailratil* tram (ha psinc of vlco that tb(|i Inctaaaa the
atorai* rise or 'shelf llfa~ «r foods^ Irradlacloa alwald aat
hoHiver be r>gird*d «» a panacea fer all feed pi«i«T>a[loD
preblcai. Aloni with the deaired etiecta a nuaber of M(hlr
■ndealrabla one. ara alia pcoducad. iladuclni ao.. {but not
all) of Ehtie aiy be pcialble throutb uac of heat or of very
lou te-peratutra, ta»o.al of oxjtan dorlnt irTadtatlAn. or aae
ot aoac chealcal addUlvea. lo cheae taaei ItiadiatioD ba-
the atcrafc lift of (ha product and Irradiation Hill not
Itplaca thii aa one of tht aaln HChoda of pr*e>t>atiaB.
thould not be accn a* a ttchnlcal (Oluiion ta all food liT(icBa
probl**). (t)
UBOLESOMEMUS Of IIUDUTED roOD
(he Idaat of nouriihlnt and healthful. There la no alallar
uord m Dthcc langua(ai. thlB li unfortuaata. In iha
intirnatlonal toruii, auch al thoie of [ha Unltad Hatlona
OnlT cover, the cineept of aafely and aafaty only natrowlT ^
defined a. the ati.ence o( fsevilafil, Thi_
a) j|""<<>j '"'%f "'"'; „ , il/f ttt^-t"^
c) .UntMcant i»paet. on nutrition JI^^w''^^
d) induced radloactlvU, in the food "^^£>*Ay^
Moat people vll 1 find it leaaiurlni to knOH that, provided ^.V^^V Wif
Irradiation la proptrly controlled, the food la not Bade -Wp«^ ^i**-
radloactlve. ''c^^t^rt^^J
On the othtr lafety aipectc the altuatlon Ig lex claar cu(. fffjJr^y.
It 1. po„ll,la to argue that the rlak, are .light, and Uk.ly .^L^f,:^.^
Vhaf l'."no''''«ciptlMe"^hitev7r""i ''hPu.*.'^ of"lh"V.V- •* 'l^^^f'
-vhole.o»e- for food, that are to he aold a. freah hot, 10 ^cfL^
... :^/i^
,y Google
d da uk( and ll•llc^ th*|i n
iitloB dcxm ■■(•T* duas* to actat <t(*alaa, pcrllCBlar
■ Ina A.C.D.E ( X and (OH af th* > vitnlaa; 11
lealai, bu[ alio IZ, ■!, >(, 112 aad (allc acid a
ol fc&d aod th* dsii (Ivin. Fruit Julc*a vtll tultn BOTa
than fraah fiulta and thaaa asra than vatatablai, tralna and
peat prodiKta. Ctnartlly apaaklni (Im wc* coaplai tha food
the Icia It auffaia tltMln Isaaaa duTlds Irradiation.
In an atc*Bpt to Juatlff tha clals that th*** le**** ara not
„GoogIe
..p.cc.4 d.cln| «
t»dt. (12)
Vic»in E !■ not o
. wpplHtn
( .(t«r irridlitlon
An fit *■
csDklnt li conc»r
(""*.' «
[>"bi|">oh°«>V<:
■ wt Dbt*ln I I>rt( peiclen ef eur villain C frs* (taih
■luj uneooktij vittiablt*. T)w leu et ulEuln 11 duTlna
•ppncKccd. Foor taltnt hitilt* ■»
1« br povtriy, dr br tTii pittern of
look frtth IC I* iitrcul;r lapoTCanc that IE (» eltttlj
lod ID th(I th* coniuxr It nal aialod.
rota QOfkLiTT
,y Google
or control of atorati d«c*T (c)
■) d.lly
n attlni
<b)
UMMUS (i)
KUKoes
SWET crowiES <b>
lOHATOM (c)
STWUKIMES
) .cc.l.r.
.d rip.
BlBg
PEARS ay PEACHES
AVOCADOS HECIARIMES
(•)
OUCHES LTCHEES
TMCEIINES HOHETDEW MELOH
CUCUMERS
it)
APPUS
CAKTELOOreS
d bcfor
.HUT t.
(Oil and IDT potxo* thai it« locKn or diufgd. bthirwlo the
trtidl*(lon project In Che Bid 196D'i. (69)
,y Google
c of the uln food) [or which hlfh dDH trcsIHOii h*
!V(lop<d, devclopi uh*[ hM been ch*r*cI(Ti«*il •■ ■
- ■»]!. {1){1S)
ci Mture of Hhii haa bean eallail [hot 'topical
tion flavouci- and odourc hai not Tat baan fullr
■ Flitd. farhipi avan »[a alEnllieanllr ch* ..Jer
in tenii of tha food.' chnliirr have not baen fBll,
OB caairangMenl of the and Boleculir itructura o( [ha
nUDUTTCM AID UDITlVeS
One sr the ujoT aellmt palnti In favour of food Iriadlatlon
hai bean the clalB that It will reduce the need (or hanful
chenlcal additlvaa In (ood. (19)(!0)(J1)(3;)«3)«*)
aiicBt to which roDda art balnt adulterated with chaaicala.
effect! bui for riavsur*. ccleura, and bulk fllltri tac.
In addition there li reaion to be concerned about paiclcldl
realduea In food and the harwful effect! ihiic (le having on
■grleulEoT.l and other worker.. THE LONDON TOOD COhMISSIC-s 1. ft /cpU
(2t!, and of food addltivea for both cen.u.er. and worker.. ■pa*lA'»r^'»
Table 4 balow li.i. idh at (he additive, that ar* dalsad ti
„GoogIe
» (<rt otlwr cond
d phOlph*t<
*
..
™" f
ck lilm nipped
por
[lent In >
bulk
1
s.
«
Tl(aTi
« .t 0 to 5 d.<
irlch ■ ion of
"'
Ship and
■or* .c 0-1° C
n
-( than
lU.
«
a J ity
iii
c"
■ of.
■ propo)*d to *
■ t [o 21 d.y.. (
)
nd [h> ■■k>
ir li,..
•
od
u- tc
. ,
chcaleil
■>d for
m Eo Ch* (kin
1> U»d (1
pi
'•*
'"'"
«?)
■ Blvin, ihould b* link
,y Google
»-i ft bCKcr rciiiicitsni as (tv „tr bI chMical •Mitl>«
■■f. .!• crrtni!/ u<t<l ■• i.rt»rir«cl>M. Cnitu tl>i> 1* tow
fj.'^r ar lrr>dl>:lim clXa. r>d»rtng (he rurrrnt' idglccraiieB
Sf (!■»«•.
TQiic amicus
Chaaxala fioifl [n chc Imdlated food in called .
'ridlalrilc jiroduti." or 'ridloljrio-. Han^r o( ch»»« an tH^awa-aJtiU
■lallil CO (h*aic»J chanftt ih.t occur In oihtr foiBa of food ff am/iAif ^
proeaatlRf luch >• cooHn,. Soaa howav.r arc unl<|ua ts ,-,r-,at,/-,-
Kciul* of IM CD-pItilCir D( Iht I(*ctlOn>, il 1> dlfflcolt te !£t Ct-cK^ tla
!l;"'.S.v/;U"//.v,'^^v,'?j:it"^%;m,".":;;Xi" '^'=^-^
iould b< t*>I*d. Inld.ll^ Iri.dlii.d faodi ucrt fed ts uf^HSt^fit.
.....I.. WMl. ...,.11. lb. ,.,.1.. k... >... r ,1.,. 4^ Vr>6-
;::.i;;,:::,'-rx.'r.rv.v"^vV7:;'.'".;"r;:.';:s r£^#><
li Inadt^uace. Only laall iguaniltlrt of Cha unique [adloljtaa O^^-f^dL.
sla
»i and mo
* noraal
Mth dote caiclng Via
1 baao don* en
.'."■
1) Alain
a* a'd'vV
".'".Vfa'T" h'.'vTl
a* raaaaullnl.
par
s..v;;
rHd".
heic confora to ch
di and tha (uldcllne
tha.e ait noc
dcvalaptd by
H Jo
ini Ciparc
""""
of iha WHO/FAO/IAEA
(I)
,ulr
pll
■.'.Hri
"""an"!
ad'la.ad food prod"T.
tcaa Initially
In 197t thli
food could tt
kC». Th
d^frrVd'l"
and Dru( Adulnlatr
ltd In Iha aadluado
ic langt could
udy
i> aoouih
"od'a'Trr?
lated abova 1 kCr
coilcologlcal
irt radtolytie ehtaleiH aii citaitd and cht grcatai cht
pottntlal rlik. Initially the HHO/FAO/IAEA apcciflad hoch
lailaua and Blnlaua doici chii ihould bt uaad in (Ivlnt
1980 I
wat tpaelflad. Tht <
hanitd and only an ".mt^til'Ar
t acetpctd in dolnt ^^^.^Z -fC
,y Google
Eildncc af cam (or
riject'd t)» US Acny'l r>HiTch on Icridlilfd ^rk, anil Hit
dciHclcanncf (roa Irradlaled baton glvtn tn 1963. In t
isro'a ihc US Any i:Dn[ric:[cd [hell THMrch [o Induttrlal I
E tti icradlaod food ha** bt*D found t
Fth, chanix In whit* blood calla and
r chcaical a|(Bta raiponalbla ha>a bo
c Mtailon*. Th* t
Polyploidy- ■ cbTowaoM deface - haa baan obaarvad IncMld-
ren, wmHeya and nti led trradlatad vhaat, aad haaaiara tad
Irradlaccd diet. Other acudlaa of (eedln( trradlatad utwat or
polyploidy. It 4,<peara (hat the daaaf* that laada to aucb
,y Google
ttQttt *nd I
food »T accD
( rclnforcct
indiilen* an
CaaparlioD *ltb otbci rroc»K>
nrit unccnilniiK (bout (■fx; de nac «pp*(r In cha icpotci
t>chnlqg». Thr quanililtt produt^id hawasir
llfcicnc. Hydcoion Pccoilda for cxnplc.
Hop afier iTnitKclon. SCOEid foodi can ha«a
lvt> ■!< IlkclT [Q ba oatdad for ua* with
roducca created by IntaTacclen bciwcan thcae
idlolrtu pcoduco nctd ib ba tatitd alio. *■
, product, of
,1 Irradiated.
,y Google
CB to allp [hiough thr (afety net hardly
Foe this niacin i« hava aCMaacd that
A foodi, and the chEalcal producta of
HICKIRIOUICICAL Bi
atani aalionilla hava bien davtlepad by lapaatcd liradl
< undar laboratcty condlttona. Radiation cxlaca
erli hue bean found In anvlianBuii mih high nacural
,y Google
Flnl found In 1971 (33) ind conllraed In 1976 and 1978.
Kliloiln. irc poKttfgl ■gunig for »u(ln( ll..r cancel.
TabU }: SttKuUdM Dt Aflatoila PraJuctie
nt ^rticulaily la lurmins di teod la tatni off
■ puEild tHll. Taaata aod aouU* alas CMpata
(touih Df thaa* baetcr
■111 nst be killed. Dndii [ha ilfbc cendlilena (ha betallnuB
ceutd aulilply and bccoH ■ baalth haiard vlthsat cha esuamai
hailng any wacnint a-all. (1) C») (16)
Hlch riih thta ta lai* llkalr- Ac tha doiaa prepoaad thar*
■re IlkelT to be tnoufh ipollata orianlaaa laft to Uttltlplf
BBdcT alBlliT condlclona to th* botultnua ao chat tha food
nalla unaecaptabla lAaii betullas baesHi a haurd. (1>
tha ntad for a
la and tha coadl
d handled.
,y Google
1 ctftcti. Eipeiutt of work
(i){ii) (n)(i»)
Ttiarc li no chnihold bt »rt level below which thcic lone
ten erticti do not accui.
lIMn radiation acrilus ■ llvlni »1 1 on* of thrct thtnK can
call* ara doc klllad at onea tha body will allalDalt
iha daad call* and liiiu han irlll h* done
• the call will be daaa|*il bui autvlva to reproduce In
rcproduetlona titm tha d**ag(d call uiy •hoM up aa what
we call a caneal, or be paaaad od aa a (anatlc dataci
to future lanaratlona. Ct3K3»>
Than la alao a itowIbi body of avldanee that radiation eauaaa
■ Kira laneral radoetlon lo health ty waaltantni tha body'a
raaiatanca to diiaaa*. a*)<*0)
The crucial point la that thtc* la no doaa below which thaaa
ef facta do not occur. It la Ilk* walklnt (creaa a aalB road
blindfold. Do chiB In the ruth hour and r*u'll he killed. Do
It at Hldnliht when there I* lea* traffic and you can be aora
lucky but It Tou do (tt hit br on* of tha few vehicle* around
you c*n ba Ju*E ■* d**d. A little bit of radiation doean't
five you a little bit of cancer. My de*a homvar (sail, cen
be (h* on* that do*a tb* diatf*. (13)
r* la Ih* Induatry. They
I of ■alfunctlonlni equlp-
or accidental aapoeur* to
,y Google
Hlble <1){*1)
I IhouK b( kept 1
f*l(^d uBitT ataadardi
lOCEPTUU tISKt
tolil expoauT* 10
".:
er dggi
h. SIEVEBT
. r.,1.
■tad to
tha llkaly
d <0.0
L il.v.t
:). 1
|u*l> 10
■11
'"■""
plat
It umceapcabl* 1(»1 of rltk.
(li
orkir racalvlni thli doia aach j
k B to 18 llawi highar thin la
[a~ Indultry. («I)(«3)(««). A
apt! that 1 Horkat In 10,000 »11
o».r 1 llf«tl»». 1 io 100 work.
accident at wtk.
arly ■ rlak 10 or Bora llBaa jr
cciptabla for a
tat* loduatiy'
dl( och Tain
a Bill dl* tram
„GoogIe
lion „f by .t !«.
I* higher ihH'
.l««t» th.t [he
(SOKSDCilXSJ)
s higher .1111, (i9)
tn [he.
elicuaacencee i
alRhc here be
Retute
■ [.niJlTd* ter r
er.e t) the ce.e
. (5*)
ce in 19B6 «o
rewJy toadequ
Under t
w nev ICKP beee
•yetcB (or c
ent pert, of I
„GoogIe
T«bl» i - Cur
0.™
1 LlSl"^
! LIM
POSAL
1 ;s:.
Thyroid
Br«.t
l'°
"-
"
'-
1,., .
Bon.
1 30
r„.
1 so
,...
1 i.i >
Red M.r
OW
1 5
r«.
1 .1
.~.
1 ... .
L«i.«
r 15
in.
1 «
„..
1.8 K
Skl»
1 M
r».
so
r».
1,.7 .
Extr«i
1..
! 75
r«,.
50
,~.
1 O.il ,
HMd (1
.'cH)
1
1
1
j..O.
:onold(»d leccpKblg. (SO
■ rtjuHiory
■ctlon for u
log, -ill bt
,y Google
4»
•rtu>d for . new
> planl uould be d
ua Into Una vicli ihoic f(ced 1
oniuneri, workers need to be i
,y Google
n mwunoM
Kludlnf
0 Che uTk*t Itufi o[ imdiitfd fMdi
o coapetltlon ttom oihar piocciHt
n* 1981 npocc of [ba HHO/FAO/UE* c*ll*d for tavxlltatlm
There ■!• aoM people who hIII ■(<>* thai iht Btrkat placi vlll
■ort out all [h>a* problaa*. If Iha pric* t* Tl|ht cha
conauaar will buy Irradiated fooda. If Mt than tccadlailon
won't happen. HaalKy la Bora eoBplai Chan thla at>pl« (coear
ahop V lax of aconoalca.
Ea of food iriadiallon akould
eenaldcr the lapact the techn
lologT would ha>a on the wkol*
food Induatcr. on •■ployaam
appear flnaiKlallr banaflelal.
1 Indicate that Ic 1* aftai all
■iDdaaltable. S»eh . atudj. mu!
Id help la aaaaaalBs clalaa aada
absul the eeonoalc benefjta of
food irradiation.
COSTS OF tUMCunoN run
There are currently atognd H
> pilot or ■iptTlMntal planta
ep.rattni or under eonttructl
on worldwide. Thaaa >arr (roB
la •euniad In ahlpa, Ibiousb to
large acale aulti-purpoae Irr
adlation planta. Thara are. la
leal facllitlaa daalint la
atarflfaatlon of Mdlcal produr
:t« attached heapllala.
owned by ISOTROH Ltd will be be able to hand]* coBBticisl food
Irradiation, one other Blthl be able to do ao. SoBa hoapital
facllltiea sight be uaed >a part of hotplcal caterlot-
larg* acale production facllltT baaed oo a D.S- daaltn vaa
coated at Cl.li Billion In 19St. (61) A recently eoBplatad
facility for ISOTDOH Ltd in Irliain coal U.O ■lUisn. (»1)
,y Google
(■cllltr would cosl around 1100. OC
Ignlflcinily If ch«ap radloactlva cobali ot Caialua aaurcea
uclear waitcg. Evan ao, the Initial coacn >» high (nd thara
111 be conililarabla praaiuca to utlllia cha facllilUa » tha
HBO HILL tBKWnl
he »]0[
Inadli
ite benaficHry or ■ daclaian tt
«Jor ic
'':S.
ba ISOTttON th* ona ccwpanr thai
Ion plant. It I* not thtrafort
11 aaong tha la«dlng adTocataa ol
m th(
It* dapan.
higher pi
""t,V
m/or tha larga ratallera trill
■arglna for profit on food art
tg. turnovar, or froa balng .bl<
r ■ food product. Currantlj thll
„GoogIe
dsne by pr«c
■■lilt (oodi and cli«r(ln
tha coMoMt for tbla
[h( bail* of It* ~
it 1> dene bj prtaantl
Bt Ih* lood lt«B ■• •
.lUT |.t<Mj«
:- -frath,- -th^ ba>
t of tba <tof.' -tha
•ltilt««'t.i.-
Th* indarlTiBt IdM U
!■■ tht iMoelailoa ol
■ qu.lItT !■
haalthy food. It la
dlatcd foeda will b* ■
rk*t*d aaln both tha
Igeratioa/fraaiar taehMlotjr ii aliaadf avallabla li la
doubt. Ttia adiaatat* aiiht lit la tha ua of Irradlaiad
iiiti(hc aaalad paekaiad fooda, bat ibOM hIII likalj naad
loaa) hl(liai than an llkaly ta ba annyat at
ac. hainc da
*aloMd
fowl Iriadti
'■•«• "'•«
h. ,.kl
I abolan
: idaa that, mllka aanj othar procaaaaa, Irradlacad (owda
> anadulttratad by chaalcat addltivaa la alaa halna
irsBotad. Thit It KltlaadlBt. Aa ua hava ahowB, ■ddltloa*
dll ba oaadad to raduca uadaalrabla chantaa taaaltint (roa
Tcadlatisn.
a vaijr raal faaT that conaaaaTa aaj Dot accapt
d (Dodt for tihaiavar raaion. Thla la aoifhaTa aora
than evac laballinc of Irradiaiad (oodi and food
l*an abat la K
■•a batn latredoead tat* bath
■ould bM tha laballlBi af
M U.S. Ihaaa bllli alao aoak
„GoogIe
■ bout all tiT*dUc*d food*. Nat airalr pr*-pKkataiJ faoit but
thoi* told la«** (nd In bulk (*nd lb* Inadlitad caatuit mch
u flciiii and aplcaa In pToeaaaad fveda). I( la ariuably alto
tshaia elaar laballlnt. tBrthlnf laaa than irhola haarced
at (attlog public acc«pi*aca ot cha pr«(*i.
Mcui oosn
ad<
raniat**
£to« Ittadtatla.
11 at faoa.. Sueli ■
idtaatata
ira alght
ba ata llktly It
1 baaafll aanufactu
tn
:allata bf anabllni ftiichti
coiKantratUB e[ aarkat eooi
itol.
All
*ra, vroducari, and
bal
lot aqua I
laad aut. Thla
piacatt, Hhlla a
llb-lBC
s banaflt, t«dD<
:*> iha raata of et
■anjr
>» radaca* accaoalb
iiitr of
food
V"
tba poar. aldat
1, asd othaia lata
rantaia at
kcr
>*ftl> la
faad auppliar.
■ cha frowia. mi
iBUtactur
"•.
•Aolaaalara
and miliar, fro. Irr>dl.t*d food*
thay
,i lansar. Thla
taia. It
■li
TSa pro.
daicrtbad •<
iTllar, tor lov dm* Inadlallon of
aaaia, irauld
: only ai
Uad
■■plofad. Tha caao of unaaploxaant ara paaaad on to tl
food Irradiation ahould taka aecouat tha ehanglDS pattarna
aarkaclng and aaploTaanl In cha food InduatTT and balan.
llrecE aconoaU benetfta, if any, atalnat (uch aoelal caatt.
,y Google
t) IS FOOD HMDIATIMI WECESSAItTt
■ piccur* af • prsctm thai, fat [rsa
» prohlcBi of foeil pmatvaClM, vnild
:*p In ■ virtciy of fooJ prae*i*]a|
itri(e»ilan, uie at chealeal addlilvu,
and aoliture. packattni *«* hriUaic
. ■rtually adrlt ta the ccnplllltT of fssd
ercaco undciirabli chantti In <ha food.
chnliiuea are nuteaaacy to caduca thta
I* pachapa worth aiklni the fundaaiantal
tr [a [hit it hj no aaana clear cut. In lH
I there altht te a Jvattftcaclon for Irradt
of ttorkera) than aoat
quarantine arrangeaenti eilat (ef In the DS to contiol tha
do ultti the ability of the foad Induatry to atackplla or to
diatanc* ihipaanta arc Invalved. The beneflta ta the canauHr
In thit area appear to b» aarjlnal, partUularly -hen the
affect* on uhalcaaBencat and nutritional value are conalderad.
Iriadlatlon of jralna to control Infcatatlon uy alao require
to tee that there Hill be clear cut economic beneflta that
could not be derived If theae other technliguei Here Introduced
alona. By far the ireateat food loatea occur in the nara
■aiat and leai developed countrlet which lack the capital to
Inoeit In Bui:h itorige technolo(y. Food Irradiation Hith Itt
vtry hIth capital coact and coaplea technoloiy rooted in the
■aaaurct that ahould ba undertaken to laprove the altuailon In
Hould Inevitably Btun that coniral of the food reaarvet ef
theae couDCriei would coae even aora under control of
nultlnationel a|ribu>inata than they already are. But than
■lyhe that la ptecliely why it H baing propoted.
Idea of detrlaental efftciB autwclghlnt benaflta
r of alcrooriinlgaa that cautc food t pa 1 1 hi* In Mate
„GoogIe
1 of food DlloUt
111. SfTiiiastiDn br i
,y Google
MOHITOILHIC or FOOC IWAMATIMI
of preoitlnt. <17)
iture. piclia(ln(, mi
IghtlT csntTOlIad 11
arc to be avaldcd.
,y Google
„GoogIe
nie Hiilch and Safety EiecuClvc hsa not only failed Co rtduc*
iBplenenctng n*H rtguladona that uauld b* laai atTlagvnt chaD
:onfldeiice. Clvcn tha prsklmi [hat cha Irradlailsn of (ead
*111 faea In (alnlng public acceplanea. It la vital thai a
:l«ar and Integrated regulaiary ayaten I* eatabllihad that
Elvt* priority to the a(aiiciea nith traditional
reaponaibllltiei tor public health. Thla neada to bt
,y Google
a - suwwit or cowemsioiis ahp ■ecohmewdatiqhs
pcnii food trrwIlatlOD ihould be prccecdcd by • rull public
coKiru. Tta 1S72 food (CDactol sC Irradlalisn) r*(ulitl«ia
•tasuld net 1>( uiEd •■ thr baaia tor id^ forthcc pctbIk foi
haraonlac tba natlaul TegDlatlsaa oq iTTadlaclnn of load.
Th> conauaer hag a fundaaenlal rlfht to knox about
Iha food he or aha 1> buylnf. Hence all Inadlited toikdat<
tena at tke pblal of tale.
It la alao poailble for irradiation to fcllt off aou b
that aarv. ixaful functlone while lea>/tnt othar.
hanful, behind.
Food Irradlalloa n»t >at, tbinfara, I
,y Google
> will Bost Illcct thnie IcHt abl* lo taki
mgrn - thD.f llvlnE In "Third Horli"
The full nutrition*] I
ISMDUTIOH AMD ASDITins
TESTING OP THE raOMICTS OF lUADUTIOK
food uddlttvci.
Europcio wldi atudles ts Inlatc and aubjccc tbcaa pioducti to
IsBg t*ra aafity taat* ahenld ba nBdaitakca (a IdaatlCf aa;
biologlullx hanCul affccta. Thcac ihould al«o contidar tht
eoabln.ilon itfacci with packaging aacariali <Dd patalttcd
If iTiadlallon If ta t>a pcnlltad at. all, !■ cba tirat
iBataaca, bbIt Ion deia Irradlatlso rrecealea ( laaa tkan 1
kCr) ahauld be llcaacad. Doaca iItcd to cacb toadatatf abaald
be BitblD atrlctlj UBtrollad aaKiaa and bIbIbm dsM llmlta.
STAKIUDS POl tfOUZt EXPOSDU
TM currant liatli for occupational aipoiuTC rcpraaani lavila
of rl.k chit would b. unaccopt.bla in any other induttry.
That! llBlci Ihould not ba uied at iha biiK for deiitn of
ITtadldlon plant.
Th* curraat ragulattooa for wtker aipoaorc aboald ba r**taa4
*D that all Kcupatioaal eivoaana ara Halted ta laaa ttaa
eoe teath of tba eurceat UHiua praalaaabla aipoaar*. Im4-
latlsn facillllaa absuld be dealgaad ae tbat oceapattoBal
,y Google
46S
right to d>«nd
„Googlc
retul.cory i^tt*- In plaei.
at ficilictci, ■tiixUtdi (or
,y Google
t Htth by the cohUck.
trradlated fooda until th(» IHuei are dtill ulth.
!. Wrlle to your Heabcr of the Europcin Pailment ■■
food irrfdldton dtvtlop»nti until ouotindlnl 1>
rlty {Chi.f Envlrc.mi.iit»l M
:111ori snil the Chief' Exeo
effective way of lobbrlfif uould bt to nlle to the
■ ll9t belDH for ha*d office addreaaea).
wich. Ask for aaaurancci thai tf
they will clearly labal It ai
. Aak If thei
are being aarketed locally. ITCadlaiad food* ac* not
that Illegally laported Irradiated Fooda could bt detect-
ed unleaa they are labelled. Exotic South African fcutt,
• ui^h at patiayai, cr potatoet, onlona end garlic floa
Hhat 1* going on.
,y Google
„GoogIe
, NS IDU, (01) 611-S7B2
Hlniiter of Slica far AaTlcullur* Fl>httl« ud Toot
Mlltfhltl FUnc LondDn 5WL
Tlw Rt Hon. t^rnty HcyhiH
I HDUH, Eltplunt and Caatla,
, SE1
aabcr of Farllaa
c/a I quHH Asne'a (
^ati
t, Loi
rulos. SHI
Tlia faUoirlog NP-. ,
■ltd
KEF'
■ (ra kK»
•"•■
Fiank Cook
HF Houi
T0117 Lloyd
HF
T« Fandiy
HF
(ryisac John
Kobarc Kc Cilndla
KF
Carola To»|ua
KF c/=
Hlkt EUioil
HEF LIHI
Glya Ford
WP
of COMont, Loodsn SUl
,y Google
T»» rood Kanyracluctrx
Fadarailo.
doa, UCZ
Unllfv
« riC,. Unil«y.r
Houaa.
■ lack
rtati, Loadoi, ICW UQ
laparl
■1 rood* Ltd,
n HsuM, Coldlnt
an Roa
, Bad
ford, H»0 3»P
*(*eee
littd Irttlih reod* PLC
ttittbrldt*, London, SUl
7U.
J Lron
* and Co ltd, C<
ky Hall. Lon
dan. U14 OP*
Dlll*t
J SpllUii, 19 K
novar Sq»a[a
Londoa, UlR 9m
RMDI
RUUU
J Siln
StMlo
.Wy PIC.
rd KouH, Stnio
t. lo
don. SEI 9LL
s«r*iH
y Pood StOT*> LC
, Mddo. V.T
Aflaafotd. laat. ICZO 1l
Kmo
ttoroi ltd, Tiic
ni Uilt>vn Ctom
Bare*
Dala
EMS
aara load,
»SL
UaltTO
■• Ltd, t Old Ca
and i ah
Straa
; Loado.,. HI* lEX
j|-;;
ar. Ltd,
euia, Prathana
«d. w
l^r.
Bardan Clcy, iarta
A«di ru. A*d> noui*.
ritann
a Roa
1. ttoilay, Laadf. UZ7 Oil
AiDrii
PIC, nillinitcHi
no.-.
•>...
Hlddli, D13 tAT
tUrki
and Spancar PLC,
tax.
o.don
WU IDH
S».r.
11 /«0 madatoM
ttrlva.
aaldaiona, HMroH, Hlddx,HA3 X
STrt.r
In* Hatk«Ein| Lt
di Koui*, Stat to
Road,
Garra
da C»a*. Buck*. $L! BRU
0»op«I*tI«* Wtnltul*
TO ten J], Corp«ritlsn
Soetaty
Stiaat
Kaackoalar, M *ts
/*
„GoogIe
[h> South link, 101 SoTDuth Kaad, London
I isithoIoBm' • Hoiplcal Hidleal Sehosl,
c, Untvirtlcy df Sutn^. Guildford, CO: SXH
inchrxcr rel]rt(chnlc , Holllnli ttcuUr,
• AmocUtln, I* lucUnihH str«t.
rrliDdi si tlH Earib, 177 Clcy
Craanpcaci, ]i Crabaa Stnat,
The ladlailM ud Malih lalor
cf Tha IrttUh Eoelatr lor Social
The lakart, road and Atllad Workcis Ui
Scanboiwith Bouaa, Cr(*c Nocch Road,
Hal^n Cardan Clt)r, Balti, ALB 71A
n* Canaral, Hsnielpal. ■
Then* BouM, luilCT HId|
Tha traoaport ami Ccnctal
•d, LoDdoa. MUI ns
. Ulltt, SHI i
,y Google
Edi»ril S Je>*ph*an .nd Niriln S Fxarion (Eda).
PRESERVATION OF rOOD BY lONlIlNC RADIATION. (] VBls)
C.R.C. Pr.ii Flotldi U.S.A. Vol 1 1»B3. Vat 2 i 3 I«l.
IRUDIATION. ElMvKr BlcH
S** ltbltSB»iihy tn-.-
FAO/IAEA Dlvlilsn DC IiecDpt and Rsdlxlen ef Aco>lc
Entny for Food and AirlculcuTil DtvclopHiic. TRAlimK
HAHUAL ON FOOD IRHAUIATION TECHHOLOCT AND TECHRIQDES.
[Sicond Edition) I.A.E.A. Tcchnlcsl Rfporti Stria* Ha IIA
Wotld Ht.lt
h otE*ali*tloii.
UHD T«hnlcr
>1 Btport S«rl»i
Vorld Baalc
:h Or(«ilutioii.
WHOLCSOKENESS OF IRIAOUTED
HHOLESOHEHESS OF IIUDUraD
of Joint FAO/IAEA/UHO Expcit CdbkIiio*.
KopoTI Sctlo* Ns. £S$ l^Bl.
S COHHISSICM.
No. 13M/S1 b; Hi NbtJoi
W2 to Hr Schmid «
n ltlB/S3 flvto 7 F(bru,
ndBinl) RESULATIONS
IVISORY COKKITTEE ON IRRADIATED AND
NOVEL FOODS D.H.S.S. Frtaa Riloaao IBch Hay 1981 tit
Tcrsa of Rcfcianct and Hoabaiahtp.
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION ON IRRADIATION OF FOODSTUFFS.
118A. Alao Mra Fulllit NOTION FOR A RESOUniOM - OH THE
TECHNIQUE OF IONIZING RADIATION TREATKEHT. EuiDpaao
Parllaaent Voiklnl Docuhdi B 2-5S0/BS Juna 19S5.
RADIATION AND HUNAN HEALTH.
FOOD COHFONEHTS. Elatvi
oy Google
£•• lADlATIOH ON THE JOI.
InforBatlon Service 1«B3 *
KADIATION TOUR HEALTH AT I
InfaTHIlan Servtci 1980.
[HHEDIATE DANCE* - riOCHOSIS rOI A
I. SCIENTIC AND TECHNICAL PKOIUHS INVOLVED IN
EING KADIATIONS FOR THE PKESERVATION or FOOD.
cicntific snd InduiEFld tci(«rch, rood
Ion Sp«l*l Report No. 61 H.K.S.O. I91S.
CAHKASTER. 21 Oct 19B1. HaTtlnui Hllhof •
K.D. tinkln In FOOD imHISTRIES HANUAL.
IRRADIATED FOOD. THE FACTS AH[
x, 16th Karch UBi.
A. NOVEL FOOD STORACe TECHNIQUES.
,y Google
IRHAD]*TED FOODS. ADVANCE NOTICE OF
COKSUHPTION. US FEOERAL KCISTER VOL t
t.H. Tuekir and R. Alvini. COHHENTS OH fKOrOSED
RECUUTIONS ON IRUDIATION IN THE mODUCTION, FKOCESSIHC
AND HANDLINC OF FOOD. (FDA DOCKET NO. 618-0004). Hailth
and Enetgc Initltut* Wi(liln(ton D^. USA 19S*.
D. Andtrtsn and I. FurchiH. MtTTACENIC ITT OF FOOD. Id D.
Canning and A. Lanidom (Ed*). TOXIC UAIAKDS OF FOOD.
Crooa HtlaKint D-N. H83.
O.U. Thayar. SUHHAKT OF tUFPOBTIHG DOCDHENTS POK
moUSOHENESS STUDIES OF PRE-COOKED (ENZYME INACTIVATED)
CHIC1ZH PRODUCTS IN VACUUM SEALED CONTAINERS EXPOSED TO
DOSKS OF IONIZING RADIATIOM SUFPICIENT TO ACHEIVE
'CDHHERCIAL STERtLlTT." U.S. Dapl Bf Aarleultur*. 19
March 198*.
lulleraan ac al. USE OF CRAHHA IRRADIATION TO PREVENT
E. PryadcTthlnl P.B. Tuplr. EFFECTS OF GRADED DOSES OF
CRANHA IRRADIATION ON AFLATOXIN FR;>DUCTIOH >Y ASPERCILLU5
PARASITICUS IN WHEAT. Coixl. Taxlcalatf Ma. iOi 1ST9.
TnnlcDlniy NQ. 2*3 1976.
FACTORS INFLUENCINC THE ECONOMIC
IRRADIATION. FrBCacdinfa oC • Pan*! tiald V
1971. Drganlieit by FAO/IAEA Dlvlalen of AlsaK
read and AgrUultura. IAEA STl/PUB/331 1973.
A COHHERCIAI,
,y Google
IMMOVEKEHT OF TOOD QUALITl
ol PkiwI held June 1971. Ot|>nlied by
sti/rvtnio. 197*.
mtl OAILY BREAD - UHO HAKES THE DOUGH
foT Soclil Rtaponitblllty In Scltncc
197S.
r.S. Ellii. IRRADIATION OF FOOD. Envi
Oct 1982.
ILZ. HorEU IB RADIATION TOUR HEALTH *
C.V. Daliyajlle H.L. B*)irr. X RAY EXAMINATION F
CAHCCK ; BENEFIT VEBStTS RISK. In U.R. Hen.
HEALTH EFFECTS OF LOU LEVEL RADIATION Applecai
Ciofla I9B*.
H RADIOLOGICAL
EFA )20 4-81-003 J
EXFL AMATORY NOTES RELATING T
THE ATOMIC ENERGY CONT
Ddcuubi C-7B AECB, QtnmiM L4 Nov 1963.
THE CONTROVERSY OVER LOW DOSE EXPOSURE TO
HSC TheaK In Occutitclsntl HeilEh
vcrally of Aaton In llrsUBhu. Oct
iKi>c» an [he BIdUbIc'I Effteia sf loaiilng MdUlion
lEIR III) THE EFFECTS ON FOFUUTIMS OF EXrOSUBE TO LOW
,y Google
ItlHIrc. G. Knrila. SADI/lTlOH EXPOSURES
ERS DYIHG FROM CKNCER AND OTHER CAUSES.
I'd! 33 36S-385 19TJ.
of mdieine Vol ZS lS6-lSt l»8I.
T- Uakabiyaihl, H. Kaco, T- Tkadi, W.J. Schull, STODICS
OF THE MORTALITY OF A lOHS SURVIVORS. RirORT 7-111.
.INCIDENCE OF CANCER IN l9i9-lS7» lASED ON THE TUHODR
RECISmi. NAGASAKI, UdliclDn icicarch. 93, 112-1*6 1H3.
MORTALITY OF EKFLOYEES OF THE UNITED KIHCDOH
C ENERGY AUTHORITY 1**6-1479. Irltlah Medical
.1 Vol m Au( 198S.
IONISING RADIATION
55. SUBMISSION OF THE CANADIAN LABOUR CONGRESS TO THE ATOXIC
ENERGY COHTROL BOARD OH nOFOSED RETISIONS TO REGDLATIOKS
UNDER THE ATOMIC ENERCT CONTROL ACT. Ctaadlan Labour
Can|[«i> octfH, Cauda. Jan 19S*.
56. NOTE FOR THE RECORD OF A DISCUSSION UITH DR A.S. KcLEAH
AND OTHER SENIOR STAFF OF HRPB ON THE IMFLICATIONS OF
ICRF PUBLICATION 26, AT RISLEY ON 1* JULY 197B.
R 197B.
0 PUBLIC FORUB ON NUCLEAR P
RADIATION PROTECTION REGULATIONS : 1 YEARS EXPERIENCE OF
ICRF PUBLICATION 26 IAEA tntarnatloaal Conraianc* as
Nuclaai Power Eiperlaoce, Vlenoa S»pt UBI, IAEA~CN-
E.F. RADFORD. STATEMENT CONCERNING PKOPOSED FEDERAL
RADIATim PROTECTION CUIDANCE FOR OCCUPATIMAL EIPOSURES-
Ofrte* or Radlatlea PrograaM* I9S1.
,y Google
TO EXCEED £1
t THE LAWS OF THE HEMBER STATES MUTIMC
FRESENTATIOIl AHO ADVEKTISIMC Of
FOOOSTUFFS FOIL SALE TO
Cnloten 79/n;/EEC 1
PKELIHINARY ASSESSHEMT D
FACILITY. SlBon rood ]
IMA.
r.J. Uy. HEU INTEREST IN THE USE OF IltRAEIIATION IN THE
FOOD IHDDSTHT In T^. IIDb*ris «ii<l F.A. Sklnnir (Edi).
FOOD HICKOllOLDCT : ADVANCES AND FROEFECTS. Ac(d*alc
PrtH, Lendon 19S1.
L. Fl«. CAKHA IRRADIATION AS A MEANS OF FOOD
FRESEXVATIOK IN CAIUM. Fallullon Frob* FouadatlOB 1983.
DISCUSSION DOCUMEHT OH IRRADIATED FOOD. Frcpircd tor Ch*
Europ«*n ConauBci Froccctlon Faru- Jin 1983 Irrlln Jin
19S3.
H.H. Froccat and J.F. Hughci CHEMICAL HAZARDS IN THE
UORKFLACE KpiMncalt 1978.
South Hanclwlter H«l(h Auchorliy AFFRAISAL O
HCTHODS 1985.
HOaU P
,y Google
"■ z^BB.
G.C. Bobtt... THE (lAOlATlON EXPOSUIIE OF IHE
N 19aA REVIEW, The Nitlonil Kidioletlcal
• Tt. mpB - R173, 198t.
1985.'
!<»•, Letter CO Editor, Obi.rv.r 9lta K«t
76. Ft.nk Uy. D
Jar. 19B3.
rector of ISOTBON on report. In IBWOUTION
IMC ACCEPTED by jDl.n Young, The TI«i, 31«l
"' isbV" * "
Cannon, THE FOOD SCANDAL. Ctnlury rublliUnt
78. J.L.-ls. FC
OD RETAILIMC IK LONDCm. London Food
COALITION TO
STOP FOOD IRRADIATION
„GoogIe
Nalional NutritioiHl Foods Association
STATEMENT
OF THE
ivember 18. 198S
Prepared by : Burt
■en the opportunity to testify before the House Agriculture Sub-
urittee on Government Operations concerning o food preservation
hnoloqy — irradiation — whose time, we fell, has not yet come
' unanswered safety and nutritional issues. Therefore,
ges the subcommittee not to pass U.K. 696 for some very
INTHODUCTIO
J
itia
ly, we be
ve th
t the
public ha
the
right to know
its food
apply
nd th
step3 ta
proces
kept as t
e uppermost criter
n date
q the tut
e of f
od ir
adiation.
e urge
slowly in
□ f fo
rradia
ion
nd to do
essary to
fety.
June
cept, we
t food
St
be di
closed to the public
through
prope
58-005 O - 86 - 16
,y Google
IKADEQUftTE TESTING
lelieve that the irradiation process has not
sd to trust its safety. A.E. Olson, of liim
riculture, recently said, in the pEOCe*diriqa
1 conference for Food Protection, Hay 19&4,
preparation of a particular food, studies
should be undertaken on the possible foma-
tion of toxic compounds in that food and
the effects on the processing on nutrient
bioavBilBbility . Particular attention
should be directed to the possible fonna-
tion of any previously unidentified coD'
pounds in that food and how they may affect
Ue doubt that Olson's criteria have been fully net In t
period of time that has elapsed since he made thi
In fact, safety testing of irradiated foods has produced
years a number of conflicting results.
For example, one important study indicated that chi
changes occurred in the white blood cells of malnouiished Indian
children who were fed irradiated wheat. Although this study has
been criticized, it has not, to our knowledge, been refuted.
(Bhaskarar, Amer. J- Clin. Wutr. ZB, 130-135, 1975)
Additionally, a major series of feeding studies have been
conducted which utilize chicken sterilized at hioh dosages of
with sterilized chicken were called off prior to coiqiletion due
to excessiue mortality which was not diet-related. Another study,
involving the feeding of dogs over a two generation period, indicated
lower body weights in a group of males fed irradiated chicken, but
no other signs of toxicity. In a third (three-generation mouse)
study, gamma-irradiated chicken reduced survival and appeared to
produce a high incidence of tumors. These results have been
challenged on the grounds of a claimed choice of inappropriate
statistical methods, exaggerated by an increased unexplained
death rate in the females of this group of animals. Hhile we
testimony at this time, we will be glad to do so if the Committee
Still another study raising serious gueatior
health dangers of irradiation is a genetic study *
(common frulctly) , which showed a reduced number c
cultures raised on gamwir radiated chicken. Thee
„GoogIe
iible with uitanin Bupplementa
ling of foods can produce
rtized chicken conducted by
QUftLITY OF F
Cion of I
iturated fatty acids, which are
irmai structural integrity and functioning of
irradiation. As the Subcommittee is undoubtedly
L oil fatty acids have gained widespread attention,
ly underway into their application as protective
idiation studies, it was found that specific amino
jon to protect against the appearance of lipid
.s, which probably play a similar protective role
ficially depleted during the irradiation of food.
the anvjunt of oxygen pi
lie low temperatures
arocesBing and deoxyi;
„GoogIe
the coat and energy requirements
111, in turn, make the entire procei
lly. Hith or without such precautio
face a significant reduction in protective materiale trtiich hava
been present in foods throughout evolutionary time if we allov
for the wholesale irradiation of food, ft biologist must conclud*
that theie protective materials have served a purpose in inaulatlng
humans from natural radiation and from naturally-occurr'-- -- ' '--
toxicants. Why should we lower our actual defenses at
environmental pollutants and carcinogens are on the ris^
such a move ia not in the beat interests of the public.
Intensive scientific investigation and public int'
currently being given to these naturally-occurring protective
agents against degenerative disease and sone aspects of the aging
process. Prudent diets emphasiilng these agents have been recently
~ ~ ' of government agencies, including NAS/HPC.
Hhat these studies suggest is that, while the right hand 1*
making advances in the protection of society through enhanced
nutrition. Incredible as it may seem, the left hand is advocating
the large-scale introduction of a food processing technique which
specifically destroys many of these protective nutrients.
The need for an exact quantification of nutrient loss and
for strict supervision of commercial irradiation procedures is
apparent. A study of the mutagenicity of irradiated juices and
sugar solutions showed that irradiated fruit juices were not as
of this work concluded, therefore, that irradiation is safe in part
because radiation doses in comnercial use would be lower Chan their
experimental doses. It must be pointed out, however, that their
and that it is very closely related to dosage and the amount of
oxygen present. (Report by Nieoand, et al., J. ftgrlcultural t Food
Chem. 31, 1016-1020, 1983)
This same concept is further brought out by Sinic, et al . , in
Integral Component of Radiation Processing of Food," (Radiation
. . . would like to see unquestioned approval
irradiated foods. Some demand acceptance, if
totality, of radiation processing without eve
having to reevaluate its safety. Ttiere are,
the other hand, groups who like to see 'dissc
3,Googlc
lytic products and safety testing of all
those not present in standard foods.
, Simic, et al., conclufie that the piopei anB»er
is to
ated foods. They point out that the radiation-i
nduced
Free r
adioal reactions which occut in irradiated foods
are
jsponsible for all the biological and chemical effects,
r ondesirablei that they produce a variety of radiolyti
id that they are dependent on dose, dose rate, Cemperat
anosphere, physical state and extent of hydration.
from the animal studies done to date, and from the limited use of
irradiated foods by astronauts and cancer patients, can be used for
accurate predictions of safety and nutritional adequacy by the
entire diverse population of our nation, especially down the road
twenty years when a large portion of our diet has been irradiated.
The National Nutritional Foods Association has issued a
position paper affirming its opposition to the concept of food
irradiation and to further extension of the use of this process.
A copy of this is attached hereto.
He have also strongly endorsed labeling of irradiated foods
at point of sale. American consumers have a basic right to know
what they are purchasing. When they buy and use food treated by
canning, pasteurization, freezing, pickling, dehydration, salting,
etc., they have a reasonable knowledge of how that food has been
treated. There is no special reason that we are aware of that
creates special treatment for irradiation and mandates that its
Irradiated food was recently banned in Great Britain and ia
illegal for domestic consumption in Vjest Germany. Not everyone i
junping on the bandwagon for irradiating the food supply of the
world.
Let us not rush into a decision with irreversible effects
on generations to come tor our love of advanced technology. Let
love for the welfare of
„GoogIe
Nilioiial Nuliilioiiiil roods Associilioil
„GoogIe
STATIiMENT Or CLINTON RAV HILLKH
UliFORE THE HOUSE
AGRICULTURE SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENT OPERATIOKS,
Ri;SEflRCli AND FOREIGN AGRICULTURE
I.R. 696/S. 281
. Cliairm^n and distinguished members of the 5i
Thank you for allowing me to appear at thi
'.iring to offer comments and amendments of the
r.ilth Federation on H.R. 696/S. 288.
3 Clir
1 Ray
My name :
the Legislative Advocate for the National Health Federate
NlIF is a 30-year-old national consumer organization o£
iictivists uho take very seriously our mucujl reaponsibili
for the safety and wholesomeness of the food «e eat.
We have learned by sad experience we cannot delegat
responsibility to state or federal bureaucrats who are ol
on their way through a revolving door into or from high [
jobs in the very industries they are supposed to regulatt
In 1962 we "fathered" and won virtual un.iniinous a[
of NIIF's "Human Guinea Pig Amendment" which, for the fir;
in recorded history, prevented any further medical cxiieri
has fundamentally changed the practice of medicine not oi
the U.S. but throughout the civilized world,
Tlie pritinents of food irradiaticn want us to pirticiiwte in
unprecedented massive medical experiment without our kno.
„GoogIe
Members of the Hatinnal Eicalth Pcdcration and
incro.ising milliuns of othec individuals are dcuply
otjucernoil thjt e.iting "irr.idi.itod fi.od" is still in the
experimental stage, NHF .igrees with Sanford A. Miller,
Director of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Center
for Food Safety ^nd Applied Nutrition, who stated when asked
if he felt irradiated foods should be labeled!
"yes, I personally do. The department may have
another view on this, and there actually are
some good reasons why you shouldn't have to do
it... My own feelings are that it should be
labeled, and when it's said and done, I think
it will bo," (cnphasis supplied)
The NIJF is un.Tlternbly opposed tci H.R, 696 (.'?, 288) in
its present form. Unless it is drastically amended wo will
do all in our power tu urge our thousands of members and
iiiiiUons of fricnJs tu kill tlii.s legislation.
Nlir prop.is.'s the foUuwing amendments to II. R. 6'Jf,;
1. We iirg<' yiiu to amend out all language in this
bill which declares or implies in any way that
it is U.S. policy that "Congress finds that
irradiation of food is. ..safe and wholesome."
(See [I.R. 696, p, 2 line 508)
Congress may pass a law STM ING it is "safe" to buy,
sell, transport, store, keep-trac)t-of , use and dispose of the
massivt; amounts of highly radiojctivc m.iterial which wjuld bu
used in hundreds and possibly thousands of food irradiation
plants - - some of which would be located near or in our
largest cities - - but that doesn't make this terribly
Saying it Is safe doesn't make it safe.
Congress can pass a law stating it finds the world is
flat, but that doesn't bend the horizon one inch.
„GoogIe
strike ouc the present- l.\nc|ii.i'](> mi linos '•-'•: .iiitl in its
pliico insert Wiirdincj somewhat an IuIIowe:
Sec. 2 Ij) The ConqrcBs finds tli.it (IJ irr.^tlintion
of fo<iJ is ,1 relatively new iund prcseru.r-. inn ttchniil' qy ccimpiirod
with drying, freezing and canning. Thf hin;ards ut s.iEoty of
cnnsuminQ irradiated foods for long periods of tinic cuvcring
is extremely hazardous even if the irr.idi.ited fc»Kl is found Co
be absolutely safe. The transportation, storage, use and disposal
iif radioactive material Is the most li.iz.irdous tt'chrinlngy yet used
Amendment *2: ncmove ,i 1 1 l.mgii.Kje from tlio bill which
tfdold remove food irradiation from the cuciynL :,l iLiil>iiy
rcfiuirements it be regulated by PDA ,is a "l\.-i.l A.Milivo."
E.hibiCB follow:)
,y Google
^DIATION!
I— hM (wonipied ihc frw iwutilr dhpouT t
Vlrlniirmnna.lu/1 irr V
BACKGROUND
,y Google
di^cv - phx MO] «lna> 0f ihc imcldn .
H*,^ TIM appvaranc* of
K M EDB In ctwin stora
< <w- food products rocxitly
'^ ha* Iha aarmariis ol a
wall choraographad
tMckground danca lor
Itw Introduction ot
SaENTinC MNOINfiS
^~
einyiBw dib
■"T"
Tirz
ally
K«n laU
eflisi
s
MlMOO
Trw, would
Of IW.(J Ihsl
"i;»
Hi'n
r
shorih^
ZEr
tesllng
piiatM ''om
neei
1 in« hgn.
leOsol
es ol paople
gnuOfl
•*»IK-
»bly C«1B
n inil oroun
■Dll.Il
ultJ
cmnol W
BStlb-
'"rne
e l> only o
in »ay 10 pir«n( 9
cknats
inn
eneiic m
lillons
Irmna
jiroylng
>, ifid mil 1
MO wllhoul c
,tmc
itoloc
'Is'.
Td"™''!
V^l
Bcwmisis gs
nwllly
w«»
no lores' lole
dacivc
"' "' ""■
JoftnD
Hjnij
m
„GoogIe
THE SCIENTIFIC SYSTEM
AND IRRADIATION
t«'a rhff ctoltyH Borh i^ll t
I ffumtn ngfttt
„GoogIe
^vDIATION!
,CJ^ PART II
I (ptjiialT caicquad- kb a< (DOd^lV ■■ mMbiua ■ ite ia iiit pootldt Hd add *«
■ kvdi itw Mdcitboa)lii<rkk.krdr^aiiilfldt. witk Bintn lo
AMINO ACIDS ifuUml «" J^
If ^fXRANs (D JL poiOI Of
■' t™j BUfw iHoilik jodTyiln^Hin*! CARBf>IIVUKATES
1 indy p(M FATS AND FATTY ACtDS
,y Google
490
ilBiillBiM TMi '
nssuecHAMX
tnMk. Tin iihtamy tn
SI^'^riT'brtlitalr'h.*'.^'" S Sid^i^ *™^ '""""■'""" ** »hBiMrf.^«e*«yg;
Id ta IkHt flwu dKiw bI Aii-
L. nn^i.f'riT^'"""'"'
II el ImdMed flM> 01 ol All-
I —-. - h»M.t fci ■mac <b-
pMtd »< tnfoniWlDii-bartiil ■™«-
„GoogIe
491
nnuouTioii
So rir, FDA hv IP
,y Google
The iuJ
WASHINGTON .a#S
Report .,,.,„.,M^
FDA'S "NO LABEL"
PROPOSAL
\j toxd 4t,a l)..v AJmiiuMririun |s NOT THK PROBIIM ^^'' 'iL''^' '"'' °' ,|^
(MW..I >lwuli) M uiDnfly oppi>«I nmuif* « ani™
onKd. but iimnd, 'a ihc r>«m
„GoogIe
NhhimI Fowl Pio.nw.< A.uvii.i..n NUN-RADIOACTIVK
(Nfl-A), aivt that ^ «ll IM. .« PRODUCTS ARE A VALID
■uiHtmi. •■Mu.nouiKtmtnulai CONCERN
,y Google
YES, WE'LL TAKE A RISK,
BUT WE WANT A LABEL!
liwili YouDg. MO
Canunixsioner of R»d and Drugs
c/o [hickcU Muugemenl Bnnch (HFA 303)
R»d and Drug Adminulntnn, Rm. 4^1
S600 Fiihen Luie
Rockvillc MD 20857
Deti SccKUry Heckla md Cotiuniuioner Novitch:
Thtnk you fbt your inviution lo me, tkmg willi itl othei inter
>i<gge$(ioni to Improve FWs propoul lo greatly btowkn Ac appmrcd tnes of imdMbon of IbodL (lUenl
Rcgiuer. Fcbcuary 14, 1984; pp S714-S722)
I understind llw [Kw rcgulatkn would open the doer for food pncenofi M ine wiidiMioa iiMead oC or to^^
wiih. highly toik chemical pesucidci and liunigaMi to destroy inects md exlend die ibdf life o( fiab fnab
I also uiideritaiid Um iindulioB of a food al dK proposed leveli (kxs not make food ndioaiiive. Thii. boiwirci,
b NOT die baiis of my sifety conccm I am coDcemed with odKr radiolytic chango dial DO occur.
I do NOT agree widi FIM's conclusion dial simply because the food doei DOI beconie tadnctivc ii is Iherefbre
"sate" and has die idenlical nutritional value ai similar fbodi which haw mX been inadiared.
ImicKl. I shire die concern expressed by Dr. Samuel S Epstein and John W GoTmaa dial "While not
radioacLLw. irradiated food oxilains slable tadioEytic pmducis whose chemica] identity and toxicology tfe
poorly defined. "rThrVKuhngfon foil. I^bruary2j, I9S4: p. A-16)
These newly formed ladnlytic products may or may not lie highly loiic. Al diii lime we simply don't know.
[)r- Epstein and Dr Golman pointed out the FDA's assurance they are safe does not come from critical long-
term feeding tests of concentrated extracts of diese radiolytic products for mutagenic, carcinogenic and other
chronic toxic effects.
FDA states in its proposal that "Ionizing ndiation, like other forms of energy used to pmcess food, causes
chemical changes in food "
Al (he dosage proposed by FEH. iiradiation of food "would produce apprnxinuiely 30 parts per million of
ladiolyllc products. " Three parts per million or 10 percent of diese may be entirely new lubslanccs that have
never been tested for saliily by any agency or any government. Thirty, orthree parts per million, is an extremely
Doctors Epstein and Cofman said dial '[ndusDy claims for the safety cf irradiated food largely depend on
insensitive conventional animal feeding tests, rather than the more critical long-term feeding tesis of concen-
trated extracts for carcinogenic and other chronic loik effects. " FDA should extend the corrunent lime for nine
months or more until at leasl one long-term feeding test of concenDaled eittacis of Uiese newly discovered
radiolytic pmducis has been completed.
„GoogIe
m of foodi U
y. bui oDcc the public re
u raiduB— 1 un ooarid
u tadinoloor." (Hcckki'i Febniuy 14 tf
Even thcHc mUi dioit meoKMia am lananbcT the sum potitivc anuraDCQ or abxilule ureiy livcii by FDA mnd
oUicT ■■mciei thai EDB. DDT. DES. ind doieiu at Mha penkiiki. prcHTViIives. Food idditivs tnd drusi
<Mit "nfe" only lo lata diicova Ihcy woe enmndy tone U or f v bdow Ihc Icveb ipiirovcd by FDA. Eacb
lime tkii bappou. coniiutKr confidence ir Ibe integrily of our iDvenunenl ii eroded 1 Hllk
WE'LL TAKE A RISK BUT WE WANT A LABEL.
[ do not tgm with tbc NFPA/FDA propoul [hu irradiated Toodi ibould not be labeled ai the reiaJi level
Whoher the procest ll dlnietDiu. a> its opponents [en it may be. or as laTe as ils proponenli insist it is. those of
to take a risk (and ibere will be nuiny) should be allowed 10 do so PROVIDED we are
ig food which has bcoi irradiated.
I respcctFoUy request that you extend the time For canunenii (or to iddllionil nine reonlhi. The 60 diyi In your
propoial is not at all adequate for a proposal of this macnilude.
In summary, please 0) require a label, (l)eitend Ibe time For commenu until at leul one feediiifleM of concen-
trated eittBcts as proposed by Epstein and Gofinan has been com[ricted, and (J) don't prematurely assure us ir-
radiated food a "cocnpltfdy ate."
P.S. My fourth comment is that the records of irradiated food processors should not be destroyed after only one
year foUowins [he shelf life of ihi fresh fruit or vcfetable. as proposed by industry aitd FDA. Instead ihey
should be kept For at least two generations ui scieniists can check for binh defects anil other loni-lerm possible
was prepared for my convenience by Clin
ileallh Fedetalioa, SOOI Seminaiy Rd., t
3:S5.1»/H);S9.00/IOOatNHF. BoxMS, Monr
,y Google
!nt«T^ FOR
^*^^ RELL4SE ■
„GoogIe
«ll>M.«».M>Blll
Safety,
Risks &
TheFDA
Saiifofd A. Miller Believes
In a Little Conunon Senxe
rri AiM.r.
,y Google
Safety & Risks
„GoogIe
EKUIBIT t 6
USATOOIW-fRIDAV.NCWEMMIIl, 1985 -BA
:5_
^yclear legacy
Decisions near on where to bury deadly waste
Battle rages with lawsuit;, ads
OHMaiMBBrainatB. W^riMpiaMnMMoai mmo^^"'
euil HulreuMiul toMM ■• ■■■■ tim b» F*««r*l
matt tat U MM Mm cmh b
Em ^ MMk km* ■m
■rav Mngr MaMp mr m 1m
■knttMqplWHmlM- mmm M tnnn
*"J2£. th>» mil... * '**L«*"^ M*J
Go, ■« [liiiiiii k H» BM
la Enjry Dt^niTlHIt wMMWpM
NiKku Socidyt Ijna M
„GoogIe
of
Dr. Ullliaa U. Mirlon
Executive vice President
Council for Agricultural Science and Technola|y
CoBBlttae on lte*g*rch
Congreisun Bedell and distinguished aeBliera of the subcoflBl tree:
I an WllUaiD Harion. Execullve Vice President of CAST, which 1* Che
Council for Agricultural Science and Technology. CAST has Its offlr* It 137
Lynn Avenua, Ahms, IA. In addition, 1 serve ai co-chalr of the reaearch
conittee of the Institute of Food Technologists (IFT). a aclsntiflc society
cepreaentlng Z6,000 food scientists and technologists In acadeala, governwnt
and industry.
froa these sacleiles. Its sustaining aenbers, and sow five thousand
IndlulduaL oeabers.
CAST produces scientific, educational publications on current food and
Lculcutal Issues of national Inpotcance. Bostty by neans of aulli-
cipllniry task forces of sclent Ists 'uho ate noalnaled by chelt respective
intlfic societies. It also publishes "NEWS eton CAST' six tioes annually,
s dorunent presents Inlonnatlon on najot Issues In brief form. In
Itlon. CAST publishes an educational magailne. "Science of Food and
Agriculture," that Is sent free of charge to h^ads of science deparrnents in
high school grades 9 through t! nationwide. UndoubtEdly. you are fa.llUc
ulth one or aore of the publlcat tona.
Thank you for the Invitation to appear before you today and Co coment on
HR 696. the Federal Food Irradiation Developaeni and Control Act of 1985.
Roth CAST and IFT have published documenta In tMs field of food processing
topic of Irradiation. The first of two publications, "Who le some ness of Food
,y Google
1[ ihould be published by Iboul <he end of [his year. A second paper on
"AppUcallons" uill be published soaarlae In 1986. Dt. BrynJolEsson Is a
II haa been said chat there, have been no cacally neu food ptoceaslng
established processes of canning, drying, (reetlng, curing and Eeraendng have
been aade. And the use of alctoiiave energy o( course, haa becoae co^son In
hose cookery. The use of tonltlng tsdlatlon can becoise an opdon for a "new"
Low-level Irradiation of food offers several sdvanrsges. Ir ulll greatly
extend the shelf-life of pettshable foods such as sitawberrles. Pork, uhlrh
contributes significantly to the nutrition at aost Americans, Is sooetlBes
viewed ulth suspicion b;^ consuasrs uho fear trichina Infection. The Incidence
of trichlnoBla Infei-tlon tn hnuna Is very Iw likdaed (10 caaea in 1983; 9S In
1982). Hevertheleaa, the U.S. DapartBent of Agriculture and other advisoty
groups correcrty point out that pork should be cooked to e well-done stage.
That Inplles Internal teaperaturea of 165 to I70°F. Actually, trichina are
Inactivated at auch lowet isDperatures (IIB to I4;°F). but In choosing to be
safe conauBers eltalnate the use of pork In a nunbet of traditional European
recipes. The use of irradiation to Inactivate the feu ttlchlns that nay be
present could have a positive effect on pork coosuaptlon, ulth a coaaensurata
positive econoalc effect on the surplus grain supply. Likewise, Increased
proceiBlng and aarketlng activities assorlated with the pork Industry should
follow.
present Dr. Arl Brynjolfsson, a physicist froa Hatlck Lsboratorlas, Naiick,
,y Google
Nov. 18. 1985
STATEMEHT OF PS. ARI BEYWJOLFSSOH. HEMBEH OF THE SCIEHTIFIC TASK FOBCS W
WHOLESCMEMESS OF FOODS TliEATED WITH lOWIZIHG EMERGY. ORGANIZED feV M 63UHCIL
ra"«il{'iaiLTijgyr"SJ^15it^t AND TKJHNlbtMiY'." 'I'ath OF NOVEMBER. 1985
1. IWTRODUCTIOW
My name is Ari Hrynjolfsson. From 1972
States National Food Irradiation Progran
Army at the Natick Laboratories in HaSHa
Aliaencarius Coinmlttee on Food Additive'
"Codex Allmentarius General Standard far
International Code of Practice for the Operation of Facilities Used for
Treatoent of Foods"; and I was technical Advisor to the Joint lAEA/FAO^IfflO
Expert Committee on Wholesoneness on Irradiated Foods. Today. I an appearing
before your Subconnittee on Department Operations. Research, and Foreign
Agriculture in my capacity as a member of the Scientific Task Force on
with Ionizing Energy, organized by the Council
ethnology.
s attached as enclosure 1 with this Btateoent. 1
} I9B0, I raE <l
llrsctor of the United
conducted by t
:he U. S. Depsrtaent of
1 chaiman of the Codex
Working Group
that developed the
Irradiated Food
Is", and "RecoBMnded
am also enclosing two articles
clos
el, rel,
jted t
o the subject [A. Brynjolfsson;
Wholesomeness of Irradiated Fo
A Reviei
* Inn
rnal of Food Safety, 7 . (19B5)
PP.1C7-126; and A. Brynjolfss
Food In
Ion in the United States.
Proceedings of the 26th Europe
Springs in 19ciO. Volume 1. pp.
172-
177]
I will give you a preview of the major findings in the first part of the Task
Force report which deals with; Wholesomeness of Food Treated with Ionizing
Energy. This part which is not in its final form but has gone through the
first edition and review by all the members consists of four main sections: 1.)
"Badiolytic Products" prepared by Dr. Charles Merritt. Jr.. who with Dr. Irwin
Taub was one of the key individuals coordinating the analytical chemistry work
on irradiated foods at Natick Laboratories HA; 2.) "Toxicological Aspects"
prepared by Dr. Julius H. Coon, Department of Pharmacology, Thomas Jefferson
University, Philadelphia, PA. and Dr. Edward S. Josephson, Senior Lecturer at
MIT and former director C1%1-1972) of the U.S. Food Irradiation Progran at
Natick MA, and co-chairman of the Task Force; 3.) "Nutritional Aspects"
prepared by Dr. Edward E. Josephson; i.) "Microbiological Safety" prepared by
profeasor K. Burt Maxcy, Department of Food Science and Technology. University
of Nebraska, and Dr. Eugen Wlerbickl, Eastern Regional Research Center. U. S.
Department of Agriculture. Philadelphia PA,; and 5.) "Induced Radioactivity"
prepared by Dr. A. Brynjolfsaon. The .work was coordinated by the Chairaan of
the Task Force, Dr. Eugen Wierbicki, who also obtained many of the foreign
reports on the wholesomeness evaluation of irradiated foods.
„GoogIe
Ari Brynjolfsson
Nov. IH, 19B5
2. MAJOR FINDINGS IN THE TASK FORCE REPORT
The report Is nou undergoing final editing fo
t irradiated
n dose of 5ii
ments would indie
B possibility of detrimen
icological evalus
) the evaluation of the i
idioac
The process oC preserving food by 1
5b kllOK
tcordingly shoul
'et:''Hni
wholesome
principles In protessing, storing, and distribution of the food. FDA
and/or USDA should accordingly inspect and approve of the irradiation
facilities for processing and control of the foods; and as they do in
other federally inspected plants, keep surveillance to assure
adherence to good manufacturing principles for the benefit of the
] food
5 for
t of
d hygie
c manufacturing
„GoogIe
Alinentarius "Internalional General Standard for Irradiated Foods" in
process not only for International trade but also for trade within the
country. (Codex Allmentarius Commission , 1964) These standards could
uUh simple modifications be applied to foods treated uith sterilizing
doses. Likeuise, the Codex "International Code of Pcactice for the
Operation of Radiation Facilities Used for the TreEtment of Foods"
forms a framework and provides guidelines for operetlng the
Irradiation plants for processing of foods.
3. THE AWALVSES OF THE RAEIOLYTIC PRODllCTS IN THE U.S.A.
found in some nonlrradiated foods or in foods subject to other accepted
From the composition of the food, the Irradiation
ic products formed. A given food
inds of radlolytlc products
id i
i. TOXICOLOGICAL EVALUATION IN THE U.S.A. OF THE RABIOLVTIC PRODUCTS
ature an.
yields of
rndi
omponent
as a fat.
jroduces t
M- k
ndependei
ly o
: the food
in which 1
such as li
n poultry
linol
^Jhan'in be
the food.
It
will
e available data,
there were
umina r
easonable ,uantiti
es of bee.
irradiated in the
In 197y. the Commit
1979h):
,y Google
Qf any of these
iBted beet,
ailable to permit
OF THE RADIOLVTIC PRODUaS ABROAD
i were carried out in other countries, tn
the Field of Food Itiadiation (TFIP) aet tip
ion Chemistry of Food and Food Components
CORC) The various laboratories collaboiat ng in the research studies on
radiolyses products prepareii a series oi uorliing papers
the 15au Joint S-TiO/IAEA/FAO Expert Connittee on the ■-
Food jECn (The International Project in fie fie
lb member countries includlnft USA and sponsored by
OTKanliation <FAO) and International Atomic Energy
Nations, as well as the Nuclear Energy At^ency of t
Cooperation and Development (OETD/NEA). with the World Hea
advisory capacity.]
.he Food and Agricultural
Lgency (IAEA) of the United
:he Organliacion for Economic
6. TOXICOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF -[HE BADIOLYTIC PRODUCTS BV JECFI
lyses (Ellas and Cohen, Eds. 19U3I w
;. THE AKIMAL FEEDINt. STUDIES.
[brinfi the last 37 years the effect of irradiation on the wholesoaeness of
food has been studied Siore thoroughly than that of any other processing of
foods Alresd ^n 965, the Office of the Surgeon General of the U.S.Arny.
that [The Surgeon Gener
sorbed doses
of 5.6 meRara
kilogray) wl
cs have been
holeEome, i.
, , safe and n
deauBte.
„GoogIe
In IWW. the JECH was able to expand
[JBCFl. 1976} and after extenBlve revi
(Anon. 1985] concluded [JECFI, 19H1]:
lCOl££]
:al t
of- foods
totieolORlcal hazard; hence,
■d is no longer required."
JECFI had available much infornation about studies on foods irradiated
'ith sterilizing doses; but JECFI limiCed its conclusion to foods treated
jith doses less than 11) kilogray, because two important studies on foods
irradiated with higher doses were still being conducted. In particular,
the animal feeding studies on irradiation sterilized chicken conducted by
Ralston Purina Company for the Office of the Surgeon General of the
J.S.Arrr.). and later continued by I'. S. Department of Agriculture, had not
Deen completed by November 3, 19B0, the date JECFI ended its Deeting and
>ery thorough studies in The Netherlands on meats irradiated at high
extensive longter
m mult igenerat ion animal
(eedinR studies.
teratoSenesis t^sts. as well as several antivitamin studies have
a sen
es of ver
hav
been
thnii
rimental
effects of irradia
:ion
on the
food. Ivan Lo^Eg;
a. THE NUTRITIONAL lA'ALlTT.
Irradiation is most effectli
enzymes
,i
h actually
DNA. ar
e of irrad
ch as the
hydroly
to the sma
lynphat
tern. The
Che ami
ds of the
much smaller
molecules
damaged
senslti
T
Che food i
n any prot
nolec
This
5 for
large
ally
Eternizing the dry enzyiies. The large
mils of food before they enter our blood and
of the major nutrients in the food, such as
le fatty acids and the monosaccharides are
'nzyoes and the DNA and ate therefore largely
he highest doses. Less than about IX Is
zed. This is such smaller than the measurln);
,y Google
(158 to 194 F) depending on Che product.
There ace exceptions to the nain rule that the
significantly the nutr lonal components, of th
doses, bi) kllogray may be significant. Thiain
of the radlolycic products and acts as a acave
vitamin, vhen the food is Irradiated at room t
disinfestatlon of fresh produce, or for ellmln
is Ducti smaller and insignificant. At sterlli
vitamins is reduced by irradiating the food In
n JECFI concluded [JECFI, 19B0]:
tudles suggests that in the low-dose range (up
encluded dur
e ranse C
olo.v
res belp.
nd in the
ir) alsL. par
>■ MtCllOBtAL__5A)^Tt,,.
The raicrobiolc-gical salet
to good manufacturing pra
food 1
fully
all c
rable
high hygienic standards throughout t
processing and storage belore, during anil after processing. It involves
Consideration of the possible contaminating flora, knowledge about the
Preprocessing levels, determination of the inactivacion factors, and proper
storage tenperatures for preventing outgrowth.
„GoogIe
Hov. 18. 1985
iied by ra
ind chicken ineat, about 2&b
foods were kept up to 24
:h product SB that wtiich
ToKoplasM gondii ,
d about the poss:
he request of FA(
Dflrd of the Intel
of producing new
the International Coimittee on Food
ionsl Union of Microbiological Societies
t the Royal Veterinary and Agricultural
. (Anon. 19821
nti
ic knovledRe
available to
techniques were adequat
of foodborne pathoi^ens
nd
shifts in the nlcroflor
or
changes in i
le attributes
£the
mlcroorfianisiiis.
10. THE irJDUCED VI
I by Brynjolfsson [I9B51
.DIOACTIVITt.
of lU MeV ot les
-137, K-rayE below 5
Ml measurements on foods treated with a dos
:obalt-60 gamma rays and 10 MeV electrons.
in these measurements which was about 0. II of the natural
Che food varies significantly, often by factor of two. fro
her and from place to place.
t the activity 1
,y Google
Nov. 18, 1985
sienlflcance whatsoever.
U. WHY FOOD IRRADIATIOH
d produce activity Dore than million
the food, and thus of no
tding t
c food t
A few eomples will illustrate the point. Let u
fumigation with ethylene oilde. Before fumigati
rehvdrated by steam, preferably for 24 hours, T
the ethylene Diide for about 16 hours, flushed w
ethylene oxjde anij for drying the product. The p
clumped together and must tie reground.
Similar procedures are involved in sterilizing m
effective unless the product is moist. It is im
residual ethylene oxide as it is toxic; much pre
contaminated.
Apart from the heavier shielding around Che sour
luld d
sterilized food may seem dull and flat after
night enjoy for a change to get irradiated ft
farmer out in the field, the seaman out on I
han and cheese on Irradiated rye was one of
lij the Apollo 17 astronauts".
There are people in hospitals who need sterl
that some of the patients would prefer in
iheir heat sterilized councerpar
58-005 O - 86 - 17
,y Google
Ari Brynjolfsson Nov. 18. 1985
12. USE OF ENERGY
The ovErall energy used in the irradiscion process tends Co b« leu than In
BBny ather processes. (Brrnjolfsson. 1978] The use of the proceSE Hill b1*o
tend to reduce the food lasses. Therefore,
KEFEREHCES
ANON. 1980. "WholeEoneness of Irradiated Food"; Suonaries of data considered
by the Joinc FAO/ IAEA/WO Expert Comnittee on the Wholesome ness of Irradiated
Food, Geneva. 27 October- 3 Novenber 1980. £HE/ei.2A. This docunent can be
obtained from the Division of EnvirDnmenl.al Health, World Health Organization,
Avenue Apple, 1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland.
AHON. 19115. "KTP says tuinars from chicken irradiation are not treatnent
related". Food Chemical News. April I, pp. 42-64.
ANON. 1982. Report of s neeting. on the 16 Dec. 1982. of the Board of the
International Conmittee on Food Microbiology and Hygiene of the International
Union of Microbiological Societies. The Board net at the Royal Veterinary and
Agricultural University in Copenhagen.
BRVN JOLFSSON , A. 1978. Energy and food irradiation. In "Food Preservation by
Irradiation". Proceedings of a symposium in Wageningen, 21-2S Nov., 1977i
Jointly organized by IAEA, FAO. and WHO. Vol. 11. pp. 285-299, Publiahed by
IAEA. Vienna, STI/PUB/470; ISBN 92-0-010378-2.
BRYN JOLFSSON , A. 1980. Food irradiation in the United States. Proceedings of
th 26th European Meeting of Heat Research Workers; Colorado Springs, Colorado
U.S.A. Vol. I. pp. 172-177. Prepared by the American Heat Science
BRVKJOLFSSOK, A. 1985. Whol
Safety. 7(2). 107-126.
esomeness
of irradiati
!d foods: A review. J. Food
Code* Alinentarius Commissio
Radiation Facilities Used £o
Programme Codex Alinentarius
Agricultural Organization of
■n. 1984.
ir Treatmei
. CoonissK
the Uniti
"Code. Gen<
1 Code of Prf
U of Foods";
in. Vol. XV 1
•ral Standard for Irradiated
icclce for the Operation of
; Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards
: first edition; Food and
forld Health Organization; Roae.
„GoogIe
Found in Irradiated Beef", b; Life Sci
Anerican Societies for ExperinentBl Bi
200H. Contract Number: DAMD-17-76-C-6
F.A.S.E.B
JECFI. 1976.
t FAO/IAEa/UHO Expert Co
le Food Safet
, 1211 Geneva 27.
59. World Health
n Research. Developneni
105-106. U.S. Covernniei
USDA Eastern Regional Research Cent
■ - ■ ■■ Final fie
and Radletio
e Joint ConiBltt
Chic
1 RSD Command:
1 by t
*-lin
tagenicity of I
hal Tea
I D*MD 17-76-C-60
Bophila
J Sterili
3 15 1979. T
irradiated chicken toxicologlcal studies (PBS4-186980; PBe4-l&6y98i
PBbi.-l (17004; PBBi-ia7lJl2:PBt!*-18702O: PBtM.-187036: PBB4-ie70i6: PBbft-187053;
PEW-167061; PBM-1&7079; PB-1870B7j and PBBi.-187095) are available from
Technical Information Service. 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 2il61.
VAN- LOGTEN, M.J,, BERKVENS. J.M. ,ANI1 KROES, R. 1978. Investigation on Che
, DE VRIES. T.. GARBIS-BERKVENS, J.M., an
ion on the vholesomenesa of autoclaved or
No. B8/BU AlB-Tox./Path. of the National
"^ARBIS-BERKVEKS,
■I.J.. DE VRIES, T., VAN DER HEIJDEN, C.I
STRIK, J.J.T.W
d or irradiated pork in rats,
of Public Health, Bilthoven,
. , VAN LEE1IV.-EN,
Long-term who]
t No. 6174010(
,y Google
URI BBYNJOLFSSOK
Council for Agrlcultur
Professional
Laboratories
thief Radiat
Hassachusett
Irradiation
1972-80.
s Danish AEC Research Eslablislwent 1937-65.
jrces Division L'.S.Arny Nallck Laboratories i
-72. Director of the U.S. Kational Food
n conducted by the U.S. Depamiient of the Arn
*dvis
.iJ
to the
FAO/ IAEA/WHO
Joint Dipert
COUDli
I tee on
TF?i7
ated
Food (
ECFl) in
198U. Chairman
Codex
AllnntarluE
K Or
oup tha
develop
he "Codex Al
rius General
Stand
or Irra
iated Fo
Inter
nal Cod
for the Ope
ration
of Radiation
Facil
ties
Used f
or Treatmi
nt
of Foods",
977-19B1.
Educa
Ion
Doct
or of Phi
oso
ph, in theor
etical
physics from
kT^TT
^^
Instlt
gte, Unlv
ty of Copenhagen,
Dennark.
der
von Humboldt Sch
olar
at the Unlv
of Gflttingen
Gerrna
"y-
AMP Sch
ool of Bu
ine
ss Admlnistr
at ion
Harvard
University. Bo
scientific JO.
applications o
Personal: Bor
1970; n. Margu
Bridle Path. U
„GoogIe
Art Bcjrjolfsson ORAL PRESENTATION Nov. 18, 198
STATEMENT OF DR. ABI BBYNJOLFSSON . KEHBEB OF THE SCIENTIFIC TASK FORCE OK
WHOLESOMENESS OF FOOCS TREATED UfTH liSNlgltiti ENEIjGY. ORGANIZED BY THE COUNCIL
FOR AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE AND TECHIJOUniV , 18th tit NOTEmSFJi, \^ii
My name is Arl Brynjolf sson. From 1972 to 1980, 1 was director of the United
States National Food Irradiation Program, conducted by the U. S. Department of
Arny at the Natlck Laboratories in Massachusetts.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate to have the opportunity to present to the Committee
the findings of the Scientific Task Force on Wholesomeness of Foods Treated
with Ionizing Energy, organized by the CAST.
A list of Task Force Members Is attached as enclosure "A" with this statement.
Uith ne. I have the full text of the statement which I hereby submit for the
record. It is 10 pages long, and I will therefore abstract it in my oral
presentation. I also have with me articles and reports tliat are highly
statement as enclosures "B" through "H".
MAJOR FINDINGS IN THE TASK FORCE REPORT
The major findings of the analysis were as follows:
I. It appears proven with reasonable certainty that foods Irradiated with
doses up to an average dose of 56 kilogray are safe and wholesome.
This conclusion is based on two principally different approches:
! from extensive animal feeding
a) the analyses and
products: and
toxicologic
b) the evaluation o
f the result
n.
The effect of irrad
comparable with oth
iation on ni.
er cur rent 1)
III.
The irradiation doe
problem.
IV.
No induced radioact
1.11, i. pre
The process of preserving food by irradiation up to an average d
5a kiloHray accordJnBly should be recognized as safe and wholeso
„GoogIe
ORAL PRESENTATION Nov. 18, 1965
r processes for preserving food for public conaunption,
liigh hygienic standards and sound principles in
processing, storing, and distribution. Present standards and rvgulacions for
treatment of nonirradiated foods, such as standard hjrgienic oanufacturing
practices, can he expanded and also applied to irrsdiated foods.
FDA and/or USDA should accordingly Inspect and approve the Irradiation
facilities for processing and control of the foods; and as in other federally
inspected plants, keep surveillance to assure adherence to good Banufacturing
principles for the benefit of the consumer.
FDA and USDA should be petmitted to set
and operation of radiation facilities f<
NRC has set for design and operation of
processing of non-food items.
The Coden Alimentarius "International General Standard tor Irradiated Foods" in
international trade forms a reasonable fraraeuorlt for regulating the process not
only for international trade but also for trade within the country (Codex
Alimentarius Comiss^ion, 19B^). These standards could with Eiaple
modifications be applied to foods treated with sterilizing doses. Likeviae,
the Codex "International Code of Practice for the Operation of Radiation
Facilities Used for the Treatment of Foods" forms a franeiiork and provides
guidelines for operating Che irradiation plants for processing of foods.
Mr. Chairman, members of this Subcomsiittee , 1 believe the Bill. II.R.6V6, will
Under the heading: "FINDINOS AND PURPOSES" on page 2. we have In the paragraph
trichinosis from eating trichina, Trlchinella spiralis in meats. I believe
the sentence should be changed to "it elininates trichinas in neat products,"
parasite (protozoan) in raw neat s. About 25% of the L',S, adults have
antibodies indicating previous infection. While the disease in adults often
has no noticeable symptoms, it nay In a pregnant woman cause grave threat of
birth defects In her child, including heart and brain damage and mental
retardation. Toxoplasma gondii is eliminated by very low doses, less than U.3
kGy, of radiation.
Under the heading: "LEASING OF NUCLEaK BYPRODUCT HATERIAL FOR FOOD" on page 10,
I would like to see clearer support for research and development. I believe
the consumer, the industry, and the nation would be best served if university
and industry laboratories were encouraged to continue to research end develop
Che best product, I believe that if the section SI of the Atonic Energy Act of
19M is changed to require that the rates reflect fair market value, that
Improving food irradiation technology. Cesium-137 Is on hand and before
„GoogIe
Arl Btynjolfssof
ORAL PRESENTATION
Nov. 18
1985
processinK it ma
leave us vith -nc
benefit of the
y represent a negativ
able compensation to
re fle«ibiliCy in pro
asset. The
he Governmen
«)ting resear
old pro
h and d
vision which onl
ch noterlal" naj
evelopment for t
e
Under the headi
IRRADIATION on
the Department
CoiilBlsslon wokil
B: ESTABLISHHEST OF JOINT OPERATING COMMISSION FOB FOOD
age 11. a Joint Operating Commission for Food Irradiation
f Agriculture would be established. I believe that such a
nder
coordinating ro
Subcommittee on
Interagency Radiation
tins Council for Scie
ce, Engineer
ng, and
iCh the existing
Technology.
he
Mr . Chairman an
hope it will be
members of this Committee, I beli
passed by The Congress. I thank y
ings of the ^AST's Task Force as w
ve this
is a good Bill
he opporcunily t
V point of view.
nd
12. USE OF ENERGY
The overall ene
sses. [Brynjolfsson,
he food losses. Ther
y7ej The us
o be less than i
-
APPENDICES WITH
THE STATEMENT
BBYNJOLFSSOS , A. 1900. Food irradiation in the United States.
Proceedings of th 26th European Meeting of Meat Research Workers: Color
Springs, Colorado U.S.A. Vol. I, pp. 172-177. Prepared by the America
F.A.S.E.B. 1977. Report prepared for U.S. Army Medical Research an
Development Command: "Evaluation of the Health Aspects of Certain
Compounds Found in Irradiated Beef", by Life Sciences Research Offic
Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology. 9650 Eock
Pike, Bethesda Hd. 2uui4. Contract Number: DAMD-17-76-C-6055. Final
Report.
1979. "Possible Radio
,y Google
ORAL PRESEHTATION No*. 18, 19U
JECFl. IVei. "Whole HOBcneBB of Irradiated Food"; Report of • JolDt
FAO/IAEA/WHO Expert Comittee. Technical Report Scrlas: 6S9. Vorld HMlth ~
Organization. Geneva, 19B1.
Cadex Alinencarlus Coomisslon. 19tti. "Codei General Standard for
Irradiated Foods"; and "Recoooended International Code of Practlc* for the
Operation of Radiation Facilities Used for Treataent of Foods"; Joint
FAO/WHO Food Standards Prograinie Codex AllBentariua Coaisslon, Vol. IV ;
first edition; Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nation*:
World Health Organization; Rome.
„GoogIe
un naanBooi
I R»TS
JttUn
CIb H. FmlBi, [>*p«rcaaot cf Ulaal Selise*. D&lT«»lcr at Ki
Jota L* Good^wugh, D«p«rtBaot of At^coltural ftif In wlrn , Tc
Sarald D. aoltta, Cnf* Ruureh LikoncsTT, DUb Scau Coin:
Mil 1. Eadac, DapartMOt gf roaalgn'- lolTirUcj ol CalUonili
CharlM S. ?«n:T, B
'lDtT> DntnntCT >
AtTleulIural Uiurel
■ klliii, nsrldi
, Katloiikl Bunau sf S
1, cijH am, ubuqiM
pactsat of Holoflsa
d-Froduct Iaj*c
M, Bonh lua* Sue* Unlvat*
„GoogIe
WHOLESOMENESS OF IRRADIATED FOODS: A REVIEW
AM BRYNJOLFSSON
DrparimtHt efApplird Stoloiiml ScwHm
MaiaaeliiartliliitliliiltofTrehiUftagy
CambridiK Maaoehuirllt 02139
The nmjor finding* in ikt whoUwomentii iludiei on imdiattd fitodt art
rtvitwed It it concluded ihai Ihi* prvceta ii rtady fi>r induMtriai applira-
thni and eould be effectively regulated for the benefit of the a
INTRODUCTION
The wholesomenessri'irradiated foods (more apecifica My, electronically
preserved foods or foods preserved by fast electrons) has been studied
thoroughly during the past 37 years by private. Aational, and interna-
tional organizations. The OfTice of the Surgeon General of the U.S. Army
(OTSGI sponsored extensive studies in the fiflies and early sixties. Baaed
on these studies, the Surgeon General concluded in 1965 that foods
irradiated with doses up to the sterilizing dose of 56 kilogray (kGy), which
is equal U> 5.6 million rad. were safe to eat and issued the following
statement (The Surgeon General of the U.S. Army 1965): "Foods irradi-
ated up to absorbed doses of 5.6 megarada with a cobalt 60 source of
gamma radiation or with electrons with energies up to 10 million elec-
tron volts have been found to be wholesome, i.e., safe, and nutritionally
adequate." The conclusions were based on extensive studies conducted
between IMS and 1965.
At the international level, joint expert committeeH sponsored by the
United Nations' Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), Interna-
tional Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and World Health Organization
(WHO) were convened in 1964, 1969, 1976, and 1960 to consider the
question of wholesomeness of irradiated foods. At the last meeting in
Geneva from 27 OcU*er to 3 November, 1980, the "Joint FAO/IAEA/
WHO Expert Committee on Wholesomeness of Irradiated Food" (JGCFI),
reviewed the extensive data collected up to that time. After a thorough
review, the Committee concluded that irradiated foods are safe and
wholesome. The Committee's main conclusions were (JECFI 1981); ". . .
lOT
,y Google
lOe ABI BBYNJOLFSSON
that the irradiBtion of any food commodity up to an overall average doM
of 10 kGy presents no toxicoloRical hazard; hence, toxicoloKicat testing oT
foods so treated is no longer required." The report also states that:
"irradiation of foods up to an overall average doae of 10 kGy introduces
no special nutritional or microbiological problems."
The studies and the reports which led to these conclusions were exten-
sive, and the evaluation thorough. The different subspecialties of the
whotesomeness queiition of irradiated foods bad been reviewed in the
previous years by groups of scientists in the different sublields. The
JRCFI members were from many countries, but served there as individu-
als and solely as experts in their respective fields. The report summarit-
inR the conclusions is brief, 34 pa^es (JECFI 19811.
The FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission was established to
implement the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standard Program for foods In
international trade. Following the JECFI report, the Commission,
through the Codes Ftnd Additive Committee, developed two standards
for irradiated foods 'Codex Alimentarius Commission I984h (II Interna-
tional General Standard for Irradiated Foods and (21 International Code
of Practice for the Operation of Radiation Facilities Used for the IVeat-
ment of Foods. At its 15th session in July, 19B3. the Commission, repre-
senting 122 member countries, accepted the General Standard and the
Code of Practice for Irradiated food.
In accordance with General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, GATT,
these Standards should be accepted by the member countries to GATT,
unless there is a good reason for not doing so.
JECFI members were well aware of the many studies that bad been
carried out on foods irradiated with doses above 10 kGy. The Committee
limited its conclusions, however, to foods treatedwith doses less than 10
kGy, because important studies of foods Irradiated at the higher dose
levels were stilt being conducted. In particular, the animal feeding stu-
dies on irradiation sterilized chicken conducted by Ralston Purina Com-
pany for the Office of the Surgeon General of the U.S. Army, and later
continued by U.S. Department of Agriculture, had not been completed by
November 3, 19H0, the date JECFI ended its meeting and announced ita
conclusion. (JECFI 19811 •
The Radiation Sterilized Chicken Studiea
The studies, which included long-term multigeneration studies on dogs,
rats and mice fed irradiation sterilized (electronically preserved) chicken
meat, have now been completed. Preliminary evaluation has been made
for the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) by an outside
,y Google
WHOLESOMENBSS OF IRRADIATED FOODS tW
conaultingrirm in this field. Tracer Jitco, Inc., (1983). No diflerenoM were
round amotiK the Tour groups studied: 2 control groups and 2 test groups,
in each and every one of the many toxicoloKy leata and mutagenesia teat>.
"nie control groups were fed either enzyme inactivated meat stored froun
(the F KTOup), or meat made shelf-stabte by heat sterilization (the T
group). The test groups were fed either electron irradiated meat (the B
group), or gamma-ray irradiated meaL (the G group). The average irradia-
tion dose used Tor sterilizing the frozen meat was 58 kGy, (45 kGy
minimum dose, 68 kGy maximum, median 56 kGy, and an average of 58
kGy). The temperature during irradiation was on the average about -25
°C. Alter irradiation the meat was kept at room temperature, about 24 *C.
Although no detrimental effect as a result of irradiation could be dis-
cerned, some questions have been raised about some Hndings in two of
these studies: the long term multigeneratlon mouse study and the Oroao-
phila mutagenesis study (Anon 1984). A few excerpts from the main
conclusions in the Tracor Jitco's report will be sufficient for this over
view. The reviewers found: (1) Main Conclusion: ". . . all the meat dieU,
frozen control, thermal control, gamma irradiated teat diet, and electron
irradiated test diet to be indistinguishable in nutrients and euentially
free ofcommon toxic contaminants." (2) Neoplasms: Among the meat fed
mice, group F (frozen rontrol) had the highest incidence of total neo-
plasms In both sexes. Group G (gam ma -irradiated) had the lowest inci-
dence among the male group, while group E (electron irradiated) had the
lowest among females, the latter being significantly lower when com-
pared to F (frozen control) females. Group G females had the highest
incidence among the meat fed groups, although this was not significant
when compared to group F. Renal tubular neoplasms occurred at low
incidences only in meat groups T (thermal control) and F. and were
observedonly at terminal sacrifices. Group G and Eeach had four cases of
interstitial (Leydig) cell tumM", a raro slow growing benign testicular
tumor. Group F had only one case of the.se tumors, significantly lower
than the two test groups. Using the National ToxicoloKy Program's Sta-
tistical Analysis Package (NTPSAP), however, no significant difference
could be shown between groups F and G in incidental tumor test or time-
to-lumor analysis. (3) Growth and body weight: 'Through four genera-
tions, each of the four chicken diet« supported growth to adult body
weight approximately equally." (4) Reproductive performance: "In repro-
ductive performance through three generations, the only important dif-
ference seen in mice fed diets F, T, G, and E was comparatively decreased
fertility in group T. Among the groups fed Irradiated chicken, there was
no reduction in the number of offspring born, no increase in the number
of stillbirths, and no reduction in survival of pups."
„GoogIe
110 ARI BRYNJOLFSSON
FDA's Division of Pathology haa reviewed the pathotogini Blidas and
found among other tKings that (Anon 1986); (1) There wan noincreaae in
interatitial cell hyperplaaia in the testea of thew aniRiala, and no evi-
dence of progreaaion of testicular lesionB from hyperplaaia to neoplaaia.
(2) There were no demonstrable toxic lesions (e.g., atrophy or necroais) in
the testes which could have contributed to the pathog«neei* of neoplaaia.
(3) All the testicular tumors were unilateral, i.e., none ofthe tumors were
bilateral. Only one of the testicular tumors was interpreted u malignant
tumor. (The National Toxicology Program, special subcommittM that
reviewed the slidea found no malignancy). (41 A mnjority of the tumon
were reported in animals at the time of terminal saeririce (i.e., two yeara
of age). Three ofthe animals with testicular tumors which died before the
terminal sacrifKe had other lesions also which may have contributed to
their early mortality, (5) Cystic vascular int«rstitial cell tumors mimic
other tumors and the reported incidence of interstitial tumors ia probably
not represented fully in the historical control data.
Thenumberof test groupB needs clarification. While the two groups fed
irradiated meats were treated in thereportsaa if they were independent,
they actually are not independent, but equivalent, lite action of the
gamma-rays is due to the fast electrons they produce. TIm irradiation
effects are, thus, produced by fast electrons in both caaes.
Some of the early researchers named the procesa correctly electranic
preservation (Huber 1945). The overused words radiation and irradiation
are used for many kinds of radiatitms, including nonioniling mdiationa.
They are often used in the context of radioactive fallout and destructive
power of nuclear weapons, for alpha emitter radiations and neutron
radiations. The use of the words radiation and irradiation of foods for
electronic preservation is therefore often misleading.
The chemical and any toxicotogical effects are initiated by the fast
electrons produced by the gamma-rays, just as if the food had been
irradiated with electrons from an accelerator. Thus, the gamma-ray irra-
diated, and the electron irradiated meats, from a toxicological point of
view, are in fact both irradiated by electrons. Dose rate effects are not
important in the case of meats, as eonTirmed hy the analyses of the
radiolytic products (Merritt tt at. 1978), with the exception of the water
solubleandhighly reactive thiamine rniomasctoi. 1981), whidi isof no
consequence in the present context.
The use of two positive control groupa, alao, needs clariTication. When
the studies were initiated, the scientists at a FDA hosted meeting on the
suttyect could not decide which was better as control: Ibe froMn stored
meat or the beat sterilized meat stored without refi'igvratton. Some
,y Google
WHOLESOMENESS OF IRRADIATED POODS
contended that the heat steritization could destroy some natural toxi-
canli in the meat. Also, the radiation sterilized meat would replace in the
market place the heat sterilized meat. The comparison should therefore
be made between these two processeB. Others felt that the heat steriliia-
tion process could poasibly produce minute amounts of toxic subataneea,
and therefore the frozen stored meat should serve as control. No data
were available to support slrotiRly one or the other contention. Many felt
that such data on the efTecl of heat sterilization were needed. The deci-
sion was to use both groups. Also, the two positive control groupB if
considered equivalent correspond to double the number of animals in one
control group which would improve the overall statistics.
The reason for selectini; the two separate test groups was somewhat
similar. It was dilTicult for many to accept as unequivocal that the two
test groups were equivalent from a toxicological point of view.
When the studies were planned, il was of course well known that the
mice were mainly herbivores. It was in question how much protein they
could tolerate in the diet. Still, in a study of this kind, it was reasonable
to go as close as possible to the tolerable limit of protein content in the
diet. The renal problems in the four meat eating groups were anticipated.
The fifth group, the negative control, fed standard lab diet had leas of a
problem in the renal system.
Droaophila Mutageneais Study
Several different hinds of mutagenesis studies were conducted, and in
all the tests, the four meat groups were tquivalent to each other. In one of
them, the test organism was the fruit fly Drosophila melanogatler. Evolu-
tion did not develop the fruit fly toconsumeor thrive well on meat, which
appears toxic when fed in excessive quantities. The fruit fly has been
used, however, extensively in mutagenesis studies and hereditary
research, ever since Thomas Hunt Morgan and his associates at Colum-
bia University researched the subject in the early part of this century. It
was therefore traditional to use this organism in chromosomal stuHies.
When tested on the irradiated chicken meat no mutagenic effect was
observed. Nor had any mutagenic effect been observed in previous tests
on irradiation sterilized beef and ham iMittler 1979). Fewer progeny
developed from all the groups fed diets containing chicken meat than
from those fed a standard diet. The scientists at Ralston Purina noted,
however, thai fewer progeny developed from diets containing chicken
meal irradiated with Co-60 gamma-rays than from those fed on other
meals. Several factors could affect the number of progeny. For example,
the viscosity of the dieLi varied slightly, and was observed to affect the
,y Google
ARt BRVNJOLPSSON
number of progeny that developed. Because the water holding capacity oT
the irradiated meataiaaiightly lees than of the noniiradiated meats, the
viacoeity of the irradiated meat will be leea when the diets are made up
with equal amounts of fluid. The viscosity ■■ difficult to measure, llie
irradiation will shorten some of the long protein molecules, lliis dissocia-
tion and variation in the viscosity is likely to make some of the amino
acids more available, and therefore to cause greater toxicity in the fhiit
fly. The observations could possibly be explained in this way. llie statisti-
cal fluctuations in these obeervstions were Isrge, and it was actually
difficult to determine if the effect was in fact real.
It had previously been questioned if antivitamins could be produced in
the processing of the meat. None have ever been observed to be produced
by irradiation of foods. Addition of vitamins to tfie Drosophtia diets
containing the meat appeared to enhance slightly (statistically insignifi-
cant) the toxicity of the meat. So, if there was an effect of irradiation, it
was not brought about by antivitamins, as initially su^ested by Mme.
Several separate antivitamin studies using mammals have also proved
negative.
The Drosophila Studies were for testing possible mutagenicity of meats
that were processed in different ways. They were never intended to
Iwcome reproductive or toxicological studies. Mammals are CMisideraUy
more relevant than Orowiphila for evaluation of toxicity of human food.
Professor Sidney Mittler, who previously had done similar studies (Mit-
tler 1979). remarked when asked about his view: "The fact that fewer
progeny grew out of the meat diets is comforting, because it indicates that
the larvae were eating the meat. That was important in these mutagene-
Comparison of Radiation Effects
on Living Organisms and on Food
The effect of irradiation processing (electronic preservation) on foods
has most likely been more thoroughly investigated than the effect of any
other .food- preservation process. Irradiation of living organisms is well
" Known to be harmful and to be mutagenic. Mental association with these
effects made many believe, incorrectly, that irradiated fboda would
produce some similar effects. The opposite is doaer to the truth.
The radiation damage to a living organism is based on the damap to its
mseromolecules, such as DNA and proteins. The DNA is abcmt a million
times larger than the basic units d'food, such as amino acids, fatty acids,
. and-Tnonosaccharides, The number of chemical changes in e molecule are
„GoogIe
WHOLESOMENBSS OP rRRADIATED POODS 113
roughly proportional to the molecular weight (Brynjolfsson 19S1). There-
fore, the DNA is roughly about a million timea more aeniitive to radia-
tion than the basic units of food. It follows that living organiama, the
psresites and the ipoilage microflora, are much more aenaitive to irradia-
tion than the basic unita of food. About one per cent or leas of the basic
molecular units of food are afTected by irradiation dosea that steriliie the
food (Brynjolfsson 1981). These changes are much too small to be mea-
sured in any protein efficiency study. This has been confirmed in many
experiments, including the studies on sterilized (58 kGy) chicken (Tracor
Jitco 19831. Heat sterili9^ation destroys or changes a much larger fraction
of these basic units of food. For example, moat enzymes are easily inac-
tivated by heat, but not by irradiation. The macromoleculcs, such aa
DNAs and the proteins, which irradiation affects the most, are generally
toxic in their intact form and must be digested (hydrolyzed) before they
enter the blood or lymi^atic system.
The EITects of the Radiolytic Products
Although the number of chemical reactions as a consequence of irradia-
tions (more specincally, as a consequence of electronic preservation) is
smaller than In corresponding heat |»ocesse8, the question could be
raised, whether the producta of irradiation are significantly different,
and if some toxic compounds could be produced. These compounds would
be produced in minute quantities. The animal feeding studies have failed
to find any harmful effect. The conservatives in the field contend, how-
ever, that the animal feeding studies are too insensitive.
At the U. S, Army Natick Laboratories in Massachusetts, as well as at
many other laboratories throughout the world, very extensive analyses
were made of the radiolytic producta formed in irradiated food (Taub«(af,
1976; Merritt tt at. 1978; Simic 1978; Diehl 1978; Nawar 1978; Ward
1978; Taub rt at. 1980; Thomas el al. 1981; Basson 1983; Merritt and
Taub 1983; Simic 1983; Nawar 1983; Merritt el al 1983; Taub 1983). The
actual analyses <rf the components formed in the food and niS the reaction
producta in the many model systems, as well as the theoretical estimatee,
gave a consistent picture of what changes take place. It was shown that
the [H^ucts and their concentrations could be predicted from the com|M>-
sition of the food, the radiation dose and the temperature (Merritt and
Taub 1983). The results of these analyses were then given to an indepen-
dent group of biochemists and toxicologiiitE for evaluation (F.A.S.E.B.
1977, and Supplements I and II in 19791. This evaluation was bnned on
the known toxicity of these compounds, which in turn had been derived
„GoogIe
AM BRVNJOLFSSON
rrom Mparate testa and observations. Host of the compounds are innocu-
ous and standard hydrolyses products of foods. Others may be more
problematic. Bemene is produced in ports per billion quantities at the
highest irradiation doaea. but it is also found in many natural, nooirra-
dialad foods including meat, ftsh, vegetables, nuts, dairy products, ^gs,
and beverages (F.A.S.E.B., Supplement I, 1979). It is produced at about
tlie same level aa in the heat sterilization prwess (Chang and Peterson
1977). It is found in many times larger quantities in eggs and many other
foods (MacLeod and Cave 1976; and Van Straten 1977)
This chemical analjrsia approach to wholesome evaluation, in principle,
amounts to concentrating the radiolytic products and feeding tliem to the
animals. These analyses and evaluations, most likely, man than any
animal feeding studies, convinced the skeptics that irradiated foodi are
While a large number of scientists, including many oonaldered to be
health authorities, are familiar with the results of the studies on irradi-
ated foods, still many more are not. The extensive literature on the
subject is scattered, often in publications with limited distributi(». It is
difHcuIt, therefore, to get an overview and to diacem the aignifieant
contributions. Although many health offKials recognise the aafety at
irradiated foods, they prefer to proceed slowly, to give the critics an
opportunity to make their points. It would be helpful if lasrfolk became
more knowledgeable about the process. Epstein and GofTman (1984) pro-
posed work of extracting and concentrating the radiolytic products and
then testing them. This had already been done, in principle, (F.A.S.E.B.
1977, 1979, and 1979) as indicated above.
Many other individuals have been profoundly concerned about the
impending general approval of the process (Anon 1984). Some of the
concerns include the following: (1) Two Russian studies show detrimental
effects in rats fed food irradiated with gamma-rays at doaea of 8 and 6
k(;y (Kamaldinova 1970. and Shiltinger and Osipova 1970). (2) Thrae
Indian studies showed abnormal white blood cells ^n children and mon-
keys and rats fed irradiated wheat (Baskaram and Sadasivan 1975; and
Vijayalaxmi 1975 and 19781. (3) Two Indian studies showed that irradi-
ated wheat, maize, sorghum, pearl millet, potatoes, and oniofu produced
more anatoxins than the non-irradiated samples (Priyadarshini and
Tulepule 1976 and 1979).
At the request of U.S. Army Natick Laboratories the Runian studies
were reviewed in 197071 by several scientists with expertise in this lieM.
,y Google
WHOLESOMENESS OF IRRADIATED POODS
Each found them poorly deRiKned, and recommended that they be
tgnoKd. In the experiments by Katnaldinova (1970) the basic diet did not
meet the modem standards. The conclusions of the author were sup-
ported by statistically insignificant data. The changes in fat metabolism
were claimed on the basis of tributyrinase measurements. However, an
analysis of the data shows that liver tributyrinase activity was identical
in the parent test group, first generation test group and in the first
generation control group. Only the parent control gnnip had slightly
lower activity.
In the studies by Shillinger and Osipova (1970) the diets did not meet
modem standards; the 30 mg per day of calcium was inadequate and the
low cakium/phosphoroua (Ca/P) ratio about 30/100 aggravated this ddl-
ciency. The test diets were mistreated. Fresh fish irradiated at 6 kGy was
stored between - 1 and * TC Tor a period of two months. Considerable
bacteriological as well as chemical changes can be expected. The control
was kept frozen. Lack of data in support of the conclusions and contradic-
tory sUtements made evaluation difficult. The JECFI (1976) was well
informed about these papers.
Soviet authors (including the above) have subsequently published sev-
eral papers confirming the safety of the irradiated foods: Bronnikova and
Okuneva (1972); Kamaldinova. Shillinger and Zaitsev (1977); Zaitaev and
Osipova(1981); Zaitsev and Maganova 11981); Shillinger and
Kamaldinova (1973); Zajcev (= Zaitsev), Shillinger, Kamaldinova, and
Osipova (1975).
The data reported by Bhaskaram and Sadasivan (197S), and Vyay-
alaxmi (1975 and 1978) on the possible chromosomal aberrations are
meager and have lai^ statistical fiuctuations. Kesavan ( 1978), who had
an opportunity to consider the data more closely, reported that the;
"eKperiments were not designed well, and consequently their results
were found to be imprecise ... It is concluded that the NIN data failed to
demonstrate any mutagenic potential in irradiated wheat". NIN refers to
National Institute of Nutrition, Hyderbad. It is helpful to take note of the
fact that the 1 .8% polyploidy observed in these studies In children receiv-
ing irradiated wheat is in the normal range, while the 0% polyploidy in
children receiving unirradiated wheat is abnormal, and probably impos-
sible. Several studies were undertaken to check if there was any muta-
genic effect in irradiated wheat: George el at. (1976); Tesh el al. (1977);
Reddi rf al. (1977); Cheuhan el al. (1977); Murthy (1981). Additional
studies contracted out by The International Project in the Field of Food
Irradiation could not confirm any mutagenic effect (JECFI. 1976).
The whoteMme studies on poultry meat, irradiation sterilized with the
hif;h average dose of 58 kGy. included several investigations of possible
„GoogIe
lie ARI BRVNJOLFSSON
chronHwomal efTects. No chroincMomal efTecta from conHumption of irradi'
Bted poultry meat could be discerned. (Tracor Jitco, Inc. 1983)
In the anatoxin studies by PriyadarahJnJ and Tulepule (1976 and 1979)
the samples were heat sterilized before infection with fungi. Such a heat
sterilization process, like many other food processes, destroys natural
antifungal conponents in the food (Sharma et al 1981). The observations,
therefore, are of little or no relevance to irradiation of raw agricultural
commodities, such as potatoea, oniona, and wheat which contain anti-
fungal components. Related are the studies by Schindler «t a/, (1980). who
irradiated Aspergillus flavas and AnpergUlua paratilicus and who
obtained by mutation or selection an organism that produced more toxin
than the unirradiated culture. White their test tube experiments may not
be directly applicable, they remind us that caution must be observed,
when we selectively destroy more of some strains or organisms than of
others. In this respect irradiation, like any other food prticesa, can change
the naturally occurring or normal microflora. Several authors haA
investigated the proposition of aflatoxin production: Bullerman tl al.
(19731; Sharma et al. (197S); Behere el al. (1978)i Sharma et at. (19791.
JECFI (1981) was well informed about these Indian studies and scruti-
nized them thoroughly, like any other report that could give a hint about
possible harmful effectj.
The comments in the penultimate paragraph of the Science News arti-
cle (Anon 1984) are about the kidney problems in mice fed protein rich
dieta and about reduced number of offsprings from fruit flies fed meats.
As mentioned above, the very protein rich diet causes great stress on the
mice, especially their renal system. Toxicotogists evaluating these data
take this into account. Furthermore, the overall incidences of neoplasms
in both sexes happened to be most common in the frosen control group
and not in the test groups fed irradiated (with the high average doee of 58
kGyl poultry meats. Reasonably, this higher incidence in the froien
control is due to a statistical (luctuation. The Science News' comment
about Drosophita studies is likewise based on misunderstandings, as
discussed above.
There has been no lack of critics, skeptics, arid scientists that
thought irradiation of food might produce harmful effects.
Every suggestion of these skeptics had been thoroughly and
fairly reviewed, and followed up by experiments This had con-
tributed greatly to an exceptionally thorough evaluation, during
the last 30 years, of the food irradiation process.
„GoogIe
WHOLESOMENESS OF IRRADIATED FOODS
The Microbial Mutanta
Sometimes, a question ia raised about the possibility of producing new
and barmful microbial mutanta. This is an important subject. Many very
able microbiologista have be«n concerned and have researched it for
manyyeBrB<Among others: Erdmanpf of. 1961; Thatcher 1963; Chriiten-
sen and Kjems 1965; Licciardello et al. 1%9; Epps and Idziak 1970;
Previtte et aL 1970; Oliver 1977; Maxcy 1977).
Al the request of FAO and WHO, the subject was considered at a
meeting of the Board of the International Cornmittee on Food Microbiol-
Ogy and Hy^ene of the International Union of Microbiolof;ical Societies
on 16 December, 1982. The Board met at the Royal Veterinary and
Agricultural University in Copenhagen.
Alter analyzing the scientific knowledge available to date, the Board
was satisfied that there was no cause for concern and that modern
techniques were adequate to control the situation. Food irradiation was
considered to be an important addition to the methods of control of food-
borne pathogens and not to present any additional hazards from shifts in
the microflora or changes in the attributes of the microorganisms (Anon
1982).
Most processes based on heat, drying, freezing, or use of chemicals will
produce mutants, or selectively favor some mutants that are constantly
being produced by nature. The irradiation process is no exception. The
mutants produced or selected by the irradiation method have usually
been less competitive than the unmutsted natural flora (Previtte el al.
1970; Cliver 1977; Maxcy 1977). Radiation usually destroys the genes
rather than creates them. Therefore, the mutants produced by irradiation
aremissingsomeoTthegenesthat are important for their survival in the
real world (and rtot isolated in a test tube). They otlen require a rich
medium for outgrowth. The exposure of the bacteria in our environment
to the background radiation produces many more mutations than we
would ever create in food irradiation. Stilt, much more numerous are the
mutations produced by heat or by chemicals.
A problem of slightly different nature is the selective destruction of
some organisms more than others when substerilizing doses are used.
Lack of natural competition may then favor the growth of some strains or
microorganisms. In this respect irradiation is analogous to other food
processes. This underscores that food irradiation, like other processes of
food for the public, should be in the hands of food technologists, microbiol-
twists and others knowledgeable in the field.
„GoogIe
ARI BRYNJOLFSSON
Labclltng
lite question oT labelling irradiated Tooda is ■ aeparate matter. The
JECPI (1981) noted that: ". . . It was therefore not thought necesnry on
scientifK grwinds to envisage special requirements for the quality, who-
lesomenesa, and labelling of irradiated foods." Some other consulting
groups have recommended against mandatary labelling (Anon 1983).
If irradiated foods must be labelled, and if they are subsequently proc-
essed into difTerent other products (e.g., orange juice made from oranges
disinfested by irradiation) or become an ingredient (e.g., condiment! of
another product, it must be resolved at what stage and at what fraction
the declaration of irradiation is no longer required.
Proponents of labelling contend that this is a new method, and one
should have the choice of not eating irradiated foods, and to have that
choice, the food must be labelled. The proponents of nonmandatory label-
ling point to the fact that: chemically sprout inhibited potatoes and
onions are not labelled; chemically treated fruits and vegetables for
disinfestation and for preventing or retarding rot are not labelled; poul'
try meat and other foods washed in chlorinated water are not labelled.
Therefore, it could be misleading to mandate labels only on irradiated
foods. The consumer would in fact not be able to make an educated choice.
Irradiated foods usually look the same, and are to be handled in the
same manner as their nonirradiated counterparts. If that is not the case,
then a labelling informing the consumer about the special handling
would be needed.
In the "Codex (General Standard for Irradiated Poods", (Codex Alimen'
tarius Commission, 1984) the labelling requirements are: (1) Inventory
control. For irradiated foods, whether prepacked or not, the relevant
shipping documents shall give appropriate information t« identify the
roistered facility which has irradiated thefood, the date(B) of treatment
and the lot identification. (2) Prepackaged foods intended for direct com-
sumption. The labelling of prepackaged irradiated foods shall be in
accordance with the relevant provisions of the Codex General Standards
for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods. (3) Poods ip bulk conUiners. The
declaration of the fact of irradiation shall be made clear on the relevant
shipping documents.
The labelling requirements are currently under revision by the Codex
Commission. In March 1985 the Committee on Food Labelling recom-
mended mandatory labelling. This recommendation will be considered by
the full Commission.
„GoogIe
WHOLESOMENeSS OF IRRADrATED FOODS
Radiation Sources
The radiation sources are stipulated in section 2.1. of the Codei Gen-
eral Standard for Irradiated foods: Radiation sources. The followinK types
of ionizing radiation may be used; (1) Gamma-rays from the radionuelidea
Co-60orCs-137. (2) X-rays generated from machine sources operated at or
below an energy level of 5 MeV. (3) Electrons fienerated from machine
sources operated at or below an ener^ level of 10 MeV.
The energy limits are for preventinf; any problems of induced activity
in the foods. These radionuclides are extensively used in hospitals and for
sterilization of medical products. The nuclear re^latory controls of the
radionuclides are necessarily strict and often cumtiersonie. The industry
usually prefers, therefore, electron accelerators which provide nio!it of the
industrial radiation sources today, mainly for crosslinking and poty-
meriiing plastics.
Environmental Concern
Irradiation of food will reduce the food losses, and it will reduce the
amount of energy used in the food industry (Brynjotfsson 1978). It will
reduce the use of insecticides, such as halogenated hydrocarbons, and it
will reduce the use of some other undesirable chemicals, such as ethylene
oxide. It will reduce also the amount of food borne diseases of microbial or
parasitic origin. If cesium-137 sources are used, a waste product from the
nuclear industry would be put to use under tight control. Cobalt-60, on
the other hand, would be intentionally produced for the purpose ofirradi-
ation and would increase the total load of radioactive isotopes in the
environment. Although the technical problems of operating safely in the
hands of skilled people are small, the administrative problems of assur-
ing safe operation may be more ttinicull. It is important, therefore that
the controls of these sources be enforced strictly. The nuclear regulatory
controls are already in place. In addition the facilities could be inspected
by the food health authorities. As long as these controls are strictly
enforced, the environmental impact of the isotope sources is small. When
electron accelerators are used, the technical and administrative problems
of assuring safe operation are small, and undesirable effects on the
In the Codex General Standard for Irradiated Poods, (Codex Alimenta-
riuH Commission. 19841 among other things, it is required that: (1) Radia-
tion treatment of foods shall be carried out in facilities licensed and
registered for this purpose by competent national 'authority. (21 The
facilities shall be designed to meet the requirements of safety, efficacy
„GoogIe
120 ARI BRYNJOLFSSON
and good hygienic practices of food processing. (3) The facilities shall be
staffed by adequate, trained and competent personnel. (4) Control of the
process within the facility nhall include the keeping of adequate records
including quantitative dosinwtry. (5) Premises and records shall be open
to inspection by appropriate national authorities.
In the 5 points above the verb "ahall" is used rather than "should",
which is more common in the Co6ex standards. These verba were dis-
cussed at the Codex meetings, Hwesfeltthat strict requirementa in these
areas would help inspection and control for assuring good manufacturing
practices.
En the sections on hy^ene of irradiated foods and technological require-
ments, it is among other things required that: (1) The food should comply
with the provisions of the Recommended International Code of Practice-
General Principles of Pood Hygiene (Ref. No. CAC/RCP 1-1969. Rev. 1,
1979) and, where appropriate, with the Recommended International Code
of Hygienic Practices of the Codex Alimentarius relative to ■ particular
food. (2) The irradiation of food is justiried only when it fulfils a technolog-
ical need or where it serves a food hygiene purpose and should not be used
as substitute for good manufacturing practices.
CONCLUSION
As summarized above, the data on the animal feeding studies conducted
at a great many laboratories as well as the radiation chemistry data
indicate that irradiation of foods does not introduce harmful effects and
that the process is reedy for practical applications for the benefit of the
consumer. These benefits include reduced use of chemicals, such as some
pesticides (halogenated hydrocarbons) and some bactericides (ethylene
oxide), and for extending shelf-life of some products. As this is done it is
important that good manafacturing practices be applied.
The Codex Standard for irradiated foods in inte^ationat trade form a
reasonable basis for regulations within the different countries. The regu-
lations would make it possible for the health auth<H-ities to control the
irradiation process to the extent needed. In the United States, the irradia-
tion facilities for procewilng of food could be approved and inspected, not
only by the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), but also by
FDA and USDA.
,y Google
WHOLESOME NESS OF IRRADIATED FOODS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
llie author thanks his colleagues for auffgentionn during the review of
this paper, in particular: Dr. Irwin Taub, Ms. Miriam H. Tlwmas. and Dr.
Charles Merritt Jr. at US Army Natick Research and Development
Cmter, Natick. MA; Dr. Eugene Wierbicki, USDA Eastern Regional
Research Center, Philadelphia. PA: and Dr. Edwards. Josephson.MaMia-
chusetts Institute of Technolt^y, Cambridge, MA.
REFERENCES
ANON. 1984. Pood irradiation: Are there problems? Science News. 725
(22), 349.
ANON. 1980. WholesomenesB of Irradiated Pood; summaries nf data
considered by the Joint FAO/IAGA/WHO Expert Committee on the
Wholesomeness of Irradiated Food. Geneva. 27 October- 3 November
1980. EHE/81.24. This document can be obtained from the Divisinn of
Environmental Health. World Health Organization, Avenue Appia.
1211 Geneva 27. Switzerland
ANON. 1985. NTP says tumors from chicken irradiation are not treat-
ment related. Food Chemical News. April 1. pp. 42-44.
ANON. 1982. Report of a meeting, on the 16 Dec. 1982. of the Board of the
International Committee of Food Microbiology and Hygiene of the
International Union of Microbiological Societies. The Board met at the
Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University in Copenhagen.
ANON. 1983. Marketing and Consumer Acceptance of Irradiated Poods.
Report of the consultants' meeting on marketing, market testing and
consumer acceptance of irradiated foods, organized by the Joint FAOI
IAEA Division of Isotopes and Radiation Application of Atomic Energy
for Food and Agricultural Development Held in Vienna. 27. Sept.-l.
Oct.. 1982, Document No,, IAEA TEC DOC 290 Issued by IAEA. 1983.
BASSON, R. A. 1983. Advances in radiation chemistry of food and food
components— an overview. In Recent Advanrcs in Food Irradialion. (P.
S. Elias and A. J, Cohen, eds.l pp. 7-25, Elsevier Biomedical Press,
Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
BEHERE, A. G., SHARMA, A , PADWAL-DESAI,S, R, and NADKARNI
G. B, 1978, Production of aflatonin during storage of gamma irradiated
wheat. J, Fd, Sci 43. 1102-1103,
BHASKARAM, C and SADASIVAN. G 1976, Effects of feeding irradi-
ated wheat to malnourished children. Int. J, Radiat. Biol. 27, 93. and
Am, J, of Clin. Nutr. 2H. 130-135. 1975,
,y Google
122 . ARI BRVNJOLPSSON
BRYNJOLFSSON. A. 1978. Energy and food irradiation. In Food /Vvwp.
oation by Irradiation. Proceedings of a Bymposium in Wageningen,
21-25 Nov.. 1977: jointly organiied by IAEA, FAO, and WHO. Vol. 11,
pp. 285-299. PubliBhed by IAEA. Vienna, STI/PUB/470; ISBN 924-
01037M.
BRYNJOLFSSON. A. 1981. Ghent icleara nee of food irradiation process:
lU scientific basis. In Comhinalion Processet in Food Irradialiaa. Pro-
organiied by IAEA and FAO. pp. 367-373. Published by IAEA, Vienna,
STI/PUB/568; ISBN 92-0-1 10081 7.
BULLERMAN, t. B.. BARNHART. H. M. and HARTUNG, T. E. 1973.
Use of fcaniniB irradiation to prevent aflatoxin production in bread. J.
Fd. Sci. 38. 1238 1240.
CHANG. S. S. and PETERSON, R. J. 1977. Recent develi^ment in the
flavor of meat. J. Food Sci. 42, 298-305.
CUVER. D. 0. 1977. Unlikelihood of muUgenic etTecta of radiation on
viruses. In Wkolrmimenett af Irradiated Food, Annex 2, pp. 43-44.
Report of a Joint FAO/IAEA/WHO expert Committee. World Health
Organization Technical Report Series: 604. WHO, Geneva.
CodeiAlimentarius Commission. 1984. Codex General Standard /or Irra-
dialed Foodt; and Recommended International Code ofPraetke for the
Operation of Radiation Faeililiet Used far Treatment of Foods; Joint
PAO/WHO Food Standanla ProRramme Codes AlimenUrius Commis-
sion, Vol. XV; first edition; Food and Af^cultural Organization of the
United Nations; World Health Organization; Rome.
CHAUHAN, P. S.. ARAVINDAKSHAN. M., KUMAR, N. S., SUBBA
RAO, v.. AIYAR, A. S. and SUNDARAM. K. 1977. Evaluation of
freshly irradiated wheat for dominant lethal mutations in wistar rata.
ToxicoloKy. 7,85-97.
CHRISTENSEN. E. and KJEMS, E. 196S. The radiation resistance of
substrains from Streptococcus fa PC ium selectedafler irradiation of two
different strains Acta Path, et Microbiol. Scandinav. 63, 281.
DIEHU J. F., ADAM, S., DELINCEE, H. and JAKUBICK. V. 1978.
Radiolysis of carbohydrates and of carbohydrate-containing foodstuffs.
J. of Agriculture and Food Chemistry, 26, 15-20.
EPPS, N. A. and IDZIAK, E. S. 1970. Radiation Irwatment of foods. II.
Public health significance of irradiation-recycled Salmonella. Appl.
Microbiol. 19. 338344.
EPSTEIN, S. and GOPPMAN. J. W. 1984. Irradiation of foods. Science,
233. 1354.
ERDMAN. I. E., THATCHER. F. S. and MCQUEEN, K. F. 1961. Studies
in the irradiation of microorKanisms in relation ta food preservation.
II. Irradiation resistant mutants. Can. J, Microbial. 7, 206-215.
„GoogIe
WH0LE50MENESS OF IRRADIATED FOODS IS3
P.A.S.E.B. 1977. Report prepared for U.S. Army Medical Research and
Development Command; Evaluation of the Health Aspects of Certain
Compounda Found in Irradiated Beef, by Life Sciences Research OfTice,
Federation of American Sncietiea for Experimental Biology, 9650
Rockvilte Pike. Bethesda Md. 20014. Contract Number: DAMD-17-76-
C.6055. Pinal Report.
F.A.S.E.B. 1979. Further Toxicological ConBiderationa of Volatile Com-
pounds. Ibid., Supplement I.
F.A.5.E.B. 1979. Possible Radiolytic Compounds. Ibid., Supplement II.
GEORGE, K, P., CHAUBEY, R, C., SUNDARAM, K. and GOPAL-
AYECNGAR. A. R. 1976, Frequency of polyploid cells in the wheat. Fd.
Cosmet. Toxicol. 14, 289-291.
HUBBR. W. 1945. Electronic preservation of food. Electronics, 2/, 74.
JECFI. 1976. Whotesomeness of Irradieted Food; Summaries of data
considered by the Joint FAO/IAEA/WHO Expert Committee on the
Wholesomeness of Irradiated Food, Geneva, 31 Au^st-7 September
1976. WHO/FOOD ADD./77.5. This document can be obtained from the
Food Safety unit, WHO, Avenue Appia, 121 1 Geneva 27, Switzerland.
JECPI. 1981. Wholesomeness of Irradiated Food; Report of a Joint FAO/
IAEA/WHO Expert Committee. Technical Report Series: 659. Wwtd
Health Organization, Geneva, 1981.
KAMALDINOVA, Z. M. 1970. Effect of culinary pretr«ated gamma-
irradiated beef on theorRanism of rata. Voprosy PiUniya, 2A2), 73-77.
KAMALDINOVA, Z. M., SHILLINGBR. Yu-I.. and ZAITSEV. A. N.
1977. Investigation into the possible mutagenic activity of beef irradi-
ated with gamma rnys in the raw and fried state and its influence on
thercproductivefunctionofalbinorats; Voprosy Pitaniya, 56(21, 53-59.
KESAVAN. P. C. 1978. Indirect effecU of radiation in relation to food
preservation: Facts and fntlactcs. J. Nucl. Agric. Biol. 7. 93-97.
LICCIARDELLO. J, J.. NICKERSON. J. T. R., GOLDBLITH. S. A,.
SHANNON. C. A. and BISHOP, W. W, 1969, Development of radiation
resislence in Salmonella cultures. Appl. Microbiol. 18. 24-30.
MACLEOD. A. J. and CAVE. S. J. 1976. Variations in the voUtile
flavour components of eggs. J. Sci. Food Agric. 27, 799-806.
MAXCY, R. B. 1977. Comparative viability of unirradiated and gamma
irradiated bacterial cells. J. Food Sci. 42. 1056-1059.
MERHITT, C. Jr., ANGF.LINI, P. and GRAHM. R. A. 1978. EfTect of
radiation parameters on the formation of radiolysis producta in meat
and meal substances. J. of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 26, 29-35,
MERRITT. C, Jr., and TAUB, I. A. 1983. Commonality and predictabil-
ity of radiolytic products in irradiated meats. In Recrnt Advancrs in
Fiioil Irradialinn. (P. S. Elias and A. J. Cohen, eds.l pp. 27-57, Elsevier
Biomedical Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
,y Google
IM ARI BRVNJOLPSSON
HERRITT. C. Jr., VADJI. M., BAZINET, M. L. and ANGELINI, P. 1983.
A Quantitative study of the pathways involved in the formation of
radiolyais products in ethyl palmiUte. JAOCS, SO. 1509-1516.
MlrrLER. S. 1979. Failure of irradiated beef and ham to induce genetic
aberrations in Drowphila. Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 35. 583-568.
MURTHY. P. B. K. 1981- SCE in monkeys fed irradiated wheat lUtter]:
Pood. Cosmet. Toxicol. 19. 523.
MURTHY. P. B. K. 1981 Sister-chromatid exchanges in mice given
irradiated wheal. Toxicol. 20. 247 249,
NAWAR. W. W. 1983. Radiolysis of nonaqueous components of food. In
Preservalian of Food hy lontzxng Radiation. <E. S. Joaephson and M. S.
PeUrson. eds.l Vol- II. Ch. 2. pp. 75-124, CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton,
Florida.
NAWAR, W. W. 1978. Reaction mechanisms in the radiolysis of fats: A
review. J. of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 26. 21-25,
OGBADU, C, 1980. Influence of gamma irradiation of aflatoxin B1 pro-
duction by Aspergillus flavus growing on some Nigerian foodstuffs.
Microbios. 27. 19 26.
PREVITTE, J. J.. CHANG, Y. and EL-BISI, H. M. 1970, Effect of radia-
tion pasteurization on Salmonella. III. Radiation Lethality and the
frequency of mutation to antibiotic resistance. Can. J. Microbiol. 17.
385-389.
PRIYADARSHINl. E. and TULEPULE. P. G. 1976- Aflatoxin praductjon
on irradiated foods. Food Cosmet. Toxicol. 14. 293-29S.
PRIYADARSHINl, E. and TULEPULE. P. G, 1979, Effect of graded
doMS of gamma-irradiation on aflatoxin production by Atpergillui
paranilicus in wheal. Food Cosmet. Toiicol. 17, 505-507.
REDDI.O. S.. REDDY. P. P.. EBENEZER, D. N. and NAIDU, N. V. 1977.
Lack ofeenetic and cytogenetic effects in mice fed on irradiated wheat.
Int. J. Rad Biol 31, 589*01.
SCHINDLER, A. F,, ABADIE, A. N. and SIMPSON, R. E. 1980.
Enhanced aflatoxin production by Aspergillut flai/ia and Atpergillua
parasilirus after gamma irradiation o( the spore inoculum. J. Pood
Proleclion 43, 7-9.
SHARMA, A.. PADWAL-DESAI, S R., TEWABI. G. M. and BAN-
DYOPADHYAY. C. 1981. Factors affeciing antifungal activity of
onion extractives against aflatoxin producing fungi, J. Fd. Set. 46, 741-
744,
SHARMA, A., SHRIKHANDE, A. J.. PADWAUDESAI, S, R, and
NADKARN). 0, B, 1978. Inhibition of aflatoxin- producing fungi by
ethyl acL'late extracts from gam ma- irradiated potatoes. Potato Rea. 2^,
31-34'.
,y Google
OF IRRADIATED FOODS 123
P.A.S.B.B. 1977. Iteport prepared for U.S. Army Medical ReMarch and
Development Command: Evaluation of the Health Aspects of Certain
Compounds Found in Irradiated Beet, by Life Sciences Research Office,
Federation of American Societies for Experimental BioloKy. 9650
Rockvtile nke. Bethesda Md. 20014, Contract Number: DAMD-17-76-
C-6055. Final Report.
F.A.S.E.B. 1979. Further Toxicolc«ical Considerations of Volatile Com-
pounds. Ibid., Supplement I.
F.A.S.E.B. 1979. Possible Radiolytic Compounds. Ibid., Supplement 11.
GEORGE, K. P., CHAUBEY, R. C, SUNDARAM. K. and GOPAL-
AYENGAR, A. R. 1976. Frequency of polyploid cells in the wheat. Fd.
Cosmet. Toxicol. 14, 289-291.
HUBER, W. 1945. Electronic preservation of food. Electronics, 2t, 74.
JECPl. 1976. Wholesomeness of Irradiated Food; Summaries of daU
considered by the Joint FAO/IAEA/WHO Expert Committee on the
Wholenomeness of Irradiated Food, Geneva, 31 August-7 September
1976. WHO/FOOD ADD./77.5. This document can be obtained from the
Fond Safety unit, WHO, Avenue Appia, 1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland.
JECFI. 1981. Wholesomeness of Irradiated Food; Report of a Joint FAO/
IAEA/WHO Expert Committee. Technical Report Series: 659. World
Health Organization, Geneva. 1981.
KAMALDINOVA, Z. M. 1970. Effect of culinary pretreated gamma-
irradiated beef on the organism of rats. VoproRy Pitaniya, 29(21, 73-77.
KAMALDINOVA. Z- M . SHILLINGER. Yu-I„ and ZAITSEV, A. N.
1977. Investigation into the possible mutagenic activity of beef irradi-
ated with gamma rays in the raw and fried state and its influence on
the reproductive function ofalbi no rats; Voprosy Pitaniya, J6(2). 53-59.
KESAVAN. P, C. 1978- Indirect effects of radiation in relation to food
preservation: Facts and fallacies. J. Nucl. Agric. Biol. 7, 93-97.
LICCIARDELLO. J, J.. NICKERSON. J. T. R., GOLDBLITH, S. A,,
SHANNON. C. A. and BISHOP, W, W, 1969, Development of radiation
resistence in Salmonella cultures. Appl. Microbiol. 18, 24-30.
MACLEOD. A. J. and CAVE, S, J, 1976, Variations in the volatile
flavour components of eggs. J. Sci. Food Agric. 27, 799 806.
MAXCY. R. B. 1977. Comparative viability of unirradiated and gamma
irradiated bacterial cells. J. Food Sci. 42. 1056-1059.
MERRITT, C. Jr., ANGELINI. P. and GRAHM, R, A. 1978. Effect of
radiation parameters on the formation of radiolysis products in meat
and mealsuhstanceii. J. of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 26, 29-35.
MERRITT. C, Jr. and TAUB, I. A. 1983. Commonality and predictabil-
ity of radiolytic products in irradiated meats. In Recrnt Advanct* in
y,<o,l Irradiation. (P S. Eliait and A. J. Cohen, eds.lpp. 27-57, Elsevier
Biomedical Press, Amsterdam. The Netherlands.
,y Google
124 ARI BRVNJOLPSSON
MERRrrr, C. Jr.. VADJI. M., BAZINET, M- L. and ANGELINI. P. 1983.
A Quantitative study of the pathways involved in the rormation of
radiolysis products in ethyl palmitate. JAOCS. 60. 1509-1516.
MITTLER, S. 1979. Failure of irradiated beef and ham to induce genetic
aberrations in Drosophila. Int. J. Radial. Biol. 35. 583-588.
MURTHY, P. B. K. 1981.SCEin monkeys fed irradiated wheat [Letter):
Food. Cosmet. Toxicol. 19, 523.
MURTHY, P. B. K. 1981. Sister-chromatid eKchanges in mice given
irradiated wheat. Toxicol. 20, 247-249.
NAWAR, W. W. 1983. Radiolysis of nonaqueous components of food. In
Prrsemalion of Food by Ionising Radiation. (E. S. Josephson and M. S,
Peterson, eds.) Vol. II. Ch. 2, pp. 75124. CRC Press Inc.. Boca Raton.
Florida.
NAWAR, W. W. 1978. Reaction mechanisms in the radiolysis of fats: A
review. J. of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 26. 21-25.
OGBADU. G. 1980. Influence of gamma irradiation of aflatoxin Bl pro-
duction by Aspergillus flavus growing on some Nigerian foodBtufls.
Microbios. 27. 19-26.
PREVITTE. J. J., CHANG. Y. and EL-BISI. H. M. 1970. Effect of radia-
tion pasteurization on Salmonella. III. Radiation Lethality and the
frequency of mutation to antibiotic resistance. Can. J, Microbiol. 17,
385 389-
PRIYADARSHINI. E. and TULEPULE. P. G. 1976. Anatoxin production
on irradiated foods. Food Caemet. Toxicol. 14, 293-295.
PRIYADARSHINt, E. and TULEPULE. P. G. 1979. eflect of graded
doses of gamma irradiation on aflatoxin production by AtpergMus
paraxilicux in wheat. Food Cosmet. Toxicol. 17, 505-507.
REDDI.O. S., REDDY. P P., EBENEZER, D. N. and NAIDU. N. V. 1977.
Lack of genetic and cytogenetic effects in mice fed on irradiated wheat.
Int. J. Rad. Biol. 31. 589«)1.
SCHINDLER, A. F.. ABADIE. A. N. and SIMPSON. R. E. 1980.
Enhanced aflatoxin production by Aspergillut ftavut and Atpergillus
parasilicus after gamma irradiation of the spore inoculum. J. Food
Protection 43. 7 9.
SHARMA. A., PADWALDESAI. S. R.. TEWABI. G. M. and BAN-
DYOPADHYAY, C. 1981. Factors affecting antifungal activity of
onion extractives against aflatoxin -producing fungi. J. Fd. Sci. 46, 741'
744.
SHARMA. A., SHRIKHANDE. A. J,, PADWAL-DESAI. S. R. and
NADKARNI, G B. 1978. Inhibition of aflatoxin-producing fungi by
ethyl acetate extracts from gamma-irradiated potatoes. Potato Res. 2J.
31-34.
,y Google
WHOLESOMENESS OF IRRADIATED POODS IIS
SHARMA, A., TEWARI, G. M.. SHRIKHANDE, A. J., PADWAL-DBSAI.
S. R. and BANDYOPADHYAY. C. 1979. Inhibition of aflatoxin-pro-
ducing fungi by onion extract. J. Fd. Sci. 44, 1645-1647.
SHILLINGER. Yu. 1. and OSIPOVA. I, N. 1970. The effect of gamma
irradiated fresh fish on the organism of white rots. Voproay Pitaniya,
29(5). 45-50.
SHILUNGER. Yu. I. and KAMALDTNOVA, Z, M, 1973- Wholesomeness
of potatoes irradiated with an accelerated electron beam and gamma
rBdiation for the purpose of inhibiting sprouting. Voprosy Pitaniya,
.1216). 50-55.
SIMtC. M. G. 1983. Radiation chemistry of wBter-soluble food compo-
nenU. In Prtaervalion of Food by Joniting Radiation. (E. S. Josephson
and M. S. Peterson, eds.) Vol. II, Ch. l.pp. 1-73. CRC Press Inc., Boca
Raton, Florida.
SIMIC. M. G. 1978. Radiation chemistry of amino acids and peptides in
aqueous solutions. J. of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 26, 6-14.
TAUB. I. A. 1983. Reaction mechanisms, irradiation parameters, and
product formation. In Prexervalion of Food by Ionizing Radiation. (E. S.
Josephson and M. S. Peterson, eds.) Vol. II. Ch. 3, pp. 125-166. CRC
Press Inc., Boca Raton. Florida.
TAUB, I A., ANGELINI, P. and MERRITT, C, Jr. 1976. Irradiated food:
Validity of extrapolating wholesomenesa daU. J. Food Sci. 4i, 942-944.
TAUB. I. A.. HALLIDAY, J. W.. WALKER. J. E., ANGELINI. P.,
VAJDI, M. and MERRITT, C, Jr. 1980. Chemiclearance: Principle and
application to irradiated meats. Proceedings of the 26th European
Meeting of Meat Research Workers; Vol. I. pp. 233-236. Published by
American Meat Science Association.
TESH. J. M.. DAVIDSON. E. S.. WALKER, S., PALMER. A. K..
COZENS, D. D. and RICHARDSON, A. K. 1977. Studies in Rata Fed a
Diet Incorporating Irradiated Wheat: Part 1. "Incidence of polyploid
configuration in bone marrow cells". Part 2. "Incidence of micronU'
cleated polychromatic erythrocytes in bone marrow celts". Part 3.
"Dominant lethal assay". Technical Report Series: lFIP-45. Interna-
tional Project in the Field of Food Irradiation. Institut Tiir Strablen-
technologic. Karlsruhe. Federal Republic of Germany.
THATCHER, F. S. 1963. Appendix VIII. Some public health aspects of
the microbiology of irradiated Food.s. Int. J. Appl. Radiat. and Isotop.
N.51.58.
THOMAS, M. H . ATWOOD. B. M.. WIERBICKI. E. and TAUB, I. A.
I9H1 EITect nf radiation and conventional processing on the thiamin
conlent of pork. J Fd. Sci. 46, 824-828.
,y Google
128 ARI BRYNJOLFSSON
The Surgeon General of the Army. 1965. Statement on the Wholesome-
ness of Irradtsted Foods. In "Radiation Processing of Fooda", Hearings
before the Subcommittee on Elesearch, Development and Radiation of
the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, CongreBS of the United States,
eighty-ninth Congress; June 9 and 10, 1965; pp. 106-106. U. S. Govern-
ment Printing OTTiee, Washington DC.
Tracor Jitco, Inc. 1983. Report prepared under contract No. 63-3K06-2-
143 for USDA Baatem Regional Research Center, including: "Irradi-
ated Chicken Meat, Toxicological Evaluation", Final Report, June 30,
1983. Also Report by Raltech Scientific Services, Inc. prepared under
contract DAMD I7-76-C-6047 for US Army Medical R&D Command:
"Evaluation of Mutagenicity of Irradiated Sterilized Chicken by the
Sex-linked Recessive Lethal Test in Drotopkila melanogatler"; Final
Report, June 15 1979. This report and many of the reports on the
irradiated chicken toxicological studies (PBS4-186gS0; PB84-186998;
PB84-187004: PB84-187012; PB84-187020: PB64-18703B; PB84-
187046; PB84-187053; PB84-187061; PB84-1B7079; PB-187087: and
PBS4 187095) are available from Technical Information Service. 5265
Port Royal Road, Springfletd. VA 22161.
VAN STRATEN, S. 1977. VolaiiU Compound! in Food. 4Ui ed. Central
Institute for Nutrition and Pood Research TNO. Zeist, The Nether-
VIJAYALAXMI, C. 197S. Cytogenetic studies in rats fed irradiated
wheat. Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 27, 283.
VIJAYALAXMI, C. 1978. Cytogenetic studies in monkeys fed irradiated
wheat. Toxicology 9, 181 184.
WARD, J. F. 1978. Chemical consequences of irradiating nucleic acids. J.
of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 26, 25-28.
ZAJCEV ( = Zaitsev), A. N., SHILLINGER, J. I.. KAMALDINOVA, 2. M.
and 0S1P0VA, I.N. 1975. Toxicologic and hygienic investigation of
potatoes irradiated with a beam of fast electrons and gamma-rays to
control sprouting; Toxicology 4, 267-274.
ZAITSEV, A. N. and OSIPOVA. 1. N. 1981. Study on mutagenic proper-
ties of irradiated fresh fish in chronic experiments. Voprosy Pitaniya.
40. 53-56. ,
ZAITSEV. A. N. and MAGANOVA, N. B. 1981. Effect of the diet includ-
ing Kammairradiated fish on embryogenesis and chromosomes of rats;
Voprosy Pitaniya, 40(6)61-83.
,y Google
26th European Meeting of Meat Research Workers
Proceedings
Volume One
American Meat
Science Association
„GoogIe
Session E
Food Irradiation ^,j
tB» IWMKTM HI jm Wlttt gWII
-M)><n» tM prtAicI Br IIIU. tn'irUIr
' nn M (naff' iM 'nl it kit rtgnFug h'ih 'irrMt tf i-nir imtittfsn m IM ucnnii
M ml-Cl]. » IMI. IniM IM >Mtr(l) NnM tui Mfh «H-r<Ui. lulMlv ef nni". iM
• f>KW tUU nMcM wlalrali IIM phcUwii. In ItU, TM Ofrici tf iKrgm Cwii-i
llw U»ntVT lalttttM HH fUlormunF HUtI fHilnf IW^IM «" IrfidttM fwl, IM In
D, *»lft * Ca. (■■tlilM 1 iMar ■jUI|rnrm«. iHf-Mn inlMl 'Hdlng Hud/ en Imjlju*
„GoogIe
.1 a." -a v in* - \Hi r*
KllutllDn ir lltt br lUt/IU/V") J«tM TiH
LI 1^ all
,y Google
TULt ). tinm; (••'. ■ U tl)
SB-OOS O - 96 -
,y Google
TMU *■ Iw mt. M U 41)
•nmtii (iiarH *r«w ft
TMlt B. 1J1« 0' m-l.lr, ntlitt[><
...
0..
»^. {.!) 4>^ «w Itl
1. jwlntlw K lt-«.tlii« 1r
rt-g^"!! * «••« e'"
D.01
o.t
4; '"■"^■'^'jjr'": *_^:;:l"
*■'
10
iiJisH
•2.!""
Mcuni. tw.,1. MiHrti
'
«
gsi'g !».'a
•0
I. tUHKuil^of roM
»
•»
SiES's',S:
piomi it la ■oiKuiii utijiii flii IM ml
M'KH. It aiHIIM Inu iBlK ICIM, 'illf UIA. md ■hiiiccIu''<<1«. dl" nlMulir MlgMi IMvt HO-IW
t»Ut iHonM In IM li>v>ullc IJtlm. TM •«■(• u Dmi HlK«1t> <> chu iHul • ■IIKM tlHi twilar
»•» U Ua Mt aDlatalii. > lUrllliliig tatt UK uiail MMI 10-" ftJinllMi of CI. Wtnllmg "1" CfiH I
..... ^-^. .. .,1 -Hiiiu i««i (rtHiud l« frMtn «r IrTlireTMl imBt « lOool
!.4I <• 111 11*111. iHllf'I CMii|« l> tM «1ml« Ifw in trwi
„GoogIe
ndtilil'E g-HacI of witr, tmii iiualni in MitrgfM Ugyt » lit ■•■■ HUnl 11 <<iiii Ihi toM It ni
ttw. In (Ha, tiwr in ofiHi ciwltui •<!" itiitr ■o'lEiln iH Uw ■nn lUbli. la tnlt cDntim, <i ]
j/.G inta
1UII in luflur.: THmv «■ luntl ii
Kli»9
Nul »I.rlHl4Hl]-
fw 3% mi
";:
>iuurl1liit<[if tHUt IMlyllutl lining
*r<iif CHIH 1v>g nIcUn mil
II
iii
"i's'Sn'n s^r" '"
10.l''a2. ii'«"'
i-tr flint Dp...t|9'Vi
<HI In
•HinUlM! IM.OMJMItM'-W-
S:K
„GoogIe
« »r^i2K3sa5!jS'9^^!?jy*«=vr-
:?#=-
I. ErSiS^- "-"11.- _ _., , , .
,y Google
645
Joint PAO/WHO Food Standards Profiramma
CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION
CACA/OL XV - rd 1
CODEX ALIMENTARIUS
VOLUME XV
CODEX GENERAL STANDARD FOR
IRRADIATED FOODS
AND
RECOMMENDED INTERNATIONAL
CODE OF PRACTICE FOR THE
OPERATION OF RADIATION
FACILITIES USED FOR THE
TREATMENT OF FOODS
FIRST EDITION
WOULD HIALTH 0MANI2ATI0N
„GoogIe
zas/k: t: - ti.
emlanatopy nctes
ll»f*r*T;:» Nc. CCfEX STAN ]C>o-l<f«3
KCjmES'DEs :s7SRSAT]osAi ::?! or ?ract:ce ros the
OPEi^Tics jr iu:':at:cn fa::l:t:lj vsi3 fcr the tbeat-
MENt OF fJCES
,y Google
CAC/'.'K. XV - Ei. 1
isma3u::Tioa
Thi FAO/WHO Cod«)i Aliaantariui Ca^iitisn (th«
Camiiiien) W4i •■lablii^ici lo iBplBMnc tht Jsint Fac whs
r«ad Standard* Pie|rt3s*. Httibarthip e! t>;« C;=iiiii9n
:9cpriaai theat Htabar Kaiiani and Aaieciata M«s9«ri of FAO
a;)d/er WKO whieh hava ns:ifiad tba Orianitatient of :»air
uiih to ba ecnaidarad ai Haabara. By 1 July 19ij ^;: :3-jn-
triai had bassaa Dicbari of tha Coniaaian. Othar csun-
criai which partieipata in tha work of tha Csici*iica 07 ot
iti tubaidiary bedia* in an obaarvar capacity ara axpactad
to bacosB ^asbara in tha rtoar EuEurt.
Tha purpoaa of tha Joint FAO/VHO Food Standard!
?ro|Ta^H if to protast tha haalEh of conijoari and to
anaura fair praccicaa in tha food trada; to prosota coord-
ination of all food itandarda work undartakan by intar-
nacional govarnaantal and non-govan»antBl crianisationa;
to dataraina piioriciai and initiate and |uida tha prapara-
cion of draft atandarda :nrouth and with tha aid of a;pr»-
priata organisation! i te finaliaa itandardt and, aftar
accaptanea by (OvarnDanti, publiah :haa in a Cadax Aliaani-
ariu! aithar ai rational or world-vida atandarda.
At ita ISth SaaiioR. hald in July 19£3, tha Cos-
aiiaion adoptad a Csdax Sancral Standard for Irradiatad
Fooda and a Raco^ar.ded Intarnatieaal Coda of Prasiica tor
Cha Oparation of Raiiatten FaeiUtiaa uaad for tnt Traai-
Bant ot Fooda to ba aant ti all Maabar Nation! and Aaio-
eiaca Haabara of FAO and/ar MO.
tha Codas Canaral Standard for Irradiatad Fooda
waa davalopad in accardanca with tha Codax Procadura for
tha lavitien and toandaant of Codax Standard! by tha intar-
fovarnBantal Codas Co^ittaa on Food Additiva*. vhich alaa
daala with Food Procaaaing, in cloia caap«ra:ian with tha
Intamational Atonic Enargy Aganey (IAEA).
*" gxPLAmTOKY worts
Thia Standard takaa into account the rasoaaanda-
tiona and concluaiena of tha Joint FA0/tA£A/1flC0 Expari Cob-
■ittaea cenvaned to avaluaca all available data conserving
,y Google
th« varieuf atpccti of food irradiaiior, includiai tha
wtel«(o»tn«if of food! precaiHd by ioni*int (a«nr. It
■!■« taka* ince accoutic tha raconandstieai of FAOf lASA.'UHO
censirltatisoa en la|ialatien and ctandardiutiea of food
irradiation.
Tnit Standard rafari only to thai* «ap<:ii wfticf.
r«lat* to ih« precatiing of foodf by ioniainf anarg;-, n
ia aiauKod in ihii Standard that fooda precaaaad by irrad-
iation, lika any othar feoda, wiU b« aubjact to lanaral
food ragulaiienf ralatini to quality, hyciana, w«i|hti and
aaaturai and ac forth. Tha prewitien* of thit Standard
•neompaaa all foeda irradiated up to an evarall avarag*
dolt of 10 kCy or lowar. Tha Standard ratetnisci t^ac tha
procaaa of food irradiation hai bcaa aitabliahcd aa aaf«
for ganaral application to an evorall avarag* laval of
abaorbad doae of 10 kCy. Tha lattar valua ahculd not b«
rogard'ad at a toxicolegical uppt; Unit abovo whith
irradiatod feodi btcoae unaafa; it ii aimply tha lav«l at
or batov tfhich aafaty h«a baan tatabliahad. I;: saitia^ tha
overall avaraga deaa for cn« gaaaral applieaticn of food
irradiation, it hat b««9 racogritad that tha required doae
to achieve the deaired tachnclsgical effect ia governad by
"good irradiation practice". Applying tha apprapriata dote
level ia tha key to the tachnclogieal^y and acsr.eaita'. !y
proper appliction of food irradiation.
Dtipita :iic aacy invaicigatisnt detignad to detaet
phyaieal, cheaisal and biological cbangai in foodi aub-
jaetad to ioniiiag energy, no aatiafactory aethod for
identifying food at naving been irradiated hat ao far baan
devaloped. While certain effectt can be idar.tified,
Bufficitntly precitc aetboda do not esiac for regulatory
purpoiea. Therefore, control of eo^Hrcial food
irredietioo can only be perfoned in the irrediaticn
plant. Consequently, the Standard providea certain
aendatery proviiieni coacerning the fecilitiaa uaad and for
the central of the pvoceia in irradiation plantt.
Aa regard! "labclliag" attention it drawn to the
felloving ebaervation of the 19S0 Joint rA0/IA£A/«HO Ixpert
Ce^ittee on VholeaoMneaa of Irradiated Food : "Irradiccod
,y Google
CAc/.'ci r: - u. 1
foadc wsuld bt >ubj«ei te r*|u]atiORi c9vt;ir.t feotf
(intrall;, *nd :e inv spaeif ic food itandaTi* rdatint to
individual food*. It mi, th«r«fAr*, no: tnou|r-: nastitary
on (citritific (rsjndt lo <nviia|t ipccia; r«<;---ris*nt* for
the quality, vnelc>e«ci)cii, and labclllnf of i,rTadiatcd
fcodt". SdutviT, tiitrt caa ba a "tc:nrl:al ir:.;nd" fsr
(pacific applicaciont >i food irradiatisr. ar.d :h«
iacla;atieft sf tnii fact on th« laba^. For ir.itinca, in
the £■>• of foodt i;;«dij:«d foi the pjrpos« of elisinatins
pa;rs(an( (vhicn ihould not ba atortd tctatrttr uith
pctantially cj:::a=inatad foodi), a ttataacnt cr. tha labal
■ nd;or on tha ihippint dacuocnt* of lush d«:::::asination
t;ca:sant uould ba considarad appropriaca and inf omat iva
te taa;)ufactura;*, tradtri and othara. Tha praiar.t Standard
raquirai that tbippin( docinanta aecoBpanyinj irradiiitd
foods Boving in trad* theuld indicate t^t fact of
iriadiatioB toichar uicn ralavaoi infarvaiien (s that good
irradiation pra:;ic« can ba varifiad. Tna liSalUng of
prapaekaiad irradUtad feed* intandad iar direct lala to
the c.-ntunar ii nst covered in thi* Stinderd and ^a.t to be
in accordance i^i th the relevant proviticne ef the Codex
General Standard for the laballins of Prepac^^ated Foodi.
Tnit CeTieral Star.dard vi is the preccai of ala^frilion.
Masbert si cne Cf^iiiies are re;u<f:t' tr Ratify
tha Scereteria: of the Codex Aliaentariua :»=iii:on -
Joint TAO/WilO Food Standirdi PrO£r«3S«, c! inair aceaptanie
of the Codex Generai Standard for Irradiated Feeda,
eccsrdins to paratraph 4 si the General Principlei of the
Codex Aliaentariu* (ece fifth Edition of tne :s=iiiieR'*
Procedural Manual).
Heaber Katlou and Aieociete !(eabert c^ FAO end/or
WHO which are oot Mcabete of the Co^iaiisr. are alia
invited to notify tht Secretariat if they with to accept
thi C9dex General Standard for Irradiated Food*.
The Codei* ,)*enaral Standard tor Irradiated Foodi
will be publiahed in the Codex AUaahtariua a* a world-wide
Codex Stendard when the Co^iaaion dctervinei that it is
appropriate to Cs ee in the litht of acceptances received.
The Rece^undad iBteraaiional Cade of Frectise for
the Operation of Kadiation Focilitiaa used for tne treat-
neci of Foods eontsiaed in this publication is intanced for
the guidaace of Souernnents and is not governed by the
acceptance procedure for Codex Stanea'rda.
„GoogIe
550
- I ~ CODEX STAN 106-19S3
COOIX CEHOtAl STAIIDARD TOR CT.RAPIATED FOODS C*)
. (WoTld-vldc Standard}
1. score
This (tandard applies to feoda procaasad hy Irradiation.
It doas iiftt apply "cc fooda esrposad Co doaaa lapartad hy
mcaaurln( Inacrunanta uaad for tnapcctlos purposes.
2. CjEHCTAL REQUIREfeyrS FO?. THE PROCESS
2*1* Radiation Soureaa
Tha following typea of ionising radiation aay ba usad:
(a) Caasa rays from the radionuclides ^^Co or ^^Ca;
(b) XTays ganaratad froa aactilna sources operated at or
balov an eneriy level of 5 HaV.
(c) Electrons generated froa aachlne sources operated at or
balov an anersy level of 10 HaV.
2.2. Absorbed Dose
Tbe overall avarafe dose absorbed by a food subjected to
radiation procasslag should not exceed 10 kCy (1) (2).
2.3. Faellttles and Control of the Process
2. 3.1. Radiation traataent of foods shall be carried out
In facilities licensed and registered for this purpose bj
the eoepateot national authority.
2.3.2. I^e facilities shall be designed to n«et Ac re-
qslreaents of safety, efficacy and good hygienic practices
of food processing.
2.3.3. The facilities shall be staffed by adequate, trai-
ned and coapatent personnel.
2.3.4. Control of the process within the facility shell
include tha keeping of adequate records Indudlag qoen-
'tltatlve doslaetry.
(•} Revised version of the Recoaaended Xntenuitleoal Gen-
eral Standard for IrradUted Poods (CAC/RS lOfr-1979).
(1) end (2) See aotea oa page 4.
,y Google
2.3.5- PrcnlBea tod records shall be open to inspection
by sppxoprlstc nacional authortcl«K>
2.3.6. Control should be carried out In aceordanea with
the Reconmendad International Coda ' of Practice for the
Operation of Badlatieo Fadlitle* used for the Trcataent of
Foods [CAC/RCP 19-1979. Rev. 1).
3. HTGIEWE or IRRAPIATEII FOODS
3.1. The food should coDply with the previalons of the.
lieecnaaended International Code of Practice - General Prlft-
clplei af Food Krglene (Ref. No. CAC/RCP 1-1969, Rev. 1,
1979) and, ^ere appropriate, via the Seconaended Inter-
national Code of H?Kia"ic Practice of the Codex Alisan-
tarius relctlve to a particular food.
3.2. Uij relevant national public haalch requirenent
affecting Kicrobloloslcal safety and nutritianal adeqoacj
appZicabla in the country In which the food ia *ol<! should
be observed .
4. 7ECHK0L0C1CAI TgQUIREMtTTS
4.1. CondislcBS for Irradlatioa
-The irradiation of food Is Justified only when it fulfils a
technological need or where it serves a food hygiene pur-
pose (3} and should not be used as • substitute for good
sanufacturing practices.
4.2. Food puellt^ and Paelcaglng Requirements
The ^oses applied shall be ccmaansurace with the techno-
logical and public health purposes to be achieved and shall
be 1b eccordance wlch good radiation proceasiag practice.
Foods to be irradiated and their packaging Batcilala shall
be of suitsble quality, acceptable hygienic eonditloo and
appropriate for this purpose and shall be handled, before
•ad after Irradiation, according to good naaufacturing
practices taking Into account &• particular rcqulreBenes
of tha technology of the process*
(3) Sec note on page *.
,y Google
5.1 RS-IRBADIAIIOll
5.x. Except for foods wish lew nelstur* conteBC
(cetrcalt, pulMs, dehydrated foods cod other such ce^
aodltles) Irredleted for the purpose of eontrollias insect
reinfeststlon, foods Irrsdlstcd In eccordsnc* with sections
2 end 4 of this staadtrd shall not be Te-irradlaCed.
5.2. Per the purpose of this standard food Is net con-
sidered as having beea rc-lrradiated when: (a) the food
. prepared from macarlals which have been irradiated at lov
dose levels e>f. about 1 kCy, is irradiated for another
technological purpose; (b) the food, containing less than 5
Z of Irradiated ingredient, is irradiated, or whan (c) the
full dote of ionizing radiation required to achiave the
desired effect is spplied to the food in nora than one
isstaltoeat as part of processing for a specific techno-
logical purpose.
5.3. The cuBulatlve overall avaraga dosa absorbed
should no: exceed 10 kCy as a reaulc of re- irradiation.
6. LABELLISC
€.1. • Inventory Control
;o: irradiated foods, whether prepsckaged or net. the
.relevant shipping docuaants shall give appropriate Infoxaa-
tion to identify the registered facility which has irrad-
iated the food, the datc(s) of traatatnt and lot Identi-
fication.
-6.2. PrepacVaged foods intended for direct eonsuaptlon
The labelling of prepackaged irradiated foods shall be in
accordance with the relevant provisions of the Codex Gen-
eral Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged' Foods (4).
6.3. Poods In bulk conMlnars
The declaration of the fact or Irradlatloo shall be aadt
clear on the nltvaat shipping docuaeats.
(4) See note on page *•
,y Google
(1) For meournittot ftnd ckIcuIaCIsii of overall svcrags
dost sbiorbcd B*» Aancx A of the RecBmcnded In t*Tn« clonal
Cod* of Pr«ctle« for the Opcrsclon of RadlccJon Facilities
n»*d for Treataent of Food* (CAC/RC? 19-1979, Rav. 1).
(2) Tfaa vbolatoaanasa of foods, irradiated to as to hava
absorbed an overall average doss of up to 10 kCy, £• not
Inpalrad. la d&ls eoncaxt tiia ten '^rtioleacsehcss" refer*
to safetr for eoasucptlen of irradiated foods froa cha
toxlcologlcal pola: cf vlev. Tfae Irradiacion of food* np
to an overall average dose of 10 kCy introduces no special
nutritional or si croblologlcal problea* (Wholescnenes s of
Irradiated Poods, Bcport of a Joint FAO/IA£A/HHO Expert
Coaalttea, Tedinical B«port Series 659. WHO, Geneva, 1961).
{3) Itie ntllicr of the irradiaclea preeaas has been
dtaonstratad for a number of food lt«B* llttsd in Annex B
to the RaeoKaendtd International Cods of Fraeciee for the
Oreratlon of Radiation Facilities used for the Treatasnt of
Poods*
f4) Under revision by the Codex Cosattea en Toed
iBbelUns.
,y Google
564
- 5 - CAC/RC? 19-1979 (R«v. 1}
KSCCWyEWDEn I^TER^^ATIOHAL COPE OF PRACTICE TOR
TK£ OFEiUTIOU OF IRRADIATiaN FACILITIES USED FOR THE
; ife£AVri£H'r oF F66b5 (■>
1. IKTOODKniOH
This code refers co th« epcrAtlon of IrxadlftCloa facllicls*
baaed on the use of either a radionuclide eeurc* (^'^Ce or
~^^'Cs] or X-r«;rs end electrons geneteced froa ■aetata*
couTcea. The Irradiation fadlic? nay be of rwo designs,
cither 'coDClnuous' or *batch' type. Control, of the food
Irradiation process la 'all types of facility Involves the
use of accepted methods of Beasurlng the absorbed radiation
dose and of the aonicoring of the physical paraactcrs of
the process. The operation of thes* facilities for the
Irradiatioa of food aust coaply with the CodtK recoa-
neodations on food hygiene.
2. iRmom:oH puwis
2>1- Paraaeters
For all t}-pas of facility the doses absorbed by th« produce
depend on the radiation parcaeter, the dwell tlae or the
transportation speed of the product, and the bulk density
«f the macerial to be irradiated. Source-product s*o»>cry,
enpccially dittaece of the product from the source and aea-
surea to Increase the efficiency of radiation utilisation,
vlll Influence the absorbed dose and the henogeoeKy of
dose disrrlbuclon.
"2.1.1. Radionuclide sources j
Sadionuclldss used for food irradiatioa ealt photons of
characteristic energies. The statcacnt of the souzc*
-isaterlal completely detemines the penetration of the emit-
~ced radiation. The source activity Is aeasured la
Secquarel' (Bq) and should be seated by the supplying organ-
isation. The actual activity of the source (as veil as any
return or replcelshment of radionuclide aatcrial) shall b«
recorded. The recorded activity should take late account -
the natural decay rate of tha source and should be
(*) Revised version of the Recommended International Code
of Practice for the Operation of Radiation Tadlltles us«d
fox the Tceataent of Foods (CAC/RCF 19-1979).
,y Google
sccoapaclcd b; ■ record at the dst« of Bessureaeac or
recelculatlon. lUdloaucllde tmdlacors will usually h«vc
a uell separated and shielded depository for the source
elesents and a trcatoent area which con be entered vben the
source Is in the safe position. There should bs a positive
Indication of the correct eperxclonal and of the correct
hSk position of the source vhlch should be interlocked
with the produce novenent sysces.
2>1.2. mdtioe sources
A bean of electrons generated by a suitable accelerator, or
after being converted to X-rays, can be used. The pene-
tration of the radiation Is governed by the energy of the
electrons. Average beam power ahall be adequately
recorded. There should be a positive indication of the
correct setting of all aachlne paranecers vhlch should be
interlocked vlth the produce Kovenent syscem. Dsually «
beam scanner or a scattering device (e.g. the converting
targe:) Is incorporated in a machine source to obtain en
evezi distribution of the radiation over the surface of the
product. The product movement, the width and Speed of the
scan end the bees pulse frequency (If applicable) should be
adjusted to ensure a uniform surface dose.
2.2. ' Dosimetry and Process Control
.7rlor Co the irradiation of any foodstuff certain dosimetry
oeasurenentB (1) should be made, which demonstrate that the
process will satisfy the regulatory requirements. Various
sechniques fjor dosimetry pertinent to radionuclide end
machine sources are evallable for measuring absorbed doae
in a quentitative manner (2). *-
-Dosimetry comaisclcnl&g measurements should be made for
each- new food, irradiation process end whenever modifica-
tions are made to source strength or type and to the eouree
product geometry*
Routine dosimetry should be made during eperctlon and .
records kept of such neaaurement. In addlclon, regular
meaauremencs of facility parameters governing the process, ,
715 See Annex A to this Coda.
(2) Detailed in the Manual of Food Irradlacloo Deslsetzy,
IA£A, Vienna. 1977, Technical faporC Series Ho. 178>
,y Google
Buch &• transportttlon cpccd, dw«Xl clnt, bootcc ncpotur*
tlnct Btchitic b««a psraaettrs, on b* ludc durinf the fad-
IIC7 operation. Th« records of these measuremcnta can b«
used es lupporclRg evidence chat the process satlsfle* cb«
resulacerr requlreasnt*.
3; COOD RADIATTON PROCZSSTWC PRACTICE
FaclliCjr design should atcenpt Co optiaalize the deia uol-
£oralt7 ratio, co ensure approprlace doae races and, wharc
necessacy, co permic ceaperacurc concrol during Irradiation
(a..g. for the treacaent of frozen food) and also eentrol of
the BCBosphere. It Is also ofcan neceaaarr to Blalalxa
aechanlcal danage Co cha produce during cramporcacion
Irradlatlen and acorage, and desirable to ensure cba aaxl-
Bua efficiency In the use of chc irradiator. Vhera cba
food to be irradiated Is subject to special standard* for
hyslcna or teaperacura concrol, the facUlc; auat perait
eoapllance with these scsndards.
4. PRODDCT Aim IKVETTTOBT COSTROL
4.1. The Inconing product should be pbrslcally avp-
araced froa che outgoing Irradiated produces.
4.2. Where appropriate, a visual colour ehanga radia-
tion indicator should be affixed co each product pack for
raadv Identification of irradiated and non- irradiated prod-
. uces.
4.3-. Secordc should be kept In cha facility record book
vhicb ahov chc nature and kind of the product baiag
created, its identifying aarks If packed or, If net, tta«
ahlpplng dacalls, Icb bulk density, the type of aoure* or
alectron machine, che dosloetry, the dosiaeeers used and
dacalls of their calibration, and the date of tr«aawnt.
.4*4. All~"products shall be handled, befora and after
IrradiacioB, according to accepted good aaaufacturlng prae*
tlce* taking Into account che particular requireaeats el
the tediBolegy of the process (3)> Suitable feellltlea fei
refrigerated aterag* aay be required.
755 See Annex B co this Code.
,y Google
1. Th« overall tvr*ita «b»orb«d do»«
It can b« sssmad for th« purpess of tb* deccraltiatlon of
-tb« (AolftioBciMBt of food trcACod with SB ovczall average
dose of 10 kl^ or leas, that all radlatloe dioalcal effaeta
la that partlealar doaa range are proportional to doa«.
Tba overall average dose, V, is defined by tha follotilng '
Integral ever t^ total volnae of tiw goods
hf
P C«. y. s) . d Cx, T- «)
H • the total maas of the treated sanpla
p - tte local density at dw polst (x» y. a)
d ~ tbe local absorbed dose at the point (k, y, a)
dV ■ dx dy dt the Infinltesloal voluae eleaent
which in real cases Is represented by the
volme fractleas.
The cverall average absorbed doae can be detcmlned dir-
ectly for hoBogeneoua products or for bulk goods of bone-
geneous bulk density by distributing an adequate nusber of
dose tteters strsteglcally and at randea throu|^eut the vol-
uae of tbe goods. FroB tbe dose dlstrlbotlon detenlBed in
this BBitDcr an average can be ealculaeed which Is the over-
■ali average absorbed dose* ^
If the shape of the dose distribution curve through the
product is well deteialned the positioos of ainloua and
BaxiBUB dose are known. Kcasureaeots of the dtscributien
of dose In titeee two positions in a serlcB of ssBplea of
the product ~caa be used to give aa estlBste el the overall .
average dose. In aoBc cases tbe Bean value of die .average
valuea of the bIbIbub (Ibia} and BaxlBnw (Cus) dose will
be a good estiBate of tbe overall avarag« doae. ^
I.e. la tbeee eases
overall average doae <v Ifasx » fcja
,y Google
2* Effecclve and llnltlag ^oae v«luea
Son* .effective creacsent e.g. the eliminetioa of hkmful
alcroorganisnis, or * particular shelfltfc extension, or s
dlslafcBCarLon requires a mlnlDua absorbed docc> For other
appllcatloas coo high an absorbed dose nay causa undaslr—
able effects or as Inpaiment of the qualtC7 of the product.
Ihe design of the faelllrr and the operational paTanetcrs
have to take Icto account alnlaua and mazlDua dose values
required by the process. In sone lov dose applications It
will be possible within the tens of section 3 on Cood Rad-
iation Processing Practice Co allow a ratio of maxlBua to
alnlauB dose of greater than 3*
Kith regards to the aaxloua dose value under acceptable
vholesoaeness considerations and because of the stetlsticel
discrlbuclon of the dose a aass fraction of product of at
least 97.5 Z should receive an absorbed dose of less then
IS hGy when the overall average dose Is 10 kGy.
3. Routine DoglneCry
Keasurecients of the dose in a reference position can be
:cade occasionally throughout the process. The 'association
between the dose in the reference position and the overell
average dose susc be known. These ■casarenents should be
used to ensure Che correct operation of the process. A
recognized and calibrated sysCen of dosimetrj should be
used.
A coaplete record of all dosloetry ■eaanraBeDts Including
calibration oust be kept.
4. Process Control
In the case of a continuous radionuellda facility It will
ba possible to make autoaatlcally a record of trans- .
portatlon speed or dwell tlae together vlth ladlcatloBS of
source and produce positioning. These ■easurcBsats can be
used to provide a continuous control of the process in sui^
pore of routine dosimetry measurcaencs.
,y Google
In a batch epvntad radlonuclldtt factllt7 autosadc
racDrdtns of aouret axpoanra tlaa can b« aada and a raeerd
of product Bovcaaat and placasaat can be k«pc to provlda «
centxol oT dta procaaa In support of rouclaa doalactry
■caaareaant a •
In a aachlne faclllcjr a cootlauoua record of b«aa pars-
■stara. e.g. '•oltaga, eurrsot, ccaa apcad, scan width,
pulse repacltlon aod a record of transport acien apead
tbrou|fa the beaa can b« ua«d Co provide a eoatlnufxis con-
erol of the preeesa la support of routine doslaetry
aeasureaeaca.
,y Google
- EXAKPLES 0? TECiWOI.OCICAL COiTDITIOWS FOR TTO
aRADIATIOH or SJ>S ISDIVIDHAJ. rOOD 1T£MS SPSCIFICAU.T
EXAillKED BY THE JOIKT FAQ/ IAEA/WHO EKPERI COM.HITTEE" .
Ihls Inf oriBAtian la Caken fron the Kcpons of tSt% Jelat
FAO/IAEAycniO Expert Cooxltteea on Food Irradiation (WHO
Tcditacal Xapert Scrla s, 60A . 1977 and 659 , 1981) and
llluacratea the ntlllcy of iA» Irradiation proeass. It
alao descrlbaa the techaologleal condltioas for achiaviBg
the purpoac of the Irradiation pxocaas aafaly and acone^
lcallr<
1. CHICTSH (Gallm doietcleua)
1,1, Purpoaei of the FreeaaB
The purposes of Irradiating chicken are:
(a) to prolong aterag* life
and/or
Cb) to reduce the numbar of certain ^thogaalc atcro-
oTganlaaa, cucb as Salaonella fron evlaceratad chlckan.
1.2 • Specific Requlremente
Averas*^ dosa^ for (a) and (b), up to 7 kCy
i. COCOA BEAMS (Theobroaa cacaoj
2.1. Turpoaea of the Froceaa
The purposes of Irradiating cocoa beans are:
(a) to control Insect infestation In atorage
(b) to reduce alcroblal load of feraeotad beans vlth or
vlihout heat treataant.
2.2* Specific Requlreaenta
2.2.1. Avar^^dosc^ for (a) up to 1 kCr
""" for (b) up to 5 ioOf
2.2.3.' Treventlon «f Belnfeatattojit ' Cocoa beaaa father
prapacicefed ox "EaaJTeT In'*i>uiT,~s'Keuld be stored as far as
possible, oader such eeadltlona aa vlll prevent rain-
featatloa and alcroblal racoacaalaatloB and spellaga.
,y Google
3. PATES (ftojnlx d«ctylltera)
3»1- Purpo«« of tht Praee«»
The purpose of lrradl«clns prep«ckaf«d drltd imfm 1» to
coBCrol Insect t&festation during stotat*.
3>2. Specific Requtrenentt
3-2.1. 'Averajl*. £eMt^' up ce 1 kCy
3.2.2. jhreveat^loi>__af Reinfsseatleiit ?npack«s«d dried
dsc«9 ■hmifS'be* store? iiD^ST~£ueI)~condltloiu ek Hill pre-
vcac relafcstatlea.
*. mWCOES Ctunslfere li»dlc*>
4.1. furpoget of_ the ?roce««
The purpofies of irradiating meagocs art:
(b) to control insect lafesteclon
(b) to iDprove keeping qu&llt; hf deltjrlnc rlpcniiig
(c) to tednce Blcroblsl loed by eeablalng Irrtdlatlea
end beat treat^tat.
4.2>- Specific Beqalte»ept«
*' a^JSi £«••£. up CO I'kCy
5. OinOKS (Allltta cepa)
3.1. Pnrpoye of the Proceii
The pnrpoae of Irradlatlos ealoas Is to Inhibit sproutias
during steraga*
5.2*. Specific BequtretBt
^^^£. ^ifi. **p '" ^'^^ ^^
6. PitfATA (Carlca papeya U)
6.1. Pritpoae of, the Procapa
The purpesa of irradiating"' papaja la to eeatrol insect
Infaatatloa and to lapreva its Itaepla^ quality by dalaylag
ripening.
,y Google
6.2. Specific Requlrenwnts
6.2.1. i^' Jl^ ■?£ i^X^i. "P -*' ^ ^^
6.2.2. Soorca of J«il*tion: Th« aourc* of rcdlftCloo
should be such ■• wllT provTd? sdequatt psaetratloa.
7 . FOTATOZS ( Salatiua tubarorua L. )
7.1. PuTpOKg af the Proc*«»
The purposs of Irraaiscing pocateas la to Inhibit apreutlns
during sceraga.
7.2. Spaclflc BaqutrtaaBt
8.1. Purpoaa of th« Proceai
Tha purpoaa of iriadiatlat pulaas 1» to control Inaact in-
fastaclon in atoraga.
8.2. Speetflc Raq-jtraaant
jtwera j£ ^oj^e^ up to 1 kCy
9. MCS (Oryza apacias)
.9.1. purpoae of tha Proeaaa
Th* puxpoaa of Irradiatlos rica la to control Inaact In-
.festatlon In storaga.
9.2. Specific Requlreaenta
■ 9.2.1. ^*?Sf±^£!^j. "P ** 1 w:y
9.2.2. J^^^C.^'L-"!. £*^'ll*£.^^**£' KiCa, vhatbar pra—
packagad "or handlad in ^ulk, should bt stored as far as .
poBslbla, oadax such conditions as vlll pravaot rsi»-
fastatien.
,y Google
10. SnCSS AHD COHDHeWTS. DEBTOHATni OHIOMS, OHIOW
POWDER
10<1. Purposes of the Proce«»
Th« purposes of irradiating spices, condlnents, dehjrdrxtcd
onle&a and oslon povder are:
(«) to control Insect Infestation
(b) to reduce microbial load
(c) Co rtdoes cba Dimbcr of psthet«nle aleroorsaataas.
10.2. Spaclfic Sequlremant
AvM:aj|£-dei«ej_ tor (a} up to 1 kCy
~ ~ ~"" for Cb) *iid (e) op to 10 kOy,
11. STRAHERfg (Fragarta species)
11.1. Purpose of the Process
The purpose o± lrraaiatir.£ iresh strawberries !• to prolong .
the strrage life b^ partUl ellalaetlon of spoUaf*
erganlnw.
11.2. Specific Re^Mlreaent
A»er age doae^ op to 3 liCjr
12. TELEOST PISH ATO FISH PR0DPCT5
12.1 • Purposes of the Process
The purposes of Irradiating tclaost fish aad fish products
(a) to control Insect Infestation of dried f Isb daring
storage and sarketlng
(b) to reduce nlcreblal load of the packaged or nn-
pedceged fish and fish products
(s) to reduce the awsber of certain pathogenic alcro-
'oTgaalaBs la packaged or aapackaged fish and fteh products.
12.2* Specific Require— nts
12*2.1^ Avsraga dOMi for (a) op to 1 kOy
" for (b) and (c> vf to 2.2 fcCy
,y Google
12 •2. 2. J^PS^^^— ^Syl^SySP^L' During Irrtdikdoa and
*tor«ge th^flsh~cad flstT produce* referred to la (b) and
(c) vhould be Itept At the teaperaturc of aeltlng le«*
13. WHE/iT AHD CROOTP WHEAT PRODUCTS (TTlElcua »p«eiM)
13.1. . PurpoBB of the Procg»«
The purpose of IrrBdiaclng wheat and fround vhcat produces
is to control Insect infaaeatloa In the stored product.
13.2. Specific Requlreiaents
13.2.1. Ay «■■.!£ i^se^ up to 1 kCy
13.2.3> ^'^°3.i^"_°f Salttfesatloa: T^css products, whe-
ther pr«pacKage3~or Kanille? Tn~Eurk, should be scored as
far as possible under such conditions as will pcovcnc reln-
festation.
,y Google
Report cf a Joint
FAO/IAEA/Vk'HO Expert Committee
Technical Report Series
659
World Health Organization. Geneva 1981
,y Google
piinijr> it-[>on-if>ilii> tut inicrnaimn^l heilih mjntd and public hcalih Thioufh ihn
counric- eichanfc tht'ir Lnoikled^c and e\perienct uilh the iim ol mjl,>nf p^>\s1Mc
hfBsiNf hvjith •■ct>irei, ihr prt%cniion and conitol of &
enMTnnmcnial cnndiiiont. ihe dcvelopmcni of healih manpixvci. ihe coordiniiion ii
detclxpmcnl of hiomedical and health -.cr^ices research, and the planning ind ii
plimeniaiiiin ol health progfammti
dinlupinj: \vMcnw o( pTimjr> hcalih care ihai reach the »hole populaiion ol Memti
(.'uniric. piomoiing the health o( moihei!- and childien. comhaiing malnuirilin
iMnlii>ninf malaria and othei communicahle dit'a>e». including tuberculMil IT
prcAidinjvafe*aiersijpphei. andl
If ..'.J d'-LTH.^dlinf health stalKTical intor
.1 WHO s «.'rk IS presenicd in the Organ
The WHO Tfchmial Rrpi.ri ir'ir\ maLei Bwilahle Ihe rindings of vanout inicina-
iinnal gri'iips cif cipcrts that ptniide WHO with Iht latcsi «ci«niiric and technical
ad'icc crn a hrnad range of mediial and pubhc health iuhfecii. Members ol such
etpcn grnupv '■crte vilhoul remuneralinn m their personal capacities rather than x\
lepiCNentalites of governmenis or othci bodies. An annual i^ubscnplion lo this senes.
compming 15 lo lOsuch lepom, cost* S«. (r. KO -.
Sl.mmarle^ of ihe« rtporti and of all other WHO publications are included
rcgularK in the WHO Chion^clt. a mimthK re>ie« of Ihe Organiiaiioni aciiviiiti.
,y Google
WINIesomeness of
bnidloied food
Report of a Joint FAO/IAEA/WHO
Expert Committee
^
World Health Organization
Technical Report Series
659
World Health Organization, Geneva 1981
,y Google
Puhticaii«nh of Ihc World Hcdlih OipnizaiHin en]0> cop)ri{hi pioivciinn in
accordance uith Ihc provisions ol Prolocol 2 of Ihc Unikcrul Copirighl CKilitMion.
For rights ol reproducnon or translation of WHO put>fiC31ioiK. in part oi In me.
application should be made lo tht Office ol Puhlications. World Health Orfanizilion.
Geneva. Sv>itferland. The World Health Oiganiiaiion welcomes such applicaiions.
The designations emplo>ed and the presentation of Ihe material in Ihis puMicalkm
do not imph Ihe expression ol an> opinion uhatsoetei on the pari ol Ihc Secreluiat
of the World Heahh Orpanizaiion concerning Ihe legal status of an> counlr>. icrnlon.
cii> or area oi ol it' auihorines. or conceininj Ihe delimit 31 ion' of its [ronliers or
boundaries.
,y Google
CONTENTS
i
1. Inlroductkin
2. Gcnenl romiikraiiani
3.1 Principles
Z.2 Reasom lor Ibc use ol food irradiaiion ,
i. Tedinicil upccli
3.2 Absorbed doM
.3.) Processint condilions for irrsdialiDn
3.4 Packaging of irradiated food
3.5 Repeated irradiation
3.6 Teclinological efficacy
3.7 ReqifiTen»enlt of quality atiuranoe and laheWng
4. Aspects of radiation chemistry
4. 1 Chemical analysis and wbolesomencss evalualian
4.3 Conclusions
h. Microbiological aspects
tt.2 Radial ion -induced genetic varialions
(1.3 Microbiological aims of food irradiaiion
7. Toiicologica! aspects
7.1 Re-evaluation of provisional acceptances and new evaluations
7.2 Constderations arising from s review of data on irradiated laboratory
animal diets and other diets ,
7.3 Toxicological evaluation of radiolytic products
H. Re-evaluation of fish, onion, and rice
H.I Teleost fish and fish products
H.2 Onions
V 1 Cocoa hcani.
t ; Dales
9.3 Mangoes
1.4 Pulse%
Ml Conclusions un the acceptability of irradiated food
111.1 Totict^gical acceptability of irradiated food
10.2 Microbiological and nutritional acceplabiliiy of irradiated food
1 2. Recommendaiinns
„GoogIe
v [) O < lu.r. t..,^ Krvioich In.iiii^ic ^nd r>.T-Timtni ..( Food M.cir
.J■^ ,,inn.A,.,.l,.j:,, I ,.|,t,„n 1.1 VlnonMn. Maii^-n. tt [. ISA
:i J I Pithl PiTvi.T. In-inuie nf Bi.vhvmiMri, ffdcii.1 Rr^c^ich Cenli
- jTi'i.T, K,';!.-uhi-. Fidir.-.! RtpuW'c "i Ctimanx
(.i.„ld DiT.ao,, Cirtirtl Miuohiok-i-Kiil 1 Hh,.;-i('rics. McMfm C.cneri
[•IL,I. E^Jtnl-u.t-h Sun1.rfid(/(or.c..fhwl
l-hid.iU'. .1i. [iiu'CI.'i nni-i.'n o( Muljc^nor.. Rio]o).-tcjI !;j(ch Re..':.ic
■L. \,,-,. : ..■ l"...iu;. ,.( JI,.-,.,..L <^.K„... T..UO ]„p^„
..- |..,;.i r!,.,d. I.--..;.-..,. 1,., f:,r..^l To„<.-lop>. \.i;..->4l \\M,
Dr A. (» OI,.fun<1s. n. ; .irimi-nl ot Fo.id T.i.hn..l,.in. Fa<^1n o1 Tithnol,.gv.
\cmiv of Ihai^n. IK.J^n, Nigeria
pK.fcm.i M J Rind, rhainnan. Drpiirlmcni of Phaimac<MoE>. l^niNetsiu ol
Di P C Tulpulc. Direclot. ^JTl.'n^I InMiiuic of \uiniion Indrin Council ol M>
ical Research. H>dciahad. Andhii Pr^idoh. India (I irf-Chmrman)
Dl K. Vas. Direcioi rcniral ^^K«^ pL-.tarth In-uiuif, Budapisi. Hungary
Ob.ifnrr.' Onuirdb} FAO.IAEM.
Dt J Faikak Prii,c^-| Diiccloi. [ncrrjlu'n.il FhciIiij lor Food Inadialii.n Tethn
Of. |IFF!T|, Waji-nififen. NtihciUnd^
Ml a' Fehtr«ct. Chaiim^n of Code* rommiTite on Food Addiliit>. Minwn
Ajiiculluic and i-i'-ticiiev The Hajue. Ncltitrland'.
Ml W. T PoIieT. Piojrd S.c«Iafi, Imemalional Fond Iriadialinn Projrct. NucI
Energi Ajrno. Oipinuaiion for F.conomic r™pfralion and Dexlormt
Pans. Franrc
1r W B Biadf.'id Pimcipal Scunlific Officer. Foi.d S^itnie DiM-.on. Alomic
F.ntifi Rr-n.h, MiniMri of Afntulluir. Fi-h.iif and Fi«id London. England
{fAO'lAEA Tim/u''"'^ Adi.^er)
,y Google
Dt A. BiynjolfsHHi. Hcid. Radiation PtMcrvnlion and Food Division. Food En-
giiwehng LBboraioiy. US Army Nitick ReM»rch and Devclopmtnl Laborarory.
NttiOt. MA. USA {FAO/IAEA Temporary Adviitr)
Dr P. Eliis. Projecl Direclor. [ntemBiional Projcci in the Field oF Food Irradiation.
Federal Rescaicli Ceniie lot Nulnlion. Karliruhc. Federal Republic ol Germany
(FAO/IAEA Tmpotaty Adviin)
Dr K. O. Hen. Food Slandatds and Food Science Service. Food Policy and Nutri-
rion Division. FAO, Rome. Italy t^,40./o(MSKrAar>')
Dr F. K. Kateniein. Rcspontible Officer for Food Safery. Unil of Environmental
Hazards and Food Protection, Division of Environmental HeaHh. WHO, Geneva.
Swiizerland
eller. Nutrition Unit. Division o[ Family Health. WHO. Geneva. Swiizer-
van Kooij, Head, Food Preservation Section. Joini FAO/IAEA Division
of lioliqie and Radiation Applications o( Atomic Energy for Food and Agri-
culture Developmeni. IAEA. Vienna. Ausiria {IAEA Joim Seertury)
A, Koulikovskii. Veierinaiy Public Health Unil, Division of CotnmunioMe
DiseaKs, WHO, Geneva. Swiiieriand
L. C Ladomery. FAO'WHO Food Siandank Progiamme. FAO. Rome, Italy
F.C. Lu, Consulting Toiicologist. Miami. FL, USA (WHO Temporary .
Dr N. T. Racoveanu. Chief, Radiaiion Medicine. Division of Noncommunict
Diseases. WHO. Geneva, Soiizeiland
Professor H. Ruushdy. Director, National Centre tor Radiaiion Reseaich and Ti
ndogy. Atomic Energy Aulhonly, Cairo, Egypt (tCf/D rmfHvwyAifviMrl
Dr K Sundaram. Director, Division of Life Sciences, IAEA. Vienna, Austria
etioiazii. Food Toiicologisl, International Programme On Chemical Safety.
Division of Environmental Health, WHO, Geneva. Switieriand {V/HO '
>r V. Volodin. Radiation Medicine. Division of Noncommunicable Disea'^s. WHO,
Geneva, Switzerland
„GoogIe
WHOLESOMENESS OF IRRADIATED
FOOD
Report of a Joiat FAO/IAEA/WHO Expert CoH^ttcc
A Joini FAO/IAEAAVHO Expen Committee on the Wholesomc-
ness of Irradiated Food met in Geneva from 27 October to 3 Novem-
her 19K0. The meeiing was opened by Di T. Fulop, Director of the
Division of Health Manpower Development, on behalf of the Direc-
tors-General of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations, ihe Intematbnal Atomic Energy Agency, and the Wortd
Health Organization. He mentioned that, as a result of recommenda-
tions from previous Joint Expert Committees and of the conclusions
of other technical or legal expen consuliaiions organized by these
agencies, the FAO/WHO Codex Alimenlarius Commission had
adopted a general standard for irradiated foods as well as a code of
practice relating to food irradiation facilities. Once the recommended
general standard is accepted by Govemmenis. foods evaluated by the
Expert Committees would be permitted to be irradiated. These would
include chickens, papaya, potatoes, strawberries, wheat and ground
wheat products, cod and redfish. onions, rice, mangoes, dates, cocoa
beans, spices, and pulses. A number of these products are of special
interest to developing countries.
1. INTRODUCTION
The world's food requirements continue to grow, but in an environ-
ment of scarce resources and of limitations on methods of food produc-
tion. In addition, the problems of food storage and processing make
it necessary to search for effective alternative methods of food preser-
vation, particularly where existing methods are costly because of the
energy requirements and may be difficult to provide in some areas.
Accordingly, ii is reasonable to consider Ihe use of ionizing radiation
for food storage and preservation as one alternative, provided that it
does not adversely affect the wholesomencss of food.
The need to consider ihe wholesomencss of food processed by
irradiation was emphasized at an iniernalional level at a meeting
sponsored by FAO. IAEA and WHO in Brussels in 1961 (/), The
studies required to ascertain the wholesomencss of irradiated food
were discussed by a Joint FAO/IAEA/WHO Expert Committee on
Irradiated Food in Rome in 1464 (.2). Taking a< a premise that the
,y Google
irradiaiion of food resulted in ihe produi:iion of radiolylic products
in the food, the Commiiiee adopted the view that these pioduas re-
presented additions lo the food. It iheiefore concluded that the es-
tablishment of the safely of irradiated foods should folio* procedures
similar to those generally used for evaluating the safely of food addi-
tives and should be pursued on a food-by-food basis.
A subsequent Joint Expert Committee, which mei in 1969 {3).
had available for consideration the results of a number of toxicologi-
cal studies carried out on three specific foods on the basis of the re-
commended procedures. It reviewed the comparative dala on several
varieties within a major ctop, and accepted exirapolalion of data from
a major variety to all varieties of that crop. The Committee recom-
mended temporary acceptance of irradiated wheat and potatoes as
wholesi'me, and specified further studies on onions. The next Joint
Expert Committee, convened in 1976 (4). reviewed a large number
of animal studies on various irradiated foods. Unconditional or pro-
visional acceptances vvere recommended (or most o( them. The Com-
miiiee also reviewed the results of radiation chemistry studies on the
major components of fimil; it noied ihai mam of the rudiolytic pro-
ducts idLnlificd were pie>.Lnt in f-H'd Ire^ilt'ii b> heat und other pro-
.t->.-- ^nd u.n-i.l.r.d ih.n ti.e lv,:l;h 1;.i ..d fj..m the .,.n.-.nlralions
foLrid vsa:, prnh;.blj lU'^li-ihle. Ii ih^-itfvrc tnniuiiiged furllior studies
on the chtmical changes in food components associated with irradia-
A large number of data on irradiated foods and food components
have since been generated. The preseni Committee v^as convened to
evaluate the wholesomeness of the irradiated foods for which data
were available. Ii was also asked to review ihe acceptability of irradi-
ated food in general, in the light of all the loxicological data and the
daia from radiation chemistry studies, and lo make suggestions for
further studies w here desirable.
2. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
2.1. Princi)ries
The principles and guidelines set out in ihe reports of the 1964,
1969. and 1976 Joint FAO/IAEAAVHO Expert Committees formed
the basis for the present Committee's approach to its consideration
of the w'holesomeness of irradiated food.
„GoogIe
2.2. Reasons for the use of food irradiation
The Commillee was aware thai irradiation of food may be used to
achieve a variety of desirable objectives including the following, wliidi
are classified according to the average radiation dose required to
achieve the objectives in question:
Low-dose appUcalions (up lo about I kGy)
Inhibition of sprouting
Insect disinfestation
Delay ot ripening
Medium-dose applications (about l-MI kGy)
Reduction ol microbial load
Reduction in the number of non-sporing pathogenic mkroor-
ganisms
Improvement in technological properties of food
High-dose applications (about 10-50 kGy)
Sterilization for commercial purposes
Elimination of viruses
The sections that follow (3-7) summarize the evidence which
enabled the Committee to assess the effect of the irradiation process
on the wholesomeness of food and to arrive at conclusions on the
acceptability of irradiated foods.
3. TECHNICAL ASPECTS
3.1 RaiBalion sources
The Committee stressed the importance of using appropriate radia-
tion sources. From the point of view of safety, the energy level of the
radiation applied to food is the most important characteristic that has
to be regulated in order to prevent the possible formation of induced
radioaaivity in the irradiated material. In practice, this is only of
trnportacKC when considering machine sources, since the most com-
monly used isotopic sources (^Co and "^Cs) emit radiation of a
maximum energy (£ 1.33 MeV) which is lower than (hat causing
induced radioactivity. The Committee examined a lecent unpublished
report (5) showing that, with machine sources, induced activity is
negligible and very shortlived below an energy level as high as 16
MeV. In this respect (he Committee reconsidered and endorsed a
,y Google
1 ihe report of a Joini FAO'lAEA Advisor)' Group on
Inlemalional Acceptance of Irradiated Foods t^)) that the radiation
permitted for food irradiation should have a maxiinum energy' level
of (a) 10 MeV for eleeirons and (b) 5 Me\' for gamma rays and
X-rays. On the basis of Ihal sialemeni and Ihe report of the Expert
Committee thai met in 1964, which mdicaied X-ra>^ as a suitable
lypw of radiation, Ihe preseni Committee decided lo recommend the
inclusion of X-ray sources in ihe list of acceplable radiation sources,
3.2 Absorbed dose
The ptesent Committee reiterated the view of ihe E>perl Commit-
tee of 1976 (4) that, as a matter of principle, ihe applied dose of ioniz-
ing radiation should not be higher or lower ihan is needed to achieve
Ihe desired effect. Finding and applying the appropriate dose level is
Ihe key lo Ihe lechnologically and economicall; proper application of
the irradiation process to food.
It was stressed that Ihe application of the correct dose would be
taken care of. wherever there was good irradiation practice. It was
recognized Ihal adiicc on the doses necessary' for Ihe treatment of
specific food items and the procedures Involved would assist those
concerned. Such ad\ice could be included in a code of technological
The CommiiR-e noted that no new method for ihe determination
of itbsorbed dc-c in the food ii-.elf, or indeed for the idtniificalion of
iii;Kli:Ltod food. h::d Iv^ome ;<>:.ir.Me -in^e 1976. Il ihcrefore upheld
the view of the Fxptii Coi.,i;.iikc il.a ;;ia jn 1^76 (■!) ;^,it iffccii^e
dose control can only be exercised in the iir;idi;iiion pbnt. Fhe opera-
lion of irradiation facilities should be subject to supervision by the
appropriate national authoriiies in order to ensure thai proper dose
control is exercised. Jn this tespeci it was noied thai assisianee in the
calibration of dose conirot is offered by Ihe IAEA through its pro-
gramme on High- and Low-Dose standardizalion and inter -compari-
son for industrial radiation processing.
As regards setting an overall average dose* for the process of
irradiation, it was considered that, contrary lo Ihe opinion expressed
ilue. an adequaic numbti of dot
II l^ ciposcd lo iht ladiaiion. T
rains etiimaiion of ihe doie dm
ni dtnsii) and if Ibe mtituictnci
„GoogIe
by the Enpen Comminee that met in 1976 (4). it is |»w»ica] (for
reasons such as the technical design of the irracltation facility} to
stipulate an average value rather than to require that no part of the
food shall receive less than a minimum, or more than a maximum,
dose. Taking into account the ratio of maximum to minimum dose
absorbed by the product (i.e.. the "dose uniformity ratio") in jnlM
and currently used commercial facilities, the overall average dose
may result in a small fraction of the food receiving a maximum ab-
sortied dose up to 50% higher.
3.3 Processing conditions for imMfiation
It is expected thai, with wider apfriication of food irradiation, pro-
cessing conditions will be designed to meet ^cific techitologica] re-
quirements. Plani design should attempt to minimize the dose uni-
formity ratio to ensure appropriate dose rates and, where necessary,
to permit temperature control during irradiation (e.g., for the treat-
ment of frozen foods) and also control of the atmosphere. It is also
necessary to minimize mechanical damage to the product during trans-
portation, irradiation, and storage, as well as to ensure the maximum
efficiency in the use of the irradiator. Where the food to be irradiated
is subject to special standards for hygiene or temperature control, the
faciliiy must permit compliance with these standards.
3.4. Psckaging of imdialed food
The packaging method and the packaging material used must be
safe aitd appropriate to the food to be irradiated. Irradiation must irat
adversely affect the functional properties of the material chosen, nor
must it render the material unsafe as determined by appropriate (est
iTKlhods of the kind applied to the unirradiated material.
3.5 Repeated irradial ion
While adhering lo the view that irradiation of food should normally
be carried out once only in each case, the Committee agreed that in
certain circumstances repealed irradtalion might be justified. This is
a departure from the statement in the report of the Expert Committee
that met in 1976 that any repetition of irradiation is to be avoided.
In deciding upon this change, the present Committee took account of
the following findings: (a) the concentration of radiolytic products is
II
,y Google
a lineai funciion of dose; {b) (here is a considerable and rapid reduc-
tion in the conceniraiion of some of these radiolytic products follow-
ing irradiation; and (c) an overall average dose based on loxicological
and other considerations could now be established (see seaitMi 10).
Consequently, a repciiiion of irradiation within this overall average
dose would not be harmful, provided that no significant impairment
of nutritional or technological properties occurred. The Commiitee
agreed thai, at the present stage of knowledge, the acceptability of
repeated irradiation should be limited lo the case of food commodities
of lo« moisture content, in which reinfesiation by insects could not
be effectively prevented under practical conditions of storage and
transport.
Two other Ijpes of repetition of the irradiation process were also
considered acceptable: (o) when the food to be irradiated is a proces-
sed form of food that has already undergone low-dose treatment (for
example, dried onion prepared from onions treated to inhibit sprout-
ing); (b) when it includes irradiated minor ingredients (for example,
meal products or dehydrated soup containing irradiated spices). In
both cases, it was considered that the additional amounts of radiolytic
compounds formed in the final products would be insignificant.
By analogy with lyndallizaiion, fractionated irradiation (i.e.. when
the full dose has to be applied in two or more instalments) should not
be considered as repeated inadiaiion.
3.6 Technological efficacy
The Committee stressed that, like other food processing techniques.
food irradiation is justified only if it serves a useful purpose. Results
of studies on the efficacy of the irradiation of the food items specifi-
cally examined by the present Commiiiee clearly showed that the
applications in question are technologically justified and effective.
'.^.7 Rt'i4ijiri.ini:rits of quality asi^urance and labelling
The lise of soi-nd r;iw ir.a'.t-'ri.ils and prop<;r handling and pmct's-
sing techniques, as well as strict maintenance of the wholesome ness
and Other desirable qualities of foods arc a necessity when irradiation
or any other form of processing is applied. Furthermore, users and
consumers are entitled to expect that the quality and safety of food is
not adversely changed either by irradiation or by other currently
accepied forms of iteaiment.
12
,y Google
The Committee understood thai irradiated foods would be subject
to regulations covering foods generally, and to any specific food
standards relating to individual foods. It was therefore not thought
necessary on scientific grounds lo envisage special requirements for
the quality, whole some ness. and labelling of irradiated foods.
4. ASPECTS OF RADIATION CHEMISTRY
I Chemicat m
Treatment of foods with electrons (of energies up to 10 MeV) or
gamma-rays and X-rays (of energies up to 5 MeV) does not produce
radioactivity in the foods so treated. The need for toxicological eval-
uation of irradiated foodstuffs stems from the fact thai the apphcation
of radiation energy results in chemical changes. The nature of the
radiation-induced compounds depends primarily on the chemical com-
position of the food. The concentration of radiation -induced com-
pounds generally increases with increasing radiation dose, but can be
modified by factors during irradiation such as temperature, presence
or absence of air. and the water content of the sample. The energy
taken up by the irradiated food is much less than that taken up by
healed foods. It is therefore not surprising that chemical changes
caused by irradiation arc quantitatively much smaller than those caus-
ed by healing. For instance, an absorbed dose of lOkGy (I Mrad)
corresponds to a temperature rise of only 2.4 "C in a food having the
heal capacity of water (4.184 ]/°C. 1 cal,h/''C). This is about 3% of
the energy needed for raising the temperaiure of water from about
20°CtoH»0X.
The Expert Committee that met in 1976 concluded that the radio-
lytic products delected in the wide range of foods and individual food
constituents that had been studied did not appear lo pose any toxico-
logical hazards in the concentrations at which they were delected.
That Committee also accepted ihal. for doses below 10 kGy (1 Mrad),
dala may be extrapolated from one member of a food class to related
members (p. 1(1 in that Committee's report (4)) and, furthermore,
that if certain studies in radiation chemistry and toxicology were
continued, a purely chemical approach to the wholesomeness evalua-
tion of irradiated food may prove to be possible (p. 11 in the re-
port (4)).
13
,y Google
4.2 Receni studies
The above proposals stimulated a great deal of ctiemica. research
on irradiated foods and on model systems, which has confirmed the
earlier assumptions and enabled more radiolytic produas to be iden-
tified and quantitatively determined. Thus, the mechanisms of radi-
ation chemical reactions in carbohydrates, lipids and proteins are now
known in greater detail.
A study of the radiolytic products in beef, pork, ham and chicken
has shown that formation of volatile hydrocarbons depends on the fal
content of the meal, regardless of origin. The electron spin resonance
spectra from the four types of meat irradiated at -40 °C were identi-
cal, indicating the production of common free radical inicrmediaies
(1. A. Taub & C, MerrJtl, unpublished observations).
Another study showed radiolytic products from various starches
(derived from maize, amyjomaize. waxy maize, wheal, manioc, pota-
toes, rice, and beans) to be qualitatively identical. Smalt quaniiiaiive
differences were reiaied to known properties of these starches, such
as the ratio of amylose to amylopcciin. These results were confiriped
by elearon spin resonance which showed that the nature of the radical
inlermediates is the same in all the irradiated starches (J. Raff) & L.
Saint-Libe, unpublished observations).
A study of radiation -induced changes in a fruit model has shown
that the extent to which these changes take place is in accord n-ith
well established kinetic laws. These changes may be calculated using
digital computer methods to solve the differential equations which
describe Ihe reaction probabilities. Chemical analysis con^rmed the
prediction that the radiolytic products present in greatest yield in the
irradiated fruit were derived from ihe major constituents of the fruit,
i.e., from sugars. Yields of products derived from minor constituents
such as protein, malic acid, phenolics. and nicotinamide were much
lower (R. A. Basson and co-wotkers, unpublished observations).
The products of radiolysis in beef (irradiated with an average dose
of 56kGy (S.fiMrad) ai -ICC ± 10°C) have been studied in detail
Over 100 volatile compounds ha\e been identified at concentrations
v:.rvinc from 1 to 700„c'ke. wiih a Inial yield of 9 me/ke. Mom oi
Ihe >.omp.uii'.!s mc kiioan lo ,>.i'iir h^o in unirri-diaicd t'-cds. The
Com mill I'e niicd that this subject had been reviewed recently (7. S)
and agreed ihai ihere were no grounds for suspecting these products
of being a hazard to the consumer.
,y Google
4.3
Since similar radiolytic reactions occur with the si
of differeni foods (protein, fat, carbohydrates, water, etc.), (
radiolytic products are fonned in roughly predictable yields w4ien
these foods are irradiated. Although only approximate predictions of
product yields are possible ai present, these are sufSciently accurate
to enable eslimales to be made of the upper limits of yields. Thus
there is now considerable addiiional evidence to suj^mrt the view that
information obtained from toxicity tests on one iiradiaied food can
be extrapolated to other foods ol simitar chemical composition, or to
other processing conditions for the same food.
5. NUTRITIONAL ASPECTS
None of the evidence published since 1976 necessitates a change
in the advice on the nutritional aspeas of irradiated food given by
the Joint Expert Committee that met in that year {4). The salient
points are as follows:
Evidence trom most studies suggests that in the low-dose range
(up to 1 kGy) used for the irradiation of food, nutrient losses are
insignificant. In the medium-dose range (l-lOkGy), losses of sotne
vitamins may occur, if air is not excluded during irradiation and stor-
age. In the high-dose range (10-50 kGy). the technology used to
avoid effects on organoleptic quality (i.e.. irradiation at temperatures
below A'eezing and in the absence of air) also partially protects nutri-
ents, so that losses may actually be lower than in the medium-dose
range if such precautions have not been taken.
Confliaing results have been reported concerning the effect of
radiation on vitamin C levels in foods. Some authors have determined
only ascorbic acid, without taking into consideration that radiation
converts some of this acid to dehydro -ascorbic acid, which is also
biologically active. In future studies, both ascorbic and dehydro -ascor-
bic acid should therefore be determined.
The extent of losses of nutrients due to the irradiation of foods
depends on many factors, such as the composition of the food, the
radiation dose, the temperature, and the presence or absence of air
during irradiation and storage.
Whether or not the loss of a nutrient in an irradiated food is of
importance depends on circumstances, such as the contribution that
15
,y Google
ihls food makes lo the loial diet. For instance, a panial loss of thi-
amine in Tish would be of concern if thai was the key source of thi-
amine to a particular population. Other relevant factors include the
nutritional status and requirements of the population for which that
food is intended. Some other areas of uncertainty (i.e., folic acid
losses) require further investigation.
In 1976 the Joint Expert Committee suggested that the reduction
of nutritional value produced by irradiation alone should be compared
with that produced by other processes and during storage, ahd by
combinations of irradiation with other processes (4). A considerable
body of evidence is now available in (his regard and the results give
no cause for particular concern.
6. MICROBIOLOGICAL ASPECTS
The microbiological safety achieved by the food irradiation process
is fully comparable with that of other currently accepted food treat-
ments. No findings have been published during the past four years
which would necessitate a reconsideration of the views expressed by
the Joint Expert Committee in 1976 (4) regarding the microbiological
implications of inadiation of food. The results of theoretical and
practical work carried out since 1 976 have not revealed any new
microbiological problems besides those already reviewed.
The results of both field and "inoculated pack" studies have
shown that the microbiological safety evaluation of a specific irradi-
ated food can be based only on studies that have specifically been
designed to reflect all the circumstances encountered in commercial
irradiation. Funhermore. il is important that the hygienic aspects of
each individual commodity should be examined separately and that
the post -irradiation storage conditions should be carefully and ade-
quately designed to control microbial growth.
6. 1 Variations in radiation resistance
The lirtiur^l riidiaiiim resisiance of microorganisms and the conse-
quences of ihcir possible survival after irradiation have been re-
investigated with regard JO some highly radiation -resist ant micro-
organisms. No new health hazards arising from these organisms have
been identified.
16
,y Google
Additional experience ha^ also been gained in the application of
polentially useful and technologically acceptable combined treatmenis.
For example, it has been demoiKirated that the use of irradiation, in
conjunciion with heal and/or sah treatment, achieves a more efficient
reduction in the number of organisms, especially the highly radiation-
re si st a ni organisms.
6.2 RadiMion-indMced genetic vtuialions
Since 1976 there have been no reports to justify the concern,
expressed before that time, about the development of irradiation-
induced mutations under good operating conditions. As already stated
in 1976 (4). the risk of inducing greater radiation resistance has only
been shown under laboratory conditions.
Changes of taxonomically lelevani characteristics, due to mutation,
have not been observed under practical conditions of food irradiatim
and thus do not pose specific problems. Methods for (he isolation and
enumeration of damaged cells from heated or dried foods may be
used for these purposes in the examination of irradiated food, but
their applicability should be tested In each case.
No evidence has been reported of enhanced irradiation -induced
pathogenicity of foodbome microorganisms, or of increased toxin
formation, or induction of antibiotic resistance in irradiated bacteria.
Accordingly, the Committee continues to hold the opinion expressed
in 1976 that irradiation of food does not increase the pathogenicity
of bacteria, yeasts and viruses.
Because of the intrinsic genetic variability of moulds, experimental
results should be interpreted with caution. Laboratory experiments,
carried out under conditions which differed greatly from those oc-
curring in practice, have shown that mycotoxin produaion by moulds
derived from irradiated spores may vary (in either direction) in com-
parison with the parent non -irradiated strain. Other laboratory ex-
periments have shown increased- mycotoxin production only if heavy
inocuta are incubated in irradiated, autoclaved moistened foods.
These observations have no relevance to food irradiation under pre-
sent conditions of practice, in which increased formation of myco-
toxins has not been found (see section 8.3).
6.3 MicTobiok^kalahuoffoodlmdiatiM
It has been demonstrated that irradiation can reduce the microbial
load of a food, (hereby increasing the useful life of a perishable food
product. The efficacy of irradiation of spices for reducing microbial
17
,y Google
load is well documented and this process may he a useful alternative
to fumigation treatment. Laboratory animal diets have been irradiated
successfully for a number of years on a large scale to render them
commercially sterile. SalmontUa occurs in livestock and is derived
from feed and other sources. Since the incidence of such Salmonella
can be reduced by irradiation of the feed, this process may afford a
means of controlling Salmonella in poultry and some egg products
and of dealing with this common public health problem in many parts
of the world. The on-shore irradiation of fish and seafood has received
much attention because, among olher reasons. Vibrio parahaemolyticus
is one of the most important foodbome disease agents in warmer
climates.
In all, properly designed irradiation processes have been shown to
be capable of achieving their intended microbiological objectives
(e.g., commercial sterilization, destruction of pathogens). Problems
of a microbiological nature that had before been thought might exist
have not materialized. Nevertheless, in the case of irradiation, as in
any other method of food processing, the gains in microbiological
quality must be safeguarded by proper care of the product after pro-
cessing.
7. TOXICOLOGICAL ASPECTS
7. 1 Re-evaluation of protisional acceptances and new evaluations
The Committee reviewed data on fish, onions and rice for rc-
cvaluation and on cocoa beans, dates, mangoes, pulses, and spices
and condiments for evaluation. These data were developed in accord-
ance with the guidelines set out in earlier reports of previous Joint
Expert Commiiiees. In making its evaluations the Committee used
ihe principles and categories of acceptance, as set out in the previous
icpoiT (4).
Tlie Cnmmiii,'c noltd that, in the i:i!».e of cocoa beans, onions, and
• pi".";, ihc pti'-.-nce of i'.V:,r,l c i^-H'M.Ttis c\crii'd lo?iii-i'lo^kMlly
siynificanl ef:Vcts «hi.n iW>c comniodiiics were fed at high Icvds in
the test diet. These effects were found, whether or not the food had
been irradiated. The information available on irradiated vegetables
was insufficient to make an evaluation, using the priiidples previously
18
,y Google
established. The data on all these commodities were also used in
considering the acceptance of irradiated food in general (see sec-
tion 10).
7.2 Conridentions arisng from a review of data on hradWcd
lalwratoi)' aniinal diels and other diets
Concern was expressed by the 1976 Joint Expert Committee about
the increasin^y common praaice of using irradiated prepared feeds
for laboratory animals, because of the possible effect on control gtottps
used in toxicological testing (4). Data requested on animal colonies
reared on irradiated diets were made available to the present Com-
mittee, as summarized below.
Studies comparing diets (sterilized by auioclavjng or irradiation at
25-44 kCy or treated to eliminate pathogens at IS kGy) have been
published by institutes in Austria. Denmark. France. Hungary, the
Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. These included multigenera-
tion studies in rats (»-/4), mice (/5-/7). and pigs (/«). In (woof the
studies (10. 13). some of the parent and F, generation animals were
kept for the whole lifespan for information on carcinogenicity. The
numbers of animals examined ranged from 5000 to 500 000.
The Committee concluded from these data that the rearing of test
animals on laboratory diets sterilized by irradiation at doses of IS to
45 kGy was unlikely to obscure any differences if a non -irradiated,
hygienically acceptable feed had been used.
The Committee also reviewed information on the results of feeding
commercial livestock on feedstuffs irradiated at doses of the order of
8 kGy to reduce organisms belonging to the Enterobacteriaccae.
especially Salmonella. Breeding and performance studies in poultry
(19). and pigs {20. 21) produced no evidence to show that feeding
of irradiated diet to commercial livestock had any adverse effects.
The Committee was aware of the practice of using totally irradiated
diets for maintaining patients on immunosuppressive therapy as the
only practical means of supplying palatable food under these condi-
tions. No published systematic investigations or accounts were avail-
able to the Committee for evaluation. The absence of reports of
advert effects suggests that this practice is not deleterious, and this
fact was taken into account in the general assessment of the toxico-
logical acceptability of irradiated food. The Committee recommended
that if possible there should be a systematic colleaion and review of
information relating to (he use of radiation -sterilized human diets.
19
,y Google
7.3 Tuxicolonkal evalualion of radiolvik producls
The Committee reviewed a study in which the principal radiolyiic
products from in-adiaicd polysaccharides were fed to rats foi 6 months
at 1700 times the concentration found after irradiation at 3 kGy. No
toxic effects were noted (22). These data also support the conclusion
set out in section 10 (See also section 4.2).
8. RE-EVALUATION OF FISH, ONION, AND RICE"
8.1 Teleosl fish and fish products
Purpose of irradiation
(a) To control insect infestation of dried fish during storage and
marketing.
(b) To reduce the microbial load of the packaged or unpackaged
fish and Rsh products.
(r) To reduce the number of certain pathogenic microorganisms
in packaged or unpackaged fish and fish products.
Average dose
For (o) up lo 1 kGy, and for (fc) and (c) up to 2.2 kGy.
Temperature requirement
During irradiation and storage the fish and fish products referred
to in (b) and (c) should be kept at the temperature of melting ice.
Microbiological aspects
Vibrio parahaentolyiicus is the agent, infectious for man, that is
mcul l>pically associated with fish and other seafoods. However, in-
" man or other warm-
-j>aiii)t,td by the loini FAO/IaEA/WHO E»pen Commiuet, Gcncvi. 37 Ociobei
lo 3 November 19S0". Copies of i his documcm are jviilible, on requen. from Division
>f Enviionmenia] l^esllh. WoiM Hctlih Oiginiulion. 1211 Geneva 27. Swilierland.
„GoogIe
blooded animals may be present in Tish because these agents were
present in the water in which the fish grew or. as sometimes happens,
because they were present in the only water that was available for
cleaning fishing equipment (including holding compartments on the
ship) ot the caich. In addition to infectious agents, toxigenic, spore-
forming bacteria such as Clostridium botulinum type E may well be
presenl in the fish as caught.
No microbiological problems are likely to arise from irradiation
for purpose (n). V. parahaemolyticus will be eliminated in the pro-
duct by the doses recommended for purposes (/>) and (c). while the
levels of other pathogens and spoilage agents will at least be reduced.
Irradiation that does not exceed 2.2 kGy (average dose) is expected
to leave enough spoilage organisms to render the food unacceptable
before cells derived from surviving C. botulinum spores can pioduce
enough toxin to constitute a hazard. However, maintenance of the
temperature of melting ice throughout the period of storage of the
product has been specified as an additional safeguard against botu-
lism: sailing, drying, or other effective nxasures would have to be
substituted if this temperature could not be maintained reliably.
Nutritional aspects
More recent studies have shown thai after irradiation at 3 kGy.
about 15%of thiamine and 25%of pyridoxine is lost, while riboflavin.
niacin and vitamin Bu remain unaffected. Higher doses confirmed
the particular sensitivity of thiamine and pyridoxine to destruction,
(he other B complex vitamins remaining practically unaffeaed. Fur-
ther studies have confirmed the stability to irradiation of the amino-
acid content, particularly of tryptophan. The protein quality of mack-
erel and hake remained unahered even by doses of the order of 5 kGy.
The lipids extracted from sailed dried irradiated mackerel showed
no evidence of adverse nutritional effects at radiation doses of up to
8 kGy, Irradiation up to a dose of 2.2 kGy does not appreciably
change the usefulness of fish as a good dietary source of protein,
■ i, and iodine.
Toxicological aspects
The Committee noted that the results of (he studies (ongoing in
1976) had now become available — i,e„ short-term, long-term, repro-
duction, and dominant lethality studies in mice; a short-term study in
21
,y Google
rai^. inve^iigaiing changes in serum alkaline phosphatase levels when
rais were fed on mixed evisceraied cod and redfish; and shon-lemi
and repioduciion studies in rats fed on other fish varieties. These did
not reveal any evidence suggesting that the feeding of irradiated fish
to these animals caused any deleterious effects.
A large number of other feeding studies in which rats and mice
were fed on other varieties of fish and fish products have also been
reported since 1976. These consisted of short-term and long-term
feeding studies and also reproduction, dominant lethality, and a num-
ber of mutagenicity studies. These new toxieological data, taken
logeiher with the results of previously evaluated studies on various
types of irradiated fish, do not indicate any adverse effects arising
from the adminisi ration of irradiated fish to test systems,
Evaluaiion
The previous provisional acceptance for cod and redfish is changed
to unconditional acceptance for fish and fish products irradiated for
the purpose of disinfestaijon. reducing the microbial load, and reduc-
ing the number of pathogenic organisms, at an average radiation
dose of up to 2.2 kGy.
Purpose of irradiation
To inhibit sproulirg durinp storage.
Average dose
Up to 0.1? kGy,
Microbiological aspects
No '.j-'ccia! microNolnjiical pioNcms of public health significance
Recent studies have confirmed the previously reported lack of
effect of irradiation, with doses of up to 0.15 kGy, on the ascorbic
acid content of cmions even after 10 months of storage. The content
„GoogIe
of reducing sugars increased in irradiated onions to a smaller extent
than in untreated onions. No changes occurred in the amino-acid
composition.
Toxkohgkal aspects
The requiremeoi of the previous Committee for a multigeneration
study in rais. at feeding levels below that causing biological changes
due lo Ihe biologically active substances that were naturally present,
has now been met. In addition, a number of short -term, reproduction,
teratogenicity, and dominant lethality studies in rats have now been
reported. None of these studies has shown any adverse effects when
irradiated onions were incorporated at a 2% level in the diet of rats
and mice. Additional corroborative evidence has been obtained from
many mutagenicity studies on onions treated (for the prevention of
sprouting) with doses of radiation of up to 0. 1 5 kCy and from similar
studies on dried onion powder treated with radiation doses of up to
ISkCy.
Evaluation
The previous provisional acceptance is changed to unconditional
acceptance of onions irradiated, for Ihe purpose of controlling sprout-
ing, at an average dose of up to (1, 1 5 kGy.
Purpose of irradiation
To control insect infestation in stored ri
Average dof^e
Up to I kGy
Rice, whether prepackaged or handled in bulk, should be stored.
IS far as oossiblc. under such conditions as will prevent re infestation.
,y Google
Microbiological aspects
If the moislure conienl of stored rice is too high, fun£i such as
Aspergillus flavus, which are sometimes loxigenic, may grow. Such
moulds cannot grow in rice thai is stored in a properly dry condition;
however, there has been concern over some results that suggested
that irradiation could enhance the toxigenic potential of the moutds.
It has been shown that toxin -producing fungi are more-susceptible than
other fungi to irradiation; that a higher water activity is required for
the growth of toxin -producing aspergilli than for that of other asper-
gilli; and that even at a high water activity, non -toxin -producing
strains of Aspergillus o\'ergrow the toxin -producing strains and sup-
press their formation of toxin. Storage of rice at a sufficiently low
level of moisture is critically important; the potential mycotoxin haz-
ard is not enhanced by inadiation under practical conditions.
Nutritional aspects
The loss of thiamine on cooking, noted in the repon of the 1976
Joint Expert Committee (4), may make any further losses due to
irradiation relevant where rice is a staple item of the diet and a major
source of thiamine. However, a recent study has shown that irradiation
at dose levels up to 0.5 kGy did not alter the content of B \-itamins
or the amino acid composition.
Toxicological aspects
The Committee noted that the results of the long-term study in
rats and the shon-term study in monkeys, requested in 1976 (4).
were now available. These showed that the ingestion of irradiated
rice caused no adverse effects on the test animals. Another multi-
generation study and a dominant lethality study in mice, as well as
c>'togeneiic investigations of the bone marrow of mice and hamsters
that had been fed irradiated rice in their diet, showed no adverrie
effeas. These additional results, taken together with the results of the
previously reviewed studies, do not indicate any adverse effects from
Ihe ingestii^n of irr;^riiiilod rice.
Evaluation
The previous provisional acceptance is changed to unconditional
acceptance of rice irradiated, for the purpose of controlltng insect
infestation, at an average dose of up lo 1 kGy.
,y Google
9. NEW EVALUATIONS'
9. 1 Cocoa beans
Purpose of irradiation
(d ) To Goniro] inseci infesimion in storage.
(h) To reduce Ihe microbial loiid of fermented beans with or
wilhuul heat treatment.
Average dose
For (u ) up to I kGy. and for (h ) up lo .s kGy.
Prevention of reinfesiaiion
Cocoa beans, whether prepackaged or handled in bulk, should be
stored, as far as possible, under conditions thai will prevent reinfesta-
lion and microbial ri
M'KTohiologkat aspects
Members of 1 1 genera of moulds, some of which are toxigenic,
have been found to be natural contaminants of the cocoa bean em-
bryo and are a major factor limiting Ihe storage life of the product.
Mould growth flourishes at moisture levels exceeding i%. Irradiation
with doses of (IS kGy eliminates moulds in young (under 2 months)
beans, whereas a dose of 5 kCy eliminaies moulds even in older
beans. Pretreatment of cocoa beans with heat (100°C for 10-15
minutes) enhances the radiosensilivily of the moulds they contain.
Nutritional aspects
Beans irradiated with doses in the range of 0.1 lo S kGy showed
no significant differences from unirradiated beans with regard lo their
content of reducing sugars. lotal amino acids, total fat. and protein.
Analysis of cocoa fat in the irradiated material showed no detectable
chemical difference from that in unirradiated material.
,y Google
Toxicologicai aspects
Tlie available results of ihe shorl-term and reproduction studies in
rats do not indicate any adverse effect due to Ihe iiradialion (realmeni
of the cocoa beans. Both irradiated and unirradiated cocoa beans
depressed growth and reduced the food Intake when incorporated ai
high levels in the diet of test animals. The observed toxic effects of
the cocoa bean diet on fetal development and sur\'ival are related to
the high theobromine content of Ihe diet. This has been confirmed by
cross- fostering experiments and spwcific studies using theobromine
alone. A number of mutagenicitj' studies have shown the absence of
any mutagenic potential in irradiated cocoa beans.
Evaluaiion
Unconditional acceptance of cocoa beans irradiated, for the pur-
pose of controlling insect infestation or of reducing Ihe microbial load,
at an average radiation dose of up to 5 kGy.
9.2 Dat«
Purpose of irradiation
To control insect infestation in stored dates.
Average dose
Up to 1 kGy.
Prevention of reinfestation
Prepackaged dried dales should be stored under conditions that will
prevent reinfesialion.
Microbiological aspects
No microbiological objectives are being pursued by irradiaiitm of
-dried dalles and no public health problems of a microbiological nniure
Nuiriiional aspects
Irradiation of dried dates with doses in the range of 0.3 to 5 kOy
had no effect on the reducing sugar content and on major carbohy-
drate components. No malonaldehyde was detected. No effect on the
„GoogIe
protein content was discovered. Irradiation of dales with doses of up
to 10 kGy induced no appreciable changes in the amino-acid compo-
Toxicological aspects
The available short-term study in rats revealed no adverse effects
that could be related to ingestion of irradiated dates. The results of
the reproduction study in rats and of many mutagenicity studies, in-
cluding a study for induction of recessive leihals in Drosophila, re-
vealed no adverse effects that oould be ascribed to the irradiation
Unconditional acceptance of dates irradiated, for the purpose of
controlling insect infestation, at an average dose of up to 1 kGy.
Purpose of irradiation
ia) Til control insect infestation.
th) To improve the keeping quality by delaying ripening.
((') To reduce the microbial load by combining irradiation and
heal ti
A verage dose
Up to I kCy.
Microbiological aspects
Microbial species isolated from mangoes do not appear to be a
threat lo human health. Gertninaiion of naturally occurring or experi-
mentally inoculated Gloeosporium fusariutn and C. singulaia is re-
duced by increasing the doses of irradiation, but complete inhibition
requires a dose of 4 kGy. which is technologically unacceptable.
Nuirilional aspects
Several studies have shown that irradiation at dose levels of up to
2 kGy caused only slight losses in ascorbic acid and carotene, com-
pared with the effects of freezing or heat treatment. The o
,y Google
rihoriavin. niacin and Ihiamine are noc affeaed. The levels of fat,
protein, sugar, and minerals icinain unaffected b> irradiation.
Toxicohgkal aspects
The available invest iga lions included short-lcnn, long-term, multi-
generation, and teratogenicity studies in rats as well as a number of
muiagenidiy studies. The results indicated that the incoiporation in
the test diets or irradiated mangoes produced no adverse effects.
Evaluation
Unconditional acceptance of mangoes irradiated for the purpose of
controlling insea infestation or for delaving ripening or reducing the
microbial load at an average radiation dose of up to 1 kGy.
Purpose of irradiation
To control insect infestation in stored pulses.
A vtrage dose
Up to 1 kGy.
Pulses, whethei prepackaged or handled in bulk, should be Mored.
as far as possible, under conditions that will prevent reinfesiation.
Microbiological aspects
No specific microbiological problems arise with puNes. whiiher
Trradiared or not.
Nutritional aspects
Pulses are a major source of dietary protein in cenain parts of the
world. Any deleterious effects of irradiation on the nutritional quality
of these crops would therefore be of importance. Conflicting results
,y Google
appear in studies of the prolein efficiency raiio (PER)' and the ef-
fects on B-aimplex viiamin^ have not lieen well established for dif-
ferent pulses. These possible effeeis should receive coosideration
wherever irradiated pulses are used as staple items of ihe diet.
Toxicological aspfcii
The available short-term studies in mice and rats, as well as a re-
production study in rats, did not indicate any adverse effects due to
irradiation of several varieties of dried beans and cowpeas. There was
a reduction in the growth rate of rats after the ingestion of high
dietary level* of both irradiated and unirradiated beans. A number
of mutagenicity studies, including a dominant lethality study in mice,
did not reveal any mutagenic pNitential in several varieiies of irradiated
dried beans.
Evaluation
Unconditional acceptance of pulses irradiated, for controlling insect
infe*tatton. at an average radiation dose of up to 1 kGy.
9.5 Spices ai
Purpose of irradiation
(u) To control insect infestation.
(/>) To reduce Ihe microbial load.
((-) To reduce the number of pathogenic microorganisrrK.
Average dose
For (0) up to 1 kGy. and for (fr) and (c) up to 10 kGy.
Microbiological aspects
Fungal contaminants, some of which are likely to be toxigenic,
occur in untreated spices al an average level of 1 0*/g. Other agents of
possible concern to human health include the food-poisoning species
' The ptoiein efficiency laiio is a roogh measure ol ihe nutritive vduc o( proTein^
ohtained hy dividing Ihe gam in body mau by ihe ma» of ihe prolein conjumed. ll is
usually meavured in yiiung ral-, (ed on a diei containing lOif protein under tlandard
„GoogIe
Bacillus cereus and CloMridium pcrfringcra; Salmonella and Shigella
have been reponed. Aerobic spore-formers and Ihcrmophilic bacteria
31 levels of up lo 10"/g must be deali with by some means other than
heat. Because ihe majorily of the flora are radiosensitive, irradiation
doses of 4-5 kGy reduce the lotal bacterial counts lo less than 10*/g,
Commercial sterility can be achieved at doses of 1 5-20 kGy, de-
pending on the initial minobial load. Tlie flora that survive irradiation
have a lower heat and salt tolerance, so that the subsequent heat
treatment of products containing the irradiated spices can be reduced.
Nutritional aspects
Irradiation of paprika at temperatures in Ihe range of 0 "C to 22 °C.
with doses of 5~50 kGy, and subsequent storage for 6 months had
practically no effect on the caroienoid content.
Radiation treatment with 5 and 15 kGy affected the relative con-
centrations of some fatty acids but not always in a dose -de pendent
manner. In some spices there is a small reduaion in the proportion of
some unsaturated fatty acids. Since spices do not contribute signifi-
cantly to the nutritional quality of food, these changes are of no
nutritional significance.
Toxicological aspects
The available reports of feeding studies in rats (including short-
term, reproduction, and tcratogeniciij studies) are less comprehensive
in Ihe case of irradiated spices and condiments than for other irradi-
ated foods. Some of the adverse effects observed in the test animals
are related to the ingestion of high dietary levels of spices, both ir-
radiated and unirradiated. No untoward effects, attributable to the
irradiation treatment, were reported in these studies. The results of
several mutagenicity tests revealed the absence of any mutagenic
potential. In evaluating the safety of this commodity, the Committee
look into consideration Ihe low levels of spices used in the human
diet.
Unconditional acceptance of spices irrudiaicd for Ihe puipose of
oonlrolling insect infestation, or of reducing ibe microbial load and
Ihe number of pathogenic microorganisms, at an average radiation
dose of up to 1 0 kGy.
30
,y Google
10. 1 Toxicotogkal acceptabtlil]' of irradiated food
The Commitiee, having reviewed new evidence, was able to for-
mulaic a rea>mmendation on the acceptability of food irradiated up
lo an overall average dose of lOkGy (see sections 2 and 3). This
development follows logically from the approaches to the assessrrwnt
of the wholesomeness of irradiated food adopted in the past by pre-
vious Joint Expen Committees, as described in the Introduciion. The
following considerations led to this development:
(if) All the toxiculogical studies carried out on a large number of
individual fixids (from almost every type of food commodity) have
pnxluced no evidence of adverse effects as a result of irradiation.
ih) Radiation chcmistrv studies have now shown that the radio-
lyiic products of major food components are identical, regardless of
the f(K)d from which they are derived. Moreover, for major food
components, most of these radiolyiic products have also been ictenti-
fied in fiKKJs subjected to other, accepted types of food processing.
Knowledge of the nature and concentration of these radiolyiic pro-
ducts indicates that there is no evidence of a toxicological hazard.
(c) Supporting evidence is provided by the absence of any adverse
effects resulting from the feeding of irradiated diets to laboratory
animals, the use of irradiated feeds in livestock production. ai>d the
practice of maintaining immunologically incompetent patients on ir-
radiated diets.
The Cornmitiee therefore concluded thai the irradiation of any
f(xid commodity up to an overall average dose of lOkGy presents no
toxicological hazard; hence, toxicological testing of foods so treated is
no longer required.
10.2 Microbiototiical and nutritional acceptability of irradiated food
The (ommillcc considered thai the irradiation of fotxl up to an
overall average dose of Ml kGy mlroduces no special nutritional or
microbiological problems. However, the Committee emphasized that
attention should be given to the significance of any changes in relation
to each particular irradiated food and lo its role in the diet.
„GoogIe
10.3 High-dose irradial ion
The Commitiee recogniied ihai higher doses of radiation were
needed for the treatmenl of cenain foods bul did nol consider ihe
ioxicolo£ica] evalualion and wholcsomeness assessment of foods so
treated because the available data are insufficient for this purpose.
Further studies in this area are therefore needed.
11. FLTL'RE RESEARCH
The Committee considered that future research is needed in the
following areas in order lo increase existing knowledge about the ef-
fects of irradiation on food and to faciiiiate future evaluations:
— The technological and economic feasibilitj' of conducting food ir-
radiation on a larger scale and with a wider variety of foods should
be established (see section 3).
— Further studies in the area of wholesomeness assessment of certain
foods irradiated al higher doses are desirable (see section 10.3).
— If possible, there should be a systematic collection and review of
information on ihe effects of using irradiation -treated human diets
(see section 7).
— ^The conflicting results published on the effect of radiation on the
biological value of proteins and B complex vitamins in pulses should
be clarified because of their importance as staple foods in many
countries (see section 9.4).
— As there is little recent information on the effect of radiation on
folic acid, future work should be carried out on representative
folate -containing foods, since the diets in some parts of the world
have a marginal folic acid content (see section 5).
— Further work on the effects of combination of irradiation with other
processes on Ihe nutritional value of foods so treated is desirable
(see section 5).
12. REC0.M>5t:NDAllONS
The technological and economic feasibility of food irradiation on
an industrial scale should be established. A wider variety of foods
should also be studied with respect to their suitability for processing
,y Google
hy irradialion. lARA ;ind FAQ should faciliiale %uch studies and col-
lect data for ihe purpose of making recommendations.
The use of high-dose radiatbn for the ireatmeni of certain foods
has been recognized as being technologically feasible. To assess Ihe
safely of this process, funher information is needed on its nutritional.
mierohiological and toxicological implications. Such infonnalion is
being generated and should be brought together hv FAO. IAEA and
WHO for future c\aluation
REFERENCES
R.V«"I ..; rhr hAO WIKVIAt.A Mreim^ nn ill,- Wh'ilrMimrnrt^ of Irn
WIIOTcthnitiil Rc[».ri Seriev So Dh, llhf. iThf leihmeal hasi^ for Itf,
•IB •rra-lialed h-d. Kcpim •>! ^< J»inT t A(> IAEA WHO bipcn Cxmniideel
WHO lii-hnital Rtyotx Scries. No 4S1. \^H\ iWholrwmtne'.t ii[ irradiat,
I Ah A WHO hipcrt (omniiilccl
WHO TechnKKl Rcpoit Sltics. No hll4. \in {Wh,^wmrnr'i .if irradiatn
RcpimolaJiHiill-AOilAEA WHO TiiKn C'oTnmmeel.
anir of Ir-adialrd fmidf. Vaatningrn. \rlhrrlandi. In Nmrmbrr-I Dtcrmhrr
;«77, Vienna. Inlcrnaiional Atomic t.nirfy, Aijenci. lt7<HSTI'PllB/^.l(l),
' F.valualiiHi nf the hrallh atpnn of ctriam campimnds found m irradiaud href.
PuMisbed h> Life Science Reteatch Olfice. Federalmn of American Socielies for
t'lpcnmenlal Biolo^v <I-ASF.B]. Rockville Pike. Bethesda. MD. USA. IV7T.
( Krahalinn iif ihe htallh aspnli of crnam compounds found in irradialed hnf.
meni II. Poisihir radiohlic compounds. PuhJi'.hed h> Life Science Reuirch Office.
Federation of American Sncielie^ for Expenmenlal Hiolo^ IFASEB). RockviUe
Pike. Belhesda. MD. I'SA. \-iTi
I. A■AVIN^■h.SHA^. M. (1 ai . MulliiLeneralion feeding Mudiev wnh an inadialed
rii>n Ffncrtdings ol a Svmpoiium held uI Iht Indian Vnrnnary Rtsearch Insnnae.
halnogar. India. Ifi-IS Drctmhti Itli Bcimhay. Food and Agriculture Cnm-
mittee. Depanment iif Alnmic F.nerp. I"*?*!, pp. .'25-.',';.
I. ARAHNiiAhsiMN, M. n *i . M ull igcnciat lon feeding «udi«i with an iitadialed
whok diet. In Food prrsmaiifm by inediauan. Vol. II. Prncfedingi of en Inter-
naiional Svmpimum. Wagemngen. Ntihrrlands. 2l-2i Novtmher 1977. Vienna.
Internalmnal Atomic Fnerg> Ageno. I<»T« (STl'PUB'471lk pp. 41-51.
,y Google
. Barna. J. [H'AolfHMBfnrtj mi of oradiaitd compleir din m nulugrntisatm tx-
perimtm. I. Cromih anil body tarifh dau\ (puMished in Hun; iriin. lummat) in
EnglnJi). Budii[>e«. Ccniiil Fond Rescirch Imiiiuic. 197.1.
12. IWADa S. ET AL. Sieriliiiikin of Isbnraior) sniinit dicit by ftnim* ridiiinn.
In; Food irrtdiaiion in lite Takauiiti Radiatian Chem'atry Fneanh Eaablishmtm.
No. I (April 1064-March 19731 PuMithtd by Ihc iapin AlnmK Enrify Rc-
leirch Imiiiuie (Rcjion No. lAERI-MMSE). 1973. pp. 34-47.
I. EuikSEN, W. H. ET AL. CumptrisoB of the biologkal rffeeis in rtu of rtiiaiion-
mriSitd »nd tuioclavf-tirriliitd food. Roskildc (Dtnmaik). D>nith Aiiimic
Entity Conntistion, 1973 (Rbo Repoil No. 260).
I. Van LootES. M. J. ET al. Invaligaion of the wholeiomenea of auloclaitd or
irradiaui feed in raa. Ulrechl. NltioniJ Inililule of Public Heihh. 197E (un-
published report No. 3.^/78 Al^ To».),
>. NAdid^akv. I. Experience of radialion iieainienl of libouior\ ind farm ani-
mal f«d» in Hungary. In: Deroniaminaiion of animal feed by irradiation. Proce-
edings of an Adi-isory Croup Meeting. Sofia. 17-21 October 1977. Vienna. Imei-
niiional Atomic Enero' Agenc>'. 1979 (STI/PL'B/.SaS). pp. 33-41.
>. ADAUikER. D. Praclical eiperiencei wih irradiation of laboralor) animalt' leed.
In; Deraiiaminauo'i <4 animal feed b) irradiation. Fmctedingi of an Adiisorv
Croup Meeting. Sofia. 17-21 Oaober 1977. Vienna. Inleinaiionit Aiomic Enrift
A(enr>. IMSISTI't-UB'SOBlpp. 113-119-
'. Saist-LEBE, L. Radicidaiion ei radappeniuiia
ai<niques hti^iDt'niquet. Hecutil de miditii
(1979).
18. SiCKEE- E. Inadialed diei in routine me ui omi-enlionalliation of ;noiobioiic pi|-
leii. \n: Decaniaminuien ef animal feed by trradiaiion. Proierdingi of an Adiiiory
Croup Mteiing. Sofia, 17-21 Ooobtr 1977. Vienna, Iniemationa) Atomie Enerp
Ajeney. 1979 (STI/PUB/508), pp. 133-13!.
19. COK, C ETAL. Poultry feed radicidaiion. 1. Lonf- and >hon-ienn pmitlr> feeding
trial* wilbirradialedpOuKryteedt.FoiifiryKiencr. S3: 619-624(1974).
20. Griese. W. ET At.. Pasteuriution of fiih meal by irradiation, 2. Siudiei on the
harmleshneu of feedinf fattening pip iriili tab meal patteurtied bv inadiaiion
(in German). Zenlralblaa fiir Veurinarmtdizin. Fteihe B. 23l 769-.7'Iil (1976).
U-SSE. U. ET AL. Pa.'^ieuriuiiDii of fiih meal by Irradiation. 3. The question o(
increawd raie> of TPiicnis aflei feeding radial ion-pasteuriied HUi meal lo pigs (in
Cetiranj.Zemtalhlanfuf feiermdtmeili:in. ReiluB,iis 500-509(1979).
22. TBfHAiT. R & S*iM-l.Eȣ- L. Difftienles voies d'approehe pour I'ftaluaiion
ioiiico1ogii)ue de lamidon iiradi*. In: Food prtttn-aiion by inadiaiion. Vol. II.
Proceedingi of an Inirinaiional Symposium. Wageningm. .\ttherland3. 21-2f .Vo-
iin^er 1977. Vienna. Iniernaiional Aiomic Energy A(enc>. 1978 (^Tl'PL'B-
470). pp. 31-40.
,y Google
WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION
TECHNICAL REPORT SERIES
'I WkolnoaKiKii of imdtiicd lood
n.'f a]omlFAO [AEAWHOEip
Report (il a WHO Eipcn Commitiec (106 pag«l . .
I ( l"~-i Til mil iiliBiMi iiiiftiiii l» tliHH
Rep.ui.ifi WHOScieniificGrouplJUpagrvl . .
' |1477|WHOEipcnCmBmHeaL«fn«T
Fitih repon (4K pa^«> - - - -
' irVTiCrtMtulottlKeTilaifk
Rcp.<>i o1 J WHO Study Group
Report o(* WHO EipcM Co
< MV77} WHOEip«nC«B»
Report ot a WHO Enpen CommiiTee (J9 pagcil
' ll<'77)P«MicMcraMHiial<Md
Report olihe l47h]oini MMiini of ihe FAD Panel of Etpertton Pnti-
L'lde Residues and the En>ironinent and ihe WHO Eipen Croup on
Pei.K:tdeRe..du"ll-Spageil
: iIU-'^iChiMmeniallwaHhudpDxbawctal
Repiin uf B WHO Enpfrt Committee (71 pai
I ,:<m, WHO F.ipcrt C<
PrcpnrBiiiHs
T»enlv-iuth report (5) p»|«sj
' (I^''7|TlM*clecttMal*M«MWdnt>
ReponofVHO Eipert Commiitee (Jftpagei,
Report of a WHO Scientific Group (14; pigeil
' 1 1 ''TM J EvaliuHin al eerlaia loa< iMMtm
Twenty-lirst repcin of Ihe Jmni FAO'WHO Etpert Committee on Food
Additives (J 1 ptget) - .
( ( l-J^m WHO Eipeil Ciwwiww on Bet Piptrtinn
T-entv.fir%t report (4^ pages)
t 1 1 W7H I Sitf ot< conlwctp>iB« ««d Ihe rMi nt nupliili
fiep<iri ..1 a WHO Scieniidc Group (54 pagesl ,
WHO Eipen Comtnniee on Vector Bnlogy and
eniidcGioupiWpai
Tin promMion and 4t*tlapiiwM ol
AM (I47K) Epidemiolour. oMaty. and pXTCMlM
Report ol a WHO Scieniidc Gioup (60 pagetl
,y Google
623 (l9Tt!)lildi
6W (lyJSlSur
cniific Cfoup (65 p*|ci)
If iht p>ttciiIionH>< tenlrel si iMilth hi
tntrrab>n>ri*
Rtjwn o( a WHO mcelin| (•
61S (lV7S)Fi>»nrin|i>fl»irih>«*ica
Rcpon ol I WHO Siudy Gioup ' P*f<>)
626 (1970) WHO EipcrtCnanUtmMiBMatlrriSlMdtrdluliM
Twfnijf-ninih fepon (ItTpitn)
Ml (1V7HI Rtwarck la baiuB npndiactiaK llin(llMala( •! moi
Rcpon of ■ WHO Study Craup (16 |Mgn)
62K (I97ll> Antriathjpcrltnuoii
Rcpon ot a WHO Eipcii Cooiraillcc (SI pa(ct)
629 (197)1) nt ippncitiDii •! Id'
ncurolotka' ■
WHO S'ud) Gioup (83 p*|«)
63U <I971I) Immunsdcnticno
Rcpon of I WHO Scitni.tic Croup (U p>|a]
631 (I97II) Et^MUoa «r rcrliln Itiod idiiiti'n ami CMl*»lMMi
Twcnty-iecond rcpon ol Ihc ioinl FAO/WHO Expcn Cotnmlncc on
Food Additiwi (39 pi(n)
632 {1979)C>ric<rilcl»ba
Rcpon of ■ WHO/IARC Eapcn Commincc (<7 pagn)
633 (1979) TnlBtac ml «iHa«M al aaiUM} fiii»—il In nwil lw*H>
iMini Ib df >ctop<n( nHiDlriM
Report o( * WHO E.pcn Commntte (3S pifi)
634 (l979)Sif*«ici>lp«lind«
Thud report el ihc WHO Ei^rt CommittM Ol Vccuw Bkiogt and
Cooliol I** pifn)
635 (1979jn« Afrtnnlr}piBO»n><»a
Report of a Jo.ni W HO Enpen Cammiilce ind FAO Expcn ComuRa-
>n t9t p.
636 (1979) ContrDlGatlhcwokinicridMk
Ripon of Ihc WHO Eipcn Comnuiltt on Smokul| CoBiral (87 pa(«l 9.—
637 (1979) ParaiilkuwDowt
Rcpon of * WHO Eipen Comntittcc wjih ihc psnicipition of FAO
. [ 1 07 p>Eei) 10-
6:iH (1979) WHO Eiprrt Coi.i^Hltc on Biolcfici I Slrnri^iitlutlioa
n(199p.v") •
10.-.
639 (1979) Hu<
Rcpon of 1 WHO Socnuric Group (SOpagei)
640 <l97<l>WHOE>pcnCanmrt1*<MMal>rla
Scveniccnih ,epon (7 p,ga)
641 (l9T9)'nM>*l«llonofe»rMUI4ru|>
Second report of Ihc WHO Eipen CommiTlee (44 p*(et) . .
641 (19liO) V^y reiplralT *MM
Report of a WHO Scieniiric Group (63 patet)
,y Google
„GoogIe
tidirif l«L>ri Rmi CWEii
KETHERLANDS
Indii WHO Hrfunil Onkr
Mtra Bunt Apncy. U Shihrmh-E-Qui^-E-Auin. PO In TN. Luou
TV WHO Pnvnnini CeOrdinui. PO >D> WW. IDKIU
Njili Uiuv>nii> Ciill<«t BmUtop lUaiMiwt nl Sinn I
Thi WHO Pn^runme CSocdiiBliir. JU Moi^mein Ko^
IPic} Lid. 31-^ TtnfHn SKi^nf Ctmft- 3/F. l9T«ntliHl
SRI LANKA HT IndH. WHO R^UM Of
SWTDCN 1lliilmli|il rr Till III fill
J I TV HlytTf uu
5-><i>4wi AmM A..iM.\Y lillOs!A>iru':wD.
or WHO n*SK>nal Offia< kind at
MorlottwWorWH
4 17, SwitMritnd On)*'* hOTi ecuitrin whi
It to Ih* Gvnsv* MMrao. bin muM b* paid for i
application to tho WHO programmo
aaKh Orsanltnlan. DiMribulion and S
If* Hiaa aganU havi nol tal baan ac
In pounA ataiVng. US doAn,at 8m
Prioaa an wAtaa to tftango Ml
„GoogIe
m
EVALLATION OF THE HEALTH ASPECTS OF
CERTAIN COMPOUNDS FOUND
IN IRRADIATED BEEF
Augux 1977
,y Google
REPOBT DOCUIlEHTiTIOH PAGE
HiDHiTuvcno..
f ""'""""
'FYn"i°k^"ri:VTJl.VyS1l
lo30Septemberl97?
Beet, Herman I. CMnn, Chairman
UAMD-n-7a-C-605S
Life Sdirneei Research Ottice. Federation of
9«S0 Rocki-Ule Pike, Beihesda, Md, 20014
August 1977
" '"-"jir"
UNCLASSIFIED
alcohols alkynea food Irradiation
aldehydes aroinatlc hydrocarbons halogen -c onts intng cocnpoundB
slkanes heef hydrocarbons
cal procedure for Ihe preservation of beef; meal treated in tMs manner !■ now
underRoing a mulMgeneralion wholeBomeneaa study in mice, rals and doga.
UNCLASSIFIED
58-005 0-86-30
,y Google
UNCLASSIFIED
id^nlifled In Ihe Irradiated beef , These Ineluda both fiHurated and un»tH-
ot their alcohol, aldehyde and ketone derivatives; three aromatic hydroMr-
bect with a total concentration ot 8.4 mg per kg.
persed in our atmosphere and water supplies. The concent ration* ot the
such eicist, while many others are below the amounts found in common foods
or absorbed from other sources.
of their possible carcinogenicity. The ivBilible evidence demonstntes that
the tetnchloroelhylene found In Irradlaled beef samples wss not > ndlolytlc
product, hut wis a contaminant probably arising from Ita use ■■ ■ cleaniDg
■ gent In the pntcesslng plant. Among difCerenl asDiples of beef, il wai either
.lot present, or Us concent rationl were no greater thu those In oooiTndlsted
beef. Irradiation with doses up to 120 lillograys (12.0 megsrsda) did not
Increase ita concenlnllon in the beef. The daily inUke from Ur, water.
and other foods iB many llmea greater than (hal from Irrsdlated beef.
Benzene is suspected of being a possible human leukemogen, although many
eitperts dispute Ihis claim. The small contribution from Irradlaled beef is
not believed to constitute a slgnUlcantly added risk.
quantities of beef irradiated in Ihe deecrtbed manner.
Block
ketones
IB-
loiriclty
UNCLASSIFIED^
,y Google
EVALUATION OF THE HEALTH ASPECTS OF CERTAIN COMPOUNDS
FOUND IN 1REMIXATED BEEF
U.S. ARMY MEDICAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT COMMAND
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20314
Contract Number DAMD-17-76-C-6055
LIFE SCIENCES RESEARCH OFFICE
FEDERATION OF AMERICAN SOCIETIES
FOR EXPERIMENTAL BIOLOGY
eeSO Rockvllle Ptke
Bethesda, Maryland 20014
,y Google
SUMMARY
For more than 20 years, the U.S. Army has been Investigating
ionizing radiation as a possible preservation process {or ToodB. It tiMm
developed a practical procedure for the preservation of beet; meat treated
in this manner is now jndergoing a mult i gene rat Ion wholeaomenesB study in
mice, rats and dogs. As an adjunct to this feeding study, the Army requested
a thorough review of the possible toxicity to man of the volatile compounds
detected in the irradiated beef. This is a report of that review.
Sixty-
five compounds
have
been identified ii
n the irradiated beef. A
number
■ of noi
nvolatile c
ompounds '
would I
lot be
dece
cted by the analytical
method
s employed and
.naider
■ed in
study. Those identified
include both i
latu rated :
ated a1
iphat
2 to 17 carbon atoms: c
ertain
1 ofth
eir alcohol.
aldehyde and ketone derivatives:
three a
ic hydroca
rbons
sulfui
itrogen- and chlorine-
contain
ing CO
m pounds.
The
CO nee
ntratio
,na of
the 1
from 1
to 700
Bg per kg
beef'
withe
I total
conce
ion of 9. 4 mg per kg.
The Select Committee reviewed the usual distribution of each comfMund
in foods, water supplies and the atmosphere as well ae its absorption, meta-
bolic formation and disposition, acute and chronic toxicity and potential
hazards for man. Many of these compounds are found in human fooda; aome
are approved addilives or flavoring agents; and some are widely dispersed
in our atmosphere and water supplies. The concentrations of the compounds
while many others are below the amounts found in common foods or absorbed
Tetrachloroethylene and benzene were scrutinized with especial
care because of their possible carcinogenicity. The available evidence
demonstrates that the tetrachloroethylene found in irradiated beef samples
was not a radiolytlc product, but was a contaminant probably arising from
its use as a cleaning agent in the processing plant. Among different samples
of beef, it waa either absent, or its concentrations were no greater than
those in nonlrradiated beef. Irradiation with doses up to 120 kilograyB°
(12.0 megarads) did not increase its concentration in the beef. The daily
intake from air, water and other foods is many times grester than that from
In this report, absorbed dose ia generally expreaaed in terms of the gray
(Gy), as recommended by the International Organization for Standardization.
Values expressed in terms of the rad are given in parenthesis. One rad ■
10' Cy. In a few instances where graphs are reproduced from reports
published l>efore this convention waB adopted, the older terminology is retained.
„GoogIe
irradiated beef. Benzene is Euspected of being a possible human leukemogeili
although many experts diepute this claim. The small contribution to the
general environmental burden of benzene from irradiated beet is not believed
to constitute a signiftcant added risk.
On the basis of the available data, the Committee concluded that
there were no grounds to suspect that the radlolytic compounds evaluated
in this report would constitute any hazard to health to persMis consuming
reasonable quantities of beef Irradiated in the described manner.
„GoogIe
FCfiEWORD
■the Life ScienccB Research Office (LSRO), Federation of American
SocietieB for Experimental Biology {FASEBI provides scientific BBMSSmenta
of topics in the biomedical Hciencea. Reports are baaed upon compretieosive
literature reviews and the opinions of knowledgeable inveBtigators who are
actively engaged in work in specific areas of biology and medicine.
This technical report was prepared for the U.S. Army Medical
Research and Development Command by the LSRO. FA5EB. in accordance
with provisions of contract number DAMD-17-76-C-6055. The report was
written by the members of an ad hoc Select Committee on Health Aspects
of Irradiated Beef with the assistance of the LSRO staff.
The Select Committee whose members are listed in Section IX accepts
the responsibility for the contents of the report. Other scientists provided
useful information to the Select Committee; however, the listing of their
names does not imply that they endorse the study conclusions. Special
appreciation is expressed to Dr. Walter M. Urbain, Special Consultant and
to Dr. C. Jelleff Carr. Director Emeritus, LSRO, for their valuable
assistance to the Select Committee in the preparation of this report.
The report was approved by the Select Committee, the Director of
LSRO. and subsequently by the LSRO Advisory Committee composed of
representatives of each consliluent society of FASEB, under authority
delegated by the Executive Committee of the Federation Board. Upon
completion of these review procedures the report was approved and transmitted
■arch and Development Command by the
h D. Fisher, Ph.D.
,y Google
61}
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Summary v
Foreword .•-... vil
Introduction . 1
Materials and Methods 5
A. Beef Preparation 5
B. Analytical 7
Results 13
VaHables Affectins Radlolytic Products 19
A. Pat Content 19
B. Temperature 24
C. Dose 24
Evaluation of Health EffectB 29
A. Possible Ori^n 30
B. Acceptable Daily Intake (ADD 31
C. Dtslrlbulion in Food and Beverages 31
D. Authorization by Food and Drug Administration 32
E. Toxicity of Metabolic Products 32
F. Data From Conventional Toxicity Studies 34
G. Carcinogenicity, Mutagenicity and Teratogenicity . . . 34
„GoogIe
AnalysiB or Individual Chemical Classes 37
A. Hydrocarbons 37
1. Alkanes 37
2. Alkenes and Alkynes 47
3. Aromatic Hydrocarbons 56
B. Oxygen -Containing Compounds 68
1. Alcohols es
2. Aldehydes 73
3. Ketones 80
C. Sulfur -Containing Compounds 88
D. Nitrogen- Containing Compounds 95
E. Halogen -Containing Compounds .............. 99
General Discussion 107
Conclusion 109
Scientific Consultants ' Ill
Distribution List US
,y Google
I. [NTRODUCTION
Although it has long been known that food can be subjected to
irradiation and thus preserved for extended periods (1, 2, 5), only irradiated
wheat and potatoes are currently accorded official sanction in the United
SUtes.
Radiation is defined by current BUtutes (21 CFR 179. 21. formerly
121. 3001) aa a food additive (3). rather than as a process, so that rigorous
standards of safe^ must be met before food processed by irradiation can be
approved for human consumption by the Food and Drug Admmistration. [n
1954, the Surgeon General's Office undertook an extensive program to meet
these standards of wholesomeness* for irradiated foods, concentrating on
products of special military significance, especially beet, chicken, pork
After many years of Investigation, the Army was ready for a
definitive study and called upon governmental and academic scientists to
devise an experimental protocol that would determine unequivocally the
safety or hazard of foods subjected to Sterilizing doses of irradiation.
Beef was chosen as the first food to be tested because of its wide consump-
tion in the military and its popularity with the American public. Extensive
discussions were held with officials of the FDA and with governmental
o( the National Academy of Sciences - National Research Council to provide
overall guidance. As a result, a comprehensive long-term experiment was
designed that would evaluate the effect of feeding irradiated beef to several
generations of mice, rata and dogs. The animals were to be subjected
to a comprehensive toxicological study to uncover any acute or chronic
harmful effects of this diet. On March I, 1971, a contract was awarded to
the Industrial Bio- Test L,aborati>ries. Inc. of Northbrook. Illinois to conduct
the prescribed study. At the suggestion of the Food and Drug Administration,
the Army expanded its Aholesomeness assay to include mutagenic and
teratogenic effects as well as analysis of heavy metal^ pesticide residues
and organic volatile compounds.
The Lite Sciences Research Office (LSRO) of the Federation ot
American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB) was asked to
undertake an evaluation of the possible toxicity of certain compounds
found in irradiated beef. To accomplish this task, the staff of LSRO
compiled relevant data on the distribution, metabolism and toxicology of
„GoogIe
those compounds found in irradiated beef by the Army . LSRO also convened
a conimiltee of investigators in biochemistry, pharmacology, oncology,
toxicology, food technology and nutrition to review the available data and
to assess the health aspects of the compounds separately and in tolo. The
committee members are listed in Section IX (p. Ul).
This report contains the findings and conclusions of this committee.
„GoogIe
REFERENCES CUED"
Otrice or the Federal RegiBter, General Services Admin let rat ion.
I9TT. Food and Drug Administration; rules and regulations. Food
[or human consumption; reorganization and republication. Fed.
Regist. 42:14301-14669.
Spaander, J. 1966. Aspects o( legislation cm irradiated roods in
European countries. Pages B9T-91S in_ Food irradiation. Proceedings
of a symposium. Karlsruhe, 6-10 June 1966i jointly organtiaed by
the IAEA and FAO. International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna,
. Patent 101, 302.
cililate referral, the references cited appear al the end of each sec
than in a single bibliography for the entire repnri. Consequently,
references appear in more than one section.
„GoogIe
II. MATERIALS AND METHODS
The chemical analyses which form the basis oT this repoM wmn
performed on samples randomly selected from large batches of beaf
prepared for the animal-wholesomenesa studies.
BEEF PREPARATION
Fresh beef was processed by a major packing house in a plant
inspected by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). meeting all USDA
requirements. Cleanup was done during the off-shift (us'ialty at nlghtt. After
cleanup, all equipment was sprayed with food-grade white oil and not rinsed
before use. iri accordance with the USDA approved procedures.
Catllc. approximately 500 kg live weight, were placed in restraining
-acks. stunned and hung on rails by their hind legs. They were slaughtered
and dressed conventionally. The carcass was split to yield approximately
162 kg per side. These sides were washed with hot- and cold-water sprays
and placed for 24 lo 72 hours in a chilling room at -3° to 2°C. Refrigeration
was of the ammonia type. The water in the plant was chlorinated to meet
USDA requirements. The sides of beef were cut into front and hind quarters
and transferred to the cutting table by a stainteas steel conveyor. The
quarters were then deboned, partially defatted and cut into large primal cuts.
and 4, the meat from all portions of the
o 700-gram pieces. For production lots
5. 6 and 7, the meat was moved by the conveyor to a slicing machine wMch
cut the meat Into 2. 5-cm strtpa. The hand -cut or machine -sliced meat was
transferred to a meat tub holding 325 kg. When held in these tubs, the meat
was always covered with a sheet of plastic. A sample of this meat, removed
for chemical analysis, represents the "raw" beef shown in Table 1. The
remainder was placed in a E50-kg capacity ribbon vacuum mixing machine
and sodium chloride, sodium tripoly phosphate (TPPI and ice were added to
the meal in the followmg proportions.
Ueboned me
at 100. 000
0.750
TPF
0.37S
Ice
3. DUO
„GoogIe
The mixer was evacuated to 200 to 2S0 torr and the meat w»a mixed
with these additives lor at least 20 minutes at 3' to 5°C. The niixture was
then transferred to meat tuba, kept In coolers at -3" lo 2°C for not more Ihan
24 hours, and then loaded into a dumping machine which vaa a large,
funnel-like piece of equipment used to fill the stuffing machine located on
the lower floor. The stuffing machine filled casings to fit two types of
containers: no. 6l cBsings tor cane and no. 11 casings tor pouches. On the
clipping table the filled caaings were cut into rolls containing IS kg for cans
and 11. 5 kg for pouches.
Thirty of these rolls were placed on each of seven trees (210 rolls)
and treated in stainless steel cookhouses which were normally employed
as smokehouses. To produce the enzyme- inactivated beef, they were
washed before uae and smoke was not added. The total elapaed time from
the mixer to cookhouse was at least 1, but not more than 24 hours. In the
cookhouse, which was heated with hot steam coils, the meet was exposed to
gradually increasing air temperatures:
First 3 hours SO'toOCC
Next 6 hours 60° to 71* C
As required 7 1* to S0° C
To obtain the desired center temperature of 6B° to 75° C and a
yield of not more than B5 percent deboned weight of the raw beef, steam was
mjected to control the humidity of the cookhouse.
Next, the rolls were spray washed with cold water and the trees were
transferred from the cookhouse to a cooler (-12° to 1°C> until the center tem-
perature cooled to -3° to 5°C. Tills temperature must be reached within
12 hours. The rolls were kept in the cooler at -3° lo -2°C for up to 8
days if their casings had not been removed. They were then placed in meat
tubs and moved to the processing room Tor canning or pouching at IO''c.
Four separate products were processed; froien controls, thermally processed
gamma irradiated and electron irradiated.
Frozen Controls
The rolls were placed on the cutting table, the casings were
amoved and the meat was cut into 1. 3-k( pieces which were packed into
pray-washed 404 x 700 cans, evacuated lo SOO lorr t>*fore sealing, packed
I cans to a case and frozen at -40° to -1S°C. The frozen samples were
nipped !□ the feeding site and kept frozen at -20° to -18°C until used.
„GoogIe
Thermally Sterilized
The rolls were placed on the cutting table, their caBingB
were removed, the meat was cut into 0. 37-kg pieces, and packed into
404 X 202 cans. The cans were evacuated lo 600 torr, sealed, placed In retort
baskets and thermally processed to Fn -5. 8 (a minimum of 5. 8 minuties at
12l''C). The cans were labeled and packed 48 cans to the case. Samplea were
t as.B-c s - - -
en shipped
Gamma Irradiated
The rolls were placed on the cutting table, their casings
were removed and the meat was cut into 1. S-kg seclioni. These were packed
into 404 X 700 cans which were then evacuated to 600 torr and sealed.
Dosimetry labels were placed on the lids, the cans were packed 12 to the case,
frozen at -40° to -18°C and shipped to the Nalick Laboratories in the frozen
state. Here they were stored at -45 to -35°C until irradiated with cobalt
a*, an average dose of 56.0 kGy (5.6 megaradsl at -30° t 10°C, inspected and
shipped to the feeding site where they were stored at 21° to 25''C until used.
Electron Irradiated
The rolls were taken from the cages, placed on the cutting
table and the casings were removed. The meat was cut into 225-g slices
and transferred to meat trays. The slices were packed into flexible pouches
and vacuum sealed. Dosimeters were placed on the pouches, which were
kept overnighl at r to 2° C m meat tubs. The pouches were then inspected
for vacuum intefirity and packed eight pourhes per box and eight boxes per
case. They were frozen at -40° to -I8''C and shipped to Natick. where they
were stored at -45° to -25°C until irradiated with an average dose of 56 kGy
(5. 6 megaradsl at -30''tlO°Cby a 10 MeV electron linear accelerator. After
inspection, the irradiated pouches were shipped to the feeding site, where
they were sloied at 2rto 35" C until used.
All analyses were performed
Food Sciences Laboratory, U.S. Ar
Command under the diiectioii of Dr.
,y Google
travB. The meal was covered and heated for IS ni
e oven at 204°C. The covers were then removed i
led for 2 minutes more. The healed meat and juic
Collection of ToUl Condensate
The coarsely ground sample waa weighed to the nearest
gram and pUced in a cylindrical vacuum bottle of approximately one liter
capacity. 'Hie flask containing the sample was attached to a vacuum mani-
fold, cooled to -196= C in a liquid nitrogen bath and the system evacuated
to an absolute pressure of 1 X lO'^ torr. The volatile compounda were
vacuum distilled at 30'' ± S'C, This temperature was mainWined by
periodically changing the water bath around the flask. The votalileB wore
collected in a smaller cylindrical sample bottle (approximately 400 ml)
immersed in a liquid nitrogen bath. Both the vacuum manifold and the
sample bottle had previously been evacuated to an absolute pressure of leas
than 1 X lo" torr. This distillation continued for 6 hours. The condensed
distillate in the smaller cylindrical sample bottle represents the total
!ic Total Condensate
The total condensate (mostly water) was allowed to thaw,
hen immersed in a bath of dry ice and ethanol; in some
ne replaced the ethanol. When the sample had reached the
dry ice mixture (about -BO°C), the compounds volatile at
e were distilled from the total condensate and collected in
e bottle immersed in a liquid nitrogen bath. This thawing .
stillation cycle was repeated five timeS; or until the absolute
id the CO, fraction, the distillate collected at -196° C
,y Google
and Concentration of the Water Fraction
ethanol bath. The distilJ
nitrogen bath. The reaii
fraction.
Analysis of the Volatile Fractions
The fractions were subjected to gas chromatography.
A support -coated open tubular (SCOT) column coated with 1, 2, 3 tris
(3-cyanoelhojijr) propane (TRIS). precooled to -100°C and programmed from
-50" to 125° C at 5" C per minute was used for the CO, fraction. For the
water fraction, a SCOT column coated with carbowax 20M Wft8 used, pre-
cooled to -50" C and programmed from 0°C to 200° C at 5° C per minute.
The effluents flowed directly ii
spectromeler which allowed It
tative data.
Chloroform Extraction of Beef Residue After Collection of
Total Condensate
Thia procedure has been used thus far only on four beef
iples. All four of these samples were from a single
procurement.
The beef residue was placed in a Waring blender with 250 ml of
chloroform at room temperature. The mixture was blended for 5 minules,
filtered and the residue washed with 30 ml of chloroform. The combined
filtrate and wash were placed in a separatory funnel, the residual water was
removed and the chloroform was evaporated at 25°C in a rotary evaporator.
The flask containing the residue was fitted with a cold finger and attached
to a high- vacuum system.
The cold finficr was filled
1 with liquid nitrogen and the flask was
aled. The p esidue was hea
istillate was collected on th
ted to 80"^ C with continual magnetic stirring,
e cold fmger for two hours and then washed
test tube with several sma
11 aliquols of chloroform totaling 10-12 ml.
■duced to approximately 20^1 by evaporation
■ a gentle alrcam of nitrager
1 gas. The volume o( the remainder was
ured and a O.Zjii aliquot was
! analyied by combined programmed temper-
gas chromatography- mass
spectrometry. The gas chromatographic
„GoogIe
column w«fl a SCOT column coated with carbowax 20M, precooled to 0°C
and programmed from 0°C to 200°C at S'c per minute with a helium carrier
gas (low rate of 5 ml per minute.
The sensitivity ot the analytical technique is approximately 1 ppb
or I ag ol compound detectable per kg ot beef.
REFERENCES CITED
Merritl. C. . Jr. 1972, Qualitative and quantlutlve aspect
trace volatile components in irradiated foods and food subs'
Radiat. Res. Rev. 3;353-368.
1966. Irradiatii
Merritl, C, Jr., D. H, Robertson, J. P. Cavagnaro, R.A. Grahkm
andT. L. Nichols. 19T4. A combined gaa chromatography-maaa
spectrometry -computer system tor the analysts of volatile r
components of foods. J. Agrlc. Pood Che m. 22:750-755.
,y Google
[[1. RESULTS
TabI
1 is a lis
of the 65 ,om
pounds and their
detei:le
d in
he cooked
and uncooked s
amples of frozen
and irr
adia^
Bd beef. The variously ii
rocessed beef sar
analyse
tient. Th
B use of identi
ally trei
betwee
n the
chem.cal
and the feeding
studies.
ange fron
tely 700
are by
percen
of a
1 the subs
total w
ight
fall into
his category.
The sati
Their c
ontent exceeds
the com
byl.5
andof ih
aromatic hyd
ocarbona by mor
ich these
wholesome-
phatics (alkanes)
il of alkenes and alkyne
han in the uncooked beef
Thiis
ethane was
found in the
ted specimens, but none
could b
the cooked
e. an even more volatile
hyd roc
arbon, was a
bsent from
ooked beef fractions, al
hough I
heoretically
significant
lave been produced by i
radlsti
n.
The type of radiation, gamma rays by "Cobalt or high energy
electrons by the linear accelerator, does not signlftcantly affect the
kind or amount of compounds produced. Consequently, no distinction
has been made between these sources in considering the radiolytic
The presence of a compound in irradiated beef does not necessarily
imply that it is a radiolytic procfuct. With few exceptions, all of the
compounds in Table 1 have been found in other foods, often in concentrations
exceeding those in irradiated beef. As is evident from this table, many
but not all of the compounds mcrease significantly after irradiation. Most
of the aliphatic hydrocarbons are substantially more abundant in irradiated
than in nonirradiated beef. However, the quantities of xylene and
letrachloroelhylene are essentially the same whether or not the beef was
irradiated, while ucetonitrile. carbonyl sulfide, di.nethyl disulfide,
methanol and methyl heptane ate present in greater amounts m the
thermally sterilized than in the irradiated samples.
The kind and concentration of the lesulling products will be
itent of the beef and by irradiation
aluie and oxygen tension (see Section IV).
,y Google
' ssssii'
i i % I % i i 0.0-.
? : ; s a 3 = stss
ipiiiiiiii I ! n i i 1 iiiiiiiii ! I i) 1 i li
! I I
.„ilu
ilHi
„GoogIe
.^ si & & » % I ^
.^ ^% % % % '■
Hill
= • = ==- SS CI !S S J ! 5 S ! S --'
i i I I 11
III l# ! I !{
i}|!i|j||! 1 j J j ! I f
! s
!! i
m I
„GoogIe
la this connection, it must be emphasized that the Commiltee considered
only those compounds detected in the irradiated beef prepared and analysed
according to the procedures described in the experimental section (pages 10
to Is). This approach permitted correlation of the Committee's study with
the wholesomeness experiments in which the animals were Fed beef composed
and irradiated in the manner described. It is recognized that variations in
the beef composition, the irradiation technique or the analytical procedures
may modify these results.
During the course of this study, analytical techniques have been
improved to allow determination of certain higher molecular weight
compounds not originally reported in the quantitative analysis. This effort
to improve the analytical methodology iB a continuing project at the Nalick
laboratories. A recently developed, unpublished procedure utilizing
dichloromethane appears lo extract certain hydrocarbons more thoroughly
than previous techniques. Very preliminary results on a single sample
reveal significantly higher levels of pentadecane and heptadecene in the beef
than those shown in this report. 11 is hoped that continued analytical refine-
ments will ultimately ensure a comprehensive and accurate inventory of
compounds in irradiated beef. However, at present, the Committee must
confine its consideration to the best available data, rt-cognizing both their
qualitative and quantitative limitations.
REFERENCES CITED
Burks, R.E., Jr.. E. B. Baker, P. Clark, J. Essllnger and
J.C. Lacey, Jr. I9S9. Detection of amines produced On irradiation
of beef. J, Agric. Food Chem. 7:778-782.
Wick. E.L., E. Murray, J. Mizutanl and M. Koshlka. 1967.
Irradiation flavor and the volatile components of beef. Adv. Chem,
Ser. 65:12-25.
,y Google
IV, VARIABLES AFFECTING RADIOLYTIC PRODUCTS
radiation produces volatile compounds in meal because the energy
from the electron or gamma source is sufficient to ionize any
,om with which it inferacta. [nteralomic bonds are broken, thus fragmenting
le molecules and forming free radicals ivhioh can reoombine to form new
impounds. In moBI biological sysleins, water is the most abundant
impound and the moat obvious target of high energy irradiation. Transitory
jdiolytic products of water are formed; these react with other molecules
r fragments to produce a number of compounds (2). Irradiation may also
ireclly cleave bonds in organic molecules to produce free radicals. The
fcombmalion of these molecular fragments creates ne* compounds.
heoretically. irradiation of a complex matrix such as beet should produce
umerous radiolytic products. In the frozen state, the number of new
roducts would be reduced somewhat since the rigid structure would impede
le reaction of molecular fragments. Many of these products would be
id would have remamed undetected by the analytical methods
ployed in this study. These compounds were not considered.
FAT CONTENT
Investigators have shown the major source of volatile compounds
formed upon irradiation of beef to be the lipid fraction (5, B. 9. 10). Protein
is of secondary importance in their production and carbohydrates, vitamms.
sterols and pigments make an even lesser contribution (HI. This la graphi-
cally demonstrated by Figures ! and 2. At a constant temperature and
radiation dose, production of Cg to C, alkanes was three to five times greater
when high fat (35 percent) beef was irradiated than when lean specimens
(5 percent) were similarly exposed. The concentration of acelaldehyde
A major effort has beei
1 made to elucidal
radiolysis, Merritt and Nauai
- and their i esper
the leading investigators in thi
s area. Merritt
to point out that the chief prodi
lets of fat ii'radial
unsaturated aliphatic hydrocar
bnns. Subsequent
„GoogIe
Figure 1 . Effect of tat content on component concentration*. Irradiation
temperature; -So'C, dose 45 kGy «.5 megarads). From 7
10 20 90 4C
% FAT
Figure 2. Effect of fat content on component concent ration* , Irradiation
lemperalure: SO'C, dose 4S kGy (i. S megarads). From 7
wilb permlsEion.
„GoogIe
uasive evidence of the n
r triglyceride are the most vulnerable to
to the csrbonyl is ruptured, alkanes and
cceasful in defininji
ve confirmed the production
en various fats are irradiated
Bchanism involved, -They
arbonyl group of the fatty
cleavage (3). If the carbon
ilkenes are produced with
---)
\
B than the original a
-1^
I ' I
,y Google
lound in animal fat IC18:1}, yields significant quantities
leptadecadiens atter irradiation. Similarly, irradiatio
ted fatty acid (linoleic 1 to a triene and a triply i
Although preferential scission occurs ne
any of the carbon bonds in the falty acid chain c
to produce the entire gamut of hydrocarbons trt
Stearic acid, tor example, could yield all hydrt
to heptadecane:
carbonyl grouping
iroken by irradiation
to its C^,j homologue.
CH,CH,CK, CH,CH,CK,CH,CH, CH, CKg Cl^ClbCEfa ObCUj Clb CH,COOH
Oxygen compound*, with the exception of carbon dioxide, sre usually
found in modesi amounts in irradiated beef. Carbon dioxide is produced
in large amounts from the decarboxylation of the fatty acids. Small amounts
of aldehydes and ketones are generated after irradiation of beef, even in
the absence of oxygen. They, too, are believed to originate from the fat .
presumably from cl'-avages within the glyceryl moeity adjacent to the ester
linkage (9). Ethanol is delected in irradiated beet but not after irradiation
of dry triglycerides or fatly acid eaters (6).
The small amounts of sulfur and aromatic compounds resulting
from radiolysis probably come from direct bond cleavage of amino acid
moeities. Merritt £l aL (B) could find no evidence for the rupture of
peptide bonds. The main products from protein irradiation originated
from the cleavage of side chains or end groups. The aromatic amino
acids or those with sulfur groups seem the most radloaensitive. Benzene
„GoogIe
^/
^
/
«■ woo
/
/
/
/
/
4 1000
y
A
i
x '
ULTUB J>
y COWPOUMOtX^^
^^/*
^^^
2 9M
^-^ ^^
i^ii,^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^22!!!
^5S»^
-to -40
+20 tU
TEMPERATURE, C
Figure 3, Effect oT temperature on component concentration. Irradiation
dole 4S. kGy (4. 5 megarads). From 9 with permtssion.
-80 -70 -SO -SO -« -30 -M -10 0
TEMPERATURE-'C
Fif^re 4. Effect of lemppralure on caniponert concent rations.
45. kCy (4,5 megaracjs). Krom T wilh permission.
,y Google
and toluene are thought to be produced from phenyl alanine while ■uindea,
disuirides and mercaptana are derived from methionine or cystine (E). The
contribution from the steroids is minor and is generally ignored. Cholcaterol
irradiated at 60 kGy (6 megarrds) gives rise to a aeries of normal alksnes
C, to Ci as well as to isoalkanes (C^ to C,) (Bl. These products are most
likely derived from the cleavage of the alkyl side chain of choleaterol. A
recent publication provides an excellent discussion of the radlolytic products
from various food components (4).
B. TEMPERATURE ^
The quantities oi radiolytic products in becT are related directly
to the irradiation temperature. Figure 3 shows the amounts of volatile-.
compounds produced in beef related to the temperature at which the meat
was irradiated [9). All products increased with incrsases in temperature
between -IBS" and *60''C. The effect of temperature on tlie production
o[ representative individual compounds is shown In Figure 4. The charac-
teristic irradiation odor and flavor also became more apparent as the
irradiation temperature increased. An expert flavor panel had no difficulty
in identifying the beef irradiated at the higher temperatures (9>.
Although volallles are minimal at extremely low temperatures,
economic considerations dictate that the irradiation be accomplished at
a somewhat higher temperature. The most favorable compromise among
quality, cost and irradiation requirements is about -30° t 10°C (121.
Merritl and colleagues (101 demonstrated a linear relationship
tween irradiation dose and the production of radiolytic compounds.
fact, this relationship is an excellent test to determine whether a given
mpound was of radiolytic or nonradiolytic origin. Figure 5 ahoWa that
e concentration of volatlles increases steadily as the irradiation dose
le absolute and relative quantities Shown in ihe figures in this section
er significantly from the data in Table 1 because of differences in the
content and irradiation doses of the respective samples. For example,
data for Figure 5 shows lesser amounts of hydrocarbons in comparison
1 the sulfur and carbonyl compounds and reflects the low fat content
o 3 percent) of this sample. The values in Table 1 are from beef with a
content of 10 to 12 percent.
- 24 -
,y Google
IRRADIATION DOSE.Mrods <-c>"°>
Figure S. Effect o( Irndtatlon doa« on component concentration. IrradUtion
temperature -40'C. From 9 with pennteBton,
DOSE
Effect of irradiation dose on component concent,
at -ao'C. From 7 with permlBSlon.
(To convert to kGy, multiply megaradH by 10)
-26 -
,y Google
Figure 6 shows (he concentrations of several hydrocarbons and of
acetaldehyde found in beef as a function erf radiation dose. A linear relation-
ship between dose and radioiylic product exists over the entire dose range
studied, with the concentrations ot hydrocarbons rising more rapidly than
those of the sidehyde.
At an irradiation temperature of about -40° C the minimum radiation
dose for microbiological safe^ of beef is 41 kGy (4. 1 megarads) {1). This
represents the ra'diation dose required to reduce by a factor of lo". the
nuifber of viable spores of the moat radiation- resistant strains e* Qoatrldium
botulinum. In the present study the dose averaged 56 kGy (5. 6 megarads).
„GoogIe
REFERENCES CITED
AnelliB, A,, D. B. Rowley and E. W. Roan. Jr. [1977] Micro-
biolo)[icBl safety af radappertized beef. Proceedings. 1st International
Cor^resa on Engineering and Food. 9-13 August 1976. Boston. Mass.
Dubravcic, M. F. and W.W.
mode of cleavage in simple t
45:636-660.
Nawar. 196B Radiolyaia of lipids:
riglycerides. J, Am. Oil Chem. Soc
Elias, P. S. and A,S. Cohen.
1977. Irradiation chemiatry of m«j
Amsterdam.
Merntt. C- , Jr. 1972. Qua
trace volatile components m
Radiat. Res Reviews 3:353
ilitative and quantitative aspects at
irradiated foods and food substances.
-368-
Merritt. C. . Jr. . P. Angeii
1966. Irradiation damage in
ni. M. L. B««inetand D.J, McAdoo.
lipids. Adv. Chem. Ser. S6:225-24i
Merritt, C. Jr., P. Angelini and R. A. Graham. '1977] The
effect of radiation parameters on the formation of radiolysis products
in meat and meal substances. J. Agric. Food Chem. (In press)
Merritt. C. Jr.. P. Angelini and D. J. McAdoo. 1966. Volatile
compounds induced by irradiation in basic food substances. Adv.
Chem. Ser. 65:26-34.
MerrLtl, C. Jr.. P, Angelini. F. Wierbicki andG. W. Shults.
1975. Chemical changes associated with flavor in irradiated meat.
J. Agric. Food Chem. 23:1037-1041,
Merritt, C. , Jr., J. T. Walsh. M. L, Baiinet, R.F. Kramer and
S.K. Bresnick. 1965. Ilydiocartions in irradiated beef and methyl
oleate. J. Am. Oil Chem, .Soc. 43:57-58.
Nawar. W.W, 1972. The effects of ionizing radiation on lipids.
Pages 89-lia m_R.T. Ilolman ed, PiogiesH in the chemistry
of fats and olhei- lipids, vol. 13. Peryamon Press, N'ew York. N.Y.
Wierbicki, E, . A. Brynjolfsson. H. C. Johnson and D. B. Rowley.
Il973^ Preservation of meats by ionizing radiation; an update.
Rapporteur's papers: paper no, 14. Presenttd at the 21st European
meeting of Meat Research Workers, 31 August - 5 September, 197S.
Berne, Switzerland.
„GoogIe
V. EVALUATION OF HEALTH EFFECTS
Designating "safe" levels for the intake or specific substanceE Is a
perennial, elusive and perhaps impossible goal. The goal Is sn ever-moving
target, constantly changing aa new data become available and analytical
techniquGB become more aensttive. Absolute safety can never be assured.
Nevertheless, assessments of aafety are often required even when data are
not always adequate. In the face of this dilemma, prudence suggests that
realistic guidelines be developed to gpuge the potential benefit and hazard
of products lo which the public is exposed. Various expert commissions
have attempted to fortnulale such guidelines for food additives, but no
universally acceptable criteria have yet been established.
Perhaps the moat widely employed concept Is that ot margin of
safety, based on some fraction of the largest dose of a substance that can
be given to animals or man without causing adverse effects. Often 1
percent of the minimum toxic dose, determined experimentally in animals
is considered safe for man (2). This is an arbitrary measure, with the
obvious dangers of extrapolating from animal to human exposures and of
variations in individual sensitivity.
A more arbitrary guideline Is the attempt by snne bodies to specify
an absolute quantity of a substance as "toxicologic ally inconsequential"
or "toxicologic ally Insignificant. " Values of I to 10 parts per irlltlDn
in foodstuffs have been suggested by various groups. The Committee
believes this "guideline" to t>e potentially dangerous for many substances,
such as aflatoxln, plutonium, botulinum toxin, dloxin and others, are
serious health hazards at even lower levels. . .
Other criteria of safety suggested by one or another working group
include the long-term consumption of a substance without apparent hazard;
its presence In foods: a r.hemical similarity with compounds of known low
toxicity; its rapid metabolism to Innocuous products or its occurrence as a
natural conslUuenl or metabolite of the human body. A frequently used
criterion is thai of "added burden. " This Is Interpreted as the potential
increment of hazard added to that received from other sources.
The Committee utilized all of these factors and other relevant
evidence in its conaideration of each compound in irradiated beef. No
substance was arbitrarily dismissed because of "insignificant" or "incon-
sequential" concentrations. The Committee found, as have other groups
concerned with similar questions, that the available expeiimental and
„GoogIe
s types of evtdeiK
stdered by the Committee ii
POSSIBLE OBIGEN
\s stated in the introduction, the irradiation of food has beea defined
lalules of the Food and Drug Administration aa an "additive" rather
a "process" (21 CFR 179.21. formerly 121. 3001) (4). Consequently,
talions governing food additives must be applied to irradiated foods.
1 most of the compounds under discussion increased eigniflcantly
-adiplion, several showed no change from the frozen control levels
ioi be considered as radiolytic products. Other compounds increased
ler thermal sterilization than after irradiation. The concentrations
compounds in frozen control, thermally sterilized and irradiated
' compared in Table 2.
T.ble 2. Conce
irjtton o
"'""" '""f"
unds tn irr
*"" ""
«ntr™<n..,d b,
et.
Cooded
llnc°al<ed
Themnlly
Thertn»lly
lrr.dl.l.d
IrricHatcd
«/lui
M/fcR
«/W
M/kK
Ac«ronttflle
C.rbonyl wlfide
Dimclhjrl Bulttde
0
S
Hciene
31
34
Hydrogen auinde
40
2-MMhy1bulini
11
! -Methyl hepUiM
21
J)
chloroethylene
'?
^
I
"
'J
f
„GoogIe
ACCEPTABLE DAILY INTAKE (ADD
A working parly commissioned by tlie Council of Europe and
representing 17 countries reviewed the tOKicology of a numbei- of widely
used flavoring substances and recommended acceptable levels of daily intake
in those cases where il deemed the data to be adequate <!). Five of these
compounds are among those detected in the irradiated beef. These compounds
and their concentrations in beef are listed in Table 3, together with the
Council of Europe's ADls. For each of Iheae compounds. Che ADI is at least
several hundred times the amount one would normally ingest from beef.
lailj tnlal
•eight ■ 70 ki; dntly
DISTRIBUTION iN FOOD AND BEVEHAGES
Virtually all the compounds detected in the irradiated beef are
present in other foods. Some of the simpler compounds such as methanol,
ethanol. butanone. etc. have been identified in almost every food or
widely consumed foods are considerably greater than in the irradiated beef.
Thus, cheese is richer in ketones, eggs in sulfur compounds, citrus fruits
in aldehydes and apples in certain hydrocarbons. Although the presenc? of
a compound in a common food does not assuie its safety, it does provide
a standard against which the amount in beef can be compared. In addition,
these data help gnuge the "added burden" of substances that might be
very small fraction of the amount of a compound entei iii|; the body from
Other sources. Perhaps the most striking example of the lelatiielj tiivial
Sft'OOS 0-86-21
,y Google
addition from beef to the overall intake is that of ethanol. A peraon
consuming one kg of irradiated beef daily throughout a long lifetime
would ingest only a small fraction of the ethanol contained in a single glais
AUTHORIZATION BY FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
The Food and Drug Admtntstraiion authorizes the use of certain
solvents and additives in the preparation and preservation of various
foods (3). In some cases, the compound Is authorized by name; In other
cases oils or solvents with well-defined boiling or melting point rangea
are indicated. Thus, dodecanal is speclftcally authorized as a synthetic
flavoring subslsnce, methanol as an extractant and butane as an axysen
displacer. Implied rather than specific permission is given to certain
alkanes found in irradiated beef since they fall within the authorized
boiling range of "odorless, light, petroleum hydrocarbons, " which Is a
permitted additive for a number of foods. Similarly, other aliphatic
hydrocarbons in irradiated beef are presenl In mineral oil which ii
authorized for certain food usages. Table 4 summarizes the various
regulations In which the compounds In irradiated beef are either explicitly
or implicitly authorized in food. It should be noted that more than
one-third of the compounds Identified in irradiated beef are lound in thla
list. Including all of the strsight-chsin alkanes except pentane.
TOXICITY OF METABOLIC PRODUCTS
Any evaluation of the toxicity of a compound must include
conatderatfon of Its metabolic transformations in the body. Unfortunately,
these pathways are not always linown so that the fate of some compounds
must be inferred by analogy to related substances whose metaballsm
has been studied more thoroughly. Available evidence luggests that
alkanes and the oxygenated compounds are converted through well -recognized
metabolic pathways. The metabolism of alkenes, alkynes and certain
other compounds is not as well known. The fete of Itie individual
compounds will t>e considered in detail in the following section* of this
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
DATA FROM CONVENTIONAL TOXICITY STUDIES
Although constdersble toxicity data are available Tor many of th*
compounds under c one i deration, they are of limited utility In th« present
study since routine teats generally utilize single exposures to large doaea.
This method enables Investigators to establish the LDsg, LDuo> mlntmitm
lethal dose or least toxic dose of a compound. It provides a crude Index
which allows one 'to distinguish among highly, moderately, and mildly toxic
compounds. It has little relevance, however, to the problem of irradiated
beef where the concern is with possible toxicity induced by repeated tnKeation
of small doses of a compound. Long-term studies at modest dose levels wotild
be more Informative, but are rarely reported.
Another difficulty in utilizing the available toxicity data to evaluate
the compounds In irradiated beef lies in the different routes of administra-
tion. A number of the volatile compounds In irradiated beef are widely
used as Industrial Bolvents and have been carefully studied for their safety
In the factory or shop. However, the primary objective of these
toxlcological studies has been to eEtabllsh permissible levels In the
workroom atmosphere; and it is difficult to utilize such data in eatimatlng
the toxicity of a compound when Ingested In food. In the first place,
data on the retention of inhaled compounds are scarce and not alvsys
reliable. Then, too, a compound abaorbed through the lungs may undergo
a fate different from that it would experience after enteral absorption.
This would be particularly true for compounda that are metaboUted In the
lung or the liver, so that one cannot interchange with any assurance
toxicity data between the two routes.
CARCINOGENICITY, MUTAGENICITY AND TERATOGENICITY
In recent years, some compounds long believed to be innocuous,
have been implicated in tumor production, genetic alteration or birth
abnormalities. The traditional toxlcologtcal indices must therefore be
increased to include these parameters. Regulations concerning the
possible carcinogenicity of food additives are particularly stringent.
Consequently, tetrachloroethylene (perchloroethylene), benzene and
certain alkenes have been scrutinized with especial care despite their
low concentrations in Irradiated beef. Tetrachloroethylene in very high
doses has recently been shown to oause liver tumors in mice (3>. Bensene
is a suspected leukemogen in man, while the alkenes In their metabolism
produce epoxides, some of which may be carcinogenic. These will be
discussed In the appropriate sections.
„GoogIe
REFERENCES CITED
o! Europe. 1973. Natural navouring subsUncea. their
, and added artiricial flavouring subatancea. Maisonneuve,
Straabourg, France,
Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives. 1914.
Toxicological evaluation o( certain food additives with a review or
general pHnciples and of speciTtcatlona. ITOi Report. WHO Tech.
Rep. Ser. No, 539.
National Cancer Institute. 1971, Bioaseay of leirachloroelhylene
For possible carcinogenicity. (Draft: released to Data Evaluation
and Risk Assessment Subgroups. Clearinghouae on Environmental
Carcinogens, March 16, 1977) Bethesda. Md,
orrice of the Federal Register, General Services Administration.
1977. Food and Drug Administration: rulea and regulations. Food
for human consumption: reorganization and republication. Fed,
Regist, 42:14301-14669.
,y Google
VI. ANALYSIS OF INDIVIDUAL CHEMICAL CLASSES
HYDROCARBONS
Occurrence
if alkanes in cooked and uncooked satnplea
1 controls and of heat- and radlatton -sterilized beef are liated In
The table also includes data on the occurrence of these compounds
later and food. These data strongly suggest that the straight- chain
Lcta at radiolysis for the irradiated beef contains each it
jrodi
frozen controls. On the other hand, the brani
2-niethyl propane, are found
sterilized meal.
It ia also apparent from Table b that many of these alkanes are
common In our environment. They are found In air and water and In many
foods, including untreated or cooked meats, vegetables, fruits, nuts, and
dairy products. Quantitative data are not generally available, but
single studies on apples (24) and eggs (20,21) reported concentrations
of the higher alkanes comparable with or greater than those found in
irradiated beef. There la also evidence that some of these compounds
are produced during cooking and that their content in beef is higher
after microwave than after conventional cooking (22).
The lower members of the ilkane series are gaseous or highly
volatile at normal temperatures. They are used widely In industry as fuels,
lubricants, solvents and fped-stocks for numerous chemical processes. It
is not surprising, therefore, that many of these members have been delected
al significant levels in metropolitan atmospheres and water supplies.
pulmonary system and their retemior
of the body and tissues. Rats expose
vapor (170 gltn' ) for 2 to 10 hours, r
tlon of approximately 4 mg per g of 1
es are absorbed through the
closely parallels the fat content
to high concentrations of hexane
n concentrations
„GoogIe
I il.-
nil
i-.f 1. 1 fj
i! ,i H I . ;l
ll ^f =i I jl it
5' H 1; If !; !l
;| i: ii il Ti i?
ill II I ill! ill ij Sil i! If il
.-' -■= 1 ■ is:
H V i I >|!
til iiii; Jllll
"'ill
i
i ii iJ =1. J i
II
i ', '■
8 1 I
„GoogIe
?'i
IH
1
s|.
11
1
ii^
=i
} ;■ J !
S f
i i i
il
1
-11 s '
ill 1 1
ill
s
J
i
* :
_
r
i 1
"
1
1
1
5s 5 =
i
t
^s
= o
- '
u
" :
S 5
i
G
1
■ ■■ -~
J
!■
2 ■"
= 3
i
1
1
1 f, I
1. f.
si
I !!ll
!i !l
.»,
„GoogIe
in most tissues occurred in 4 to 5 hours. When exposure was terminated,
the volatile hydrocarbons were rapidly eliminated unchanged in the expired
air. This fact was demonstrated with human volunteers who breathed
approximately 100 ppm ot hexane tor 4 hours. When returned to ambient
air, the subjects rapidly eliminated (he hexane and within 4 hours, its
concentration in the expired air was lees than 0.5 ppm (26).
Llllle is known about the absorption at alkanes from the gastrointes-
tinal tract, but the degree of absorption seems to depend on the molecular
dimensions of the hydrocarbon. Mineral oil, consistinE largely of paraffins
with 15 to 30 or more carbon alome, is poorly absorbed (17). On ingestion.
only 2 percent is absorbed and this presumably represents the shorter
members ot the series. Slight, but significant, absorption of hexadecane
(3, 7) and heptadecane (31) occurred in rata fed small amounts daily.
Longer chain paraffins were more poorly absorbed.
Because of their relative physiological and pharmacological
Inactivity, the metabolism ot alkanes has not been studied as thoroughly
as more reactive substances. Consequently, the precise metabolic
disposition of many ot these compounds is not Itnown and can only be
surmised from investigations on some ot Iheir homologues.
metabolism of alkanes and isoalkanes is catalyzed by microsomal mixed-
function oxidases (MFO) (12). This ubiquitous, highly inducible enzyme
system (5,11) found in most tissues of all higher organisms, is generally
associated with the metabolism of steroids and a wide variety of xenobiotic
including drugs and pesticides. Both low and high molecular weight
alkanes such as butane (10). pentane (10), heptane (G), decane (15), and
hexadecane (19; are oxidized to the corresponding alcohol by this system.
Although ail of the alltanes found in irradiated beet have not been studied,
it seems reasonable to conclude that they are metabolized in the same
way as their higher or lower homologues. .
Among the simpler alkanes, the preferred site of attack is the
he secondary bond the next most Susceptible and
(10). Thus, n-butane on oxidation yields 2-bulBnol with only traces ot the
primary alcohol. Similarly. 2-pentanol is the msjor product of n-penlane
hydroxylation. Significant amounts ot 3-pentanol but only barely detectable
amounts of the primary alcohol (1-pentanol) are also produced.
However, the higher alkar
„GoogIe
The ultimate fate ot the alcohols produced from the atk»ne tiydroxy-
latlon is not known with certainty. Some are probably conjugated and
excreted in the urine «s glucuronldes (18) while aoffle may be metabollzad
further to the corresponding fatty acid (19. 23). a fate clearly demonatrued
tor hexsdecane and octadecane. Hexadecane was converted by the MFO
and other enzymes to cetyl alcohol and palmitic acid (19). the latter
presumably by further oxidation of the alcohol, in contrast with tbelr
activity In decane oxidation, lung microsomes showed relatively low actlvily
compared with liver microsomes in the oxidation of hexadecane, white the
kidney microsomes were completely inactive. Alcohol dehydrogenase
catalyzes the oxidation of lower aliphatic alcohols (30) to the correapondlfls
aldehydes, which are then further oxidized to their acids.
The simplest stkane homologues -• methane, ettiaoe and
propane -- are generally considered to be innocuous when inhaled at
concentrations t>elow 1 percent by volume. Several thousand parts per
tniltion of these gases are necessary to produce any detectabla physiological
effect and even ai these levela, the effect is a mild hypoxia reaulting from
the corresponding reduction of oxygen in the inspired air. No threshold
limit values (TLV> have t>een established for their presence in workroom
atmospheres.
range from
Table 6. Threshold limit values for alkanes (1).
"■g^*"'
Pentane 600 isoo
Heitane 100 380
Heptane 400 ISOO
Octane 300 1450
Nonane 200 1Q50
„GoogIe
Propane and butane are used In processing and packaging of Tooda
to remove and displace oxygen and have been approved bb GRAS ("generally
recognized as safe") by (he Food and Drug Administration for this purpose
(27). Petroleum hydrocarbon Tractions are used as solvents Co eittract oils
from various food preparations. These fractions are mixtures of hydro-
carbons boiling within a given temperature range and may include hexane.
methyl pentane. heptane, dimethyl butane, and other compounds. Their use,
in accordance «ilh good manufarlunng practices, has been approved by the
■ Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (17). Similarly, FDA
regulations permit the use of hexane (21 CFR 173.270; 172.560, formerly
21 CFRJ21. 1045; 121.1082) 2- methyl heptane (21 CFR 172.882. formerly
21 CFR 121. L154) and heptane (21 CFR 172.250, formerly 21 CFR 12!. 1203) as
solvents for foodstuffs under controlled conditions (27). Also mineral oil
which contains high molecular weight hydrocarbons is employed for a variety
of food and medicinal purposes (21 CFR 172.878, formerly 21 CFR 121. U46)
(27,17).
Virluaily no toxicological data are available tor the individual higher
molecular weight alkaAes. Most of the available reports concern various
industrial products consisting of complex hydrocarbon mixtures including
some of the C,ot° ^i alkanes. One of the few studies of these higher
paraffin members given syslemically la thai of Jeppsson (16) who injected
mice intravenously with emulsions containing various ai^tanea. The LDioo
for penladecane. hexadecane and heptadecane was approximately ID g per
kg for each of these alkanes. Hine and Zuidema (13 ) administered the^.
following mixturea of paraffins and naphthenes intragastrically to rata at
concentrations of 25 ml per kg without causing death in any of the animals;
C, and C,o; C,,and C,,and C,, through C,, .
None of these alkanes has proved carcinogenic but some have enhanced
. ("promoted") the development of papillomas in mouse skin pretreated or
"initiated" with subcarcinogenie doses of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.
Sice' (29) "initiated" tne skin of female Swiss mice with 7, 12 dimethylbeni
(a)anthracene and subsequently applied a number of alkanes and alkanols.
The skin tumor incidence /number of mice were 'as follows: hexane (0/30),
octane (0/40). decane (2/30), dodecane (6/30), te(ra<lecane (5/30), hexadecane
(1/50) and octadecane (1/30). The Latent period before tumor appearance
promoted by dodecane and letradecane was 20 to 60 weeks, compared with
more than 50 weeks with decane and octadecane.
Similar conclusions were reached in an experiment with dodecane
(28) and in a more recent series of experiments by Horton ct al. (14)
in which male C3H mice were treated repeatedly with 0. 14 percent benio(a)
pyrene dissolved In certain alkanes or in decalin (decahydronaphthalenel.
Benzo(a) pyrene In decalin alone caused 33 percent malignant tumors while
benzo(a) pyrene with dodecane. hexadecane, octadecane and elcosane produced
„GoogIe
malignant akin tumors In >ll of the anlmalB. These expcFlmeota aucgeBt
that chronic e;q>osure to high concentrations ot some alkaiias can mbanc*
the production of tumors "Initiated" by polycyclic aromatic hj^drocarttoos,
but ^ve no indication that the alkanes alone were carcliMtgenlc.
Disc UBS Ion
Each at the alkanes round in Irradiated beef has occurred
in other toods, sometimes more abundantly than in the irradiated
beer. Their origin in many of these foods is unknown. A number of the
alkanes are employed as solvents or In preparations approved for vartoul
purposes by the Food and Drug Adminlstrallon and by africUl Intematlonkl
bodies. The lower homologues are common industrial substances whose
threshold limits In workroom atmospheres are several orders of magnitude
greater than their concentrations In beef. A similar margin of safety
exists for each of the compounds whose least toxic effect has been determltMd.
Some of the metabolic products of these substances, where known, are cither
compounds normally found In the body or substances metabolized by
known physiological processes to compounds believed to be nontoxic.
The Committee carefully reviewed the dsta demonstrating that
several of the higher alkanes and alkanols may act as co-carcinogen3
or tumor -promoting agents In mice pretreated with polycycllc aromatic
hydrocarbons. The possibility seems slight that alkanes In the quantities
found in irradiated beef are co-carctnogentc. Not only were the tklluinefl
applied in Ihe presence of a large concentration of a known carcinogen, but
their doses were huge in comparison with the amounts found in beef.
The available data on the alkanes suggest that the consumption
of irradiated beef would not pose a significant increment of hazard to
the amounts an individual would be unavoidably exposed.
„GoogIe
REFERENCES CITED
American CoRference ttf GovemmenUl Industrial HyglenlBM.
1976. TLVs*: threBhold limit v»lu«a Tor chemical aubatancea and
physical agents in the workroom environment with Intended changes
for IBT6. Cincinnati, Ohio.
Bohlen, P. , U. P. Schlunegger a
-diatrlbution at hexsne in rat tissi
25:241-249.
Committee or Medical and Biological Ctfects of Environmental
Folluunta, National Research Council. 1876. Vapcr-phase organic
pollutants: volatile hydrocarbona and oxidation products. National
Academy of Sciencea, Washington, D.C.
Das, M. L. , S. Orreniua and U Ernster. 1968. On the fat^
acid and hydrocarbon'hydrMtylation In rat liver mlcroaomes.
Eur. J. Biochem. 4:519-523.
El Mahdi, M.A.H. andH.J. Channon. 1933. The absorpUon of
n- hexadecane from the alimentary tract of the rat. Biochem. J.
27:1487-1494.
Environmental Prelection Agency. Health Effects Research
Laboratory. 1976. Organic compounds, identified in drinking
water in the United Suies. Cincinnati. Ohio.
Flavor and Extract Manufacturers' Association of the. United States.
iSH. .Scientific literature review of aliphatic primary .alcohols,
esters and acids in flavor usage. Washington, D.C,
Frommer. U. , V. Ullrich and H. Staudinger, 1970, Hydroxylation
of aliphatic compounds by liver microsomes. I. The distribution
pattern of isomeric alcohols. Hoppe-Seyler's Z. Physiol. Chem.
3&t:903-SI2.
,y Google
Gholson. R.K. . J.N. Baptist and M. J. Coon. 1963.
oxidation by a bacterial enzyme aystem. II. Cotactor r«<|uireinenta
for octanol formation from octane. Biochamislry 2:1155-1158.
Horton. A.W. . D.N. Eshleman. A. B, Schuff and W.
1976, Correlation of cocarcinogenic activity among n-alkaoes with
their physical effects on phosfdiolipid micelles. J. Natl. Cancar
Inat. 56:387-391.
Acta Phai
R. 1975. Parabolic relationahlp between lipophilicity
cat activity of aliphatic hydrocarbons, ethers and ketones
venous injections of emulsion formulations into mice.
nacol. Toxicol. 37:56-64.
Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives. 1970. Food
grade mineral oil, pages 39-41; petroleum hydrocarbon fractions.
pages 110-113 in Toxicological evaluation of some eiitraction Solvents
and certain other substances. FAO nutrition meeting report series
48A. WHO/fcod addiIive/70. 39. Food and Agriculture Organiiation
of the United Nations, Rome, Italy and World Health Organiiatian,
Geneva. Switzerland.
Kamil,
, J.N.
nith a
l.T. V
tcohols. Glucuronide formaticm.
Kusunose,
Blophya. A
. Ichihara and E. Kusunose. 1969.
Tiouse liver microsomal fraction.
6:679-681.
MacLeod, A.J. 1976. Personal communication to H. I. Chinn.
From unpublished data, MacLeod estimates the total volatile content
of eggs to be 50Uiig/g. All values for eggs in this report have
been calculated using this estimate; the relative concentrations were
reported in (21).
,y Google
MacLeod. G. andB.M, Coppock. 1976. Volatile flavor components
of beef boiled conventionally and by microwave radiation. J. Agric.
Food Chem. 24:835-843.
McCarthy, R. D. 1964. Mam
Meigh. D. F. 1864. The natural skin coating of the apple and its
influence on scald in storage. I. — Fatty acids and hydrocarbons.
J. Sci. Food Agric. 15:436-443.
National Air Pollution Control Association. 1970. Air qjali^
criteria tor bydrocarbons. NAPCA publication no. AP-64. Available
as PB 190489 from the National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Va.
Nomijama, K. and H. Nomiyama. 1974, Respiratory elimination
of organic solvents in man. Benzene, toluene, n-bex«ne,
tnchloroethylene, acetone, ethyl acetate and ethyl alcohol. Int.
Arch, Arbeitsmed. 32:85-81.
Office of the Federal Register. General Services Administration.
1977. Food and Drug Administration: rules and regulations. Food
for human consumption: reorganization and republication. Fed.
Regist. 42:14301-14669.
Sice', J. 1966. Tumor-pramoting activity of ri-alhancs and l-alkanols.
Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 9:70-74.
Acta Chem. Scand. 5:1105-1126,
Tulliez, J. and G. Bories. 1975. Me'tabolisme des hydrocarburea
paraffmiques el naphl^niques Chez les animaux superieurs. I.
Re'tention des parafftnes (normal, cyclo et ramifiees} chei le rat.
Ann. Nutr. Aliment. Z9:Z01-Z11.
Weurman, C. and S. Van Straten. 1968. List of volatile cmnpounds
in food. Report no. R 1687, 2nd ed. Central Institute for Nutrition
and Food Research, Zeist. The Netherlands.
„GoogIe
2. Alkenea and Alkynes
Although the most apparent effect of lipid Irradiation ia the
production of n-alkanee with one or two leaa carbon atoms than the original
fatty acids, significant amounts of unsaturated hydrocartKins are also
produced. Simple alkenea are produced from saturated fatty acids while
The alkenea and alkynes and their concentrations found in
reated beef samples are listed in Table T aa are their
in air, and in other tooda.
As might be expected, almost the entire series of straight- chain
alkenes, from Cg to Ci, haa been identified in the irradiated beef.
An exception is prapene which was not detected. Heptadecene
and hexadecadiene are (he most abundant of the unsaturated hydrocarbons
with 618 and 706 ug per kg beef, respectively. The former la presumably
generated from stearic acid and the latter from oleic acid, among the moat
common fatty acid constituents in beef. Traces of decyne and undecyne
have also been detected. The precursors of these highly unsaturated
report suggests that eggs are a particularly rich source of these compounds
(13, 14) and several of the higher homologues — nonene, undecene,
pentadecene, hexadecene and heptadecene — appear to be present
In concentrations considerably greater than any alkene in the irradiated
beef. All alkenes from hexene through heptadecene have l>een found in
cooked beet and most members of this series have also been detected in
other meats and dairy products. The amounts are generally greater
In beet when cooked by microwave than by conventional means (15),
presumably because of the rapid rate of healing. Every metnlier of tlte series
Q to CjT has been found in coffee or in some fruit or vegetable (26).
Some dlenea and alkynes also appear in food, but no reference could be
located (o indicate the presence of pentadecadlene, hexadecadlene and
undecyne in any food.
Ethene is exceeded only by methane as the major hydrocarbon
emitted into the atomaphere from automotive exhausts (19), Lesaer but
propene. bulene and hexene --- ai e also present m exhaust fumes (18).
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
[n tieevays and in metropolitan areas, the concentrBtion of elhene approxi-
matea 400 to 800 ng per cubic meter of air (1. 20) while other alkenea rajige
from 3 to lU ug per nV (2U. Hydrocarbons with more than 12 carbon atoms
are generally not pi'esent in the atmosphere in any significant amounta (16).
Butene has been identified m drinking water supplies in the United States (6)
but its concentration has not been reported.
The alkenes are employed in large quantities In the manufacture
of uaHous Industrial products. The simpler members provide the raw
material for plastics, those with 8 to 13 carbon atoms
for plastiiizers, and the longer members (Cu to Ci,)
facluring alkyl ^ulf^1e detergents.
This class of compounds Is oxidized in the body to epoxides
by the micrasoinal mixed function oxidases (MFO). Although the epoxides
exhibit a very short half-life and are extremely difficult to Isolate, they
have been demonstrated to be obligatory intej-mediates of alkene metabollam
(13, 21, 25). They may be unstable and rearrange to unknown products or
may be converted to their corresponding diols by epoxide hydialase (9).
The diols may then be excreted unchanged, undergo further oxidation, or be
conjugated with glucuronic acid (4,5). Epoxide? may react with glutathione
with or without enzymatic mediation.
Boyland and Williams (3) reported the direct conjugation of arotnatic
epoxides by glutathione S-epoxlde transferase found In rat liver, but this
reaction has not been studied with the aliphatic epoxides. Both enzymatic
and nonenzymatic conjugation would depend upon the stability of the
aliphatic epoxide intermediate and upon the relative affinities o( the
glutathione transferase and epoxide hydratase for this epoxide.
The metatmlic pathway of the dienes remains virtually unexplored.
However a single study with butadiene suggests that this compound, too.
is metatjolized through the intermediate formation of epoxides. When
butadiene was incubated with rat liver fractions, 3-butene 1, 2-dlol and
erythritol (I, 2,3, 4-telrahydroxybutane) were produced (8). These are the
compounds one would expect if the oxidation of each double liond proceeded
in the same way as those of the monounsaturated alkenes just discussed.
One can only speculate on the fate in the body of the two alkynes.
dccync and undccync. produced b> beef iii-Bdialion. Phenylacetylene
(Oa llBt'SX-'iit, oni' or the few rel.ntcd compounds that has been Studied, was
found to be relatively stable and only slowly n
„GoogIe
acid. Williams (27) postulated an initial hydration of the triple bond to fonr.
the enol rorm or phenylacetaldehyde which was then oxidized to phenylacetic
acid, the precursor of phenaceluric acid. He believed a similar pathway
Is taken by the nuoroalkynes to yield fluoroacetic acid. By analogy, the end
products o! decyne and undecyne metabolism would be decanoic and
undecanoic acids respectively.
TOJticologists have largely ignored the volatile olefins,
because they appear to act primarily as asphyxiants in high concerilralions and
exhibit no discernible harmful effects at low or moderate concentrations. All
several orders of magnitude greater than those found in beef are necessary
before any significant hazard is produced (2,7, il. 17). The Committee
smaller quantities involved. Toxicity data for ihe higher alkenes are unavail-
able.
The demonstration that alkenes are converted metabolically to
epoxides raises the poBSlbility of carcinogen formation in vivo.
Epoxidation of ethylenic bonds In vinyl chloride, polycycllc aromatic
hydriiCBfbons »nd aflatoxln. B, Is thou^t by many to represent conversion
of the pro-carcinogen to its reactive form. The question arises, there-
fore, whether alkene epoxides represent a cartinogenic haiard. Relevant
data are currently confined to skin-painting experiments and have been
summarized by Lawley (10) In a series of experiments with Swiss
mice. Van Duuren et al, 123) found i, 2 -epoxy butane and i. 2-epOxydodecane
to be inactive but they cOQSidered 1. 2-epoxyhexadecane to be lumongenic
Since It induced two papillomas and one squamous ceil carcinoma in 41
mice surviving an average of 427 days. The Committee questioned the
authors' conclusion that these data demonstrated the carcinogenicity of this
compound. The possible presence of impurities in the large amounts ot
test substance used and the very few tumors induced in this experiment
raise considerable doubt that 1, 2-epoxyhexadecarie is truly a carcinogen.
Van Duuren (22) has pointed out that diepoxides are more apt to
be carcinogenic than the monoepoxides. He speculates that this may result
from the cross Unking ot DNA with a consequent alteration of its
replication. The ability to effect such cross linkages would depend upon
the interatomic disunces between the epoxides. No information is available
on the diepoxides that could theoretically be produced from Ihe dienes
detected in the irradiated beef.
„GoogIe
Ab is evident from this brief Ireatmenl of ttis a!
alkynes in irradiated beet, significant gaps exist In our knowledge of the
metabolism and toxicity of many of these Bubstknces. The growing
conviction ttiat epoxides may be iroportant in the carcinogenicl^ of certain
chemicals emphaaizes the importance of additional, systematic investiga-
tions on the metabolism and toxicology of the aliphatic unsaturated
compounds.
The total alkenes and alkynes amount to 2. 4 mg per kg at irradiated
beef for an average daily conaumption of approximately 0. 3 mg. Each
of the compounds under consideration has been identified In other foods.
with the exception of pents- and heiadecadiene and undecyne. All of the
alkenes from tiexene through heptadecene (C, C^, ) have been reported in
conventionally cooked beef. As mentioned above, the ooty analogue of
these compounds alleged to produce tumors is 1. 2-epoxyhexadeGaiM. a
presumed epoxide of hexadecene. Hexadecene has been found in eggs,
cooked beef, pork, onions and chicken broth as well as In Irradiated
Despite the widespread induatrlal u
e quantities, no reports of ai
be found.
There is insufficient information to permit an unequivocal decision
on the long-term effects of small quantities of alkenes. However, based
on Che available data, the Committee concUidea that. these compounds,
consumed at levels found in irradiated t>eef,. are not likely to represent a
significant increment of hazard to that encountered by expoaurs from
unavoidable s
„GoogIe
REFERENCES CITED
Altshuller. A. P. andT. A. Bellar. 1963. Gas chromatographic
analysis ot hydrocarbons in the Loa Angeles atmosphere, J. Air
Pollut. Control Assoc. 13:Bl-87.
American Conference of Governmental Industrial Ifygienists.
1976. TLVs *: threshold limit values tor chennical substances and
physical agents in the workroom environment with intended changes
tor 19T6. Cincinnati, Ohio.
Brooks, C.J. W. and L. Young. 1956. Biochemical sfudie 6 ot
toxic agents. 9. The metabolic conversion ot indene into cia-
and tranB-indane-l:!-diol. Biochem. J. 63:264-269.
El Masri. A.M.. J.N. SmithandR.T. Williams. 195B. Studies io
deCoxication. 73. The metabolism ot alkytbentenes: phenylacetylene
and phenylethylene (serene). Biochem. J. 68:199-204.
Environmental Protection Agency, Health Effects Research
Laboratory. 1976. Organic compounds identified in drinking water
in the United Stales. Cincinnall, Ohio.
Gerarde, H. E. 1966. Hydrocarbons (toxicity). Pages 293-307 in
R.E. Kirk and D.F. Olhmer, eds. Encyclopedia of chemicallecjv'
nology. 2nd ed. Vol.11. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.. New York, N.Y.
Jerina, D. M. . H. Zlfter and J.W. Daly. 1970. The role ot the
arene oxide -- oxepin ayslem in the metabolism of aromatic
substrates. [V. Stereochemical considerations of dihydrodiol
formation and dehydroge nation. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 92:1056-1061.
Law ley, P. D. 1976. Pages 63-244 in_ Chemical carcinogens.
C.E. Searle. ed. American Chemical Society Monograph 173.
American Chemical Society. Washington. O. C.
Lazarew, N.W. 1929. Uber die Gittigkeit verschisdener Kohlen-
wessersloffdSmpfe. Naunyn-Schmiede bergs Arch. Exptl. Pathol,
Pharmakol. 143:223-233.
,y Google
Leibman, K. C. and E. Ortit. 1970. Epoxide inter mediates In
microsomal oxidation of olefins to glycols. J. Pharmacol. Eip.
Ther. 173:242-248.
MacLeod. A.J. I97fi. Personal communication to H. I. Cbinn.
From unpubUslied data, MacLeod estimates the total volatile content
of eggs to be SSDug per g. Ml values for eggs shown in this report
have been calculated using this estimate; the relative concentrations
were reported in (14).
MacLeod. G. and B. M. Coppock. 1976. Volatile flavor com pone nta
of beef boiled conventionally and by microwave radiation. J. Agric.
Food Chem. 24:835-843.
National Air Pollution Control Administration. 1970. Air quali^
criteria for hydrocarbons. NAPCA publication no. AP-64.
Available as PB 190489 from the National Technical Information
Service. Springfield. Va.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. 1975.
Registry of toxic effects of chemical substances. Christensen, H, E.
andT. T. Luginbyhl, eds. U.S. Government Printing Office.
Washington. D. C.
e Los Angeles atmosphere.
Papa, L.J. 197
hydrocarbons d(
(Part 3):43-65.
Scott, W.E,. E.R, Stephens. P. L. HanatandR.C. Doerr. 1957.
Further developments in the chemistry of the atmosphere. Proc.
Am. Petrol. Inst. 37:171-183.
Stephens, E.R.
hydrocarbons in
13:929-93B.
Van Duuren, B. L. 1969. Carcinogenic epoxides, lactones an
halo-ethers and their mode of action. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci,
163:633-651.
,y Google
Van Duuren, B.L., L. Langseth, B.M. Goldschmidt snd L, Orris,
1967, Carcinogenicity of epoxides, lactones and peroxy compounds.
VI, Structure and carcinogenic activity, J, Natl, Cancer Inst.
39:121T-1Z2S,
Watabe, T'. and N. Yamada. 1975, The biotranaformatton of
1-hcxadccene to carcinogenic 1, Z-epoxyhexadecane by hepatic
microsomes. Biochem. Pharmacol, 24:1051-1053.
Weurman, C, and S, Van Straten, 1969, Lists of volatile compounds
in food. Report no, R16a7, 2nd ed. Central Institute for Nutrition
and Food Research, Zeiat, The Netherlands.
„GoogIe
H
iJi
pi lit 1^
4 |l
ll
till
,y Google
3. Aromatic Hydrocarbon a
Three aromatic hydrocarbons have been detected in irradiated
beef: benzene, toluene and xylene (Table 8). Irradiation had little, if any
effect upon the concentration of xylene, which is apparently not a radiolytic
product. On the other hand, the amounts of benzene and lotuene varied
directly with the irradiation dose (Figure 71, presumably from the
action of ionizing radiation upon the amino acid, phenyl alanine (iU. Heating
alone produced comparable amounts of toluene but not of benzene. Similarly,
small amounts of benzene have also been produced after the irradiation
of codfish (40).
hundreds of millions of gallons are produced annually in the U. S. Of special
significance is the presence of benzene in gasoline with the consequent '•
ubiquitous contamination from automotive emissions. It has been estimated
that over one billion pounds of benzene per year are emitted into the
atmosphere. Significant quantities of benzene, aa well as of toluene and
xylene, have been detected in the air and water of virtually every metropolitan
ghl.
All three of these compounds have been reported in numerous foods,
including meat, vegetables, null, dairy products, and bevera^s (12).
"Large" amounts of benzene have been reported in boiled beef (6) and in
canned beef stew (61, Thus, conventional cooking, itself, will cause an
increase of benzene, probably from amino acid precursors. Benzene and
toluene (but not xylene) have also been detected in fruits, fish and eggs. Id
common with most of the compounds under consideration, quantitative data
are scarce. Eggs appear especially rich in aromatics if a single report
is typical, for their content of benzene and toluene is estimated to be more
than a hundred times that in the irradiated beef (18. 19). Large amounts of
both these compounds were also found in haddock kept under refrigeration
for 14 days; as much as 200 ^g per kg of benzene and 500 ^g per kg of
toluene (20).
Absorption and Metabolism
These compounds are usually rapidly absorbed through the
lungs although significant absorption through the skin and gut is also possible.
Human subjects exposed for 4 hours to 52 to 62 ppm benzene or to 98 to 130
ppm toluene had an apparent retention of 30 to 40 percent of the hydrocarbon
inhaled during that period (28). No comparable data are available for xylene.
After exposure ceased, elimination of the unchanged solvents through the
lungs continued for many hours (29). When labeled benzene was given orally
to rabbits. 43 percent was recovered Unchanged in the expired air. 34. S
percent in the urine as phenolic conjugates and 0. 5 percent in feces within
2 to 3 days (32). Similarly, beniene injected subcutaneously in mice was
- 56 -
,y Google
funclton of irradiation dose.
„GoogIe
recovered in large part (TO percent) in the expired air (39). The major
urinary products were phenolic glucuronides and ethereal sulfalea, with
small amounta of free phenol and catechol.
Toluene, too, may be excreted unchanged through the lungs or, as
metabolic conjugates through the kidney. In contrast with benzene, urinary
excretion is the preferred route, accounting for SO percent of administered
toluene (30). Most of the toluene is converted to benzoic acid, which Is then
conjugated with glycine and excreted as hippuric acid. Small amounts of
beniyl alcohol and ortho and para cresol may also be detected.
The pathways in the body of the xylene Isomers are sirnilar to that
of benzene. Very little is excreted in their unchanged form, either through '
the lungs or the kidneys. Virtually all are converted to their respective
toluic acids, conjugated with glycine and excreted as methyl hippuric (tolurlc)
acids. A small amount of xylenols can also be found (37).
n the alkenes already discussed, the aromatic
hydrocarbons undergo oxidation by the hepatic mixed function oxygenases to
form highly reactive arene oxides. They may Isomerize readily to phenols,
may be converted by epoxide hydratase to dihydrodiols or may form
glutathione conjugates (30). The possibilities tor benzene are shown
below; j-^ OH ■
.P'
^m
k^Asc
„GoogIe
r labile epoxides a
n the melabollam at
these aromAtic hyiiroc
e the subjects of recer
mmariied in Table 9
irkers in the United States are exposed
have been extensively inveatigateil and
1. 35.271. The acute toxicitiea are
Acute toxicity of
Compound
Animal
Route
LDbo
R«f«r«Dec
Beniene
Mouse
Intraperitoneal
468
se
Rat
Inhalation
I0,000ppm/7hr.
le
Rat
Oral
930
7
Rat (younB)
Oral
3400
IS
Rat <old)
Oral
5600
18
Toluene
Mouse
InhalaHon
5300 ppm
2e
Rat
Oral
5000
ze
Hat
Intraperitoneal
1640
26
Xylene
Rat
Oral
4300-5000
26
Altl
lough
deaths
and St
-vere
cen'
tral ne
trvous
dietui
rbances
ed from acu'
of benzene
(appi
itelv
2.5 pe.
■pent) (27), i
expos
-ate 1<
ivels .
ol the
compound th
at has
arc
jused 1
the gi-i
concern.
f the
■ clear
■Iv .
■apabl
? ofdf
rpresa
ing bone
tivity.
El
;posure
orkroom
pherf
r IS *£
;II kn
lead tc
. bloo<l
Idy
aciasi
as, pa
■rlicu;
any to a
„GoogIe
Vartoufl types of leukemia have been report ed to result from chronic
benzene exposure and possibly to arise preferentially in those persons
developing aplastic anemia. Blood dyscrastas and teukemias have also
been noted among patients receiving certain drugs such as phenylbutazone,
chloramphenicol and some sulfonamides. However, the evidence of an
association of leukemias with blood dyscreslas in these patterns and those
exposed to benzene is equivocal and Is based mainly on unconvincing case
In an extensive epidemiological survey. Aksoyetal. 0) in 1974
reported a correlation between benzene exposure and leukemia. Among
28.500 shoemakers in Istanbul. 26 patients with acute or preleukemia
were detected during a T'year period for an annual incidence of 13 per
100, 000, contrasted with 6 per 100, 000 among the general population.
rhe maximum benzene concentradons to which these i^oikers were exposed
were 210 to 650 ppm. The mean duration of exposure »aa 9. 1 years.
Thorpe (41). on the other hand, reporting the same year, failed lo detect
an increased incidence of leukemia among 38, 000 petroleum v^orkers who
were at least potentially exposed lo benzene. A recent report by the
National Institute of Occupational Safety and Hesllfi {141 compared the
deaths from leukemia among white, male employees exposed la benzene
m a large rubber plant, w uh those m a control population dm ing ihe same
time period. Seven deaths among 748 men were recorded in the former group
or approximately five times the Incidence among the controls. Largely on
the basis of this report, the OccupalLonal Safely and Health Administration
on May 27, 1977 proposed a temporary emergency standard reducmg [he
permissible workroom lei'els of benzene from 10 lo i ppm (31). On June B,
1977. the Environmental Proteclion Agency added benzene lo its list of
hazardous air pollutants (K), These studies have not eliminated the possi-
bility that agents other than benzene may be responsible for leukemogenests
in Ihe large study populations.
Stable or unstable chromosomal aberrations in man may t>e produced
by high levels of benzene (several hundred ppm) (27). No correlation has
been demonstrated between the persistence of these changes and the .legree
of benzene exposures.
Despite its status as a suspect leukemogpn in man. attempts lo
induce leukemia in animals by benzene exposure have t>een unsuccessful (42),
Benzene has frequently been used in skin painting experiments as a solvent
without producing tumors. Because of this inability to induce leukemia
in animala. Ward et aL (42) speculate that benzene may induce leukemia
only in highly sensitive persons or by synergistic action with other
environmental agents.
„GoogIe
No developmenUl malformBtiona were detected when pregwat
inice were exposed continuously to doaes ranging from 1 to 670 in| per in*
or benzene vapor, but at the highest dosea. the number erf fetusen per litter
was reduced (36).
The poBBibility that beniene may be a leukemogenie agent in man
cannot be excluded on present evidence. After a recent critical review
of the relevant daW. the Committee on Toxicology (27) ot the National
Research Council concluded that benzene must be considered a auapect
leukemogen but that more definillve data are required for an accurate
assessment of its effects.
Tolwenc
Workmen's exposure to toluene la almoat ezcluatvely
through the lungs or sktn, so that very limited data are available on lU
oral toxicity. As shown in Table 9 the lethal dose by this route in the
rat Is 5000 mg per kg. In animals, the toxic effects are primarily on the
central nervous system and range from light narcosis to prostrattODi
depending upon the extent of exposure. No effects could be conllnned
on the blood or blood-forming organs when toluene was administered either
by inhalation or percutaneously, even at levels that produced marked
central nervous effects.
In man, too. Che acute effects are largely on the central nervous
system (5). They are narcotic and result in muscular weakness, incoordui'
ation and menial confusion (24).
The TLV for workroom- exposure la 100 ppm (375 mg per m" ). After
chronic e^qjoHure to atmospheric concent rat Ions of 100 to 1100 ppm for
2 weeks to 5 years, enlarged livers and macrocytosls were noted in
about 20 percent of the subjects <11}. Chronic exposure to approximately
200 ppm for 3 to 15 years produced no chromosomal changes in the
lymphocytes (8). Various reports in the early literature report toxicity
to blood and blood-forming organs by toluene. However, since industrial-
grade toluene contains significant amounts of benzene, many of the
reported effects may be attributable to this contaminant.
„GoogIe
«I
The acute toxicity of xylene in animals approximatea that of
i (Table 9). Inhalation (or 4 hours of mixed jtyleoes by rats and doga
ntrattans exceeding SOO ppm caused no apparent ill erfeete <4).
Guinea pigs exposed to 300 ppm for 4 hours daily. 6 days per week for 2
months showed only slight liver and lung effects (38). Recent Investigations
wtth both dogs and rats revealed no gross or microscopic pathology nor
any hematological disturbances, even with exposures as high as BOS ppm
for 6 hours per day, 5 days per week for 13 weeks (4). Intraperitoneal
injection of xylene Into rats caused liver necrosis and diffuse nephritis (2),
Liver and kidney damage has also been reported in man after inhalation of
sufficient xylene to cause unconsciousness (23). However, the victims
recovered fully and there Is no evidence In the literature of irreversible
damage to either kidney or liver (25).
Commercial xylene contains varying amounts of the ortho-, meta-,
and para-isomers as well aa other aromatic and aliphatic hydrocarbons,.
thiophene, pyridine and phenol. Consequently, many reports on the
toxicity of xylene are unreliable since exposures were rarely to a pure
preparsllon. Thus, even though early reports attributed a myelotoxic
effect to xylene, it is now believed that xylene poses no threat to the
blood and blood-forming organs. Its toxic effects are very similar
to those of toluene and are reflected primarily in the form of headache,
lassitude, fatigue and Irritability, together with minor gaatrolnlestinal
symptoms (10). The TLV of xylene is 100 ppm or 435 mg per m' .
Berenblum (3) painted the skin of white mice wtth xylei^e atone and
with 3, 4 benzpyrene and xylene and concluded that xylene was neither
carcinogenic nor co -carcinogenic. Pound (35) reported an Increased
Incidence ol skin tumors in mice pretreated wtth xylene and exposed to
ultraviolet light, but he attributed this increase to the hyperplasia Induced
In the skin, rather than to carcinogenic properties of the xylene. Pre-
it with croton oil or acetic acid caused similar increases in skin
Russian workers (H) investigated possible embryotoxlc effects -of
xylene by exposing pregnant rats to para-xylene (US ppm) continuously for
20 days. No teratogenic effects were noted.
„GoogIe
product, and the concentration oF toluene in thermally ateriliied beef is equal
to or greater than that m the irradiated samples. Both are widely diatributed
in other foods, often in considerably greater amounts th«n in beef. The
15 to 19 ug per kg after exposure to 56 kGy (5. 6 megarads). lliia would
represent a daily inuke from irradiated beef of approKimBtely 2 ug-
Benzene has been detected in nonirradiated beef fay numerous
workers, but comparison with irradiated samples is made difficult by
the lack of quantitative data. The only reported value is Z ppb (6. 4 ug per
m'^ } in the head space of canned beef (33). In semiquantitative studies
lew (B. 34). and boiled beef (6. 13). It has also beei
1 detected in roast
>ef 122) as well as in a score of other foods.
Unavoidable absorption from air and water s
lupplies also contribute
ignifitantly to the daily inUke of benzene. The av.
•rage atmosfAeric
ancentralion in metropolitan areas is about 45 ug per m" and may increase
>veral fold during peak traffic periods. Body rete
> be 25 to 30 percent (23. 13) of the total inhaled or
about 100 ug daily. This
i approximately 40 limes the daily inUke from irri
tdiated beef. The
;cently imposed emergency measui-e for workroon
1 atmospheres reduces the
?rmissible levels from 10 to 1 ppm. Even at this s
iharply reduced limit.
ie average workman (after Ills 8 hour stint) would :
retain about 2.5 to 3.0 mg
enzene or more than 1000 limes that consumed in I
rra dialed beef.
The C-ommiltee believed that a small additic
in of benzene from
■radiated beef contributes only a trivial increment
to the normal body
urden and is unlikely to increase sipnificantly whai
lever hazard exists from
„GoogIe
REFERENCES CITED
, 1. I94i. The c
Carpenter. C. P. , E. Kinkcad, D. L, Geary, Jr., L.J, Sullivan anc
J. M. King. 1S75. Petroleum hydrocarbon toxicity studies. V.
Animal and human response to vapors of mixed xylenes. Toxicol.
Appl. Pharmacol. 33:543-558.
Carpenter. C. P. . C. B. Shaffer, C, S. Weil and H. F. Smyth, Jr.
1944. Studies on the inhalation of 1:3 -butadiene: *ith a comparison
of Its narcotic effect with benzol, toluol, and siyrene. and a note
on the elimination of styrene by the human. J. Ind. Hyg. Toxicol.
26:69-78.
Chang, S. S. and R. J. Peterson. 19T7. Symposium: the basis
of quality m muscle foods. Recent developments in the flavor
of meat. J. Food Sci. 42:298-305.
Cornish. H.H. and R. C. Ryan. 1965. Metabolism of benzene
in nonfasted. tasted, and aryl-hydroxylase inhibited rats. Toxicol.
Appl. Pharmacol. 7:767-771.
Environmental Protection Agency. 1977, National emission sunda
for hazardous air pollutants: addition of benzene to list of hazardoui
air poimwnts. Fed. Regist. 42:29332-29333.
Form. A,, E. Pscifico and A. Limonta. 1971.
studies in workers exposed to benzene or toluen
Environ. Health 22:373-378.
Greenburg. L. . M. R. Mayers. H. Heimann and S. Moskowitz.
1942. The effects of exposure to toluene in industry. J. Am.
Med. Assoc. 118:573-578.
,y Google
Hirai, C , K. O. Hen, J. Pokorny and S, S, i
and identificsuon of voUCiie flavor compoondi
J. Food Sci. 38:191-397.
Infante. P. F. . R. Ricw^. J. K. WacooEraodR. TooBf. IVT
Lcukemu among aorkeri ezpoaed to bcnxene. Report, datrd
April 13. I9T7. to Director of MOSH. Hatiooal tMlitalB tar
rVcupational Safc^ and Health. Cincinnati, Ohto.
Kimura. E. T. , D. M. Ebert and P.W. Dodfe. t»71. AcMe Uwici^
and limit* of solvent residue (or aizteen orfsnic uriTenta- Tmieol.
Appl. Pharmacol. 19:699-704.
Krotov. lu.A. and N.A. Chebotar. 1972. Study of the einbrjratoxic
and teratogenic action of certain iDdustrial •ubatancca formed durinf
the production of diinetbyltereplttbalate. Gig. Tr. Pr<t. Zabol.
l6;40-43. Cited by (25).
MacLeod. A.J. 1976. Personal cORimimication to H. I. Chiim.
From unpublished data, MacLeod estimates tfac total volatile
content of eggs to be SOOug/g. All values tor eggs aboan in tbia
report have been calculated using this eatlmate; and ttie relatiTe con-
cerarations were reported in <IS)>
. Jr. 1972. Qualitative and quantitative aapecta of trace
(rritt, C. . Jr. , P. Angelin
mpounds induced by irradia
lem. Ser. 65:26-34.
oy Google
Morley, R. . D.W. Eccleston. C. P. Douglas, W.E.J. Greville,
D.J. Scolt and J. Anderson. 1970. Xylene poisoning: a report on
one fatal case and Iwo cases of recovery after prolonged unconscious-
ness. Br. Med. J. 3:442-443.
National InsiUute for Occupational Safety and flealth. 1973. Criteria
for a recommended standard: occupational exposure to toluene.
U.S. Government Priming Office, Washington, D. C.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. 1875. Criteria
for a recommended standard; occupational exposure to xylene.
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C,
National Institute for Occupational Safe^ and Health. 1975. Registry
of toxic effects of chemical substances. Ctiristensen. H. E. and
T. T, Luginbyhl. eds. U.S. Government Printing Office, Waahlngloii,
D.C.
National Research Council, Committee on Toxicology. 1976.
Health effects of benzene: a review. National Academy of Sciences,
Washington, D.C.
Nomlyama, K. and H. Nomiyama. IS74. Respiratory retention,
uptake and excretion of organic solvents in man: benzene, toluane,
n-hexane, trichloroethylene, acetone, ethyl acetate and ethyl'
alcohol. Int. Arch. Arbeitsmed. 32:75-83.
Nomiyama, K. and H. Nomiyama.
1974. Respiratory elir
of organic solvents in man: benieni
i. toluene, n-hexane.
trichloroethylene, acetone, ethyl a
ceUte and ethyl alcohol.
Arch. Arbeitsmed. 32:85-91,
Ogau, M. . K. Tomokuni and Y. Takatsuka. 1970. Urinary
excretion of hippuric acid and -n- or p-methylhippuric acid in thi
urine of persons exposed to vapours of toluene and i>- or p-xyler
as a test of exposure. Br. J. Ind. Med. 2T:43-E>0.
Occupational Safely and Health Administration. U.S. Department
Labor. 1972. Occupational exposure to benzene; emergency
temporary standards; hearing. Fed. Reglst. 42:27452-27478.
Parke, D. V. an
49. The metabt
J. 54:231-238.
,y Google
l^rBson, T. and E. von Sydow. 1B73. Aroma of canned b«ef:
gas ctiromatagraphic and niBBS speclrometrlc analysis of tlia
volalilcB. J. Food Sci. 38;317-38S.
Peterson. R. J. . H.J. lz£o. E. Jungermann and S. S. Ctiang.
, 1975. Changes in votatUe flavor compounds during the retorting
of canned beef stew. J. Food Sci. 40:948'9a4.
Pound, A.W. 1970. Induced cell proliferation and ttie initiation
o( skin tumour tormation in mice by ultraviolet light. Pathology
2:269-275,
Pushkina. N. N. . V.A. Gotmekter and G. N. Klevuow*. IMS.
Changes in content ol ascorbic acid and nucleic acids produced
by benzene and formaldehyde. Bull. Exp. Biol. Med. M:8S8-870.
i^divec. V. and J. Flek. 1976. The absorption, metaboliam and
excretion of lylenes in man. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health
37:205-217.
SrQTder. R. 1974. Relationship between bensenc toxici^ and
metabolism l^ges 44-53 ln_ Proceedings oT Ute aympoalum oa
tmicology of benzene and alkyl benzenes, 28-29 August 1914.
Mellon Institute. Industrial Health Foundation, Inc., Ptttsbirgh,
Taub. 1. A. . P. Angelini and C. Merritt, Jr. 197B. Irradiated
food: validity of extrapolating wholeaomeness data. J. Pood Sci.
41:942-944.
Ward. J. M. . J. H. Weiaburger, R.S. Yamamoto, T. Benjamia,
C. A. Brown and E.K. Weisburger. 1975. Long-term eRect of
benzene in C57BL/6N mice. Arch. Environ. Health 30:32-25.
Weurman. C. and S. Van Straten. 1969. Liat o( volatile compounds
in food. Report no. Rie87, 2nd ed. Central Institute for Nutrition
and Food Research. Zeist, Tne Netherlands.
Wuir, M. A,, V. K. Rowe, D. D. McColliater, R. L. Hollingsworth
and F. Oyen. I95G. Toxicological studies of certain alkylated
benzenes and benzene. Arch. Ind. Health 17:387-398.
„GoogIe
OXYGEN-CONTAINiNG COMPOUNDS
1. AlcohoU
Methanol and ethanot, the simplest ttt the primary alcohols
have been detected in both trradiated and nonirradiated beef (Table 10),
Tlie concenlrfliions of methanol in the thermally sterilized samples mre greater
than those in the irradiated beet. Ethanol, on the other hand, increases
significantly with irradiation.
Occurrence
Methanol and ethsnol are produced tn huge quantities tor
a variety of industrial, medicinal and household purposes. Methanol has
been detected in water supplies of six of ten cities tested (31 »nd, as shown
In Table 10, is a normal constituent of many meats, beverages, fruits.
vegetables and dairy products. It Is also toutid normally in the breath,
blood and urine ot man and is considerably elevated after ethanol con-
sumption (T).
E^thanol can result from the natural or deliberate fennentation of
numerous carbohydrate foods. Millions of gallons are consumed annually
in numerous alcoholic beverages. Even those persons who conscientiously
abstain from such beverages cannot avoid the ingestion of significant
amounts of ethanol from other sources. As is apparent from Table 10,
milligram quantities or more can easily be ingested dally from fniila,
fruit juices, cheeses and various vcgctableB.
Mel a bolt sm
Because of its simple structure and high solubility, methanol
is rapidly absorbed trom the intestinal tract and distributed evenly in
body water. Substantial amounts are eliminated through the lungs but
its major metabolic pathway is through formaldehyde and formic acid
to carbon dioxide and water. A small amount may escape conversion
and be encreted unchanged in the urine. Small amounta of Its glucuronlde
and of formic acid can also be found In the urine (11>. Althou^ It is
generally assumed that formaldehyde Is the initial oxidation product of
methanol, it has not been delected In the blood and urine, presumably
because of lis rapid conversion to formic acid, Keeaeri4} has found
„GoogIe
h/1
1 n
o- ay
I si.
1fii
III
O.N
lilili li
„GoogIe
ithanol,
too, is
excreted throng
:e and w:
; then eo
in enter
the gent
tt In the aqueous and vitreous humors of rabbits poisoned with methanol.
Forrnaldehyde is a powerful inhibitor of retinal respiration (5) and the
blindness often resulling from methanol consumption is believed attributable
to this action.
;adily absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract,
the tungs and kidneys but most is metabolized
;r. It Is first oxidized in the liver to acetaldehyde,
I acetate or to its activated form, acetyl coenzyme A,
al metabolic pool of two carbon fragments.
Several enzyme systems are capable of oxidizing methanol and
ethanol and their respective roles have not been entirely elucidated.
Alcohol dehydrogenase is primarily responsible for the oxidation of ethanol
and probably for that of methanol as well (2). Catslase (10) and a
microsomal oxidizing system in the liver (7) may also participate under
certain conditions or in certain animal species.
The subsequent oxidation of the acetaldehyde produced from ethanol
is accomplished by acetaldehyde dehydrogenase with possible contributions
from xanthine and aldehyde oxidases. Both of these enzymes rapidly
metabolize acetaldehyde and other aliphatic aldehydes in vitro. However,
only traces of xanthine oxidase arc present In the human liver (9), so its
significance in normal metabolism Is questionable.
Although methanol or ethanol poisoning usually results trom
■erly generous consumption of alcoholic beverages, both compounds
tufficiently volatile to pose potential hazards to workmen exposed to
fumes. Consequently, threshold limit values have been established
workroom environments in the U.S. For ethanol. the TLV is 1000 ppm
1 mg per m' 1, and for methanol it is 200 ppm (260 mg per m^) (1).
The relative toxicity of these alcohols by different routes in
rent animals can be judged from representative values taken from th«
slry of ToJtic Effects of Chemical Substances (8) (Table 111.
,y Google
Table 11. ToxlciV of mettianol and ethanol.
Animal
Route
LD„
mc/ks
Methanol
Ethanol
Monkey
Mouse
Rat
Rabbit
Guinea
pig
tnhaUtton
Intravenous
Uitrav<nou<
Oral
o»i
9800
1000 (ppm)
B28S
1440
1973
esoo
5560
Dtscusaion
The ethanol in a single beer or cocktail or glass of viae would
equal that present in many tons of irradiated beef, so that the potential
contribution of irradiated beef la trivial and can be disregarded as a haallh
hazard. Virtually every category of foodstuffs -- fruits, vegetables, dairy
products, juices, -- contains significant quantities ofethanol.
Methanol also is widely distributed among foodstuffs and consumed in
[I has been detected in the water supplies of six oC
where such Bnalyses were made. While data are not
□rmsl intake of methanol, it is believed to be far higher
t would be contributed daily from irradiated beef.
-e believes tl
,y Google
REFERENCES CITED
American Conference ot Governmental Industrial Hygienists. 1916.
TLVs^: threshold limit values for chemical substances and physical
agents in the workroom environment with intended changes tor 1976.
Cincinnati, Ohio.
Casarett, t.J. and J. DouU. 1975. Methanol. Pages 512-513. 522-526
in Toxicology: the basic science ot poisons. Macmillan Publishing
Co., Inc.. New York, N.Y.
lenUl Protection Agency. 1975.
of suspected carcinogens in drinking wat(
Washington. D.C.
Kini, M. M. and J.R. Cooper. 1962. Biochemistry ot methanol
poisoning. 4. The effect of methanol and its metabolites on
retinal metabolism. Biochem. J. 62:164-172.
Lieber. C. 5. and L. M. DeCarli. 1968. Ethanol oxidation by
hepatic microsomes: adaptive increase after ethanol feeding.
Science 162:917-918.
Majchrowicz. E. 1975. Effect of peripheral ethanol metabolism on
the central nervous system. Fed. Proc. Fed. Am. Soc. Exp.
Biol. 34:1948-1952.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. 1975. Registry
of toxic effects of chemical substances. Christensen, H. E. and
T.T. Luginbyhl, eds. U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington,
D.C. .. ■'
Tephly. T.R,, R.E. Parka. Jr. and G, J. Mannering. 1S64.
Methanol metabolism in the rat. J, Pharmacol. Exp. Thar.
143:292-300.
Detoxicelion mechanisms. 2nd ed. CI
„GoogIe
Occurrence
A number of mldehydea were detected la the Irradiated nncoohed
beet ■amples (Table 13). Apart from 2-mettiyl pmtanal. all were relatively
long chain compounda ranging from 11 to 18 carbon atoms. The total aldehjda
content was approximately 0. 8 mg per kg of beef. Almoat half o( thla
amount came from octsdeeenal and presumably arose from oleic acid, a
major constituent of beef tat. The concentrations of the remaining aldehydes
varied from 0. Oil lo 0. 127 mg per kg of beef.
As is evident tr<xn Table 12. tlie free fatty aldehydes are widely
distributed tn nature. They have been tdentifled in yeait (71 bacteria (St,
fruit (9). vegetables (9) and in various manrnialian tissues (6, 12, 14, 26).
Some are natural flavoring substances and are present in relatively large
amounts in certain foods, especially in citrus fruits. In (act, the longer
chain aldehydes are the major flavor conatitutents of most citrus oils (2).
Thus, a kilogram at orange oil contains 140 to 4S00 mg uodecanal (IT),
760 to 4600 mg dodecanal (2, 17) and 130 to 1240 mg tetradecanal (2).
Hexadecanal has also been Identified as one ot the major alddtydea In orange
oU, although its concentration was not reported (2),
Dodecanal and tetradecanal have been used as fragrances (or
approximately SO years and undecanat since the 1940<s, Approximately
20, 000 pounds each of undecanal and dodecanal and 2(K>0 pounds ot
tetradecanal are used annually In soaps, detergents, creams, lottons
The fatty aldehydes have also been identified as naturally occurring
components In mammalian llplda, where they occur both In tree and tn bound
forma. Gllbertson jst bL (13) have isolated from the hearts of rat. dog
and cow all the aldehydes found In Irradiated beef except for 2-methyl
pentanal. The total tree aldehyde concentrations were approximately 20 to
40 mg per kg of treah heart muscle. Hexadecanal and octadecanal
were the principal aldehydes present, with the former accounting for
rou^ly half ot the total. Only trace amounts of undecanal and dodecanal
were detected. More recently. Ferrell and Radlott (B) measured ttie free
fatty aldehydes (C* to C|() in normal and Uifarcted hearts. In th: apparently
normal hearts of two men, 46 and 72 years old respectively, they found
1.91 and 9.14 it moles at aldehydes per 100 mg lipid {2I». The principal
Free aldehydes detected were dodecanal, hexadecanal, heptadecanal, octa-
decanal and octadecenal. The infarcted hearts showed increased aldehyde
concentrations. Especially ot tetradecanal. Free aldehydes tiave also been
found in rat brain (26). human serum (12) and mouse livcr(6).
,y Google
T»bl« 12. Dtalribulion ot aldehydea lound ir
lrr.di.ted
Compound
beef
Other foods
ufi/kB
.a/ks
3-Methyl pent.nal
Tetr.dec.nal
Pent, decanal
Hexadec.n.1
OclB dec anal
Hexadecenal
Octadecenal
Found In beef, chicken, coffee, crtap
brtad, garlic, meat, onion, peanut,
tomato, vinegar
Bilberry - SOi oil, orange - 140,000-
4, SOO, 000; oil, roaated peanut - 1 SO;
alao found in fruit, meat, dairy producta
Bilberry - 30; milk, dry - S: beef,'
cooked ' 100; egg -- 1400; citrua otla -
760, 000-4. BOD. 000; tomato - TTlOi
Oil, roaated peanut - SS; found in
•pproxtmately 2D foods-, dairy, fruit
Bilberry - 20; citrua oils • 130,000 -
I, 240, OOOi oil, roaated peanut - 230;
alao found in grape, lemon
Found in beef, bilberry, chickeiv citrus
fruits, cranberry, porii
Found In beef, chicken, pork
Oil, roaated peanut - 63
„GoogIe
MetaboUsm
It is generally stated that atdehydea are readllj oxidized In
the animal body to the corrwgponjing acid? aii't fionvorled by beta oxldltlaB
to carbon dioxide and water (27). Thla oxidation Is calalyied by thre« ensyme
systems; aldehyde dehydrogenase(ZO) , aldehyde oxldaae (22) and nnthlna
oxidase (23). Although this pathway is well documented, there 1b growtng
evidence that reduction ot the aldehyde to <ta alcohol also occurs and may
actually be the favored route, especially tar xenobiotlc aldehydes and ketones,
Kessler and Ferrell (16) isolated an alcohol dehydrogenase from the
supernatant traction ot mouse liver homogenate capable of reducing aldehydes
ranging from Hcetaldehydc to octadecanal. Bachur (1) has recently complied
a list of c a rbony I 'reducing enzymea whose characteristics are remarkably
similar. All these enzymes are found In the cytoplasm and are widely
distributed in tissues. Bachur has termed this ubiquitous clsss of ei
"cytoplasmic aldo-keto reductases. "
Toxicity
Toxicity data on theae aldehydes are disappointingly sparse.
Oral rat LD,g values for 2-methyl pentanal (25). vindecanal (24), dodecalial
(3), and tetradecanal (18) are all gretter than 5 g per kg body weight. Rats
survived inhalation of 8000 ppm of 2-methyl pentanal for 4 hours with no
deaths (25). After intraperitoneal injection ot tetradecanal, hexadecanal and
octadecanal into mice, the LDggB were 2.2. 2.0 and 1. 3 g per kg body weight
respectively (11). Data on oral ingestion are available only tor tetradecanal
which was fed to mice at levels of 166 mg per kg for 130 days with no apparent
toxic effect (111. No data have been found on the toxicity of hexadecenal
and octadecenal.
Uisct
The long chain aldehydes are Important flavor components
of fruits and other foods. With the exception <>f pentadecanal and octadecenal.
each of the compounds found in the Irradiated t^eef has been reported in
other tooda and most of them have been detected in cardiac tissue. Those
that liave been tested have very tow toxlcltiea and wtiat la known of their
metabolism suggests that these aldehydes are readily ronverted to innocuous
materials. Sonte of theae campounds or their close relatives are utilised
by the food industry to simulate Ihe odor and taste of natural foods (151. The
Food and Drug Administration (191 sanctions the use of dodecanal and
tetradecanal for this purpose as well as several close relatives ot undecanal:
namely, undecs lactone, undecenal, undecanone, uoderyl alcohol and undecenyl
3,Googlc
^1
• <21 CFR 172. SIS. formerly 21 CPR 121. 1164] (19). The Council of
Europe (4) has approved undecanal itself as a flavoring adjuvant as well as
dodecanal and tetradecanal. Similarly, these three aldehydes have been
approved as food flavors by an expert committee for the British Ministry
o( Agriculture (10). The acceptable daily intakes are roughly 1000 to 10. 000
times the amounts of the respective aldehydes from the irradiated beef.
„GoogIe
REFERENCES CITED
Bachur, N. R. 1876. Cytoplmamlc aldo-kelo reAictaMa: ■ «1»M
of drug metsboltzing enzymes. Science lB3:S&i-S97.
Braddock. R.J. . andJ. W. Keaterson. 1976. Quantitative aialyaia
of aldehydes, esters, alcohols and acids from cltrua oila. J.
Food Sci. 41:1007-1010.
Calandra. J.C. |971. Report to Research Institute for Fragrance
Materials. Inc.. tZ April. (CUed by D, L.J. Opdyke^n Fragrance
raw materials monagraphs. Food Cos met Toxicol, ll:4S3, IB73h
Council of Europe, 1973. Naturat flavouring si
sources, and added artificial flavouring substances. Maisonneuve.
Strasbourg, France.
Ferrell, Vi . J. , R.J. Kesslcr and M. Drouillard. 1971. Identifica-
tion if n-nonaldehy'ie in photobaeterlum tiahert. Chem. Ptijts.
Lipids 6:131-134.
Ferrell, W.J. and J. N. Miceli. 1972. Eftecta of ethanol on
membrane lipids. II. Changes in the content and metattolism
of aldehydogenic lipids in muuse total liver, mitochondria and
microsomes. Comp. Biochem. Physi<M. 41B;19-26.
Ferrell. W.J. and J. F. Radloff. 1972. Aldehydogenic lipids of
human heart; qusntitatiiv and qualitative comparlBona between
normal and intarcted tissue. Int. J. Biochem. 3;49B-502.
Flavor and Extract Manufacturers' Association of the United States.
1974. Scientific literature review of aliphatic primary alcohols,
esters and acids in flavor usage. Section 4. Washington. D. C.
Food Additives and Contaminants Committee. Ministry of Agriculture,
Fisheries and Food. 1976. R,-port on the reviem of flavourings
in food. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.
„GoogIe
Gilberlson, J.R., W.J. Ferrell and R. A, Gelman. 1967. Isolation
and analysis of free fatty aldehydes from rat. dog, and bovine heart
muscle. J. Lipid Res. 8:38-45.
Gilbertaon. J.R., B.C. Johnson, R.A. Gelman and C. Buffenmyer.
I9T2. Natural occurrence of free fatty aldehydes in bovine cardiac
muscle. J. Lipid Res. 13:491-499.
Hall. R. L. and B. L, Oser. 1965. Recent progress in the considera-
tion of flavoring ingredients under the food additives amendment.
111. GRAS substances. Food Technol. 19:151-197.
Kessler, R.J. and W. J. Ferrelt. 1974. The purification and
properties of an alcohol dehydrogenase from mouse liver. Int. J.
Biochem. 5:365-374.
Keslerson, J.W. and R. Hendrickson. 1962. The composition of
Valencia orange oil as related to fruit maturily. Am. Ferfum,
Cosmet. 77:21-24.
Lynch, T.A. 1971. Report to Research Institute for Fragrance
Materials, Inc., 16 June. (Cited by D.L.J. Opdyke In Fragrance
raw materials monographs. Food Cosmet. Toxicol, ll;4B7, 1973).
Office of the Federal Register, General Sources Administration. 1977.
Food and Drug Administration: rules and regulations. Food for
human consumption: reorganization and republication. Fed. Regist,
42:14301-14669.
Badloff. J. F. and W. J. Ferrell. 1970. Qualitative and quantitative
analysis of free fatty aldehydes in human heart. Physiol. Chem.
Physics 2:105-109.
Raja,>opalan, K. V. , I. Fridovich and P. Handler. 1962. Hepatic
aldehyde oxidase. 1. Purification and properties. J. Biol. Chem.
237:922-928.
Rajagopatan. K. V. and P. Handler. 1968. Melalloflavoproteins.
Pages 301-337 iii_T. P. Singer, ed. Biological oxidations. Inler-
sclence Publishers, New York, N.Y.
,y Google
SheUnakl, M.V. 1971. Report to Reaearch Inatitute tor Fragr«ncc
Materials, Inc.. 14 November. (Cited by D. L.J. Opdyke In
Fragrance raw materials monographs. Food Cosmet. Toxicol.
11:481, 1973).
Smyth. H.F.. Jr.. C. P. Carpenter. C.S. Well, U, C. PosMDi
and J. A. Striegel. 19G2. Range finding tonicity data: liat Vt.
Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 23:95-107.
Vignais. P. V. and 1. Zabin. 1958. Form
dans le cerveau de rat. Pages 78-84 ir^ Ir
on biochemical problems of lipids. Vienna.
Williams. R. T. 1959. Detoxication mechaniam, 2nd ed. ChkpmBii
and Hall, Ltd. , London.
,y Google
The two Eimplest ketones, acetone and 2-butBnone (methyl
ethyl ketone) were present in concentrations of 139 and 89 ^g per kg respectively
in the irradiated b^ef (Table 13). No other ketones were detected.
Both compounds are widely distributed tn nature. Acetone hss been
delected in virtually every food examined. Its presence has been r.^por(.;J
In over 10 foods Including bevcra^ea, fruits, vegetables and meat.
Amounts in excess of 1 mg per kg (1 ppm) have been reported lor beer.
butter, certain cheeses, milk, eggs, strawberries and other foods.
It is found in significant amounts in diesel exhaust (25), in the effluents
from wood burning (14) and solid waste incineration (27), in drinking
water (S) and in ambient air (10) (Table 13). It normally is found in small
amounts in the tissues and fluids of man and other animals. In severe diabetes,
when Tat Is the predominant metabolic substrate, as much as 100 grams per
day of acetone, beta hydroxybutyric and acetoacetic acids (ketone bodies)
may be produced and excreted. Comparable amounts may also l>e produced
during starvation.
2-Sut9none is also a ubiquitous food constituent, found naturally in
a variety of fruits, vegetables, nieats and dairy products. It is also widely
used as a flavoring constituent in certain beverages. Ices, candy and baked
Because of its extreme solubility, acetone is readily
absorbed into the blood stream after inhalation. Whether inhaled or ingested,
acetone is rapidly excreted through the lungs with the kidneys serving as
secondary excretory organs (6, 7. 26).
Small amounts are oxidized to carbon dioxide or converted to
formate or acetate. Price and Rlttenberg (19) administered t to 7 mg per kg of
labeled acetone to rats and found that about half was exhaled as carbon
dioxide within 24 hours. The labeled atom which appeared in a number of
compounds, including glycogen, urea and cholesterol, suggested that acetone
was split to one or two carbon atoms and utilized in various metabolic cycles.
„GoogIe
lllfllsliinils lillsil
|i> -'
„GoogIe
category of liver and kidney enzymea which Bachur (3) hut termed the
cytoplasmic aldo-keto reductases. However, tn contrast with other aldehydes
and ketones, only a Bmgll fraction of absorbed acetdne (a reduced to alcohol
and excreted as Its glucurontde (26).
Little can be added concerning the metsboHc pathways of 2-butanone.
the other ketone detected in irradiated beef. Variations from acetone seem
related to differences tn physical properties of the two ketones. Since
2-butanone is somewhat less volatile than acetonei less is excreted unchanged
through the tungs and more is subjected to enzymatic action (31). It appears
that butanone can be reduced to a secondary alcohol t>y the liver and kidney
cytoplasmic reductases described above (13). DiVlncenio 5*.^ (5)
also detected 3-hydroxy-2 butanone and 2, 3-but«nedioI after butanone
administration Indicating that some of the compound follows an oxidative
pathway.
Toxicity
Both acetone and 2-butanone are generally considered to be
relatively nontoxic. The Joint FAcyWHO Expert Committee on Food
Additives (111 has approved the use of acetone as a solvent in accordance
with "good manuhcturlng practices" and states that "many years of
human industrial experience have shown no evidence nf organ damage. "
The Food and Drug Administration (17) also permits the use of Z-butanone
in foods as a synthetic flavoring substance (21 CFR 172. SIS. formerly 21 CFR
121. 1164). as does the British Ministry of Agriculture (S) and the Council of
Europe (4). The latter permission has been on a temporary basis since 1973,
pending additional medium term toxicity studies on a sensitive species but no
study <rf this type has been reported. McCann et al. (IS) reported that acetone
was nonmutagenic in Salmonella typhimurium.
For inhalation, the threshold limit values adopted by the American
Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienisis for workroom atmosphere
(2) are 1000 ppm (2400 mg per m*) for acetone and 200 ppm (590 mg per m'|
tor butanone. Oglesby^al. (18) stated that a study of thousands of mill
workt
2-Butanone is widely used as an industrial solvent and although
workers frequently complain of its objectionable odor, tt has been stated
that exposure to 700 ppm in the air gave no evidence of permanent ill
effects (7). Dermatoses are common among workers handling butanone
and numbness of fingers anif arms were reported by some exposed to 300 to
600 ppm (22). The quesCton of possible neuropathy was reconsidered when
„GoogIe
a recent outbreak occurred among workers Id a color-^rlnt a
coated fabric plant exposed to 2-heKBnone, a close relative of b\
Salda and co-workers (20) produced extensive peripheral nerve chaxigea
In rats exposed to tiexanone but none upon continuous exposure lot)utanone
at concentrations of 1125 ppm for up to 55 days. Similar results were obtained
with cats (24). [MVincenzo et^al^ (5) attributed the toxicity of the haxanme
to the enzymatic formation of 2, 5-hexanedione, which produced a marked
peripheral neuropathy in rats. However, when rats were exposed to the
combined vapor at a ratio of one part hexanone to (Ive parts of butanooe
(225:1125 ppm) a marked potentiation of the peripheral neurMozlcltjr was
observed (30).
a in different species are
■ ■dlalitlon
Oral
Onl
IMraptrltoneal
lo.TOOmg/iig
9.700 mg/kg
1297 Tg/kg
Or.1
Intra g»Btric
S300 itig/kg
SS40 mg/kg
>20 ml /kg
Or,l
BOOO mg/kg
Inlnperilorwal
Blfl mg,kg
o«!
WOO mg/hg
2730-S«90mg/kg
„GoogIe
Acetone and butanone have been delected in scores ol food-
stuHs. In some commonly consumed foods, their concentrations exceed by
a large margin the quantities found in irradiated beef. Both have been
approved by otTicial bodies, including the Food and Drug Administration for
use as a food eictractanl or additive. Both are widely used in industry with-
out evidence of chronic human toxicity. Thi^lr metabolic products pose no
apparent hazard. ' For these reasons, the Committee believes that the
amoimts of scetone and butanone present in irradiated beef can be consumed
without barm.
3,Googlc
REFERENCES CITED
Allen. N. . J.R. Mendell. D.J. BittmaiBr, R.E. FooUine and
J. O'Neill. 1975. Toxic polyneuropaUiy due to methyl n-butaoe
ketone: an industrial outbreak. Arch. Neurol. 33:209-213. 318..
American Conference of Governmental Induatrial Hygienista. iST6.
TLVs ^ : threshold limit values for substances and physical aganta in
the workroom environment with intended chances for 1976. CincinnaU,
Council of Europe. 1973. ^
sources, and added artificia
Strasbourg. France.
DiVincenzo. G.D. , C.J. Kaplan and J. Dedinas. 1976. Cliaracleriza-
tion of the ntetabolites of methyl n- butyl ketone, methyl iso-bu^l
ketone and methyl ethyl ketone in guinea pig serum and their
clearance. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 3B:5U-S22.
DiVlncenzo. G. D. . F. J. Yanno and B. D. Aatill. 19T3. Exposure of
man and dog to low concentrations of acetone vapor. Am. Ind. Hyg.
Assoc. J. 34:329-33B,
erikins. H. B. 19S9. Pages 119-123 in^The chemistry of induatrial
toxicology, 2nd ed. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, N. Y.
Environmental Protection Agency. IB'
of suspected carcinogens in drinking w
Washington, D.C.
Food Additives and Contaminants Committee, Ministry of Agriculture.
Fisheries and Food. 1976. Report on the review of flavourings in
food. Her Majesty's Swiionery Office, London. -
GCA Corporation. GCA/Technology Division. 1976. Assessment of
acetone as a potential air pollution problem. Vol. 5. Final report.
Prepared for U.S. Enviromental Protection Agency under contract
no. 6B-02-1337. Bedford. Mass.
,y Google
Joint FAO/WHO Expert Commitlee on Food Additivies. 1970.
F^ges 86-90 in_ Toxicological evaluation of some extraction solvents
and certain other substances. FAO nutrition meeting report aeries
^8A; WHO/food addiilve/70. 39. Food and Agriculture Organization
otthe United Nations, Rome, and World Health Organization, Geneva.
Kimura. E.T,, D, M. Ebert and P,W. Dodge. 1971. Acute toxicity
and limits of solvent residue tor sixteen organic solvents. Toxicol.
Appl. Pharmacol. 19;699-704.
Levaggi. D. A. and M. Feldstein. 1970. The collection and snalyaia
of low molecular weight carbonyl compounds from source effluents.
J. Air Pollul. Control Assoc. 19:43-45.
McCann. J. , E. Choi, E. Yamasaki and B, N. Ames. 1975.
Detection of carcinogens as mutagens in the Sj Imone lla /m icrosome
test: assay of 300 chemicals. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
72:5135-5139.
National Institute tor Occupational Safety and Health. 1975.
Registry of toxic effects ot chemical substances. Chrietensen, H.H.
and T. T. Luginbyhl. eds. Government Printing Office, Washington,
D.C.
Office of the Federal Register, General Services Administration.
1977. Pood and Drug Administration: rules and regulations. Food for
human consumption: reorganization and repualicatlon. Fed. Regist.
42:14301-14669.
Oglesby. F.L. . J. E, Wiliiams. D.W, Fassett and J. H. Sterner,
1948. Presented at Industrial Health Conference. Detroit.
Unpublished. Cited in Documenution of the threshold limit values
tor substances in workroom air, 3rd ed. , 1971. America.i Conference
ot Governmental Industrial Hygienisis, Cm
Price, T, D, and D. Rittenberg.
I. Gross aspects of cataboHsm a
185:449-459.
Saida. K. . J.R. Mcndell and H. S. Weiss. 1976. Peripheral nerve
changes induced by methyl n-bulyl ketone and potentiation by methyl
ethyl ketone. J. Neuropathol. Exp. Neurol. 35:207-225.
,y Google
Schwarz, L. 1898. Ueb«
Ketone der Fettaaurereih
40U68-I94.
Smith. A.R.
at butanone ai
23:174-176.
Smyth, H. F. . Jr., C. P. Carpenter,
J. A. Striegel. 1962. Range finding l<
Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 23:95-107.
Spencer. P. S. andH. H. Schaumburg. 1976. Feline nervcws syatem
response to chronic intoxication with commercial grades of m thyl
n-butyl ketone, methyl isobutyl ketone and methyl ethyl ketone.
Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 37:301-311.
tchanisms. 2nd ed. Chapman
Assoc. 6:84-89.
,y Google
SULFUR-CONTAINING COMPOUNEIS
Occurrence
Five aulfur-conUininB compounds -- (our autfidBS and one
thiol -- were detected in irradiated beef: carbonyl aulfide, dimethyl disulfide,
dimethyl sulfide, ethane thiol and hydrogen sulfide (Table !&>. All were
found in both cooked and uncooked aamples. The thermally sterilized
samples contained considerably more carbonyl sulfide than did the
irradiated specimens. No ethane thiol or dimethyl sulfide was detected
in the nonir radiated beef, while the amounts of hydrogen sulfide and dimethyl
disulfide were approximately the same in Irradiated and thermally
sterilized samples.
SulfuE- compounds originate from many natural and anthropogenic
scurces. Significant amounts of hydrogen sulfide are constantly added to the
atmosphere from volcanic and geothermal activity, from anaerobic bacterial
action and from various Industrial processes. Natural gas is rich in hydro-
gen sulfide and the processing techniques to remove this contaminant give
rise lo considerable amounts of carbonyl sulfide. Carbonyl sulfide is also
generated when fossil fuels containing sulfur are bumed. In man and other
animals, hydrogen sulfide is liberated in the Intestinal tract and is a readily
detectable component of flatus (9] and fecal material. In addition to these
sources, hydrogen sulfide, carbonyl sulfide and other sulhir containing
compounds are also found in numerous foods, as shown in Table 15.
Sulfur- containing compounds are present in a wide variety of food-
stuffs and are especially prominent In many vegetables, meats and roasted
products such as coffee, cocoa and peanuts. Volatile sulfur compounds were
detected in 21 of 23 varieties of vegetables investigated (T). The broadest
distribution was noted for hydrogen sulfide, dimethyl sulfide and dimethyl
disulfide, with a somewhat more limited occurrence of ethane thiol. Carbonyl
sulfide was found in large amounts in horseradlsK and was readily detectable
in other vegetables and meats.
In general, the concentration of these compounds Increases significantly
after heating. Dimethyl disulfide has been reported in almost all cooked
vegetables (13). 11 represents, for example, over 25 percent of the total
volatiles from fresh cabbage and almost 40 percent of those from cooked
samples (10). It is also evident after heating beef, when it may reach levels
of 100 ug per lig and contribute to the off- flavor of overcooked meat (19).
Hydrogen sulfide is a major contributor to the flavor and off- flavor of cooked
„GoogIe
s,,=l
!!' 1
i 1
o
.
fljj
1
1 .-i
t
1X5 "
■.St ,
1
t
J ^..
I!
II
liill illlllPl liiitiills
I I
1 ?|H «ill hi 5=lsP
J t;fii lliifii'. 111!:!
If I
„GoogIe
neat*. flM, certain vegetable! aiich •■ broccoli «tMl cmbba^, and eapeclalljr
of eus.
The origin of these compounds h>a not been CKtcnaively inveeltgsted.
but metbionine ie genenJly believed to be their major precursor (2, S),
capeclaUy tor dimethyl sulfide and dimethyl disulfide. The MailUrd reacliotia
In beat-processed foods give rise to various alkyl thiols and carbonyl sulfide
QSlwhile hydr^en sulfide can arise from various snlfur-contalning amino
scida. peptides and proteins and from tbiamine. Cysteine, however, appears
to be lis chief precursor.
Meiabollam
Surprisingly few studies have been conducted on the fate of the
simple snltur volatiles Identified in the irradiated lieef. By analogy with the
body's treatment of known sulfur xenoblotlcs, oxidation would appear to be
the preferred pathway of metabollam.
Hydrogen sulfide is very susceptible to oxidation. It is oxidlted so
readily that Ita reported levels In the a'moapbcre may reflect srtifically
low values rssultii^ from oxidation during sampling and analysis (B).
Although documentation could not be found. It seems liliely tnat hydrogen sulfide
is also oxidiied in the body. In any event, the aimplest organic aulfide --
dimethyl sulfide -- has been shown to undergo such oxidation, first lo the
sulfoxide (16) and then to the sulfone <6t.
The disulfides, on the other hand, are first reduced to the corresponding
mercaptans by a nonspecinc nucleotide- dependent disulfide reductase (15).
The resulting mercaptans maybe partially eliminated, unchanged In the
eiqiired airand urine, but the bulx is oxidiied as described above and excreted
in the urine as its sulfone (14) or as inorganic sulfate (IT). Ethane thiol
undergoes a similar transformation, being partially excreted unchanged in
the breath and urine and partially as the sulfone and inorganic sulfate in
the urine. Ethane thiol may also be methylated by 5-methyl transferase to
produce its 5-methjl analogue (IB). In addition, thiols undergo conjugation
with glucuronic acid (IT) although this has not yet been demonstrated with
•thane thiol.
No reports could be found on tlie metatmlism of carbonyt sulfide.
Since It is readily hydrolyzed by water to hydrogen sulfide and carbon
dioxide, its fate in the body would presumably be the same as these products.
Toitictty
The ingestion of volatile Sulfur compounds is largely self •
limiting because of their strong odor and taste. Small ""
,y Google
necessary to impart a desirable, characteristic flavor to the fOol, hot
excessive quantities dlBcourage consumpllun tiy all except thoae wtth
highly insensitive or idiosyncratic tastes. The quantities detected in the
irradiated beef fall well within ihe range naturally present in nuuijr foods.
The Council of Europe (4) has approved the addition of several of Ibess
compuimds as flavoring adjuncts. The acceptable daily intake for dlmethyt
sulfide has been set by this group at I. S ppm of Ingested tbod (Bbaut 1. & to
2.5 mg per day) and for ethane thiol at I ppm (about 1.0 to 1. S tag per day).
No level has b««n set for hydrogen sulfide, presumsbly becsusc of ttas self
limiting aspect mentioned above. British auiborlties have recommeoded
approval of hydrogen sulfide, dimethyl sulCide, dimethyl disulfide and ettauie
thiol as food flavoring adjuvants (5). The Food and Drug Adminlatration
imposes no limit in its approval of dimethyl sulfide (21 CFR 172. 51S, tormerly
21 CFR 121. IIG4) as a synthetic flavoring substance that may be safely used
in foods [12>. '
The threshold limit value for worlu-oom atmospheres has been set
at 0. S ppm (I mg per m^ ) for ethane thiol and at 10 ppta (IS mg per m*)
tor hydrogen sulfide (1). The acute toxicities of these compounds are
summarized in Table 16, constiructed from data collected by the National
Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (11). Hydrogen sulfide in high
concentrations acts directly upon the netvous system causing paralysis of
the respiratory center and olfactory system. It also decreases the oicyfen
carrying capacity of hemoglobin by the formation of sulftiemoglobin. Little
is known of the acute effects of the other sulfur-contalnlag compotttids.
Tsble 16. Toxicity of sulfur c
Dimethyl sulfide
Ethane thiol Mouse Inhalation 2700 mg/ kg
Kat Intraperitoneal 450 mg/kg
Inhalation 4420 ppm/4 hr
Oral 662 mg/lcg
Hydi-ojlen sulflile
„GoogIe
Di«cu»«ion
TtM amounn of the ■ulfur-conulning compound) in irradiated
beet are extremely ■mall, in no case exceeding lOtig per kg. Three oT the
five compounda (carbonyl aulfldc, dimethyl disulfide and hydrogeo lulfide).
were tnOre abundant in the thermally aterilixed than in the irradiated aamplea.
Each (except carbonyl sulfide) haa been detected in numeroua foods and in
every cace where quantitative analyaia haa been performed the quantity in
meat, tish. eggs, frulta and vegetables is far greater than that in irradiated
beef. Most of those compounds have been approved by official bodies as
flavoring adjuvants at levels aeveraL orders of magnitude greater than thsir
concentrations In irradiated beef.
„GoogIe
REFERENCES CITED
American Conference of Governmenlml and Industrtat Uygieuists.
ta7S. TLVa : threahold limil values for ■ubstances and phjaip*!
agents in the workroom environment with intended changea for 197S.
Cincinnati. Ohio.
Ballance, P. E. 1961. Production of volatile compounda related to
the flavour of foods from the Strecker degradation o( DL- methionine.
J. Sci. Pood Agric. 12:532-536.
Council of Europe. 1973. Natural flavouring substances, their
sources, and added arlificial flavouring subatances. Maisonneuve,
Strasbourg. France.
Food Additives and Contammants Committee, Ministry of Agriculture,
Fisheries and Food. 1876. Report on the review of flavourings
in food. Her Majesty's Stationery Office. London.
Hucker, H. B. . P.M. Ahmad and E. A. Miller. 1&6B. Absorption,
distrlbuiion and metabolism (^ dimettiylaulfoxide in the rat, rabbit
and guinea pig. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 154:176-184.
Johnson. A.E., H. E. Nursten and A, A. Williams. 1971. Vegetable
volaliles: a survey of components identified. Chem. Ind. (London)
Pan 1, 556-565: Part 2. 1212-1224.
MacLeod. A.J. and G. MacLeod. t97U. Effects of variations in
cooking methods on the flavor volalites of cabbage, J. Food Sci
35:744-750.
National Inatiluie for Occupational Safety and Health. 1975.
Registry of toxic effects of chemical substances. Christensen,
H.E. and T. T, Luginbyhl. eds. U.S. Goveinmenl Piinting OTfict
WaahinKton. O.C.
,y Google
Office of Ihe Federal Regiater. General Services Administration.
1977. Food and Drug Administration: rules and regulations.
Food for human consumption: reorganization and re publication.
Fed. Regtst. 42:14301-14669.
related to ethane-
Tietle. P. 1970. Disulfide reduction in rat liver. I. Evidence
for the presence of nonspecific nucleotide -dependent disulfide
reductase and GSH-disultide transhydrogenase activities in the
high-speed supernatant fraction. Arch. Btochem. Blt^ys.
13B:177-1SS.
Williams. K. I.H., 5. H. Buratein and D. S. Layne. 1966. Metabolism
of dimethyl sulfide, dimethyl sulfoxide and dimethyl sultone in the
rabbit. Arch. Blochem. Biophys. 117:84-87.
WUliams. R. T. 1971. Introduction: pathways of drug metabolism.
Pages 226-242 in B.B. Brodie, J.R. Gillette and H. S. Ackerman.
eds. Concept! Id biochemical pharni«coio(y. I^rt 3. Handbook
of experimental pharmacology. Vol. XXVIII/2. Springer Verlag,
New York, N.Y.
Ziemba. Z. and Y. Malkki, 1971. Changes in odour components
of canned beef due to processing. Lebensm. -Wiss. Technol.
4:118-122.
,y Google
NITHOGEN-CONTAINING COMPOUNDS
Oc.
was Ihe only nitrogen containing organic volatile
defected in the irradiated beef. It was present in both the cooked dod uncooked
irradiated samples {Table 17). The concentrations did not differ significantly
from tho9c in the frozen controls and were considerably less than those
in the thermally sterilised beef. This suggests that acetonitriie is not a
radiolyiic product, a suggestion strengthened by the observation that
nitrilee can be produced from amino acids at conventional cooking
No report could be found listing acetonitriie as a normal
constituent of food. However, VoUmin and colleagues (S) have shown ttet
nit riles are produced in abundance when amino acids are subjected to
high temperatures, Acetonitriie was a major product when the following
amino acids were healed to 700° C; glycine, alanine, proline, _serin^,
cysteine, methionine, aspartic acid, ornithine and gamma ammo butyric
acid. Lien and Nawar (4) using milder treatments, detected the formation
of acetonitriie when beta alanme was healed at 200° C in vacuo. The
compound apparently resulted from successive decarboxylation and
dehydroge nation as follows:
CH2 - CHj - COOH -^^—^ CHj— CHj
I I + CO; ——y CHjCH-MH * B; — —> CH^SH ♦ Hj
Lien and Nawar also demonstrated that triglycerides and amino acids
interact readily to produce secondary amides which hydrolyze to forrn
Acetonitriie has been identified in cigarette smoke (2) and in the
urine of smokers <5). About one mg of acetonitriie is produced from (be
smoke of a single cigarette. The average urinary excretion among smokers
was more than 100 jig P*"" 'i'^r with heavy smokers excreting twice this
amount. The highest value detected among nonsmokers was leas than
10)ig per liter of urine.
„GoogIe
Table 17, Acetonltrite In beef.
irradiated
cooked uncooked
Thermally SterilUed
cooked uncooked
Frozen Control
cooked uncooked
Metabolism
The alkyl cyanides (e. g. , acetonitrile) are hydrolyzed to
hydrocyanic acid and a corresponding acid with one less carbon atom.
The cyanide is converted to thiocyanale which is excreted unchanged,
while the acid is metabolized through normal metabolic pathways to
carbon dioxide ajid water (9).
Toxicity
The acute toxicity of a
■ 18. It was the least toxic of all alkyl nitril
IS O). Poizani el^al, (6) subjected rats K
even hours daily for 90 days. No deaths wei
■els of 655 ppm, but two monkeys exposed to this concent cation
within 23 and 51 days respectively. One monkey inhaling 330 ppm
ved the 91 day test period as did three dogs. No gross pathology w.
nt but histological examination revealed focal emphysema and
ie proliferation of alveolar septa.
SS-005 0 - 86 -
,y Google
The TLV is 40 ppm (70 mg per m*) (t). This value seem* baaed
primarily on the study by Paznam et al^ (6) on human BubjectB *ho inhaled
the vapDt' at this cuncentratian for 4 houre. Two ul the three BubjectB
reported no adverse effects. No cyanide could be detected in Iheir blood
nor was there any increase in the level of urinary thiocyanate. The third
subject experienced a alight tightness and a sensation of coolness in Uie chest
after the exposure. There was a slight increase in his urinary thiocyanate.
Table 18. Acute toxicity of aeetonitrile.
Mouse
Intraperitoneal
2S0 mg/kg
B
Kat
Intragastric
1.7-8. 5 g/k|
3.Bg/kg
SubculaneouB
5 ml /kg
Intraperitoneal
0. 95-5.62 g/kg
Intravenous (portal)
0. 71 ml /kg
Intravenous (tail)
l.6Bml/kg
Inhalation 8000 ppm/4 hi
-. 16000 ppm/4 hr
1.25 ml /kg
5.0 ml /kg
Inhalation
3800 ppm/4 hr
Guinea pig
Inhalation
S6i>5 ppm/4 hr
e
Discussion
Acetonitrile is a nonradiolytic product. The minute amounts
in irradiated beef are no greater than in frozen controla. and are considerably
less Ihan in thermally sterilized samples. Evidence also points to its rapid
hydrolysis in the body. The Committee concludes that ingestion of acetoni-
trile in the amounts found in irradiated beef should have no harmful effecla.
,y Google
REFERENCES CITED
e of Governmental InduBtrial Hygienists. 19TE.
B Tor chemical substances and physical
vith intended changes for 19T6.
McKee, H.C., J.W. Rhoades, J. Campbell and A. L. GrosE. 1962.
Acetonitrlle in body fluids related to smoking. Publ. Health Rep.
77:553-554.
Poizani. U.C. C. P. Carpenter, P. E. Palm, C.S. Weil and J. H.
Nair, lit. 1959. An investigation of the mammalian toxicity of
acetonitrile. J. Occup. M.id. 1:634-642.
Smyth. H. F, , Jr. and C. P. Carpenter. 1948. Further experience
wtth the range (inding test in the industrial toxicology laboratory.
J. Ind. Hyg. Toxicol. 30:63-68.
Vollmin, J., P. Kriemler. I. Omura, J..,Seibt and W. Simon,
1966. Structural elucidation with a thermal fragmentation -gas
chromatography -mass spectrometry combination. Microchem.
„GoogIe
HALOGEN-CONTAINING COMPOUNDS
1 etracliloroelhylene
Occurrencg
Tetrachloroethylene (perctiLoroethylene ) was the only orgsno-
chlorine compound detected in the irradiated beef in concenCrBtiona aufficient
to permit quantitative analysis (> 1 ppb). Its concentration <B to 11 |ig per
kg) (Table L) was not significantly different from the amounts detected in Uie
nonirradiated samples, nor did it increase with higher irradiation dosea.
Because of Us nonflaniinabiHty and tts excellent solvent ability,
telrachtoroethylene is found in a number of consumer and industrial
products. It is the leading dry cleaning solvent in the U. S. : it is used
eittensively to degrease metals; it serves as a solvent for sUiconesi it is
an intermediate in the synthesis of fluorocarbons and at one time it was
used extensively as a human and veterinary antihelminthic. Its
production on a world-wide basis exceeds one million tons per year, with
approximately one-third at this amount produced in the United States.
As is evident from Table 19, it has been detected above the
North Atlantic and in the air of rural and metropolitan areas, tl is
present in the ocean waters, in rivers and in municipal water supplies; in
aquatic organisms, fish, birds, mammals and man; in fruits, vegetables,
beverages and dairy products. It was delected in eight of ten water
utilities surveyed by the Environmental Protection Agency (4) as well
as in other drinking *ater sources.
Metabolism
Tetrachloroelhylene usually enters the body through the lungs
although absorption is also possible through the skin or gastrointestinal
tract. Regardless of the absorptive site, virtually all is excreted
unchanged through the lungs. Daniel (3) administered ^*Cl-labeled
tetrachloroelhylene by stomach tube to rats and recovered 98 percent of the
radioactivity in the expired air within 48 hours. After exposure to tetra-
chloroelhylene, human subjects excrete most of the absorbed compound
through the lungs within 24 hours. Following repeated exposures, a
prolonged e.q)unenlial decay of the compound in the subjects' breath was
observed extending for 14 day; or more (14). An epoxide, which has been
recovered as an intermediate, is the first metabolic product. This
„GoogIe
ii
il ill IlisI Jit Hi'si!
Ills .i.U ilili fiii! itiili i
i 111 Ititl'Jif! i. lllil*|s
_ ; i .
' I i K5:l I'
liljljlljjiill.
Yii :
„GoogIe
Cl^ CI
-> C— C' — > CI -c -c*
CI'' CI CI ^ CI
Cls.
,>C1-
Cl /
Only traces of t
man after expos
richloroelhanol were excreted in the urir
ure to tetrachloroethylene vapor <6).
e of mice
Tetrachloroethylene is relatively nontoxic after acute
exposure. This is evident from the LD50 values shown in Table 20, as well
as by (he TLV for workroom exposure (100 ppm or 535 mg per m* ) <l). Men
exposed to 1000 ppm showed slight inebriation in 45 minules but no narcosis
after 95 minutes. At levels of 2000 ppm. light narcosis was produced
within a few minutes (2). Stewart et al. (H) exposed human volunteers
to 100 ppm tor ^ hours dally for 5 consecutive days. Over half
complained of mild eye, nose or throat irritation developing within the
first few hours and then usually subsiding. About one-quarter reported
mild headaches. Neurological, pulmonary and laboistory tests were normal.
However, Kylin et ^l. 1^) reported significant fatty degeneration of the
hver in mice chronically exposed to atmospheres of 200 ppm for 4 hours
daily, 6 days weekly for periods of I to 8 weeks.
LD„
Rp
ere
5.3 mWkg
15
4.6g/kg
5.7 g/kg
b
3000 ppm (B hrl
12
9000 ppm (3 hrl
3.4 g/kg
8
„GoogIe
Pregnant mice and rats were exposed to 300 ppm tetrachloroethylene
for 7 hours daily on days S lo IS of gestation (IS). Cesarean sections were
performed on gestation days 21 in rats and 18 in mice. Tl^e tetrachloroethylene
exposure to the pregnant mice and rats caused no signiricant maternal embryonal
or fetal toxicity nor any teratogenicity.
An unpublished study (11) recently completed for the National Cancer
Institute revealed a significantly increased incidence of hepatocellular
carcinoma in both male and female B6C3F1 mice receiving large doses of
tetrachloroethylene. The compound dissolved In corn oil was administered
by gavage five days per week For TS weeks followed by an observation period
of 12 weeks. The tlme-weighted-average dosages for male mice were
1072 and 536 mg per kg per day; and for female mice were TT2 and 386 mg
per kg per day.
Both treated and control mice displayed various neoplastic and
, primary maUgnant tumors of the liver were
le mice receiving tetrachloroethylene (Table 21).
Low dose
High dose
Males
7/79
32/49 (P <0. 001)
27/4B CP <0. 001)
Females
0/20
19/48 (P <0. 001)
19/48 <P <0. 001)
The time to the
41 weeks for the female
first observed tumor was
1 27 weeks for male mice am
Male and female rats were also exposed to two dose levels of
tetrachloroethylene administered as described above: 941 a[»d 471 mg per kg
per day for male rats and 9G2 and 481 mg per kg per day tor female rats.
There was no observable carcinogenic effect of the compound in rats but the
results were considered Inconclusive because of the poor survival of the
animals. Half of the high dose males and females died within 44 and GG weeks,
respectively. Lesions indicative of pneumonia were observed in most control
and dosed aminals alike at necropsy. A high incidence of the tetrachloroethylene-
treated rats displayed toxic iiephropathy.
„GoogIe
icingly demonstrated
n irradiated beet weri
ere is no significant differe
beer supplied by the same processing firm, no tetrachloroethylene could
be detected, [n the numerous publications on irradiated beef and other
meats, the presence of telrachloroethyltne has never been reported.
Similarly, Merritt and co-workera (10>, with many years' experience
with beef irradiatioa state they have rarely detected chlorinated hydrocarbons,
and in these rare cases, the amount detected was independent of Che r*di«tioQ
dosage. To verify the nonradiolytic origin of the telrachloroelbylene in beef,
two separate samples of beet were exposed to increasing doses of gamma
irradiation. The levels in the nonirradiated samples were zero and G vfi
per kg respectively. After exposure of each sample to 30, GO, 90 and ISO
kCy (3. 6, 9, 12 megarads) the tetrachloroethyiene concentrattonB were
unchanged, remaining at 0 in the one sample and 6 iig per kg in the other.
Nevertheless, the recent indictment of tetrachloroethyiene as a
carcinogen even at levels a million times greater than its intake from
beef intensified a search for the source of contamination. It was
discovered that tetrachloroethyiene was used as a cleaning solvent in the
meat packing plant and stored near the beef proceBSing area. To trap the
compound, samples of lard, free from tetrachloroethyiene, were placed
at various sites. In one of the beef~proceEsing areas the lard was found
to contain 91 ppb of tetrachloroethyiene. indicating a significant atmospheric
contamination at this site.
■ small amount of tetrachloroethyiene
The Committe
detected in each type
■e concludes
of beef san
stages ot preparation
of reasonable care di;
compound from beef.
iVing all prt
„GoogIe
REFERENCES CITED
American Conference of Governmental Induslrial Hygienists.
1976. TLVs :tliresliold limit values for cliemical substances and
physical agents in the workroom environment with intended changes
tor 1976. Cincinnati. Ohio.
c toxicity of tetrachloroethylene.
■ntal Protection Agency. 1975. Preliminary assessment
of suspected carcinogens in drinking water: report to Congress.
Washington. D. C.
Gehring. P. J. 1968. Hepatotoxic potency of various chlorinated
hydrocarbon vapours relative to their narcotic and lethal potencies
in mice. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 13:287-288.
Ikeda, M. and H. Ohtsuji. 1972. A comparative study of th
of Fujiwara reaction -positive substances in urine ot humans
rodents given trichtoro- or letrachloro- derivatives of ethani
ethylene. Br. J. Ind. Med. 29:99-104.
Klaassen. CD. and G. L. Plaa. 1966. Relative effects of
chlorinated hydrocarbons on liver and kidney function in mi
Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 9:139-151.
Klaassen, C. D. and G. L. Piaa. 1967. Relative effects of
chlorinated hydrocarbons on liver and kidney function in dogs.
Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 10:119-131.
Kylin, B. . 1. Siimegi and S. Yllner. 1965. Hepalotoxicity of
inhaled trie hloroe thy lene and tetrachloroethylene. Long term
exposure. Acta Pharmacol. Toxicol. 22:379-385.
Merritt, C. , Jr. 1977. Personal communication to H. I. Chinn.
National Cancer Institute. 1977. Bioassay of tetrachloroethylene
for possible carcinogenicity. (Draft; released to Data Evaluation
and Risk Assessment Subgroup, Clearinghouse on Environmental
Carcinogens, March 16. 1977) ; Bethesds. Md.
,y Google
Romt. V.K.. D.D. McColliater. H.C. Spencer. E.H. Adams
and D. D. triBh. 19&Z. Vapor toxicity of tetracUoroetbyleoe (or
laboratory animal* and human aubjecta. Arch. Ind. Hjg. Occnp.
Med. S:566'579.
SchwetE. B.A.. B.K.J. Leong and P.J. Gehrinc. 19TS. llw effect
of maternally inhaled trie hloroc thy leoe. perch lor aetbylene. melt^fl
chloroform, and methylene chloride on embryonal and fetal
development in mice and rat*. ToKicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 32:84-96.
20:224-229.
Wenzel, D.G. and R. D. Gibaoa. 1951. A atudy of the tmici^ and
anthelmintic activity of n- butyl idene chloride. J. nuu-m. Fharmai
3:160-176.
Yllner, S. 1961. Urinary meUbolites (rf ^^-letrachloroethylene
in mice. Nature 191:820.
,y Google
VII, GENERAL DISCUSSION
As pointed out earlier, thLs report reviewB only those cotnpounda
which were detected in beef irradiated and analysed by the techniqiwa
employed at the Natick Laboratories and described In Che experimental
section iaee pagea 10 ' 1E>), Major modifications of these irradiation ,
isolation or analytical procedures could change the nature or amount ol the
compounds identified. In attempting to asaess the possible health hazards
of these compounds, the Committee was often frustrated by the paucity of
Information on their toxicity. Such gaps in our knowledge have been pointed
out in the individual sections and additional studies in Uiese areas are highly
By conventional toxicological standards, the concentration of each
compound was low, as was the total of all the compounds. For those
compounds where such data are available, the least toxic doses are several
orders of magnitude greater than the contribution from irradiated beef.
There seems no chance that the volatile compounds in the irradiated meat
could cause an acute intoxication following its consumption.
Evaluation of possible chronic toxicity is a more difficult and
uncertain task. Virtually every compound under consideration has been found
in significant amounts in commonly consumed natural and processed foods.
Very few of these products have been subjected to the long-term animal
studies or to Che rigorous epidemiological surveys that would detect
subtle or slowly developing pathology or carcinogenesis. The Committee
gave this problem particular attention and examined closely all data related
to chronic toxicity or carcinogenicity.
Several alkanes and alkenes and one aromatic hydrocarbon (bansene)
produced by beef irradiation have been implicated as carcinogens or co-
carclnogens under certain conditions.
Several higher alkanes promoted tumor production when painted
on mouse akin pretrealed with carcinogenic doses of polycycUc aromatic
hydrocarbons. These results were considered to have little relevance to
the effect of alkanes in irradiated beef. Not only were the routes of
adnilnisC ration quite different, but the doaes inquired in these experiments
were huge compared with the amounts consumed in beef.
Relatively little is known of the fate and action in the body of the
various alkenes found in irradiated beef. It is now generally accepted Chat
epoxides are obligatory intermediates in Cheir metabolism and epoxides are
viewed by many investigators as potential carcinogens. This view is
„GoogIe
supported by the findings thai such potent carcinogens as benzofa) pyrene,
anatoxin and vinyl chloride aeem to owe their carcinogenicity to their
conversion to epoxide inter mediates. On the other hand, many epoxides or
compounds having epoxide metabolic intermediaies are considered to be
noncarcinogenic. Of all the epoxide meiabDlic intermediates likely to be
formed from the alkenes in irradiated beef, very few have been tested for
tumor igen icily. Of these, only epoxyhexadecane has caused increased
lumor production and these results are equivocal. It appears that there may
be structural features which cause some epoxides to be carcinogenic while
others are not. It is not possible at this time to designate the specific
structural or electron distribution characteristics that impart carcinogenicity
' to an epoxide intermediate. Additional studies are desirable, but available
evidence does not implicate the alkenes in-irradiated beef as carcinogens
when ingested in the amounts present in these samples.
Animal studies have failed to demonstrate a leukemogenic action of
beniene and more definitive studies are necessary. The amount o( benzene
ingested from irradiated beet is less than 2ug per day. an extremely small
fraction of that absorbed from such unavoidable sources as the atmosphere,
municipal water supplies and numerous foods. The amount consumed from
'ed to add an insignificant increment to the usual
The Committee considered, too, the possibility that interactions
in the body among the various volatile compounds in irradiated beef might
cause toxicity. The possibility of additive or synergistic effects cannot
be excluded. There are, however, no known or suspected dangerous
interactions among these compounds and the lack of data renders unprofitable
any further speculation along these lines at the present time.
VIII. CONCLUSION
The Committee has examined the available evidence on the possible
!alth effectB of the uariojs volatile compounds identified in beef prepared
' low-temperature irradiation preservation. In its opinion, the data do
)t demonstrate or suggest that the volatile compounds present any significant
crement of hazard to the fmblic from the normal consumption of beef
„GoogIe
a. SCIENTIFIC CONSULTANTS
COMMITTEE MEMBERS
CHAIRMAN
Herman I. Chinn, Ph. U.
Senior Staff Scientist
Life Sciences Research Office
Federation of American Societies
for ExperUnental Biology
Bethesda. Maryland 20014
David B. Clayson, Ph. D,
Deputy Director and Protesaor
Epplcy Institute lor Research
m Cancer and Allied Diseases
University of Nebraska
Medical Center
Omaha, Nebraska 68105
Harry V. Gelboin, Ph.D.
Chief, Chemistry Branch
Division of Cancer
Cause and Prevention
National Cancer Institute
Belhesda, Maryland 30014
Herman F. Kraybill, Ph.D.
Scientific Coordinator for
Environmental Cancer
^atlDnat Institutes of H<
The Landow Building
7glO Woodmont Avenue
Room C337
Belhesda, Maryland 'i(
ilth
James D. MacEwen, Ph, D.
Director
Toxic Hazards Research Unit
University of California, Irvine
Wright Patterson Air Force Base
Dayton, Ohio 45459
Frank G. Standaert, M.D.
Chairman
Department of Pharmacology
Georgetown University Schools
of Medicine and Dentistry
Washington, L).C. 20007
Gerald N. Wogan. Ph. [).
Professor
Food Toxicology
Department of Nutrition and
Food Science
Massachusetts Institute ot
Technology
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
,y Google
SPECIAL CONSULTANT
Walter M. Urbaln, Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus
Food Science
Michigan State University
Sun City. AriioBB 8S3S1
LIFE SCIENCES RESEARCH OFFICE
Kenneth D. Fisher, Ph.D. C. Jelleff Carr, Ph.D.
Director Director Emeritus
Life Sciences Research Office Life Sciences Research Office
Federation of American Societies Federation of American Societies
for Experimental Biology for Experimental Biology
Bethesda, Maryland 20014 Bethesda, Maryland 20014
The Committee wishes to express their appreciation to
Lee C. Rogers, C. Grace Gurtowski and Jeanne L, Schachter,
LSRO, for technical, bibliographic and secretarial
assistance In the preparation of this report.
„GoogIe
DISTRIBUTION LIST
4 cojAma
12 copies Defense Documentation Center (DDC)
Attn! DDC-TCA
Cameron Station
Alexandria, Virginia 22314
1 copy Superintendent
Academy of Health Sciences, US Army
Attn: AHS-COM
Fort Sam Houston, Tenas T8234
1 copy Dean
School of Medicine
Uniformed Services University of the
Health Sciences
Office of the Secretary of Defense
6917 Arlington Road
Bethesda, MaryUnd 20014
,y Google
EVALUATION OF THE HEALTH ASPECTS OF
CERTAIN COMPOUNDS FOUND
IN IRRADIATED BEEF
FEDERATION OF
„GoogIe
ni
KEPHKT DOOlHBrrATKM PAGE
inlaatLM of Eh* Baalth Apacca cf Caruto
ri^ I> Found Is Inadlatad Baaf. I. FUCClWT
Tmtcolsiteal cam Idarac Idbi of Volatlla
rinal tapoic I Octobac
A3!VSQfc*!!ftVJStfii'- ''"
Llfa Sclaecaa laaaarch Offlea, Fadaratlm
MSO IBCkvlll* rtka, Sachaida, KaTTlawl
Fort DatTtek. Fradarl
H. UUUTMMUber
UHCIASSinED
for Public Ki
Id Inadlatad baaf. Of parCleular Incfrw
Inltlatad by tha Occupaclooal Safaiy and I
"'«— accaptabl* eoncancratlon of baniai
10 to 1 parta par ■Illlon, bacauaa of tb*
tha CBi^Biiad. Thla action li balng c
rologtc iT^tou vhan Inhalad Id high
OWCUSStFlBP
,y Google
ithjl athrl kctOD* (l-butcaea*} taj taava alallar ■(facta In iBhalut ■
Eack sf tbaaa f^nunia la tsanl In Irradlatad bMf but U lavala mvm
ordara of aafAltuda laaa thaa tboaa pivduclBf chaaa t«lc afracta. Ttia
>clu^ that than la ne arUaiica that CDnau^llen of naaonabla qaanc
haaf Irradlatad In tha daacrlbad Hnaar vsnU couiLtata a haa«r< ta
„GoogIe
EVALUATION OF THE HEALTH AtiPECTS OF CERTAIH
COMPOUNDS FOUND IN ItUtADIATCD BEEF
SUPPLEBEHT 1
FURTHER TOXICOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS
OF VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
IBY MEDICAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT COMMAND
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
FORT DETRICK. FREDERICK, MD 31701
Contract Number DAMD-17-76-C-6(
This document
LIFE SCIENCES RESEARCH OFFICE
FEDERATlCffl OF AMERICAN SOCIETIES
FOR EXPERIMENTAL BIOLOGY
9650 Rockvllle Pike
Bettiesda, lilaryland 20014
,y Google
The U.S. Army has developed a process for the preser-
vation of beef by high-dose irradiation iji vacuo at about -30°C.
A total of 65 volatile compounds in concentrations of 1 to 700 ug
per kg was idontilicd in th<; irradiated beef. A number of these
were also found In equal or greater concentrations in nonlrradl-
ated beef samples. Most of the radiolytic products were saturated
and unsaturated aliphatic hydrocarbons, containing 2 to 17 curboo
atoms. There were, in addition, several alcohol, aldehyde, and
ketone derivatives, the aromatic hydrocarbons benzene and toluene,
and two sulfur-containing compounds. In 1977, the Select
Comiittee on Health Aspects of Irradiated Beef reviewed crltic*lly
the available data on each of these compounds and concluded tli*t
the evidence indicated no grounds to suspect then of constituting
a hazard to health to persons consuming reasonable quaatltlsB of
beef irradiated in the described manner.
aincf
this 1977 report
by the
Sele
ct Cawnittee, additionBl
publ
liave appE
■ared on 1
the biologic
al effect
;s of some of
thes
Js. In a
jeveral
gove
rninent ae
;encies are
ble toiii
: etfec
ts of
benzene
and toluene
Llity t.
public a
,nd the exposure
of 1
ndustrial
workers
. Fo
deem
led dealral
i again
any
possible
hazard ol kown
radiolytic products fi
■om beef J
in the
light
of newly
■ available
Upon .
can
:ful
lew of recent
studiei
s, the Select Corn-
mi t tee found
lit
tie 1
■ele-
supplam
entary
information
on the
compounds undi
deration.
. Severj
to the
of
me and toluene wl
se solvents
inhaled repea
ly ar
Lonally
ce euphoria
. More
stringent stai
nda
rds t
been
imposed
for permissible li
svels of
benzene In thi
^rkpl
, but
these are now
being contested in tb<
courts. New i
» suggest thai
: methyl
ethyl
iccentuate
neuropathies
by 1
tiyl n-b
Jtyl ketone
Df t*
n the ei
ar upon
voluntary inhi
tlon
are
far I
ligher tl
Qan are
possible fron
these compounds are also found, few recent reports were concerned
with the other volatile compounds found in Irradiated beef.
Since the reported toxicities of the above compounds occur
only at exposures several orders of rnagnitude greater than found
In irradiated beef, the Select Committee reaffimis its original
conclusion that the volatile radiolytic compounds appear to pose
little or no health liazard when reasonable quantities of beef
irradiated in the described manner are consumed.
„GoogIe
rai
The Life Sciences Research Office (LSRO), Federation of
Americsn Societies for bxperimental Biology (FASEB) provides
scientific assessments of topics In the biomedical sciences.
Reports are based upon comprehGnslve literature reviews and
opinions of knowledgeable investigators who are actively working
in specific areas of biology and medicine.
A technical report entitled "Evaluation of the Health
Aspects of Certain Ccnpounds Found in Irradiated Beef" (AD-A04S7I6]
was published in August, 1977 by an ad hoc Select Conunittee with
the assistance of the LSRO staff. It reviewed the biological
effects of 65 volatile compounds found in irradiated beef. The
present report supplements this earlier review with material which
has subsequently come to the attention of the Ccnmittee.
The Select Comnlttee accepts the responsibility (or the
contents of this report. Special appreciation is expressed to Dr.
Walter U. Urbain, Special Consultant, for his helpful coonente in
the preparation of this report. The report was approved by the
Select Connittee, the Director of LSRO, and by the LSRO Advisory
Comnilttee ccoiposed of representatives of each constituent society
of FASEB, under authority delegated by the Executive Comnlttee of
the Federation Board. Upon completion of these review procedures,
the report was approved and transmitted to the U.S. Army Uedical
Research and Development Cctnmand by the Executive Director, FASEB.
While this Is a report of the Federation of American
Societies for Experimental Biology, it does not necessarily
reflect the opinion of the individual members of Its constituent
Kenneth D. Fisher, Ph.D.
Director
Life Sciences Research 01
„GoogIe
TABLE OF COKTENTS
Sumnary
Foreword
Introduction
Compounds Detected
A. Hydrocarbons
1. Alkanes
2. Alkenes and Alkynes. . . .
3. Aromatic Hydrocarbons. . .
Benzene
Toluene
B. Oxygen-Containing Compounds. .
1. Alcohols
2. Aldehydes
3. Ketones
C. Sulfur-Containing Compounds. .
D. Nitrogen-Con taining Ccapounde.
E. Halogen-Containing Cooipounds .
Discussion
Conclusion
Literature Cited
Scientific Consultants
Distribution List
,y Google
INTRODUCTION
As part of a continuing study on the wholesonieiiess of
Irradiated meats the Food Sciences Laboratory of the U.S. Natlck
Hesearch and Development Canmand h&£ determined the volatile
compounds produced when beef is treated at about -30°C vith 56 kCy
of gamia ray or high eiwrsy electroo radiation,
compounds vere Identified after irradiation with
.one ranging frcm 1 to 700 ue per kg beef (parts per
Sane of these compounds were of radiolytic origin while
I present In equal or greater amounts in oonirradlated
1th aspects of each of these compounds, whether
or non radiolytic, were reviewed by a Select Cannittee
by the Life Sciences Research Office (1977). This
tended to supplement the earlier review by conslder-
ent publlcBtions and additional information which have
come to the attention of the Ccnmlttee. A complete
compounds and their concentratlODS is given In the
radiolyti.
assembled
subsequent
listing of
original report.
„GoogIe
11. COMPOUNDS DETECTED*
HYDROCAHBOHS
The entire series of normal alkanes and alkenes f r<M .C~2
to C-IT were found in irradiated be«i. The concentrations ruiged
from 164 to 696 ug pei* Xg for alkanes aod fran 26 to 618 « per kg
for alkenes. Small amounts (19 to 45 uE per ke) of the 2-nBthyl
isomers of propane, propene, butane, pentane, and heptane vsre
also present. In addition, two alkynes (decyne and undecyne: 23
and 4 \^ per kg) and four dienes (tetra-, penta-, hexa-. and
heptadecadiene : 16 to 706 uK per kg) were identified.
Of these aliphatic hydrocarbons, hexane (209 nt per kg
irradiated beef) has been the most thoroughly Investigated. It Is
used as a solvent in glues, varnishes, cements, inks, and a number
of other products (National Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health, 1977). Significant and repeated exposures to this
compound are largely confined to two groups of individuals: the
industrial worker and the abuser of inhalants. The former group
is exposed because of workroom contamination while indtvlduala in
the latter group deliberately expose themselves to achieve a state
of euphoria or "high".
The acute toxicities of the volatile alkanes are rela-
tively low, allowable concentrations in workplace atmospheres
range frcm 100 parts per million (ppn; 360 mg per n^) Cor beiane
to several thousand ppm (>2000 mg per Iii3) for the simplest hooio-
logues: methane, ethane, propane (American Conference of Govern-
mental Industrial Kyglenlsts, 1976). However, numerous reports
attest to the tonicity for man (Dishi et al. , 1964, Yamamura,
1969, Herskowltz et al. , 1971) and animals (Ulyagakl , 1967; Ishli
et al., 1972 Schaumburg and Spencer, 1976) of chronic exposure to
^xane or hexane-containlng solvents. Yamamura (1969) conducted «
comprehensive clinical study and reported nerve damage in 93 of
1662 workers who were exposed to hexane In an industrial setting.
He estimated that the affected individuals had been exposed to
concentrations of 500 to 2500 ppm (1.8 to 9.0 g per in3 of hexane
for 8 hours or more dally, 6 or 7 days weekly for several OoDths
or more. Similarly, Yamada (1967) described 17 cases of polyneuro-
pathy among workers in small laminating plants with atmospheric
tiexane concentrations of 1000 to 2500 ppm and in pharmaceutical
plants with 500 to 1000 ppm. Symptoms of intoxication appeared
within 1 to 2 months after initial exposure. Herskowltz ot al.
(1971) reported three cases of polyneuropathy among factory
IS refer to the original report (LSRO, 1977) which
mlted for additional details.
,y Google
workers exposed to an £
The observed huniBD neui
motor systems, *lth characteristic manifestations ol muscular
weakness or atrophy, hypesthesia. and hypoactlve reflexes.
More recent studies includinE both industrial exposure
(Paulson and tiaylonis, 1976} and solvent abuse (Gonzalez and
Downey 1972 Gotoet al., 1974. Towfighl et al. , 1976J have
confirmed these earlier findings. Although other volatile
compounds *ere present in the inhaled solvents, hexane appeared to
be the major contributor to the observed to;(icity. Some ol the
inhalant-abuse patients had inhaled hexane-free volatiles for
years without apparent detrimental effect but had developed
crippling peripheral neuropathy within a matter of months after
switching to products containing hexane (Bruckner and Peterson,
1977).
Experimental demonstration of the neurotoxicity of hej;ane
was provided by Echaumburg and Spencer (1976) who observed degener-
ative neurological changes in adult Sprague-Dawley rats inhaling
highly purified he^ane (400 to 600 ppm) continuously for 162 days
or receiving 550 to EOOO mg per kg of the compound subcutaneously
5 days weekly for IS to 3S weeks. Degeneration in the central and
peripheral nervous systems was noted in both groups of animals
within 2 to 3 months. Widespread axonal degeneration in the
central nervous system was regularly observed and was similar to
that reported in nerve biopsies frcm patients inhaling glue vapors
containing hexane (Goto et al . . 1974, Korobkln el al . , 1975),
The most apparent effects of hexane poisoning are upon the
i (1976) observed elevated serum levels of
; and glutainic oxaloacetic transaminase which
suggested Jlver aamage in one patient with hexane-induced
neuropathy. Nix et al. (1977) reported liver damage In mice
exposed to high atmospheric concentrations (6000 to 12000 ppn) of
mixed hexanes for 2 to 49 days. Hepatic lipid accumulation was
noted in rats (Bohlen et al. , 1973) and in guinea pigs (DlVlnceuao
and Krasavage, 1974) after hexane inhalation. No reports have
been found of toxicity induced by hexane concentrations below the
maximum allowable concentration in workroor atmospheres (100 ppra) .
rather than hexane itself, is the active neurotoxic agent. CatE
given 0 5 percent of this product in drinking water for periods
to 136 days developed widespread axonal degeneration similar to
that observed with hexane intoxication (Schaumburg and Epencet:
1978). Methyl n-butyl ketone, also believed to be a hexane
metabolite, has produced similar neurologic damage in Industrial
workers (Allen et al. , 1B74) and experimental animBlS {Duckett t
al., 1974, DiVlncenzo et al.. 1978),
,y Google
Hfxanr and rrlalrd i-ORipounds appear to be aetaboliced bf
ar. 1 r.<1iiri hip niori-iKivml (>n7ynic systeni. When nle« were conttn-
iiciislv r^p.^sr-d tc an almtHiphrro containing 2.5 to 3 percent
yr-Knrf . ttw ^v^nl>•■'xv(t*■n»I!^• capai-ity of the liver increased dnuMt-
i.-iir.> (Kriiner ot si., 197*1, Three isomeric aleodols ■ere fora«d
in-ir hpxane h^ (he "liwr mlcrnsoines. »lth I-heMnol pred<*iD«tlV-
I'oori el al. ilS^'S' also found !-heianol in the urioe ol EiiiBe>
p\gf- aftrr intrapi^ri tiinpal in.^pctlon of n-hexane. Tben tbe g^laaa
pins wrp pretre*t«J »ith phen(^harbital . the urlnarr 2-liei*«»l
Staple* and Marks US'??) are curw-r.ily stjajii* tbe
fwss-.Mr teralocer.i.- cftocis ol n-hrxane ir. prepnatt £T3 CIiarlaK
hivBr r.icr. No resiiUs *re yet •vallaMe.
Th( v'fnmitter- knows Of no «tiiay »enion»trs;-.nF a TuvrcTOKlc
effect of the other alkanee identities -,r irraEiaiei heef.
However, fiaullier et al. (IPToj rcpor t p,'^ jv-.;ti!Ci.r.-eiBTl:7 ii fa^
wnrkprK exposed to a solw-nt conta: r,-. nf f; _ _ _ .-
percpni hepianr. and S peroen htvanr . ?v« cufiffrret
rane or heptane, rather than hexanr rt,.pt:
observed neuroloRif damaffr. ;r<;-.re.-; f...rin:
comes fpom tht olwervalions o; rr.-mnw ; :' i
meiiiuir-length a'knnes nr- «r '. . ■>- hittm '
poemblc poBil ir
No add it
,y Google
3. AroiiMttlc Hydrocarbona (pp. 56-87)
Benzene, toluene, and xylene were detected Id bbuII
amounts (<0.1 ppn) In the Irradiated beef samplee. Benzene and
toluene iocreased Blightl]' with tncreaeed radiation doees (LSRO,
1977) and are presumed to be radlolytic products. The concen-
tratiOQ of xylene, however, was no greater in irradiated than in
noD Irradiated beef and is of nonradlolytlc origin.
A voluminous literature exists on the toxicity and
metabolism of benzene. The major area of interest has been the
effect in nan of chronic Inhalation of its vapor; this aspect has
been reviewed comprehensively In several recent reports (NI05H.
1974, National Research Council. 1976, Haley 1977, Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, 1978). A leukeroogenlc action
has long been suspected because of the occurrence of leultemia
among some worlters chronically exposed to benzene (NRC. 1976;
Aksoy, 1978). Although the affected individuals had also been
exposed in most cases to other compounds In the work place,
benzene appeared to be the common agent. Early epidemiologic
surveys yielded conflicting results. In one major etudy, an
annual incidence of 13 cases of leukemia per 100,000 persons vas
found among 28,500 shoevorkers exposed to benzene, compared wltb 6
cases per 100,000 among the general population (Aksoy et al.,
1974). Hosever, there was no greater incidence of leuEemla among
38,000 petroleum workers potentially exposed to b»n2ene than among
unexposed individuals (Thorpe, 1974). Reviewing tbe available
data, the NIOSH (1974) concluded that 'the posslblllrty that
benzene can induce leukemia cannot be dismissed." but it anpha-
sized the need for additional, careful, epidemiologic studies.
Since this NIOSH review, additional reports bave
appeared suggesting a relationship between benzene exposure and
leukemia (kcUichael et al . , 1975, 1976, Andjelkovic et al . , 1976,
Honeon and Nakano, 1976, Infante et al. , 1977a; Ott et al. . 1978).
Of especial interest, was the survey of workers involved in the pro-
duction of Pliofilm® (Infante et al. 1977a, b). In this survey the
influence of other solvents was largely excluded, for In addition
to benzene, the workers were exposed only to hydrochloric acid,
soda ash, and small amounts of antioxidants and plasticlzere.
Workers occupatlonally exposed to benzene during the years 1940 to
1949 were followed for vital status up to 1975. Of 748 workers
exposed during this period, seven died frcm myelogenous or onno-
cytlc leukemia, an incidence seven times that observed In the
general population or in workers not exposed to benzene (P<0.002).
The level of exposure to benzene by the workers during this period
(1940-1949) is uncertain. In 1941, the maximum allowable concen-
tration was 100 ppm which was lowered to 50 pptn in 1947 and to 35
„GoogIe
ppm in 1948 tor on 8-hour tlme-velghted avomge (Intuit* at ■!..
1977b). Since 1971, the allowable conceotrfttlon has beenTO ppa.
The Btatlstical trestsieat In this etudr by Infante et al.
<197Ta,b) was criticized by Taberabaw and Lam (1»77). but
defended by the original investigators (Infante et al. , lB77e)<
The NI08K report (1976) concluded that the cllnlcAl
and epidemiologic evidence demon st rated the leuketBogenlcltT of
.benzene In nan. The report reconoended that no vorker be ezpoead
time-weighted average. This recooroendatlon was adopted by OSOk
(1977), vhlch established energency temporary standardB on Hay 3.
1977, reducing the permitted employee eiposure to benzene frcn 10
ppm to 1 ppm based on an S-hour tlme-ceigbted average. On
February 10, 1978, these levels cere adopted as the pemuuieDt
standard for the regulation of worker eipoBure to benzene (OSBA,
1978). Industry contested these regulations, arguing that
enpertmental evidence was lacking that benzene at the ealatlDg
authorized level of ID ppm was harmful. In October 1978, the
Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans ruled against 08HA.
The Supreme Court has agreed to review the' ruling and a final
decision is expected in 1980 (Carter, 1979).
In June, 1977, the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA, 1977) also concluded that the evidence Implicating benzene
as a leukeBtogenic agent was sufficiently strong to merit Its
addition to the list of hazardous air pollutants.
The opinion that benzene Is leukemogenlc Is not
accepted by all investigators. Their reluctance to label benzene
a carcinogen has rested both upon the poor quality of humui
epidemiologic data and upon a consistent failure to produce
leukemia or cancerous tumors In experimental animals (NRC. 1976;
Ward et al., 1S75). Pancytopeaia has been produced in animals by
benzene Injection (Kissling and Speck, 1972), but experimentally
Induced leukemias or carclnctnas have not been reported. At a
recent seminar, Haltoni claimed that he had produced various
tumors in rats by feeding benzene for periods up to 76 weeks
(Anonymous, 1977). Of 70 rats fed 250 mg benzene per kg body
weight, five developed tumors of the Zymbal gland, five had denaal
tumors, and three a "variety of other rare tumors". No leukeiUaa
were reported. Of -60 rats fed 50 mg per kg, two had Zymbal glaad
tumors and one a dermal tumor. None of more than 300 control rats
developed tumors of any type. A detailed account of this study
has not yet appeared in a scientific Journal.
Despite numerous metabolic studies, both 1^ vitro and
-n of benzene action on the hematopoietic
I unclear. Some workers have attributed the toxicity
flf (Ikeda et al . , 1972), while others believe a
ilble (Lee et al.. 1974). In an attempt to
>ntroversy, Tlmbrell and Uitchell (1977) studied the
,y Google
effectB of 1
'arlouB ml
cr'
□soraal enzyme Induci
;rG ai
nd i
nhibitors. U
benzene ilsell were 1
toxic agen-
t, metabi
allc
Inhi
bitors would t
expected to
nd metabolic Induce;
decrease, the
tonicity of
benzene .
The opposite
effects
«ouId be
expected if i
metabolite i
rather tht
the Intact benzene '
toxic agent ar
the metaboH
destroyed before n
Baching t
he target
organ. However, the
in
vestlgators
found tl
lat both
inhibitors
{plperonyl I
lutoxide.
baltous chl<
jride) Bi
ucer (pheno-
barbital) of microson
ml
cytochrome
P-450 tended
reduce the
toxicity of
sly adtoinlsi
Cered bei
ggestlng a
complex relationship
be
t»een Its rnetabollsi
icity. Only
preireatmem
ne poteotia-
The most
Significant
uch benzene
pretrea
tment
was
a six-fold
quinol ei
etion, indii
;ating a
poss:
Lble
role of this
metabolite <
or in benzei
Ity.
mechanlsra of
unsettled ni
Id conti:
to be a source of
active inves
itiEStion.
To retain
perspectlv.
■ on the
poss'
lble
hazard of
benzene, it
is imporl
lan
t to bear U
1 mind tl
ae re
lati
ve exposures
preparal
1S73
toxicity studies Inconclusive because commercially available
toluene may contain as much b« 25 percent benzene (EPA 197E>.
Studies using purified toluene have failed to demonstrate a
nyelotoxic effect (JilOSH. 1973, EPA, 1976). In fact, a recent
study suggests that toluene may actually exert a protective effect
■gainst the hematopoietic toxicity of benzene {Andrews et al . ,
1977). Toluene (1720 mg/kg) and benzene (440 and 890 mg/kg) *ere
Injected subcutaneously in adult, male, Swiss albino ralce. This
treatment reduced markedly the level of benzene metabolites in
urine and bone marroK and reduced also the benzene-Induced inhibi-
of benzene in bone marroi' "/as not reduced, thus providing support
lor those contending that a benzene metabollte(s) is the myelo-
toxic agent. Toluene has also been shown to inhibit the blotrans-
iormation of styrene (Ikeda et al. , 1D72} and trichlorottthylene
(Ikeda, 1974).
- e -
,y Google
Reports prior to 1S73 on tbe bsaltb aap«et« of
toluene were reviewed by NIOSH <1S73) and subsequent literature by
Hiyden et al. (1977) aod an EPA coanlttee (1978). The main toiic
effect of toluene appears to be upon the Central rtervOUs syEteo.
VelBS et al. (1976 reported an excitatory eliect of toluene in
key-pecKing behavior of pigeons at aci atmospheric concentration of
800 ppm, but a depressant effect at 3200 ppn. Tskeuchl and
HlBBoaBa (1977) attempted to detect central nervous effects by
studying the electroencephalographlc cbanges during spootaneou*
sleep of rats exposed to various atmospheric levels of toluene for
4 hours. The Investigators concluded that 1000 ppm of toluene
vapor prevented sleep frcoi entering the slov-wave phase but facili-
tated its entry into the paradoxical phase. Concentrations of
2000 and 4000 pprn produced sleep disturbances, including ayoclODle
seizures at both levels.
In healthy, adult men, reaction tlae was impaired by
20-niinute exposure to 300 ppoi toluene in inspired air. Expoaure
to 700' ppm toluene was necessary to produce significant InpaimeDt
in perceptual speed, measured by the time required to Identify
Identical numbers in 60 separate columns (Gamberale and Kulten-
gren, 1972). Lewis and Patterson (1974) observed various symp-
tcas, including mental confusion, exhilaration, and fatigue when
human subjects were e;ipo8ed for 3 hours at 600 ppn.
Reports are rare of toxic effects by toluene on other
organ systems. Bruckner and Peterson (1976) tailed to detect any
Injury to lung, liver, or kidney in mice exposed to 4000 ppm of
toluene vapor for 3 hours daily, 5 days per weak, tor up to 8
weeks. Cardiac arrythmlas (Keinhardt et al. , 1971) and renal
tubular acidosis (Taher et al., 1974) have been associated witb
toluene "anifflDg" but tHe specific role of toluene waa not
established definitively. Kayden et al. (1977) in a recent revle*
.concluded that there Is little flm evidence that toluene exerts a
specific toxic effect <ui any organ system.
The Chemical Industry Institute of Toxicology baa
Instituted an investigatloa of tbe possible toxic and carcinogeoLc
effects of toluene follcwing chronic Inhalation exposure to a con-
nercial product (containing 100 ppi benzene). Only preliminary
results are available (EPA, 1977). Groups of 30 rats each stralii
and age not stated) were exposed to 30, 100, 300, or 1000 ppm of
the cconierclal toluene preparation for 90 days. No significant
differences frcni controls were noted In body weight, hematology,
blood and urine chemistries, or frequency of histopathologic
changes. Alopecia around the ears occurred in some female rata
and red deposits or dischargee from the nose and eyes were noted
in sctne male rats. The nature of the red discharge was not
Indicated.
„GoogIe
The concentrations of toluene J
50 to 65 kJg per kg, i.pproi[iniately the same bc
sterilized beef. Toluene has been detected ir
concentrations ol 500 ug per kg In refrlgeral
samples in different cities ranged from 11 t<
1977). Concentrations in single and composi
trial water effluents have been found to rai
;« per 1 (EPA, 197S).
OXYGEN OONTAINING COMPOUNDS
1. Alcohols (pp. 68-72)
The only alcohols detected in Irradiated beef were
metharol and ethanol . Publications concerning the toxicology of
these compounds, especially the latter, continue to appear, adding
to an already mainnKith bibliography. However, none of the recent
publications is relevant to the present discussion or modifies the
original report [LSBO. 1977).
Aldehydes (pp. 73-79)
The following aldehydes were detected m Irradiated beef
in concentrations from 10 to 398
ug per kg
S-methyl pentanal.
undecanal, dodecanal. tetradecans
1, pentadecanal , hexadecanal.
octadecanal. hexadecenal , and oc
adecenal .
No recent study on an
-of these aldehydes has come to t
e attenti
DO of the Select
CcffiBJltlee.
3. Ketones (DP. 80-S7)
Only the two simplest ke
ones, ace
one and methyl ethyl
ketone (UEK. E-butanone) ~ere de
rradiated beef. Both
*re widely used as lodustrial so
vents and
both have low acute
toxicities. Browning (1965) cits
■d studies
m which workers have
been exposed to lOOO to 2000 ppm
ill-effects other than temporary
headaches
or anorexia. Similar-
ly, the effects of MEK exposure a
re genera
ly reported to be mild
and temporary (Elklns, 1959). However. Vi
Ider el al. (1975)
reported a case of neuropathy in
a worker
exposed for 2 years to
nlng UEK as the solvent.
„GoogIe
Couri and coworkers (1977) have studied the influoDce of
inhaled vapors of several ketones on young Vlstar rate. Rats were
to 750 ppm of MEK, 225 ppm of methyl n-butyl ketone (MBK ,
>r a mixture of UEK/KBK. Hexobarbital sleeptlnes
were signiiicantly reduced following exposure to MEK or to tbe
mixture of Mt:K with MBK, but not to UBK alone. Hepatic microBOMtl
activities of various enzymes (aniline hydroiylase , ajninopFrlDe
demethylase , neoprontosil reductase, p-nitrobenzoate i^ductaae)
increased two- to three-fold in the UEK and MEK/HBK exposure
groups compared with controls.
Exposure to KBK causes peripheral neuropathy Binllar to
that already described for bexane <p. 2). Both hexase and HUE
have a coniroon metabolite, 2, 5-hexanedlone , and this is b«li«ved
to be the toxic principle (Couri et al . , 1978). Cats, rate, and
chickens chronically exposed to uSR vapors developed aeuropatblc
signs, white those exposed to HEK did not (Prockop and Couri,
1977). However, a more rapid and severe toxicity was observed
with combined vapors of UEK/MBK than with UBK alone. Two Of Six
rats exposed to vapors of MBK (400 ppm) exhibited mild neuropathy,
but no fatalities, during 60 days of continuous exposure. Id tbe
MEK/HBK (750/225 ppm) group, the experiment was limited to 23 d*y«
because of the severity of the neuropathy, with all six rate dying
during exposure, or within 2 weeks after removal from tbe exposure
chamber (Abdel-Rahman et a^. , 1976).
The recent report of Altenkirch et al. (1977) Buggests
that MEK in high concentrations may have neurotoxic effects.
These Investigators described a sudden outbreak of polTneuropatby
among 18 young people sniffing a glue thinner containlDg bexaoe
and HEK. These Individuals had sniffed the same brand of tbiniier,
containing 31 percent hexane , 30 percent toluene, 28 percent etbyl
acetate, and 11 percent of other hydrocarbons, for up to 7 years,
without apparent ill-effects. There had been no reported adverse
effects among an estimated 2000 adolescents who had sniffed this
product for various periods of time. In the early Summer of 1975,
the formulation of the thinner was changed to contain 11 percent
MEK and 16 percent hcxanc. The other constituents remained
approximately the same. Tbe new thinner caused neurological
symptoms in the 18 victims almost identical with those reported
elsewhere with hexane. No further cases have been observed since
the original formulation was restored In January, 1976,
C. SULFUR-COKTAlNtNG COMPOUNDS (pp. 88-94)
Four sulfides (carbonyl sulfide, dimethyl sulfide,
dimethyl disulfide, and hydrogen sulfide) and one thiol (ethane
thiol) were detected in Irradiated beef at concentrations of 2 to
10 pg per kg (2 to 10 parts per billion). Each of these compounds
has been found in commonly consumed foods at levels two to five
orders ol magnitude greater than these amounts (LSHO, 1977) and
„GoogIe
only ethyl mercaptan and dimethyl sulfide showed any
concentrntions after irradiation ( 10 g/ks). No recent
publications on the biological effects of these subetanceB
D. NITROGEN -CONTAINING COMPOUNDS (pp. 95-98)
Acetonltrlle was the only volatile nitrogen-containing
compound detected in irradiated beef. The concentr&tion was
extremely low (1 to 3 g per kg) and less than that found in
frozen controls or thermally sterilized beef, indicating a.
nonradiolytlc origin.
E. HALOGEN -CONTAINING COMPOUNDS (pp. 99-105)
Tetrachloroethylene (perchloroethylene] was the only
halogen-containing compound detected in Irradiated beef. It was
found in some, but not all samples of Irradiated beef, and in son
nonirradlated samples as well. The compound was shown to be of
-ather than of radlolytic origin.
„GoogIe
III. DISCUSSION (pp. 107-108)
Recent r«porta enphastze the poteotlal rl«k to Industrial
workers and solvent abusers chroDically exposed to «ppr«clabl«
levels of several readily available volatile coapouDda. TItB
reported toxicity In virtually all these eiperlneDtal and cllDleal
studies has resulted frcn Inhalation of 10 to 1000 ppi or aors of
these conpounds tor extended periods ol tlae. Tb« quantltlsa
Inhaled froii these exposures are several orders of Mainltude
greater than sould be ingested rrco the conauBptlon ot even larfs
sBouDts of irradiated beef. Bach of the radiolytic ccsipouiids
discussed In this report are found naturally in various co— only
coDsumed foods.
„GoogIe
IV, CONCLUSION (p. 109)
The Comnlttee reaffirms Its original conclusion that there
Is no evidence to suggest that the volatile radlolytlc compounds
found in beef Irradiated in the described Banner would coQBtltute
a bftzard to health of 1
,y Google
V. LITERATURE CITED
Abdcl-Rahnan. U.S., L.B. Hetland, D. Couri.
metabollsni of methyl -n-butyl ketone. Am. In
37:95-102.
Aksay, H. 1978. Benzene and leukaemia. Lancet 1;441.
Leukemia In stioe~«arkers
t.E. Pontftlne. 1974. I
lie polyneurc^Mithy due 1
, Am. Neurol. Assoc. 99: 74-79.
TLVs
threshold
phys:
leal
agents It
for
1976
.. Cinclni
Altenklrch, H. , J. Uagei
Toxic polyneuropathies t
214; 137-152.
American Conference of Governmental Industrial HygleniGts. 1B76.
'alues for chemical subBtances and
irkroon environment «ith Intended changes
Andjelkovlc, D. , J. Taulbec, U. Syroons. 1976. Mortality
experience of a cohort of rubber workers, 1964-1973. J. Occup.
Med. 18:387-394.
Andrews. L.S. . E.W. Lee, C.U. Wltmer, J.J. KocsIb, R. Snyder.
1977. Effects of toluene on the metabolism, disposition and
hemopoietic toxicity of (-^Hj benzene. Blochem. Pharmacol.
26:293-300.
Research 'bombshell' hits benzene. Chem. Week
Bbhlen, P., U.P. Schlunegger,
distribution of hexane in rat
25:242-249,
Bowman, R.E. 1977. Preclinical behavorlal toxicology of Inhalant
solvents. Pages 200-223 in C.W. Sharp and U.L. Brehm, eds.
Review of inhalants: euphoria to dysfunction. NIDA, Research
Uonograph 15, U.S. Government Printing Office, Vashlngton, D.C.
BroBning. E. 1965. Toj
solvents. American Else
Bruckner, J. v., H.G. Pel
toxicity, utilizing the
abuse. Pharmacologist I
„GoogIe
Bruckner, J.V., R.G. PetersoD. 1977. Toxicology of aliphatic and
aromatic hydrocarbons. Pages 124-163 In C.I. Sharp and M.L.
Brehm, eds., Revle* of inhalants: euphoria to dysfunction. NIDA,
Research Uonograph 15, U.S. Governnent Printing Office.
Hashington, D.C.
incer risk quantification.
Chang, S.S. , R.J Peterson. 1977. Symposlun : the basis of
quality in muscle foods. Recent developoients in the flavor of
meat. J. Food Scl . 42:296-305.
Courl. D., U.S. Abdel-Hahman , L.B. Hetland. 1976.
Biotranslormation of n-tiexane and methyl n-butyl ketone in guinea
pigs and mice. Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 39:295-300.
Couri, D., L.B. Ketland, U.S. Abdel-Rahman , H. Veiss. 1977. The
influence of inhaled ketone solvent vapors on hepatic nlcrosonal
biotransformation activities. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.
41:2B5-2B9.
DlVincenzo, G.D., U.L. Hamilton. C.J. Kaplan, W.J. Kraaavage, J.L.
O'Donoghue. 1976. Studies on the respiratory uptake and
excretion and the skin absorption of methyl n-butyl ketone In
humans and dogs. Toxicol. Appl. Pbamacol. 44:503-604.
DlVincenzo, G.D.. C.J. Kaplan, J. Dedlnas. 1976.
Characterization of the metabolites of methyl n-butyl ketone,
methyl iso-butyl ketone, and methyl ethyl ketone in guinea pig
serum and their clearance. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 36:511-922.
Duckett, E., N. Williame, S. Francis. 1974. Peripheral
neuropathy associated with inhalation of me thyl-n- butyl ketone.
Experientia 30:1283-1264.
Environmental Protection Agency. 1977. National emission
standards for hazardous air pollutants. Addition of benzene to
list of hazardous air pollutants. Fed. Regist. 43:29332-29333.
EnvironnientHl Protection Agency. 1976. Initial report of the
TSCA Interagency Testing Committee to the Administrator,
Environmental Protection Agency. EPA 560-10-78/001. Washington,
D.C.
Froramer. U., V. Ullrich, H. Staudinger, S. Orrenius. 1972. The
monooxygenatlon of n-heptane by rat liver micrOBOana . Biochln.
Biophys. Act* 280.467-494.
,y Google
GaultitT. Ii
Potynevritf
6.29-4-296.
lumanG ■ J. Toxicol.
Haley. T.J. 1977. Evaluation of the health effects
inhalation, Clin. Tosicol, 11:531-548.
Hayden. J.«r., B.C. Peterson. J.V. Bruckner. 1977. Toxicology of
Herskowitz. A., N. Ishii. H. Schaumburg
neuropathy: A syndrome occurring as a
exposurt^. H. Engl. J. Med. 265.82-65.
Ikeda. U. 1974. Reciprocal metabolic
trichloroethylone in vivo and in vitro.
33:125-130,
Ikeda. M. . H, Ohtsuji, T. [raamura. 1972. In vivo suppression of
ben^une and styrene oxidation by co-adminlstered toluene in rats
and etiects of phonobarbital . Xenobiotica 2:101-106.
mtante, P.E., H. Kinsky, J.K. Magoner , R. Young. 1977a.
long workers exposed to benzene. Report to Director of
istLtute for Occupational Safety and Health. Cincinnati.
Infante. P.F. . R.A. rtinsky.
Leukaemia in ben^^ene worker
J.K. Wagoner. R.J. Young.
1977b
Infante. P.F. , R.A. Hinsky,
Heply to Tabershttw and Laran
J.K. Wagoner, H.J. Young.
(1977). Lancet 2:868-869.
1977c
polyneuropathy: a clinical
Nfurupathol . Exp. Kourol . 3
Schaumburg. 1072. n-Hexa
and experimental study. J
.19li (Abstract).
ne
„GoogIe
1972. Further studies on ex perl mental
c anemia. Blut 25:97-103.
Kramer , A. , [
inhalation or
Chen. -Biol . 1
Lee, E.W. , L.
tonicity and
(Abstract).
Lewis, P. v., D.V. Patterson. 1974. Acute and chronic effects of
the voluntary Inhalation of certain conunercial volatile solvents
by Juveniles. J. Drue Issues 4;162-175.
Life Sciences Research Office. 1977. Evaluation of the health
aspects of certain conpounds found In irradiated beef. Federation
of American Societies for Experimental Biology, Bethesda,
Uaryland.
HcHichael, A.J., R. Spirtas, J.F. Gamble, P.M. Tousey. 1976.
Mortality aming rubber workers: relationship to specific Jobs.
J. Occup. Ued. 1B:176-185.
HcUichael, A.J., R. Spirtas, L.L. Kupper, J.F. Gamble. 1975.
Solvent exposure and leukemia among rubber vorkere: an
epidemiologic study. J. Occup. lied. 17:234-239.
Hiyagakl, H. 1967. Electrophysiological studies on the
peripheral neurotoxicity of n-bexane. Jpn. J. Ind. Health
9: 12-23.
Uonson, R.R. , K.K. Nakano. 1976. Uortality among rubber workers.
I. White male union employees In Akron, Ohio. Am. J. Epidemiol.
103:284-296.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. 1973.
Criteria for a recommended standard: occupational exposure to
toluene. U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington, D.C.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. 1974.
Criteria for a reccnunended standard; occupational exposure to
benzene. U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington, D.C.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. 1976.
Occupational exposure to benzene: revised criteria for a
recommended standard. U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C.
„GoogIe
740
Saitonal Instnutf lor i>cfU[)«tional Satoty »nd Health. 1977.
MUSH crtlt^ria lur a recmmiended standard, occupational eKpoBurc
tu iili(int;> ^t^'5-<.'tt < . l.^. (juvt'rnnf.'nt Printing Olfice. las&lnctOB,
Nati-.iiial Kescn-.iL vouiu'il. Connn '.ee on ToKicology. 1976. B«*lth
Nix, T. , rt. fe'.^i-soii . ■,'. HiirJf.T. 1977. Cued by Bruckner and
Pwlersoii. 1S7T.
Occupational ;Sd.:i^':y aitj H«aL^r: Adninistrat^uc . L9TT. Emergency
tumporary standard tor 'jocupationaL exposure to beazeoe. notice
ol ^waring. Ked . KegLSl. 42.^2316-22529.
LV,jjpu'.i.jnal aafu'.y iad H«il^,!; Administration. 1978,
[jccupa-ivnaL ■^■upwa-iri tu Oena-jnc . Fed. ilegist. 43.5918-5970.
'Jishi. !!.. \. Umeino. t. Yamada K. Chiba. K. Shlbata. 1964.
Saigai- [jaxu 7 2l.>i-2'2li. In Japani^^ie.
Utt, «.G., i.e. T'jwnsend, W..A. Fiadbeck. H.A. Langner. 1978,
Mortality amont; individuals 'Jcoupatianally exposed to benseos.
Arch. Knviron. Heal':h 3;i,:i-10.
Pauldon. Ij.fr. , i;.W. Waylnnis. 1976. Polyneuropathy due to
n-htnane. Arch. Intiirn. «ed . 136 880-882.
Prockup, L., U. C'juri. La77. Nervous system damage frani raijted
urganii: solvents. C.W. ^harp and U.L. Brehm, ads. [>aKea 185--19B
in Heviow of inhalants, tiuphona to dysfunction. SIDA, ResesrcQ
Monograph 15, U.S. 'iouernment PrintLng Of t ice, Washington. D.C.
rteinhardt, C.K.. A. Azar, M.E. Maxneld. P.E. Smith, Jr.. L.S.
Wullin. 1971. Cardiac arrytnmias and aerosol "sniffing". Ar<ch.
tnuiron. Health jy 265-279.
Schaumburg, H.H. P. a. Jpencer. I97b. Degeneration in central
and penphtral nervous systems pr'iduced by pure n~hexane, an
■jxpeninental study. Brain 99:183-192.
SchaumburB , 1I..1. , P. a. 3p«ncer. 1971;. Lnvironraental hydrocarbons
produce ilegeneratirjn in cat hypothalamus and optic tract. Science
199.199-2U0.
apencer, P.S. . H.H. Schauraburg. 1975. Lipenmental neuropathy
produced by L, j-henanedionti — a major metabolite of the neurotosic
industrial .solvent methyl n-butyl ketone. J. Neurol. Neurosurg.
Psychiatry M: 771-775.
„GoogIe
staples, R.E. T. Harks. 1979. Teratogenic study of n-heiaa« in
■nice. TOX-TIPS, January (Toxicology Information Program, National
Library of Uedlcine. Bethesda, Maryland.
Tab«rsha«, I.R.. S.H. Laim. 1977. Benzene and leukaemia. Lancet
2 : e67-868 .
Taher, S.M. R.J. Anderson, R. McCartney, H.M. Popovtzer, R.W.
Schrier. 1974. Renal tubular acidosis associated with toluene
"sniffing'', N. Engl. J. Ued . 290:765-768.
Takeuchi, Y. , N.
Ind. Med. 34:314-
Thorpe, J.J. 19'
Timbrell. J. A. , J.H. Miti
Van Straten, S. 1977. Volatile cofflpounds in foods. 4th ed.
Central Institute for Nutrition and Food Research TNO. Zeiet, The
Netherlands.
Viader. F. , B. Lechevalier, P. Uorln. 1975. Polyn^vrite toxique
Chez un travailleur du plastique: R6le possible du
roe'thyl-e'thyl-cetone. Houv. Presse Hed. 4:1813-1614.
Ward, J.M., J.K. Weisburger, R.S. Yanianoto. T. Benjunio, C.A.
Brovn, E.K. Weisburger. 1975, Long-term effect of benzene in
C57BL/6N mice. Arch. Environ. Health 30:22-29.
■eiss, B. , R. Wood, D, Uacys. If
carbon disulfide and toluene. Ei
press). Cited by Bcpwman. 1077.
Hood, R. 1976. Behavioral toxicology of organic solvents and
volatile anesthetics. Paper delivered at American Psychological
Association symposium on the neurobehavloral effects of
environmental pollutants. Vashington, D.C. (cited by Bomian ,
1977).
Vamada, S. 1967. Intoxication polynet
exposed to n-hexane. Jpn. J. Ind. Heal
Japanese; English sumnary) .
„GoogIe
VI. SCIENTIFIC CONSULTANTS
COHUITTEE UEHBERS
CMAIMCAN
Herman I. Chlnn, Ph.D.
Senior Staff Scientist
Lite ScleocoB Reaearcti Office
Federation of American Societies
for Eiperlmenta.1 Biology
Bethesda, Haryland 20014
David B. Clayson, Ph.D.
Deputy Director and Professor
Eppley Institute for Research
In Cancer and Allied Disease
University of Nebraska
Hedlcal Center
Omaha, Nebraska 68105
JamsB D. MacEvsn, Ph.D.
Director
Toxic Hazards Rssssrch Unit
University of Califomls,
Irlght Patterson Air Force I
Dayton. Ohio 45459
Harry V. Gelboln, Ph.D.
Chief, Chemistry Branch
Division of Cancer Cause
and Prevention
National Cancer institute
Betbesda, Maryland 20014
Frank C. Stsndaert. K.D.
Chairs
Department of P.ianaacalosy
Georgstovn University Schools
of Hedicine and Dentistry
Washington. D.C. 20007
Environmental Cancer
National Institutes of Heal
The Landos Building
7910 loodBMBt Avenue
Boon C337
Betbesda, Maryland 20014
Gerald N. fogan, Ph.D.
Head, Departaent of Nutritioa
and Pood Science
HassachusettB Institute of
Technology
Cambridge, Massachusetts 0313B
SPECIAL CONSULTANT
Walter M. UrtMin. Ph.D.
10645 WeU Drive
Sun City, Arizona 8S351
The CcMoittee wishes to express their appreciation to Cynthls L.
Claypoole and C. Grace Gurtovskl, L8BO, for toelmicsl, biblio-
graphic, and secretarial assistance in the prepanttlon of this
,y Google
DISTR
BUXrON LIST
\ ■'
-V.
■Vs.
HQDA (SGHD
Slf
Fort Detri
k
Frederick,
HD. 21701
Defense Do
umenta
io
Cen
ATTN : DDC
DDA
Cameron St
tion
Alexandria
VI rg!
ia
223
Dean
School of Hedicin
Uniformed Service
V
iver
f
Academy of Heallh Sciences. US Army
ATTN . AHS-COM
Fort Sam Houston, Texas 7623fl
-■-i^-itotW^ tfttSniiHtC^ •'!
=«K'
„GoogIe
J^ I'^-J^i^"^-
EVALUATION OF THE HEALTH ASPECTS OF
CERTAIN COMPOUNDS FOUND
IN IRRADIATED BEEF
U.S. AMIT MEDKAL USEAJtCH Am) DEVELOPMENT '
DEPAKTMENT OF THE KWKt
PORT DEnKX. FKEEXRICX. MD IINI
Numbtr nAMt>-n-l»-C-«OH
lire fcuNCEs KESEAJKH omra^
„GoogIe
REPORT DOCUMENTATIW PAGE
CorrpoLinds Found in Irradiated Beef. II.
Final Report 1 October
1977 to }l March 1979
Select Carmnttt on Health Aspects of irradiated
Beef. Herman 1. Chlnn. Chtinw.
OA«l-17-76-<:-60S5
Life Sciences Research Office. Federation of
96S0 Rock.lile Pike, Belhesda. Haryland lOOlk
''■:ai■.'Mlk•s!^VJKK■"«
U.S. Army Hedical Reteerch and Development
Conmand, Department of the Army
Fori Mirick. Frederick. HO 21701
UNCLASSIFIED
"* HJtSff.-""-'*'"""'*"*
Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unllnited
Approved for Public Helease: Distribution Unlimited
aldehydes dlol diesleri glycogen nonoglycerldes
amino acids fatty acldi hydrocarbons proitlns
carbohydrates food ketone]
diglycerides glycerol lipids
Volatile producli of beef irradiated hIIK S6 kCy IS.t Hrad) and approxi-
mately -30°C have been Identified and their health aspects discussed In a
pre.iou) report. In addiilon to these volatile radlolytlc lonpoundi, other,
nonvolatile products are possible. This report allenpli to identify the
conipounds -hlch might result froii beef irradiation; to estloeta roughly the
concentrations of tueh products; and to evaluate tlwlr possible haiard to
„GoogIe
UNCLASSIFIED
In th« abMne* of direct i*f, the Comllta* h» uIIHzsd flndlngiHlth
model lyitHB and h» extrapolated ihttt rciullt to Irradiated beef. T)m
uncertainties Implicit In luch extrapolations are discuitcd. Rough aitlfwt
of beef radlolvtic products have been attempted which have panlttad
of radlolvtic p
rlglvcerldes have been sti
een Identified. The major
carbohydrate in b«f and It* r*dlo1yttc product!
f<*d from th« protein conponent of baaf. Tha bulk
lund )n baaf has con from th* fat molatv- Slufila
UHCLASSIflEB
,y Google
EVU.UAT1(» OF THE HEALIH ASPECTS OF CERTAIN
COUPOUNDS POUND IH IRRADIATED BEEF
SUPPLEMENT II
POSSIBLE RADIOLmC (XIIP0UHD8
Hftrcb, 197fi
) S ARUY MEDICAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT COHHAND
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
FORT DETRICK, FREDERICK, MD 21701
Contract Hiatber DAMD-lT~T6-C-eO&5
LIFE SCIENCES RESEAIICH OFFICE
FEDERATION OF AMERICAN SOCIETIES
FOR EXPERIMENTAL BIOLOGV -
9650 Rockvllla Pik*
Bethesda, tUryland 20014
,y Google
A number of radlolytlc ccnpounds are produced wbon beef
Is exposed to sterilizing doses ot earaiu, rar or hlib enercj elec-
tron ridiitlon. The identity and concentration of 85 volatile
compounds hsve been determln
n A previous report. The present i
these considerations to other passit
the absence of specific data
has utilized the results tron model s
fats, and proteins to identify posslt
Despite the obvious hazard or eitripo
sodelB to a substance as coaplei a» b
:arbohydrates .
:lle conpounds.
itLng from Buct^ slMpl*
timatioos <:
the more likely
1 ol
lat
idlol
Slnpte aliphatic acids and
produced by carbohydrate In
lotiydrate present In beef sui
I products are lov In the ri
otein is kDOwn to produt
Ithough their presence (
compounds thus far dcti
Synth
vuli
several sites, suggesting a varii
pounds tron the fatty fraction o:
poBBlble concentrations ot some i
beef have been attempted by eitri
lipid systems. The most abundac
adds, dlol diesters and dielycendei
amounts of a aumbe? of other compound]
products has been revieiue'
are lacking or sparse for
carbonyl-coataiaing coapouDds
LdlatloQ, but the siBtll •Bonnt
£ests that the coDcentratlons
idlated saoipleG mia Irradl-
1 certain changes few alaple
a inoiety of beef have been
be eicluded. Most of the
pear to come iron beef
ble to bond scission at
of possible radlolytic cca-
^e) Rough estimates ot the
ag data obtained troa aodel
cts appear to be fatty
-gnlficantly leaser
The
these compound*.
relevant data
The Cod
ilttee concludes thi
pose no hazard to consumers of beef
naaner. Such products include
their simple esters, glycerol,
and aliphatic hydrocarbons. Insutfl
alio* Judgment of the effects
diesters and alKylcyclobutanonea pri
and toxicolog cal studies ol these i
evaluation can be made of the other
sible in Email amounts but vh ch hi
Irradiated beef or model systems. ]
exhaustive, can exclude the posslbl
undetected constituents, no uiiequiv<
•sens possible fraa consideration o
products alone. Such analyses though
with appropriate animal te< "
of the radlolytlc
lated to be present, should
irradiated In the deacrlbed
ndivldual fatty aelds and
■ and diglycerides aldebydes,
cleat data are available to
th of the Individual dlol
.umsbly present Metabolic
ble. No
e not been demonstrated In
cause no analysis hovevar
ty of the presence of
al detDOnst ration of safety
the individual radlolytlc
ul should be coupled
provide coavlenentary
> the ■bolesoaenes* and safety of irradiated
„GoogIe
FOREWORD
The Life Sciences Ressarcb Office (L8R0), PedeTstlon of
Amerlc&il Societies for Experlnental Biology (FASEB) provide*
scientific asseasDeDts of topics In the biooedical sciences.
Reports »re bssed upon conprehensiue literature reviews uid
opinions of knowledgeable investigators who *re actively eagaged
Id vork in specitic areas of biology and medicine.
A teclinical report entitled 'Evaluation of tbe Health
Aspects of Certain Canpounds Found in Irradiated Beef" (LSHO,
1977) aas published in August 1977 by an ad hoc Select Camlttee
■1th the assistance of the LSRO staff, it revle-ed tbo biological
effects of 68 volatile compoundB found in irradiated beef. An
analysis of the relevant lllersture on these cotnpoiinds appearing
since this report Is included in Supplaoeai I,
Coosideration of the radiation chenistry of the major
food conponenlE suggests that a number ot additional compounds
could be produced frcoi the eiposUre of beef to sterilizing doses
of Ionizing radiation. Most of the eorapounde discussed in this
second supplemental report have not been identitled In beef
Irradiated In the described manner nor have their concentrationa
in the beef been determined Nevertheless. It is bsllsvad
important to attempt an evaluation ai the health aspects of those
substances possibly produced during irradiation.
The Select Conalltee accepts the responsibility tor the
contents of this report. Appreciation is expressed to CV. Valtsr
H. Urbain, Special Consultant, for his helpful comments In its
preparation. The report was approved by the Select Cooralttee, tbe
Director of LSRO, and the LSRO Advisory Committee composed of
representatives of each constituent society of FASEB, under
authority delegated by the Eiecutive Committee of the FederatlMi
*Bo«rd. Upon completion ol these review procedures the report was
approved and transmitted to the [I.S Amy tiedical Research and
Development Cc^und by the Executive Director, PABEB.
Vhile this is a report of the Federation of ADcrlcan
Societies for Experimental Biology, It does not necessarily
reflect tbe opinion of the individual members of its constituent
Societies.
Kenneth D. Fisher. Ph.D.
Life Sciences Researeb Office
„GoogIe
PACE
Suntnary «
Foreirord vll
IntroductloD 1
Hadiolytlc Products of C*.rbohyd rates .... 3
Radlolytlc Products at Proteins S
Hadiolytlc Products o! Lipids 7
Aliphatic Hydrocarboas
Fatty Acids
Fatty Acid Esters
Glycerol
Hon oglyce rides
DlBlycerldes
Hodllied Glycerldes ,
Aldehydes
Ketones 20
Dlol Dlesters 20
Discussion 25
CoQcluaioD 27
Scientific Consultasts 37
,y Google
I. INTRODUCTION
For i.lmoat uro d«cades, investigators *t the Pood Sdances
Laboratory of the U.S. Arm; Natlck Hesearch and Dcvelopnent Ccm-
roand luve been etudylai the radiolyttc products of meats exposed
to slerillzine doses of loaizlng radiation (Herrltt, 1972; Uerrltt
et al., 195»: 1978). Sixty-five conpounds have been identified in
Eee^eiposed to an average dose of 56 kGy <S.e Mrads) of naima ray
or electron irradiation at about -30*C. Tbe con cent rat loos ranged
from 1 to approxioately 700 UB per kg (parts per blUloo) of
Irradiated beet. The health aGpectn of each of thess Buhstances
were reviewed by a Select Cannlttee of the Life Sciences Researcb
Office of tbe Federation of ilnerlcan Societies for Eiperioental
Biology <LSHO, 1977. 1979). The Ccoraittee concluded that there
were no grounde to suspect that these radlolytic products vould
constitute a health hazard to persons eonsuBlng beef irradiated in
the described oanner.
The 65 compounds identified and discussed in the original
reports probably represent osly a small portion of those produced
by the irradiation of beef. It was their relative volatility
which rendered th^ especially anenable to gas chronstographlc and
mass spectrcmetric analysis. Roeever, many other less volatile
products are also possible theoretically from the irradiation of a
substance as coaplea as beef.
The DBjor constitDants of. beet are vater, protein, and fat
while inorganic salts, carbohydrates, free aMino acids, pbospbo-
creatine, and other soluble organic eoapounds are present In mmII
amounts. Because of tbe ccmplealty and variability of natural
foods, simple ccopounds of known structure have usually been tbe
substrates for radlolytic studies. Caution pust be exercised in
extrapolating results with these compounds to aore complex sub-
stsnces. Nevertheless such models are useful in illustrating
general processes and in providing a basis for speculation about
tbe radlolytic products of various foodstuffs, such as beef.
„GoogIe
11. KADIOLVTIC PKODUCTEi C^ CARBOHYDRATES
A vast lltertture is «vallftble on the radlatloo cheolBtry
of csrbohydratoE. A recent revlev (DiupMln and St. Lebe , 1977)
lists almost 400 references on this subject. Depeadloc on th* Sp*-
eitlc carbohydrate Irradiated and the conditions of IrradlktlOD,
hydrogen, carbon dioxide, aldehydes, ketones, acids, aod other
compounds *re formed. Beef contains only about 0.5 percent carbo-
hydrate in the lomi of muscle glycogen (Swenson, 1977). Bo report
could be found dealing specifically vlth the radlolysls of gly-
cogen. However, one vould expect its radlolytlc products to ba
ainllar to those of starch or otber polysaccharideE. Irradiation
of polysaccharides leads to their depolyneriEatlon and fragjMDt-
atlon into simpler cnlecules. When wheat starch ns Irradiated,
glucose, maltose. maltotrloEe. naltatetrose, and Baltopestosa wars
all detected in significant amounts, vlth the dl- and triaaccha-
rides predominating (Ananthaa»amy , ot al, , 1970). SaA.H aoount*
of simpler compounds were also detected after Irradiation of abeat
Starch, mainly formic acid, formaldehyde, acetaldebyde , and glycol-
aldehyde. However, glycolysis occurs rapidly followlDg death ot
the animal, so that i^st of the glycogen originally present ID the
beef is converted to lactic acid. RadiclysiB of lactic acid flv**
Degradation of any remaining glycogen would alao be
minimized by the irradiation of beef In vacuo and at low tenjier-
atures, both conditions favoring narked reduction of radlolytlc
activity. Furthermore, many substances, Including aaino acid« *Dd
proteins protect carbohydrates against breakdown by radlolysla
(Diehl et al. . 1978; Phillips, 1972).
,y Google
III. fUDIOLfTIC PKOOUCTS OP PAOTeiNS
Irradlktlod produoea changes In botb the phyatcftl and
cbmlcal -character lEtics of proteins, box tbe cbaii|e> ara not
great at doses used in load Irradiation. Tbs natura and extent of
change ilepead upon various factors Includlnf the phyalcal struc-
ture of the protein Its chemical composition, Its native or
denatured state, its form during irradiation (dry, vet, frozen).
and the presence of other substances. Hydrogen bonds may be dis-
rupted allowing the molecule to unfold; the molecule may undergo
dlesoclatlOD. SEereeatlon . or traginentation : and Individual aalno
resulting products are divers*, cooi-
ry or <iuantlfy <Urbain, 1977; 1978),
At tbe aalno acid level, tbe principal radlolytlc r*-
actlone Id oxygen-free Eolutions are reductive desminitlon and
decarboxylation Tbeee reactions result in the formation of the
corresponding organic acidE and of aalnes vith one less carbon
atom than the original amino acids Tbus, glyolne would give rise
to EiethylaiDine and acetic acid alanine to ethylamlne and pro-
pionic acid etc In beef traces of *ucb amines and acids Blfht
result frcm the snail ainountG of free amino acids present Bov-
ever the low irradiation tenperature nould markedly reduce IhelP
production. Taub et >1 197B) have shown that freezing reduced
the electron-induced ammonia (ormation frcra glycine by approi-
Imately BO ]>ercent compared alth Irradiation in the liquid state.
In peptides and proteins only the tennlnal and diamine- and dlcar-
boxyllc amino acids would undergo deamlnatlon or decarboxylation.
Irradtallon la the frozen state would also sharply reduce other
radiolytic effects oo tbe protein molecule. This has been denon-
Btrated dramatlCBlly with tbe enzyme pepsin, which retained approi-
Imately S5 percent of Ita original activity when Irradiated at
temperatures of -30* to -IBO'C, but only 10 percent «hen irradi-
ated at rooB temperature <Bella[iiy and Lawton 1954 Ho amino
■eld destructtoo could be detected when beef (as irradiated GO kGy
(6.0 Hrad} at -196*C. The individual amino acid content of the
beet after Irradiation did not differ ueasurably trtm tbe nonir-
radiated sample (Kautfmn and Barlao, 1999), althougb the analyt-
ical tnethods enptoyed may have been insufficiently eanaltlve to
detect small cbaoges.
The liHllad data available •ugseet that only aaall nnouat*
of simple radlolytic products froai protein «ould result froa beef
irradiated at lo* tosperaturee In tbe abaence of oxygen. Further
Infomatloo on the natuiv and quantity of such products la
desirable.
„GoogIe
:v. RADlOLmC PhOOl'CTS Of UPIES
Tr^ radiolytic products of beef lipids lia<« been stitftad
ncr* '.:.',Tr.:ft.lY th«n tboG« of proteliis or c»^to^> Jri'ies Tftts
i«r;;)- of crcBter signif ic»nce th«n th»t ol -. :. - : :^-
kr.al/tiesl tecRalques. Also, as loplied >;..'; - ~, baa baca
Ii=:*.«d latereat Id carbobydrate radiolyBia ^■i.i^-^ .: Uic ^h11
Clyeocer. oscteot of beef. Tbe structural aiBilarity of tbe trt~
SlrcerKle* and tKelr relatively loe oolecular -weigiTs. pronite
attractiTe aodels tor bond cleavase studies, jli.4i.es can be per-
forsed QB siMplc syatbetic aodels wMdi are Delie:ed to alsic
Hacy of -. ■ .- ■ : irradlatloo are reioilr identiisaSlc
■fiicB alloas ■ .{itors to localize toe s;-.fs -oI radioljsis
and to ;.redlc' .- .:e of additional products ;Lot vet. de-
tected. 'For tnese reasons, the radlolytlc products 3! b^t lipids
are considered here la (reater detail than tbose of carbobydrales
and proteins.
Upon exposure to blgb cnerc]' Irradlstioo , lipid wc
are cleaved at a Mwber of sites to produce trse radicals.
Bay tbeo fala or love bydrosea. or i-ecoabiae to fora ■ atiabei- of
nee coapouada (Kaaar, 1977). Tbe Bost penetratiae studies Into
the aechanlu of lipid radiolyals bave beea those of Kavar and 111*
cclle»g-c-. - - . . , ;ed a serleE ol sitple triglyceride
■ f. fatty acids. Froa tbese studies
-..'.Lea tive locations (s-e) in tbs vlciattr
croups of tbe tngiyccrlds at wtaicb [refer-
age occurs. Scissioc say also occur ca a
raadoe basis at tbe 11 ■■ liiliii carbon-carbOD bonds (site f) in tba
fatty acid aolecule. Tbe Bsneral Deebaai^ la suBw.rlasd In
rigure 1.
Tbs Dost abundaot radlolytlc products ars tbose (orasd by
tbe BclssloD of s slDgle bond In tbe parent canpound, follo««d b9
abstraction w loss of a hydroteo atoa. ' Tbe tnuibsr and variety of
such poteotlal cleavage products frcB lipid radlolysis are sug-
gested In Table 1,
Tbe free radical* resulting froa tbese eleavagss ^ly rsrf
bine to fom additional ccapouiids Includlne ketones aod diketones,
esters, aodlfled triglycerides, Kl:'ceryl ether diestera alliyl pro-
panediol dlesters, butanetrlol triesters. eryttarltol tetraesters
and various dlswr bydroearboas (dxunsatursted , nonounsaiurated ,
saturated). Other radlolytlc ccnjxiiinds are |>os&lble fron mutiiple
cleavages la the aaiae triglyceride oolecule or froB the turther
dccistposition of products frcM single bond scission. Hydrogsna-
tiOD, lactone fomatlon , and other reactions oay also occur
(Havar, 1977), It Is evident that a large nunbar of ciBpounds are
[lal radlolyt
„GoogIe
"2
1
c +
1
0 *■
(.1 J,
1
1
. -1-
„ *
m ->
1
1
"2
■I
. J,
I
I
PIGUBS 1. Bond aclMtoB «it«a of tri|lye«rldM.
„GoogIe
Lipid radlolytlc products.
cleavaE« (Se« Pleui'e
Cj, Free fattf acids
Propanediol dlesters
Propenedlol dlesters
Alkyl cycLobutaDODas (Cq)
DlBlycerides
Oxo-alkaaediol dlestsrs
„GoogIe
«ar«tlcall; possible, althoutb oolr • few hava been r«port«d
der irradlatloa condltlona far BOre severe than those aaployad
th beet Tbe total production of tbesv -compounds are aoBll
npared vith those resulting from single bond scission. Namr
977 using pure triglycerides (ound their coDCfintratlona to b»
oerallT belo* one part per millloa. Ke concluded that thsy mKJ
1st In foods in traces too aaall to be detected.
Id tbe follovlnc sections, itterapts sill be nadeto eatl-
itlons of various compounda which fros tbeoret-
Dlght be expected in Irradiated beef. Such
iiinateB can oe no better than rough approxl mat ions for they are
sed on eitrapolations Iroo simple triglyceride models Irradiated
room temperatures Since irradiation in the frozen ataio has
en •ho«n to rsdoce radioljttc products (Merrltt et al. , 1975
ubet ol. , 1B78), It Is believed that the calculated values
preseot naxlsial conceDtratlons In the beef which may in some
ses, tie substantial ove rest ioat iocs of the actual content This
illustrated by comparing the concentrations -of volatile allpha-
c hydrocarbons produced after irradiatloD of pure triglycerides
25*C with those in beef irradiated with the some dose at -30°C.
Istearin. and triolein Wore 1402 1562, and 1672 iimoleH per kg,
spectlvely <Dubravcic and Nawar 1968). The correaponding hydro-
rboo production In beat irradiated at -30'C was 60 iiatoles <LSRO,
??}. Since tbe fat content of beef oa^ about 36 percedt, tbe
drocarbon production from tbe beet fat alone was about 240 u
lea. Tbua, hydrocarbon production frca the triglyceride models
radiated at rooi tenperature was about sii-fold that fran fat
ailable t« deterwiine whether IrradiBtlon of frozaa beef reault*
reductions of comparable magnitude with the Other radiolytto
mpounds uader consideration. However, •tudiaa wltb Otb«r frozen
ateas (Bellaar and Lawton, Idbt; Taub et al., 1978) auaaat •
■liar t
JtLIPBATIC HTDftOCABBCWS
Of tbe various faallles of radiolytlc coapounda, onlr the
Iphatlc hydrocarbons have been systematically analyzed. The
Qtent of both alkane and alkene inembers up to 17 carbon atoms in
ngth baa been determined in model triglyceride systems {Dubravcic
d Nawar, 1968), in pork (Champagne and Nawar. 1969}. and In beef
baapagne and Hawsr. 1969. Uerritt, 1972). These aliphatic hydro-
rbona represent approjilmately 90 percent of the total volatlles
alyzed. The health aspects of these compounds have been dlscua-
i In previous reports (LSRO. 1977; 1979) and will not be
,y Google
Hl|b«r mlvcular •sight allplutlc hydrocarbaiim froa tb*
randan recODbinatloD of tzat hydrocarbon radicals (Haaar, 1S78),
bav« also b««n dstactsd after Irradiation of aodsl lipid aratSBS.
Their presence In irradlatod be«f is aesumed but baa not yst baao
demoastrated Since the total concenCrktlon of sucb racoablnatloa
products was much l*a» than of the conpounds prodocsd fra« slBila
bond scission In the model Byatess, It la believed that the
Mnunta in irradiated beef are probably do more Ibao a few atcro-
grana per kllograa.
No reporta could be found concerning biological etudl** <tf
such loDg-chaln illphattc liydrocarbons Hoeever, these ccMpounda
■re widely dlatrlbuled id natural producis and are present aa veil
m oils and vaxea emplored m phanoaceutlcal aaaufacturliw and ia
the processlag ot foods. Schrler et al. (1976) detected virtually
the entire alkane and 1-alkeae series In grapes, trcra decane to
dotr acont&ne 4^32) '"d lirm 1-decene to 1 -dot rlacoa tens. 81ai~
larly, apgle skin contains each of the faydrocarbons frm Co to C31
(Uelgh, 1964) with C29 pradcnl Dating. Noraal alkanas up to C35
have been report«d in heated beef (latanabe and Sato, 1971).
Elcosana (£20] > docoaane (C22). u>il beiacosane (C2e) are preaent
In roasted peanuts (johnsoD et al., 1971) and heptacosane (Cm) ia
coffee (Walter and veideaianD, iSeS).
B. patt; acids
Free fatty acids are the nost abundant producta of trl-
glycerlde Irradlstlon (Haear, 1978). They are produced by
cleavage of the acyloxy-aetbylene bond (site a, Plgure 1). The
nature and anount ol the free acid loraed depend upon the tatty
acid composition of the triglyceride irradiated. The average
conpoBltlon of beef fat Is shown In Table 2 {8«em. 1969}.
The quantities of these fatty acids produced durlag the
Irrsdiatlon of beef have not been reported, but rough estimatea
--S possible Iron the investigations of LeTellier and Hawar
(1972a) with trlcaproin They reported
nnoles of heianolc acid per kg of tricaproin Irradli
(6.0 Hrad} and 2S°C. This represents approilraatel)'
the hexanolc add vtilch theoret cal y could have bei
Icaproln been completely hydrolyaed. It one 1
■adiolytlc efficiency for other trlglyceridea,
content of 25 percent, the estimated iberation of
acids In beef - ■
of l£.20
. at GO HCj
O 2 percent of
'n produced had
issuaee the
and a beef tat
n, would range
[ per kg besf for llnoleic acid to 234 n« per kg for oleic
Table 2) (see footnote* p. 13). Lean beef,
, would yield proportionally less fatty acids t
Those values oay overestimate by considerable
tatty acid liberation trcn beef irradiated as described by
th lower
upon Irradi-
„GoogIe
TULI 2. latlmtad produetloa of fkttr Msld« br bMf IrrkdlMlod.
Structure Be«r Pkt BatioKtad
(Ckrbona : C^ujoalt^on R«tlolrtlc Producl^oD
double baada) Perceot (at/kg baet: ppa)
Mrrlatlc
Palaltlo
Staarle
Oleic
Linolale
'Averaie coapoaitloa (Swem, IMS)
'see text, p. 13 for calculfttlooa flaplojed
„GoogIe
iavestlgators at the U.S. Army Pood Sciences Laboratorf (Iterritt
et al . , 1ST8). Beel was Irradiated at about -30*C ahereaa trl-
caproln vas Irradiated at tocB temperature. A* iioloted Out
earlier [Taub et al., t97B), irradiation In the froien atate
reduces souib ra3loTytlc products by over 90 percest ctBparad vltb
those from liquid aolutloss.
Slnple beating of meat liberates Blgaltlcant amounts of
and Ctdi
utely doubled aft<
beef depot lat (or 4 hours at' loo'c
0.49 to 1.04 mg per ■ fat; palmitic acid, fn
stearic acid, from 0.96 to 1.3T: oleic acid,
and llDolelc acid, frcm 0.5B to 34 LeTei:
reported that three tines as much heianoic ■<
trlcaprolD rten it «a« heated at 270*C ior v.
received 60 kGy (6.0 Hrad) Irradiation at 25'
Each of the tatty acids of Table
of many vegetable and animal lipids regu
amounts. The avenge diet in the United Stai
percent of its calories frOB fat, or about lOO
Studies with isotopically labeled triglyceride:
approxisately 40 percent arc hydrolyzed to
acids during digestion (White et al. , i3T3
take of fatty acids from noToa'T'dletary
of sagnltude greater than that possible frcm
Joint FAO/VHO Expert Ccsmittee on Food I
fatty acids to be nonoal products of fa1
limits OD tbelr acceptable dally Intake.
acid 1
2.24 t
t<m 9.24 1
19.74;
T 197 2a)
a ted troa
consumed In large
Illy.
t 40
that
and ImXty
tha dally In-
leveral order*
Irradiated beef. The
.ves (1974) considered
iboliSB r ' -
■The following calculations irere employed to eatinate Individual
lysis, each molecule of trlcaproio vould release three nolecules
of heianoic acid; one mlllimole tricaproln • 470 tug Therefore,
one kg tricaprolQ - 2,130 ddoIce tricaproln - 6,390 raooles hei-
anoic acid. Reported release of heianoic acid after tricaproln
Irradiation - 12.20 aotoles/kg. 12.20/6,390 - 0.002 (radtolytlc
efficiency).
1 kg trlmyrlstln (nol. >t. 712) - 1,404 mmoles - 4,212 ^les
myrlstlc acid. 4,212 mmoles a 0.002 (radlolytlc efficiency) ■ 8.4
iBDoles myristlc acid produced/kg trlmyrlstln. Pat Id beef Is 29
percent; myristlc acid is 6.3 percent of fat; 6.4 soKilea i 0.35 i
0.063 - 0.13 mmoles x 228 (Dol . vt.) - 30 ii« myristlc acid
released/kg beef. The production of the other fatty acids ess
estimated in a Giollar manner.
„GoogIe
Of the lAtty acid* under coiiBlderBtion la thla revlsw, all
but llnoleic acid cKn be synthesized by animals Thus, body
stores of nyrlstlc palalttc, stearic, and oleic >cldB reflect
both their dietary Intake and their biosynthesis Llnoleic acid,
hovever must be su|jplled in the diet as an essential latty ocltl.
ts exact role In the body is still uncertain, but its deficiency
Id the rat results in iBpalrcd growtli eczemtous dermatitis, and
i>[>ainneat of reproduction (Alf In-Slater and Aftergood , 1973).
RSlatlvely large amounts can be ted ulthout apparent harm. Swell
«t al. (1962) maintained 16 healthy subjects for 1 year on a high
vegetable fat diet In which 22 percent of the fat calories was
obtained from llnoleic acid. No significant change in weights of
the subjects wti6 noted and no adverse effects were reported during
the ei peri mental period. The average serum cholesterol levels
dropped from 2^3 to Z30 nc per dl during this period. In another
experiment men -vere fed a diet rich in unsaturated fats for 5
years with no reported ill effect*. DUrlDs thl* period the
ilDolelc acid of the adipose tissue rose from II to 3S percent of
the total fatty acids (Dayton et al . . 1966).
C. PATTY ACID ESTERS
Although traces of other alkyl esters of the fatty acids
may be present available evidence suggestB that the methyl esters
predaalnate LeTelller and Hawar (1972a detected iiethyl heia-
noate but no other fatty acid ester after the Irradiation of
trlcaproin Presumably, other esters If present were in concen-
trations below the sensitivity of the analytical methods employed.
Approximately &0 ng (0.39 mooles) of methyl heianoate were formed
per kg of tr caproin irradiated with 60 0 kGy {6.(1 Urad). Extra-
can be made of the methyl esters In Irradiated bbef: 6.9, 3.6,
S Q.B and 0.3 OS per kg (or methyl oleate palnltatk. atea.
rate myrlatate and llnoleate respectively A* pointed out
earlier (p. 13). these valued are apt to be overset iB&tlia becauae
tbe frozen state of the beef during irradiation would- reduce the
aaounts of radiolytlc products.
The osthyl and ethyl esters of each c
1977) although their concentrations were not
tlon, methyl myrletate Is used »S ft flavonnf
baked goods gelatins, and puddings at levels of 0.25 to O.SO ■{
per kg (Hall and Oser , 1965).
Tbe Conmittee knows of no reports which specifically
address the fate of these methyl esters in tbe body* Lipases
hydrolyze acylglycerldes, while simple, nonspecific esterases
catalyze the scission and synthesis of esters of lower alcohols
and fatty acids (Stolz, 1956). Also, a number of oethylatlon ar
,y Google
deDethyli.tiaD reactions have been reported in noma.! metabolic
proceEses (Handler and Perlzweig , 194S). Presunabl; tb« Bethyl
esters of latty acids >ould be subject to similar enzynatlc
action. No reports could be found of atudlee on '
Iclty of these compounds Koscver, Alfin-Slater
studied effects of several methyl esters of latt]
tern feeding eiperlnents. Weanling nale and femi
strain), oalntalned on a fat-free diet aere given
(about 2.0 B per leg at start of tbe experiment'
esters for 12 weeks. Rate receiving methyl my]
gained slightly less weight than tl
suppleioeiited wltb methyl oleate or
le controls during tbe experlnestal jie:
. the other methyl
beparic cholesterol esters above that obtained vith
mented fat-free diet. Smith et al . (1960) t.l _______
suppleoected with 10 percent oetliyl linoleale (about 3 g par kg
body velght) three times *eek y for an unspecified period, there
slgHlflcant alteration in the tissue cholesterol levala,
ere reported.
acl?s in abort-
100 Rig per day
various methyl
.noleate. gained
■d. Uethyl
Ho deleterious c
Oily vary SEiall i
■ounts of glycerol would ba eapected trca
toe irraaiatioD oi lata, for three cleavagea oa tba same trigly-
ceride molecule would be required for It* production. Momt radto-
lytic product* result frco a eingle bond scission and tlM probg-
blllty of two or more cleavages on the sane molecule is lov
(Hawar, 1978).
Relatively large avounts of glycerol are absorbsd froa the
normal diet. It has been estimated that about 40 percent of the
Ingested triglycerides are hydrolyzed to glycerol ai^ fatty aclda
Id the gastrointestinal tract (White et al. 1973) reprsseatlng a
daily intake of glycerol of about 4 g per day In addition to Its
presence In natural fats, glycerol Is Also employed in food iro-
ceeslog and ie listed as CRAS (generally recognized as safs) In
the Code of Federal Regulations [21 CFR 182.1320) (Office of
Federal fteglster 1977). The glycerol produced from radlolytlc
breakdown of triglycerides would be only an extremely small
fractloa of tbe aiK>unt absorbed frog normal diet*.
Glycerol is readily metabolismd in the body. Cldes and
Karnovky (1854) administered ^^C-glycerol to rats in traps ritona-
Blly, intravenously, or intragastrlcally and deaunatrated tba itt-
corporatioc of labeled carbon Into blood glucose, liver glycogen,
and tissue lipids. Only 1 to 9 percent of the administered radio-
activity could be recovered in the urine and feces. About 40
percent of glycerol was oxidized wlthlo a 8 b period to carbarn
„GoogIe
dioxide. Radioactivity was found in the lipids of most tissues
ng the brain. The acute oral toxicity at gly-
y low, with reported UJ50 values (k per kg body
* " — 10.0 for guinea pigs (Hine et al. ,
, .9.3 to 31.5 for mice (Fischer et al. ,
1939); and 27.2 to 48.5 for rats (Tlscher
cerol is extra
weight) ranglnf
1953; Smyth et
1949 La'
, 1949 nine et al. , 1853).
IxiiiE-terrD feeding oc glycerol to rats (Atlas Ctienical
Industries, 1960; Hlne et ■!., 19S3), or dogs (Food und Drug
Research Laboratories, 1962) caused AO treatment-related adverse
effects. Kale and fenale rats (Long-Evaiie strain ircre [oalntalned
00 diets containing S or 10 percent glycerol {about 5 Of 10 i p«r
kg body velght dally) Car 3 years or 20 percent (about 20 g per
kg per day) for 1 year (Mine et al. , 1953). Ho significant bio-
chemlcal or pathological changes were detected. A similar study
with Sprague-Dawley rata, also fed 5, 10, or 20 percent glycerol
1969 Dogs fed diets containing up to 30 percent glycerol (about
5 8 per kg J>ef day revealed no pathological changes (Food and
Drug Research Laboratories, 1962).
Six generations of rats were reared on diets containing 10
percent glycerol without slgntftcant Influence oa grosth or repro-
duction (Guerrant et al . , 1947) Administration of 1 g per kg
body weight to pregnant mice or rats {days 0 through 15 of gesta-
tion produced no slgnlllcant changes Jroiii control animals in
■■aternal or fetal survival or In the Incidence of olfeprlng abnor-
■alltles (Food and Drug Besearch LabOrStOTles. 1973), Johnson et
■1. (1933) fed ItO g of glycerol daily (troa 1.3 to 2.2 g par kg
Eody weight) to 14 young volunteers for SO days. Ho 111-effecta
•ere Doted.
Glycerol has been administered both orally aod paren-
terally in patients to reduce cerebral edema, ocular tension, or
cerebrospinal fluid pressure (Tourtellotte et al. , 1972). Concen-
trstlons up to 40 percent have been used Intravenously without
causing beaiolyais.
E. HONOCLVCEKIDES
Two cleavages of the same triglyceride jaolecule are neces-
sary to lorm a jaonoglycerlde, aad Since this would occur only
infrequently, the amount resulting from the radlolysis ot beef lat
should be small Of the five possible monoglycerides of beef,
those of oleic and palmitic acids are moat likely to be toraed be-
cause of their greater abundance in beef tat. These monoglyce rides
«s well a^ those with other fatty acids are produced during normal
digestive proceasss In tar greater amounts than could be jjroduced
by the radlolysis of beef tat. Hattson and Volpenheln (1904)
,y Google
found thai appronlmately three-quarte
by the rat were hydrolyzed in the Int
cerides. The nonoglycerides entered the intesttnal cells IntKct,
and were reesterifted to triglycerides, Kayden et al. (1967) tad
five men doubly-labeled monoelycerldea and detected the radiolabel
in their lymph. They concluded that the Z^mo nog lyce ride pathway
appears to be the major route of tat absorption tor man during
normal digestion and absorption of dietary triglyceride.
In addition to the amounts arielng Iras normal tat diges-
tion in the gastrointestinal tract, monoglycerldoB are also con-
sumed from many natural edible oils and frco various cooDercl al
preparations. Natural oils may contain up to 1 percent ol noDO-
glycerldes which may increase appreciably durlDg normal cookloi
processes. Approximately 0.5 percent of mo nog lyce rides in lard
and detectable antoucts In bread have been reported (Kubrt et al. .
1952). A number of synthetic monogly cerides are also used
extensively by the food Industry, priisarlly as emulsifying agents.
Uonoglycerides of edible lats and oils, as well as certain syn-
itlc analogues have been accorded CRAS status by the Pood and
" """ "" "" "nice ol the Pedaral
Mattson et al. (19S1) found monoglycerldes to be nutri-
tionally equivalent to dt- and triglycerides of corresponding
tatty acids. Reanling rats ted pure monoglycerldes at a 2S per-
cent level (about 25 g per lig per day) for 10 weeks showed no
gross or microscopic pathology. Similarly, hamsters fed S or 19
pereeot ot glycerylmonostearate for 22 to 28 weeks revealed no
sigDilicant differences from controls In growth, food Intake, or
tissue changes (Orten and Dajanl , 1957).
F. DICLVCERIOES
Although some triglyceride mlecules may be subjected to
double or triple cleavages during irradiation, to produce monogly-
oerldes or glycerol, respectively, they are more likely to undergo
a single bond scission and leave a dlglycerlde residue. LeTelller
and Nawar (1972a) reported the production ot Z.9& nnoles (761 ■■«)
dicaproln per kg of trlcaproin irradiated at 25*C and with 60 kGy
(6.0 Hrad). It was the most abundant radlolytlc product Identi-
fied apart trtm the fatty acid (caproic acid] and propanediol
dlester. Assuming beef to contain 25 percent fat, tbe dlglycerlde
production under comparable irradiation conditions would be less
than 200 mg per kg beef. Irradiation in the frozen state should
yield substantially less dlglycerlde. Fifteen different dlgly-
cerides are possible from the five major fatty acids comprlslDg
beef fat, exclusive ot positional Isomers. The actual distribu-
tion of these diglycerldes is unknown, but those containing oleic
and palmitic acids would be expected to predccoinate.
„GoogIe
riglycerides are normally produced during digestion of
fats and are re&dlly utilised by the body. They are also used
extensively as emulsifying agents by the food industry and ere
aiiproved by the Food and Drug Administration (21 CFR 182,45051
(Offxce of the Federal Register, 1977). Many of these prepar-
ations are synthesized by direct esterllicatton of glycerol with
fatty acids, or by partial hydrolysis o£ natural triglycerides.
The resulting mixture may contain both mono- and diglycerides as
veil as some glycerol, triglycerides, and fatty acids.
Relatively few reports could be found on biological
aspects of natural diglycerides, presumably because their effects
are assumed to be similar to the parent triglyceride. Mattson et
si. (1951) fed imno- , di-, and triglycerides containing the same
Tatty acids to weanling rals as 25 percent of ■ synthetic diet-
three lipids "ere nutritionally equivalent. Harris and Sherman
<1954) confirmed these findings with rats maintained for 70 days
rats were fed mono-, di-. or triglycerides and various mixtures of
G. UODIFIED GLVCERIDES
Scission of carbon-carbon bonds (sites d.f of Figure 1) of
the fatty acid moieties of the triglycerides would liberate the
various hydrocarbons already discussed, together with a family of
dlglycerlde esters of varying lengths. Only the simplest of these
esters, formyl- and acetyldlglycerldes have been detected after
LeTelller and Nawar (1972a) reported 0.79 nH at acetyl
dlcaproln per kg was produced upon irradiation of trlcaproln at 60
kGy (6.0 Urad) at 17°C. If Che same degree of radiolysls occurred
in beef with a 25 percent fat content, approximately 100 mg acetyl
diglycerides per kg beef would be produced. The concentration of
tlon Is available on the biological fate of these compounds,
although hydrolysis to diglyceride and fomic or acetic acid would
(Site b of Figure 1) gives rise predominantly to aldehydes with
beef fat, the following aldehydes would be anticipated; tetra-
„GoogIe
decanal (myrlstaldehyde) , hexadecanal (palmltaldehyde), octft-
decanal (stearaldehyde] , octadecenal (oleylaldetiyde) and octad«-
cadleniil (llnolylaldehyde) . Each of these aldehydes, except tor
Octadecadlenal , *as detected in irradiated beel, and wu dlBeiu*Bd
Id the original report (LSHO, 1977),
Id the absence ol air, irradiation of lipid produces oalj
«Ball aiBountB of aldehydes and ketones. The amount produced
should reflect roughly the content of the fatty acid coaposltloo
of the Irradiated fat. Thus, oleic acid, «hich coraprlaeB approii-
mately half of the fatty acids Id beef tat yielded 39S vs of
oleylaldehyde per kg beef after Irradiation, and palBltle acid,
the next most abundant acid, yielded 127 vt of palaitylaldebyd*
per kg beef (LSRO, 1977). Linoleic acid, cooprlBlDs only 2.9
perceDt of the total fatty acids in beef fat would be expected to
provide approxlDately 10 to 20 UB of the corresponding aldehyde
per kg beef. Hovever. although this estimated coocentratico of
octadecad^enal sas vltbln the sessltlvlty range of the analytical
procedures employed, none eas detected after beef IrradtattOQ in
vacuo (LSHO, 1977),
No Inforaatlon on the netabollsm or biological actlcKi of
octadecadienal could be found. Aldehydes as a class are readily
oxidized In the animal body to the corresponding acid and are
nonaally converted by beta -oxidation ±o carbon dioxide and VBt«r
(ffllllans, 1959). Alternatively, some aldehydes and ketones,
especially of xenoblotlc origin, laay be reduced to thalr alcohols
and metabolised accordingly. (Kessler and Perrell , 1S74). fhlch,
if either, of ibese pathways Is followed by octadacsdlennl t» not
Hooty et al. (1861) reported the prsaence of aanll aaouau
of 2, 4, 5, B, an3~9 carbon aldsbyden as "minor cmpounds' vben
ground meat ns Irradiated in a nitrogen atmosphere vith 46 or 93
kCy (4.S or 9.3 Mrad at 20°C Neither the exact structures at
these aldehydes oor tbeir concentrations were determined It Is
assumed that they were n-a iphatlc nonocarbonylE. None of tbeee
aldehydes was detected by lierrltt et al. .(1972) with 58 kGy S.6
Mrad) Irradiation at About -30"C preBumably because of tbe mark-
edly lower temperature employed , Each of these lower aldehydes L>
found naturally ia many foods including meats {Van Straten
1977). All are widely used as flavoring substance! and are ssner-
•lly recognized as safe by the Flavoring Extract Uanufacturers
Association (Hall and Oaer. 1969). Tbe Council of Europe (1974)
also includes th^ as artificial flavoring substances which may bs
added to foodstuffs without hazard to healtb. Tbe Council bss
established an acceptable human dally intake for eeeb of these
aldehyde* at l sg per kg body weight.
„GoogIe
KETOHCS
Ijeveral allpnatlc ketone
on of synthetic trtglyce rides
nty et »1. (1961) detected 3 t
tones In beef, pork and chlcUe
1 93 kGy (4.6 and 9.3 Hrad)
Bntlfled but *ere assumed to t
01 mMoles approximately 100 it
These Biaple aliphatic
lormally In many
iflcial tlavorl
1985).
500 kGy (SO Ml
et al., 1977:
pounHs louod
employed as i
Hall and Oser
1 beef Irrad:
ecn reported after 1
at roan temperature
rb-
Mil as "lone-
■ ted
at 48
vidua
ke tones ■ere
1,-2-0
es. The amoua
ta of
ut
the
otal carbiinyl
KOy (9.3 Hrad)
KB
.1 mor^ than ha
1 con
tnd k(
-neptanone) we
^lynri subjected to
cini--riture (He
jir^. la»orIul
en. 1977) and
3
Council of Europe,
1974;
to detect these volatile ketones
tate. He found only acetone and
to 58 kGy (5.6 Hrad) Irradi-
ation at -30°C In vacuo. The production of qyclii^ ketones has
also been reported after the Irradiation of [rigl)'i;oride models.
LcTelHer and Hawar (1972b) detected Z-alkylrycluDutanones ol the
Eaine i^arbon number as the constituent fatty acid These nvestl-
xators (1972a) reported that 0.Q8 mH of 2-ethyl cyclobulanone p«r
kg tr elycertde (about 94 ag) resulted frcsi the rradlitton €0
kCy; S.O Hrad of trlcaproln at 17*C. AasumlD| a fat content In
beef of 25 percent and Ilie production i-i camparable airounts of
2-alkyIcyclobutanone^ trom the individual fatty acids ti the beef
fat, a production ot 50 to 80 a% of those -cyr-lii; kfti-itics per kg
beef IS possible upon iri-sd i:.t i. .n uL 17°C. The aaouata reaultlDE
from beel Irradiated in the frozen state are unknown but would
presuubly be significantly lower.
Lilable c
ilth aspects of
DIOL Dl ESTERS
A number of dlol dieaters are possible from the radlolysis
, As shown In Figure 1 (site e) , cleavage between the
y and secondary carbons ot the glyceryl skeleton will pro-
thanediol diesters; cleavage at the acylokymethene bonds of
Iglycerlde (site a) results in propanediol dieaters, which
'erted to propenediol diesters by the subsequent loss of
I by B
'age a
;yloxy
of hydrogen
3,Googlc
Eacb ot these dlol dlester* was detected wben trleaproln
was Irradiated in vacuo «t 60 kGy (6.0 Hrad) at 17'C. By far Ui«
oost abundsnt were the propanediol dlcaproate* (1,2 and 1 3) vhleb
together cociipr sed about 85 percent of the total. Uost ot the
reoalnlng S percent cDnslsted of ethane- and propenedlol dkcap-
roatee. Traces of the oxo-derlvatlvoB (l-oio-2,3 and a-o»o-1.3
propane dlcaproates) aere also detected . but ta aaounts too aBAll
Ad attempt has been nide to estlnate the aaounta of dlol
dleaters produced by the irradiatloo of beef. The only quantit-
ative data available are those ot LeTelller and Nanr (1973) on
trleaproln Irradiated at 60 kGy 6.0 Urad) and IT'C. In eitra.
polatlAg these vt aes to irradiated beef (Table 3), It «aa aaaii— il
that beef contained 35 percent iti o,nd that the fat consisted only
ot triolein These almpllfylns asGumptions do not alter Bignlll-
cantly the estlEnatlon ot total dlol dlesters elthough it provide*
no Inionnatlon on the content of the ndividual coapounds. Tb*
five fatty acids comprising the bulk of the beef fat could produce
IS different dlester comblaalloaa. The concentration of eaeb
dlester would be a reflection of the relative fatty add eoBpost-
tion of the beef fat.
Tbe calculations suBgeat that the total dlol dl«at*r
production would be approxloiately 1 g per kg beef Irradiated at
17*C. Aa Indicated earlier, Irradiation as performed at -30*C
should yield aubstaiitlally lesser amounts.
The presence at dial cmpounds In lipid material vas first
reported In plant seeds in isei (Uklta and Tanlmura 1961). They
were later detected In nlcroorganisiBS Asselineau, 1961; DeHarteau-
Glnaberg and Higuel , 1962). and in mamcullan tieeue, when etbylen*
glycol was Identified in hydrolysaies of beef lung lipids (Carter
ot al . , 1963). Since then, dlol compounds tieve been found in the
Uplds of bacteria, yeast, plant seeds invertebrates and maoDals
(Bergelsoa, 1973). The laborator «e al Bergelson in tbe Soviet
Union and of Baumann and Schmld in the United States bava been
especially active In tbe isolation, structure determination and
biosynthesis of tliese substances. Bergelson and covorkers detected
der vativBB of 1 .2-ethanedloJ as well as of 1 2-propanediol
1 3-propanediol, 1,3-butanedlol , a.S-butanedlol , and 1,4-butane-
diol In a. number of bacteria, animal, and plant cells (BergelsoD
etal. , 1964 966 Vaver et al. , 1S71). That the dlol lipids nay
Have a biological role analogous to that of triglycerides was sug-
gested by the recovery of ethylene glycol dlpalmltate from regener-
ating rat Uver (Vaver et al,, 1969). Subsequeotly, Vaver et al.
(1972) Identified three etiiylene glycol dlester* of heptadecanolc
heptadecenolc . stearic and oleic acids from yeaats gro«n on hepta-
decane, indicating biosynthetic processes similar to those ol tri-
glycerides. Ethane- propane and butanedlols can also form tbe
backbone ot phospho iplds &« well as of glycoliplds. Bau^nn et
al. (1975) found approiiimatel; 350 ul of dlol lipids per g ot rat
„GoogIe
TSS
TABLE 3. EstlDKted ridlolytlc iiroductloD of dial dlesters.
trlccprlon
nB/kg
FroD beef
mB/kg
.2-Eth«De dlol
1 ester
0.12
73
,2- Propane dlol
dleeter
3.34
1967
.3-Prop.» dlol
dieater
2.21
1341
.3-PropeDe dlol
dl.8ter
0.46
24e
,3-PropeOB dlol
dieater
0.33
194
'Modified from LeTelller and Navar (10T3a}
Calculated as 100 percent triolein
'Asaumins 25 percont fat
„GoogIe
liver. Tbe conceatratloa in cither nunullan tlsausa *«■ aot
detsmlaed. About tvO'thlrdi of tbe tottl sere 1 , 2-ethaii*dlol
derivatives, with the remlnlni third appraiiwtely evenly divided
mmout the derivatives of 1 ,2-propanedlol: 1 , S-propaoediol ; and
1,3-butKnedlol.
Little is knoni of the syntbesis, netabollsn, or pbjaio-
loalci.1 role of the naturally occurrlni dlol lipida. Schald and
coworkerB have published a series of reports on soite aspecta and
have shown that tbe rat brain can Incorporate loug-cbain
l,2-alk«nediolB into dlol pboapholiplds (Chang and Schmid , 1973;
Schnld et al., 1975} as well as Into glyceropbosphatldaa (Cbang
and Sclutd. 197S).
Diol-derlved lecithin analc^uea poasesa atrooB beBolytie
actlona (Baer, ieS3: Reman et al . . 1969). Bergelaon (1973)
speculated that In the low conceDtmtlons found in naBnaliaa tic-
sues, such dlol lecithlDs Bay increase the permeability of call
oembranea of" otherwise modify their propertiea.
Toxicity data (Table 4) could be found oolr for tba aiapl*
dlols. Similar data are not available lor the dlol dleatera pr«-
sunably preaent In irradiated beef nor for various derivatlvaa
which alibt be present in small aaounta.
1,3-Butanediol (BD) and 1 ,2-pT-opanedlol (PD) have baen
atudied %m ayntbetlc sources of dietary calorlea. Uehlman and
, colleagues (IBTO) have shown that the addition of bd to rat diets
Increased the activity ot liver and kidney gluconeogenic enzymes
and the formation of ketones. Kles et al . (1573) Bubstlluted IS g
daily for aa isocaloric amount Of 8tarcE~in tbe diet of IS human
subjects for 14 days. Apart frcm a lowering of tba blood glucoa*.
no alterations ot blood chemistry or cytology wera noted. Tba
Investigators concluded that &D may be useful la diabetic dlata.
Ennanuel and Nahapelian (1975) fed 4 «ts contalsing 5 or 10 psr-
cent BD. or 5 percent PD to sheep for 6 weeks PD had no affect
on blood ketones, but Increased serum glucose slightly. BO, oa
tha other hand. Increased ketone bodies and reduced blood glueoaa
allgbtly. They concluded that BD and ^C> can replace at laaat part
of the readily available carbohydrate without producing adwaraa
effects on animal perfomance.
„GoogIe
Table 4. Oral 1
:lty oi simple dlols (NIOSH, 1977).
1 , 2-Ethanedlol
1,2-Propaiiedlol
1 , 3-Butaa«dlol
I .4-But&nedlal
Cuiaea pig
Rat
Guiaea pig
„GoogIe
.-e'-I ;*• *i>sr.
k Ip* vtUiile
-»iii« =tll : pervert ee- :cBC ol ci;
n.-.a. IS r»s;dlr socve-icti to ".»-!;=
riw TMicIn:: pra=uc-_« Irs uu
■e :.t ^t* body. 7:« ^^1^:7' ilrucTB^
.. ... -,-,,,ng j,.g^ «Bijjo wdtfa
t oat* axe I*cta.nt vtoofa
-:>-tic pracucr*
LiicT ii-ruliiiicn.. te pc^i.ree si
per KC twel Bs^t-.i te iD-aducad
„GoogIe
these, as veil as other v&lues obtained by eitrapolatiOD IroD trl-
Blyceride modelB may seriously overestlm&te the amount actually
produced when beef is Irradiated In a frozen state. Free fatty
acida and dlglycerldes occur naturally in nany toodstuftH, are
Domal digeetlve and metabolic products, and are authorized
additions to food for'deslrable tecnntcal ettecte. The amounts
produced by Irradiation would be small compared vlth their intakes
tran other sources and nould not be expected to have adverse
health effects.
Less lE known of the diol dlesterB, the other uajor pro-
duct of lat irradiation. There la evidence that they are natural
constituents of najmaHan tlaaues and that they are produced In
slBnltlcant quantities during normal heating processes of fatty
foods. Thus, trlcaproln heated at Z70°C for 15 hours produced ten
times as much ethane dloldlester as did £0 IcGy (6.0 Mrad) Irradia-
tion at Z5°C. However, metabolic and toxicity data are not avail-
able on the ladivldual members of this family, precluding any firm
Judgment ol their ^lossible health effects.
Baaed on studies with trlcaproln, the only other radlo-
lytlc products present la detectable amounts were esters of fatty
acids and dlglycerldes, aldehydes correspoDding to the fatty acid
components of the fat, and alkylcyclobutacones. Various aldehydes
have been detected In irradiated beet in concentrations less than
one part per million and were considered in the previous report to
pose no hazard in these amounts to the consumer. It is believed
that the esters vould be hydrolyzed by Bastrointeatinal and tisBua
esterases to yield harmless levels of fatty acids and dlgly-
cerldes. Nothing Is known of the fate and toxicity of the alkyl-
cyclobuta nones, so no Judgment can be rendered on their possible
health effects.
Although relatively fe« radlolytlc products have been
detected In Irradiated beef or model systems, and even fewer have
been determined quantitatively, many more are possible theoret-
loods, added during food processing, produced during cooking, or
present in the body as normal metabolites, ils Nawar (1977) has
pointed out, the nature of decomposition products formed by
idlatlon and heat treatment are quite sinllar. with many more
such compounds Identified In heated or thermally oxidized, than
irradiated samples.
It Is not possible to compile a complete inventory of all
ccnponents of natural foodstuffs nor of all conceivable irradl-
an products. The possible presence of undetected substances
aent such chemical
ch the effects of
compared. Such exper
„GoogIe
OONOJISIONS
1 foragolps coQBldaratloas.
1. K>ay of tbe miiolrtlc products lo t)M oaa
estljuted to bs praaaat ■ppaaj' to po«« no hau
b«*t Irradlfttad la tbe described D>iDD«r. ' Such prodneta tacloda
the Individual fatty acids &nd tbeir slapl* vstsrs, ilycarol,
nana- and dlilycerides , dlBlycerlda esters. ald«hjda«, asd ali-
phatic hydrocarbons.
3. Inautflelsnt data ars aTSllabls to allow Jod^Mst tf
tba affects on h«altb of the lodlvldual dial diestsrs sad alkyl-
cyclobutaDODss presuskbly pressnt. Metabolic and toxleolc^eal
studies of these ccopounds 'ars dsalrable.
3. No evaluatlcm cao h* i>d« of othar c
Ically possible In small anounts, but vhich have i
strated in Irradiated beef or K>dsl systcsN. Bacanss a
hovever eihsustlve, can exeluds tba possibility of the p
such theoretical but undetsctnd conatltuants , bo uoaquiToeal il
stratioD of safety sstDi possibla fron conaldsratioa of ladiTldnal
rsdiolytlc jo'oducts alone.
4. It is dssirabls t« couple ebsalcal stodiss sa
described in this report vltb aultabl* aiil*al tsmUns atudiss to
provide ccmpliasDiarr spproscbe* to enaurs tba vboleaoManaaa sod
safety of Irradiated foods.
,y Google
RSFEREKCES CITBD
Alfln-Sl&ter, R.B.; HorrlS, R.S.; Hull
Eltect* tst iiMi-esaentli.1 fattr acids c
deficiency. J. Nutr. 87:168-172.
O'Neill,
32:209-2
ADADthBSvui;
t^etm r&dlKt
35:795-798.
; Hsndell, J.R.; Billnialer, D.J.; PoDtaine, R.E. ;
1S75. Toxic polyneuropathy due to metbyl a-butyl
indu8trii.l outbreak. Arcb. Neurol. (Cblca^o)
Atlas Che
feeding stu
Atlas Cbeml
:al Industries Inc. 19E9. Glycerol: a t«o-year
Ly lb rats Report No. 11362. [83p]. Available 1
:al Industries, Inc., Illniaitoo, DE.
Baer, E.
leci thins
75:5533-5539.
BauDiann, ff.J.; Schupp, E. ; Lin, J.-T. 1975. Dtol lipid* Of rat
liver, quantitation and structural cbaraetaristlc* of neutral
lipids and pboepbollplds derived trora etbanedtol , propanadlol* ,
and butanedlola. Biochemistry 14:B41-847.
Bellamy, I
problems 1
Nucleonics 12:54-E
Bergelson, L.D. ; Vaver , V.A.; Prokazova, N.V.; Usbakov , i
Popkova, G.A. 1966. Dlol lipids. BlochiD. Biopbyc. Acl
116:511-520.
,y Google
Carter. H.E.; Johnson, P.; T««ts. D.I. ; Tu, R.K. 1963. iMUtlM
of elhylsne ilycol trcoi the lipids of beef lung. Blocbva.
Bioptijs. Rub. Cmun. 13:156-161.
Chtapasna , .1 > R ■ i Havar
irradiated best and pork fal
Chans, H.; Schnld , H.H.O.
of a loD|-chalD 1.2-alhaiie<
■a^Mlian brain. Blochca.
Evidence for the iDcorporatioa
ato dlol pbosptaollplda br
llophys. Bes. Coaun. 54:64«-eM.
rophosp ha tides. J. Biol. Cbea. 250:4877-4682.
Dauphin. J.-F.^ Saint-Lebe, L.R. 1977. Radiation chematry of
carbohydrates. In; Elias. P.S.; Cohen. K.J,, eds. Radlatloo
cheoistry of major food i:<aponeatE. New York: Elsevier
ScieDtitic PubllShiaB Cwpaay. p. 131-185.
Dayton, S.; Hasbiooto. S.; Dlioo. I.; Pearce, H.L. 196S.
Ccnpositlon of lipids Is huoan serum and adipose tissue durl&i
prolonced feedia« of a diet high in unsaturated fat. J. Lipid
Kes. 7:103-111.
OeBarIeau~Glnsburs , H. ;
d 'ethyle'ne-glycol dans t
Chin. Biol. 44:679-682.
Dieht, J. P.; Adas, S. : Dellncee'. H. ; Jakublck. V. 1978.
Radiolysis of carbohydrates and at carbohydrate-eon talnln(
foodstuffs. J. itsrlc. Food Chen. 26:15-20.
Dubravcic. H.F.; !la*sr. ■•■. 1968. Radtolysls of lipids:
1,3-butanediol and
ose in shesp fed
i diets. J. Anin. Scl. 41:1468-1473.
Fischer. I., Kopf. R. . Loeser. A.. Heyer. G. 1949. Cbenlsche
Konstltutlon und pnarmaOtologiscBe tirtung der Glykole unter
besvnitere Berucksicntigung von I .'J-ButylenglyKol. Z. Gesamte Sip.
!»ed. 115:22-39.
,y Google
Food and Drug Hese»rch Laboratories. iliml i
of ayothetic and natural glycerine In -■ *
data at one year. Report Ho. WER-149- . . i. .:
and DruB Rvaearch Laboratories Maspe K¥>
Pood and Drug Research LaboratoneB. 1973, Teratologic
evaluation of fda 71-69 (Blycerol. glycerine) la mice and rats.
Available Iron: Food and Drug Research Laboratories. Has pet h .
(27P1-
Guerrant, N.B.; fbltlock, G.P.; Woltf, M.L.; Dutctier , R.A. 1947.
RaSpoDBB Of rats to diets containing varying anounls of glycerol
and propylane glycol. Bull. Natl. Forinul. Coram. 15:205-229.
mil, Fl.L.; Oser. B.L. 1965. Recent progress In tlie consider-
ation of flavoring ingredlenta under the Food Additives Amendment.
III. GRAS substances. Food Technol . (Chicago) 19-1S1-197.
, R.S. i Sherman ,
Bine, C.H.; Anderson, H.H. ^ Uoon . H.D.; Dunlap. U.K.; Uorse. M.S.
1953. Comparative tonicity of synthetic and natural glycerin.
Arch. Ind. Hyg. Occup. Hed . 7:282-291.
Johnsan, A.E.; Nursten . H.E.: Rilllaa
volatlles: a survey of componeotB Id
Ind. 21iSS6-667.
Johnson. V.- Carlson, A.J.: Johnson,
physiological action of glycerol on t
Physiol. 103:517-534.
evaluation ot some food additives li
antimicrobials, antioxidants , emulslf iers
RHD Food Additive Series No. 5. p. 19-20.
Health Organization. Geneva.
Kayden. H.J.; Senior, J.B.; Hattsoa. P.H. IMT.
■onoglycerlde pathway of fat absorption in Min.
46:1695-1703.
,y Google
Kautfotn. F.L.: HarUn, J.R. 1969. Etfect of loa taaporatUM
irr&dl&tlon oo chemLc>.l and senBory charactertBtlcs of be«f
steaks. Technical Report 69-64 PL. AvBllable froa: U.S. Amy
NatlcK Laboratories, Natlck. HA.
Kesster, R.J.; Ferrell, a.J. 1974. The purification and
properties of an alcohol dehydrogenase Iron oouse liver. iDt. J.
Blochem. 5:365-374.
Kles. C; ToblD. R.B.; Pox, H.H.: Rehlman , H.A. 1973.
Utilization of 1 .3-butanedlol and nonspecific Dltrogen in huaan
adults. J. Nutr. 103:1195-1163.
Latven. A.R. ; Uolltor, U. 1Q3S. CamparLsoD of tbe toxic,
hypnotic and irritating properties of eight organic solvent*.
J. PhamuLCOl. Exp. Ttier. 65:89-94.
Lite Science" Research Office,
aspects of certain compouoda fo
from: NTIS, SpriiiBtield , VA; AD~iK>4571.6.
Sciences Research Office. 1979
:ts of certain ccmpouDds found
Further tax Ico logical considers I
lable from: HTIM, Springfield,
■on. P.H.i Baur, F.J.: Beck
Itlve value of mono-, dl-.
. Soc. 28:386-300.
Evaluation of the health
irradiated beef. Supplemei
ins of volatile products.
i. 22 p.
Hehloan. K.A.^ Tobin, R.B.j Johnston, J.B. 1970. Influence of
dietary 1 ,3-butaDedlol on metabolites and enzysies Involved la
eluconeoaenesls and lipogenesis in rats. j. Nutr. 100:1341-1346.
Heldani. J.; Navar, ■.■.; Yeonians. R.G.: Uerritt, C. , Jr. 1977.
The Identification of radlolycic decomposition products fron
tributyrln. J. An. Oil Chem. Soc. 54:496-501.
,y Google
Melfh, D.P. 1964. The HKtural akin co&tlas of ttk« apple and it*
Influence on scald In atoraBe. 1. — Fatty aclda and hydTocarbona .
J. Scl. Fockl Asrtc. 15;«36-443.
Kerrltt, C. , Jr. 1972. Qualitative and quantitative aspects at
trace volatile ccmponents In Irradiated foods and food substances.
Radiat. Hes. Rev. 3:353-368.
H«rritt, C, Jr.; Aogelinl, P.; Grahaa, H.A. 197S. Effect of
radiation parameters on the formation of radlolysis product* in
seat and meat substances. J. Acric. Pood Chen. S6:29-35.
Ilerrltt, C, Jr.; Ansellni. P.; Vlerblckl. E. ; Sbults, G.W. 1975.
Chemical changes associated with flavor la Irradiated aaat.
J. Agric. Food Chea. 23:1037-1041.
Ilerrltt, C. . Jr.; Bresnick, S.R.; Bazinet , H.L.; Walah, J.T. i
Angelinl, P. 1959. Determination of volatile ccnponenta of
foodstuffs. Techniques and their application to studies of
Irradiated beef. J. Agric. Food Cheo, T:TB4-787.
Monty, K.J.; Tappel, A.L. ; Gronloger. U.S. 1961. Hadiation
preservation of foods : carbonyl compounds of irradiated meats.
J. Agric. Food Cbem. 9:55-58.
The effect* of Ionizing radiation on lipids.
ed. Progress in the chemistry of fats and
other lipids. Vol. 13. Nev York: Pergamon Press, p. 89-118.
Navar, t.R. 1977. Radiation chemistry ol lipids. In: Ellas,
P.S.; Cohen, A.J., «d*. Radiation cbenlatcj of oajor lood
components. New lork: Elsevier Scientific Publishing Conpany.
p. 21-61.
Nawar, V.R. 1978. Reaction necbanlsns In tbe radlolysis of fats:
a revle». J. Agric. Food Chem. 26:21-25.
Office of the Federal Register. General Services Administration.
1977. Code of Federal Regulations. Title 21: food and drugs,
parts 100 to 199 rev. Available from: U.S. Govemnent Printing
Office. Nashlngton, DC.
Orten, J.H.; Dajanl
,y Google
Reman, F.C.; Deoel . R.A.; de Gli
H.^ *estph&l, 0. 196D. Studi
binolecular lipid leaflets by
Schmid, H.H.O.; fiaodl ,
an DeoDen . L.L.
synthetic lysolecithlns,
Phys. Lipids 3:221-233.
Sibl,
and
1975.
ethancdlol
409:311-313
Schrler, P.
volatile cc
24:331-336.
Smitli, L.C.
linoleate c
rabbits. [
23iS
Ether lipid metabolism:
[.-C; ModBon. T.H. :
Incorporation of O-
ochim. Blophys. Acta
jtlluents fraa gr«
. Frelei
ilesterol of normal
d. 103:56-58
Effect ol aathyl
1955. Liver e
Methods in enzymolc
:. p. 657-650.
, L.^ Schools,
111:48-50.
Snenson, H.
anioaU. !
Division c
fat products
'.E.. .
1962. Inlluence
Treadvell. C.R.
,n llnolelc acid on serum
:udy. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med.
J., editor. 1977,
th ed. Ithaca, NY:
Cornell Unlverslt
1965. Ccnposition
I-. In: Svern, D.
NeS York: John
Dukes' physiology of domestic
Ccmstock Publishing Association,
Taub, I. A.; Kaprlellan, R.A.i
of an international syraposium
irradiation, Noveober 21-25.
Tourteilotte, V.W.; HelnglasB
Cerebral dehydration action o
Kith emphasis on the toiiclty i
Clin. Pharmacol. Ther . 13:159-1
Uklta. T.^ Tanlmura, A. 1961.
component In the seeds of Colx
(Roman.) Stapf. l. Isolation
Colxenolide. Chem. Pharmacol.
ley a Si
Halllday, ,
on food: ]
.977.
: giy^
1978. Proceed ings
vat ion by
fageolngen.
„GoogIe
Urbaln, «.H.
P.S.; Cohen. A.J.,
conpononts.
p. 63-130.
Jl(.tlon cbenlctry of proteins.
Radiktlon chemistry of Btjor I
Elsevier Scientific PubllshlDB
Urbaln, l.l
1978. Food
Adv. Pood Res. S4:15S-227.
Vi,n Straten.
Zelst, The NetherU
Research TNO.
Vaver, V.A,; Popkov
Dlol lipids. Ie< ~
rcE cue rat Ids rax
G.A.; Ushakov, A.N.; Bergelson, L.O. 1969.
.ation of etbyleneglycol dlpalMitata froo
iver. Chen. Phys. Lipids 3:TS-S3.
Vaver, V.A.; Popkova, G.A.; Ushakov, A.N.; Bergelson, L.D. 1971.
Dlolbcye llpldy. Neitralbnye diolbnye lipidy v regeneriruyushchel
pecheni kry,s. BloUilmlya 3e:6S3-629.
Bergelson
Vydelenle
Candida
.; Ripova, S.H.; Golovklna , L.8.; Rozynov, B.V.;
L.D. 1972. Diolbnye lipidy. Soobshehenie 21.
zhlrnoklslotDykh efiror etilenilikolya iz droztazbei
iropicalis "k". vyrascbennykb ns n. gentadekane.
Akad. Nauk SSSR, Ser. Khim. (2)::
Kaf f eearooas .
Watanabe .
Biol. Che
K.; Sato, Y. ISTI. Ga« chroma tograpbic and aa«a
malyses of heated flavor eoopounda of beef fate. Agric.
1. 35:756-763.
2Dd ed. Loodoa:
„GoogIe
SCIENTIFIC OONSULTMITS
Hecman I. Chinn, Ph.D.
Senior Staff Scientist
Life Sciences Reseacch Office
Fedecatlon of Amecican SocieUea
for Cxpecinental Biology
Betheada, Haryland Z0O14
David
B. Clay>on, Ph.D.
Deputy
Director and Pcofesac
eppley
Institute for Researc
In
Cancer and Allied Disc
Onlvec
■ity of HebrasKa
Med
ical Center
cnaha.
Nebraska 681D5
. HacEwen, Pb.D.
Chief, Chenistry Branch
Division of Cancer
Cause and Prevention
National Cancer Institute
Bethesda, Maryland 10D14
Frank G. Standaert, H.D.
Chairman
Departaent of Ptianaacology
Georgetown University Sdtoola
of Hadicln* and Dentistry
Haihingtcm, D.C. 20007
Hat onal Institutes of Health
Vbt Landow Building
7910 MoodBont Avenue
RocM C337
Bethesda, Maryland 30014
Gerald H. Hogan, fh.D.
Head, Departaent of Nutrition
and Food Science
Hasaachusetts Institute of
Technology
Caabridga, Hasaachusatts 02139
SPECIAL CCTISULTAMT
Halter H. Urbain, Ph.D.
10S45 Helk Drive
Sun City, Arltona 8S373
The Coninittee wiahea I
Claypoole and C. Grace
express their appreciation to Cynthia L.
GurtoHskl, LSRO, tor technical, biblio-
aaaistance in the preparation of this
„GoogIe
12 copies
783 ^H
DISTRIBL'TION LIST
HQDA (5CRD-SI)
Fort Detrick
Frederick, UD. 21701
Oetense DocuraeniBtlDn Center {DDC)
Cameron Station
Alexandrls. Virginia 22314
»
Dean
Uniformed Services University of the
Health Sciences
4301 Jones Bridge Road
Bethesda. Karyland 20014
i
Superintendent
ATTN^^^AHS-CoS
i
L
,
■r '
^^'
r
„GoogIe
REFERENCES TAKEN FRCM
UltH IRfWIATIOII OF FRESH FRUITS AND VE6ETML£S
AH lIBexEO REFEREMCE ll*T (lt*t-l*»}
UCL A. KUea UB CMISTI N. Hflim
HMMTNiHT OF FOMOUMV, UHIVENITY » CALtPOMIAj MV», C* M«C
(•fWwtW tl>«a^ IMS (SM titin):
IMt)-n*r. ft. S. «4 E. C. mRla. IM}. M«1itl«a fil^lIlM
9m.-ut-n, B *».
Mc>Mic*I Jawwii as tf aKvAv H. 1MI. It tacla«B Mi tittai ^rlA «• m
•(■•^•(■wltj I) Mnt-Hit>i — l«r WIm< Iv w ntkv Iwlm mt a aft^tt ft
•t ^<il4 «wr^c'««v f^rt't'rn M|i %»»««'•• a
„GoogIe
noa-AL, Z. {. 1H). EiUndlng the itortg* llti of Intttallj ipraittd p«uto
lutm I b* oaaN rtdlattoit. t. Tlw laanr crap. NtaMirfrl* J. Itgric. Rti.
I«l):l4.
.. S. ind L. L. ftorrlt. IHJ. ToMton. In: IMUtiM TKtalslow 1i
- - m of bUndtM tht StNlf Of*
of FnilU (ltd V<9tUbI«. U.S. At>. Emiv Com. *l»t. Ho. UCB-3*r"
ConjMnctloo vftli PoiUirvMt >r«»dor>» u ■ Hmm of bUndtM tht StNlf t
i. UDCl-UKI, A. S.. L. L. ttom*. iM E. C. Wilt. 1t«. Tha offlct 9tvmm
tmdlitlon gn ttN pMUarvMt botavlor of toNtO frvlti. Ii: lUdlttlM
Tcchioloqr '» Cofljunctloi alth fttttarmt rrectdurai (i • Hhih Of Cxttndfng
the SheK Life of Fruits and VtgtUblM. U.S. AW. timrv Com. tapt. lo.
UCD-}4PaO-t, pp. 7-47.
G. AlIEL-IUUni. A. S.. L. L. Nsrrli. wrf E. C. Htiilt. I»6S. ThI af foct Of gWM
Irradiation on tlw pHtHarvoit balwvlor of tanto fnilu. lai RadUtloa
Taclnology In Canlunctlon •ritli nHUiar*«t froco*ir« ai a Haant af Eitandlng
tha StNlf Ufa af FnilU and VagaUbltt. U.S. Atm. Eatrgy ttm. Rapt. No.
ua>-34ni)-3. pp. M-175.
7. ABDa-UDER. A. S., L. L. Itorri*. and [. C. Miila. IH*. Tha mtflnad affact of
gwH radiation, chllllni and/or mnrUi rafulatori OH tha paftharvaat bahavlor
of tvwto fnilti. In: Prvc. I7tli Int. Hort. Conpr.! Phryland, IMC, ),
**>tr.tt No. Mt.
t. ASDEL-UkDEII A. S. L. L. tbrrti, and E. C. Niila. 19M. TM affact Of vm
Irradiation on the voi">irv«t betiailor af Uaato fniltt. Ini Radiation
TadMiology In Conjuntlon Kith Poithtrvait PntcodurM *t a Naans of Eitandlng
tha Sha]f Ufa of Fralti ind VagttablM. U.S. Ata. Enargi Com. Rapt. ■».
UCO-3«raO-4, pp. 7S-W.
). «SKL-iuUi€)l. A. i, . L. Ptorrit, and E. C. Haila. 1966. nvitoloplcal ttudlat of
jHH Imdiitad taato fnilti. In: fne. Mth Int. Hort. Canfr., Maryland.
I96C. Abttract No. itJ.
10. AflWl-KAKK. A, S.. L. L. Ptorrlt. and E. C. HiMla. I96S. Rhytleloglcal ftudlai of
qima Imdttted tonilo fruits. I. (ffact on rotplratory raM, otRylOna
production, and ripening, -^c, Aaor. Soc. Hort. Scl. tt:SS]-SC7.
11. *R«l-KADER, A. S., I. L ftorrl. and (. C. Hiila. WO. »»yilol0|l«*l Jtodlja Of
OM IrradUtcd toata frwiti. II. Effort* on daUrloratlan and ihalf>llfa.
Proc. tatr. Soc. Hart. Icl. »:UI-8U.
H. ABDCL-KASR. A. S. , L. L. ItorrU, and E. C. Naxlo. 1»B. Ph/ilolttfllcal studiM Of
OMM Irradiated tnuto frulta. III. Effort* on ticorblc acid cantant.
acidity, md lB<ture. Proc. A«w. Soc. Hort Scl. 93:M3-eS3.
M. ADtSlTAII, S. 0. 1977. Studlai on the effect of a«nw r.dt.tton CrujCataU 60
soinxa) on (toraga Ufa of tdilta yam (Oioieoret rotundit; "ir. aftn) Inflctad
■tth S^utallonaSTbradyl. Ann. Appl. BTol, BSU):!15-M8.
,y Google
AMIM, J. Md C. FrtyMlMt. Wi. MtlMKtltitlon of Afrtcm ««rMlt m4 !•■««•
b> ow liTidfitfon. SUrcg* pMt cofltrol. trrKt on iWtrltlM «•!■■ af fMi.
lull. Soc. Sc<. Hn. Mlwit. U(4):ZtS-ZTt.
MM. H., N. H. liiqvl. «. Huiuln, and A. tt. lUuln. 1912. EffKt vf (MM
ridlttlon and pKklng on tt» potthirvMt Uf« of guM (Pildlia «<>)«»■ L.).
nnippiNj. sci. iai:Ti-n.
MMU. It.. K SitUr. IL Hmuln. M. Jwfl. N. «. Ftrooql. and «. H. HmnIr. Itn.
SOM ptiytlochMlci cMiMM <n Invdiatad btr (ZtiyplMi lulubi) to-lai tnrafc
Md Tlpcnliig. PikliUR J. Scl. Iitd. Rm. 15(3):10.1«.
MMU, R. at ■!. I»7t. Indwtlwi of ripanlni diTar In atngoai (var. huhrl) by
fMM^rndlitlM ind nrrl««mlon. PitltUn J. Scl. Ind. Rai. 11(4/5}: 31 «-)!•.
WKD, t. tt. ind R. A. bennl»n 1H«. Imdlitlwi tffdCU oa Um rM»lratecy
Kttiltlaf of Iflwii >nd ar«at*t. tn: rroc. ITUi lat. Hsrt. Coafr.. Mrylnd.
1W6, I. Mitract Ho. SIB.
MKD, E. n. ind I. *. Dannlton. 1)70. EffKtt of lar-laval ImdIattM VM thi
praiamtis* of food preducti. AmiMl Kept.. July 1. ItU - XprI) 14, »n.
bwt. of Food Scl.. FloHdi Univ., Gilnaiidllt. 1i1 pp.
MCB, (. M. and R. ». Dtnnlion. 1971. TcitHn proflll of Irrddlttad a»ii|Blt and
paidiat. i. Tait. Stud. 2|4):4a9-496.
MD. E. Pi.. K. * DMinUon, «nd M. S. Ikrklar. IMS. Efftctl Of lOK 1««al
IrrtdUtlon upon tht praiirHtlon of food preducti. Arniual tdpt.. April IS.
1967 - April 14, 19ta. Dtpt. of Food Scl., Flarldi Univ.. GitHMvllU. Itl pp.
MED. E. H. . R. A. Dtnniion, ind H. S. NcHilty. 19«. Effacti of low lani
Irradlitlofl upon tht praitrvitlon of food prdducti. Amid Ript.. April IS,
1»tS - June n, 1*69. Dcpt. of Food Set.. Florida UnW. . SalnnvtlU, ZOO pp.
CO. H. S. H., I. S. «I-Hikk>k, S. i. A1-Nallli]r, A. A. Udh*. Md S. 1. Uaoou.
1911. Irndlition dlilnfcttacion of dry datat and tha paMlklllty of wlag
ccifelnatlai traatHnti. In: Caiblnatlon rrocMta* In Food Irradlttloa, Int.
An. Enarw AgtiKjr. »!•«>•, pp. i17-JM-
,y Google
McmtNE, E. t. 1M7. HtitDi7 of tht tot MUr trHtsnt of PVV- Htmlt tm. StI.
lf(3):<-6.
AMMINE, E. t., J. L. IrcKlMlLlr, ind I. luddenhlgn. 19H. DaifHtry, toUrincc.
*nd shtif life eitenilon nlitM to dlilnrcitilton of frulti ind ir»gcub1» hy
gMH Irridlitlon. AihimI Kept.. Jim* I, INS - My Jt. tlM. Co11*9( of
Tro^ <l9rlc., HmmII Univ., Honolulu, lot pp.
AKMIRE, E. K. . J. L. IrciAilKr. t. BuMenhtgrn, D. HMtar, and D. MkIi. 19(7.
Oottattry. tol«ri<KC, j<hI ihclf life (itnnlon roUtM ta dlilRfoiUtton of
fniltt ind iHitibtti fey jwat Irradlitlon. Innuil Rtpt., Juno 1, IMC -
My II. IW7. Co \tge of TroK- Aqric. »«•*) Unlr.. Honolulu, 1U W.
MUWINE. E. K., J. 1. Brn.l>ikrr. I. Rudd«nh<3fn. b. KlncK. ind J. Itoy. )W!.
OoiiHtry. tal<r««c«. v^ trwif llf« enlenilon nliled to dlllnfMUttoB of
fraltl wid >i9cUtil«t by gnu IrrtdltClon. Annual Rept., JufM I. 1M7 -
lUy II, IMS. College of Trop. Agrlc. . HM*tt Unl.., Monoliilu, IM pp.
AKWIHE, t. K.. J. BrwUkor, t. Ci.tletto. D. HlUer. init H. lin. IMS. DpiiMtry,
totorinco. ind ilwU life e.twilon rfliCrd to dlilnfeiUtlon of fnilt »nd
vogotibttl by gnu Irrnllitlon. Innuil Repl. . June 1, IM* - «iy 31. IMS.
Collogt of Irop- »9rlc.. Hs«H Univ., Honolulu. 78 pp.
AMHINE, E. K. ind T. Goo. 1971. RMplrotlon of gMH-trridlitod freth fruit*. J.
Food Set. H:ian-I077.
AUMINE, (. t. end T. Goo. I9J7. Effecu of g««i Irradlttlon o<i ihelf life
citenilOB of freih papiyii fCirtci pffjyi L. Vir. Solol. Rt». Bull.. KiiiiH
Kgric. Eip. Sti.. HMofI Unt*.. Honolulu. No. I(S, 23 pp.
UUMINE, E. K. end I. Goo. 1977. Efftcti of giHa Irradlitlon on tholf lift of
froWi lychOM [Lltefct ehlnentlt Sonw.l. tat. Boll., II»mII »jrl£. tv SU..
UmII Univ., Honolulu, Ho. IsS. 20 pp.
AWWIHE. E. K. and T. Out. 1977. Mtplratlon, ithylono productlan, and ihdf lift
■■tension In ImdUted papaya fnilt after itoragc under ilaulated ihlpping
(ondlttons. Tech. Bull.. Haoill Kgrlc. Exp. Sti. , HmoII Univ., Honolulu,
Mo. 93. 12 pp.
MUWINE, e. K. and T. Goo. 1979. Effects of lonliing IrredUtlon on 'Haden' Mngoei.
Rfs. Repl. Hiuat Agrlc. Exp. SU., HomH Univ., Honolulu, Ha. ZOS. 11 pp.
KKJMINE. E. t. and R. T. F. Wng. I9W. Extending tiM *fc*lf life of popayai Kith
gam Irradiation. HaMll Fa. Scl. »(l):*-fi-
ULI. ».. H. ». Farooql, and A. IWimm4. IMB. Pr«erv«tloB of Hnfoe* (WaniUfora
Indica L.I By gai^ radiation. Food Irrad. 9(1/1) :B-I3.
U.I. H. it a1. 1970. iRhlbltloa of Sprouting In onions by gM radiations. Food
lrra3.T^0(«) = 10-14.
W.-JASIH, «., '. Hirtatlt, end K. C. NIcMlai. 1968. Roto of ciUlia In loftcnlng
and refining Irradiated plant tliiurs In: rreionatlon of Fruit and
Vegetabloi liy Radiation, Int. >te. Energy Agwicy, Vlenni, pp. IES-1I7,
JWEIQUITA. R.. E. C. Kuit, and C. F. Johnson. 19C5. Effect of }■■*• trrtdlitlon
on ripening of 'Gros Michel baninit In: Radiation Technology In Conjunction
■Ith PoitharvHt Proccdurei » a Means of Eitending the Shelf Lift Of Fmitl
and Vegetablis. U.S. Rta. Enorgy CoH. Kept. Ms. UCD-34I>80-], pp. W-91.
JWEZguiM, R., E. C. Hixle, and C. F. Johnson. 19C6. Effect «f MMH Irradfatlen
on the poithariest behtvfor of 'GroS Hichol' baMNt. In: tidiitlon Teamolow
In Conjunction uttli Posdianest Procedum >i a Moan of Extonding thi Shelf
life of Fniits and Vegetables. U.S. AOi. Energy Cm. Rept. M. UCO-lVn-<,
pp. l-3«.
,y Google
tHl. fungil rciiNinit to Imdlitlon. In: Ridiitlon Tcclmlogir li
>nJunct1on otth Poithtmit froctdurM *t * Htint of Eit*ndl<ig Vm Hair LIfB
t FruUt IK) Vij*tibl*i. U.S. «tia. Energy Com. Dcpt. No. UCO-MPaO-l .
). 116-131.
1961. R«dt«tla<i technology In conjunction tilth potthinnt piocoAirM a% ■
■unt or (itandlng the ihclf-llfc ef fnilti ind vegttibln. AhimI tapt..
Feb. I. IK7 - Jin. 30, 1W3. De^. of Ponolofy, Univ. of Ullf.. D*ir1«. U.S.
«ta. Enerv Cvp. Rti. ind D«. Rent. No. UCD-34P30-1. Ill pp.
196]. Rticerch on
food Irridlitlon, Ew
Nenl. 4(1-Z)i<l IB.
963. Sumiry of ttit effCtt of 9W«* rtdittio"
In: Ridlillon Techno1oq]i In Conjunctli
or Eittndtng the SlwH Lire of Frulti
Kept. No. UCD-34P80-I, p». II9-II6.
1M4. ChcrrlM. In; RadUtion Ted
.i. Mb. Enerix Co*. Rept. no. UCD-»
d Vcfctiblei. U.S. Mm. Emrw Co*.
olooy In Conjunctim «IUi HMtlMrMit
h*If Ltf« of Fnlti wK VeiaUklM.
BO.;, pp. lDS-108.
De«t>crrl«. In:
■et » t Heins of E<
. Energy Conp. Rtpt
tton Techno 1
>gy In Conjunction olUi Pottfterm
Frocedu
U.S. At
X
"uc^MPBo'i
Lire of Fniiti end Vegetebln.
DP- lOJ-tW.
1964.
Any Uu
AD-6107
Irrtdlilion of -hi
rttTMiiter Re*, end
3. Mpp.
Eng
Utoes for sproot Inhibition trttk («*ilt-«.
Centr. U.S. Ata. Enerv tarn. tept. «■.
1964. Report Oil tKc reig
pragrta 1961-1961 ice»n.
Ipred. Cinedt 3:4Z-SJ.
tl of the CMidian pilot icilt poUto Imdiitloe
ta. Enerv of ^ittU Ltd.. Cob. Prad. Die. Cwa
1964. Study of ippllceblllty
South. SMtMiK IntenUte %ic
TIO-ZWlORe... 110 pp.
of redletton
eir Board.
pistairliatloii of fnilU In CM
.S. «t». Enerv Co.. Kept. m.
1965. Ri diet Ion pmemi
Sept. 17-30. 1964. Met. Ac
Ion of foodi. r
d. of Uf.. mi.
: Pn>c. Int. Omf.. lastn.
Iiez. Food IrredfaCfon:
19«. U gann i-edlalton
Mtack. Food En«. t-.n-m.
tar E»? Cttrogrw* •nS):1«>-IH.
,y Google
lUIM. H. tna H. Kl-Mntfnl. 1980. EffKt of fumt ImdUtlon *n4 storig*
condttloni m iBlno icld cta(>«iUlm af lOM triql dit*i. J. Rfrlc. FddiI Chia.
AUU, H. , Z. Uutif, intf J. Hlrjin. 197*. Efftct Of 9UH Irradtitlwi on tht Mgar
ind protein coivoiUlaii of Iraqi dittl. Ii: Ptm. Int. Im. Food rrotorvatlon
by Irriddtlo*, Vol. I, Uagtnlnton. Nov., 1977, Int. AU. EiMrv *9tiicy. Vionra,
W. *S9-46S.
AUOK, N. and L. K. Niiitr. 19*1. ClMlcol »udlM oo tM Innuenc* of a ca*4n*d
procMi of htat and IrradUtloa an cartehrdratM, pntolni, and aalno acldi of
dit«. in: Coiblnatloa hocliin In Food Irradiation, Int. «ta. Enargy Aginey,
Vftnna, pp. lU-tK.
BALOr, A. U., N. F. JoiMr, and P. BuckTe/. 1»S. ll*i)«lrMMnU of PtnleiniM
tipiiHia conljta for ovarcoilng • hcal-tnilueed lamUlvltl' to gaHa IrradTatlon.
PTlnt PFyilol. 43[$uppt.);S4 (abitract).
BALDY, R. W., N. F. Sonvr, and P. H. Sucklojr. 1970. llaco««Y of *labl1lt]' and
radiation resit Unta by hHt-lnJurOd conldia of FtnicllliMP tmiantiw U. M
I]ioa. J. aatt. 1M(2):5U-5Z0.
BALOU, J. H., A
radiation ai
59(I):ZDZ-IM.
BARALDI, D. and C. Mlucclo. 197$. Sprout Inhibition by radiation and chalcal
trcatMflt In four potato cultWan. tl». Jet. T«eh. *1la. Itatr. M. *.,
pp. MI-»e (in Itillan].
SAHKAI-GlllAII, It. and R. S. Kahan. 19(7. Tha effect sf garm In
4<>e1[>c«er>[ of Pcnlc<11lui> dUltatu- rot an Inoculited c<tri
Sun»rl» Lectu?«~Tst TT^islCongr. Plant Pith., pp. 94-9B,
BARKAI-eOLAN, R. and R. $. Kahan. t97t. The
palhoganlttty of fuojl and 1— ' '-
Agrlc. (t*i. ZH*) (abitract]
pathogenicity of fungi and ireaiti cdutlng ret In itored grapai. tiraol J.
BARKAt-BOLMI. R.. R. 1. KaMn, and R. PldOM. 19(9. Synarglitic tffoctt of 9Maa
radUtlon and htat on tha dt«tIopMnt of PowcIIIIm dWtatiw In vitro and In
ttond citnrt fretti. Phytopath. S9(7):9!!-!M.
BARKAl -GOLAN. I
tr««ti*nt:
tiratl J.
BEU1-D0N1N1 M. L. and D. .1
■cciaulatlon of tlnonei
lot. W(2/a):l6l-ieS.
d ttorod itratAorrlti. J. Food Scl. 3«:S09-$
,y Google
er'.n^, WC *««« Irrt4lrtti»
. t » m}t'^4. : ». DtMtMil. Mtf (. H. «
MA^* In IM raUtn* eamtttiMHH tt 'Viln
VI M 4ir-UI.
r»4Utla* af fralti ta ntmi artet
■b. "7. « Ml.
MMt. ■ I (H M •) I l»(Mi. tMt. r.«au rMtittan o< imiUHw to Mtoni
MfMt Ufa u t to»t Dfrtc. ■•(«. *n. I**!. JW. 701. If ««.
■WIK, ■ > in^ « C. IMmi. 1*71. **dlatloii VmtnitiM of tiAtroplcal
'■■lit )■ tWIK •rnia. I" foM »rtt«n«tlon kr Irridfatloo, «al. 1, Int.
*<■ iKiM, *«M>T. *<«M*. M i«r-in.
mil, H l.a { riKiMi. f «t»tr, iM H. laxan. I)7*. Stud<« ob tha «M
i>r (MP* iiK^utiM «•>< Ml Hilar trMtomti tar ilialf lift ntamlsn aT
l>«*«r«> 'IMI OK (avlr. U(«l:74<-rt).
■ Haiar, MOH* '«*•■ fflllwlnv tpor* Injuiy >r t»a ra^laltsii. nqrla^tk.
M(I) IW (••(trMII
Ut>, r N , N I \tm»r. D • CbW, ». DaHr. •"< [. C. Naita. ItM.
IwLlUtilwi ut UUvnl ttolwtfar iMr'^llalWrM by i<n|1a aad raiblMd
liHlM"M •» HHtUa. i.)>mr>it, M« t«*M-)rr»tfl*ttw. »niU. ■— -
>Wi*d »i**»l> ■■]••■ tat. 10(11 H-».
,y Google
BUCU.ET. P. H., H. F. Son
cM>(C*1 prvUctlon a. .... . . .
UMlBoai iMlaolfT laonnalwuorai. ftidlit. Itn. M:Zn-Ui.
BUCUEI. P. N., N. r. SMMr, r. t. Hitiunata. ind M. Dilly. 1MT.__RMpoin«^af
Ho. 397 TO pP {^n Dutdlj.
>. 400. IT pp. Cl* Drtck].
'3. Pnuiilng of Imdlitiri patitoci to clitpi and criipi. t.
IMCIUHI >Dor Bct-irlng trt Vcntrklng on LindMwproAiliUn. Mdiddllngn.
No. 4», 17 pp. {In DvUK].
lUITOMIt, N. 1««. Tilt chIImit ind procMllBf quality of poUtOM trwt«d kIUi
clactroii ridUtlwi. iMtltwit »oor tanHng wi Vcnitrklng *ui
UndbMMproduktwi. NedtdtllnQM. No. «H, 17 pp. [In Dutch].
BUUITT. N. K., Jr. IMZ. Sum ImdUtlon at a quarantine trMtiMiit af trviu.
lUdUtloii IR Food Prouiitng, Lot Kng<I«, Jure 6-10. Tram. A*. Nucl. Soc.
«t;3l-U.
BURDITT, A. K., Jr.. H. C. Hoitiorui, T. T. Hotton, 0. H. Sptldin,
0. L. von Hlndogutb, and t. E. Skn. 1W1. LoH-dsic IrraiUtloo M a trMtMiit
for graptfruU and iiangoei lafntad with CarlbbMn fruit fly lanra*. U.S. Dtpt.
Atrlc, Afric. Ht%. Mrv.. «M-S-IO.
t S«o. 1971 Dose requirements fur quirantim
irvH Irradiation. In^ Dit Infestation Of Fruit bji
rradlatton, Int «». Entrw J^*"^- Vlanna. pp. 33-41.
BUROm, A. K., Jr., S. T. Sm, and J. H. Balock. 1971. Baili for M««10pln«
quaranttno trMtwntt for fruit nlei. In: Olilnfcitatlon of FniU by
Irradiation, Int. Rta. Energy Afcncy. Vivna. pp. U-ll.
BUSSa. J. and E. C. Hail*. IMS. Gat uchanjo In 'Bartlttt' paan In rolatlo*
to gann Irradiation In: Radiation Toeluiotogy In Conjun— ' '" »-"-"
Proctdurei at a neani of Eitendlnf the Shelf LIf* of Frvit
U.S. *to, Eneray Zom. "ept. Mo. ueO-»PaO-3. pp. Z7-47.
BUSSEl, J. and E. C. Naili
lAla vltaalni: Changof during procetilng and ttorago
Food Tochnol. 21:99B, 1000, 1002. 1004. IDOt-IOOI.
,y Google
JUCM. J. C. *n4 N. I«m. IMS. Mitttir-dty MMCuta •»! tonldtr itVdiM
radlitloivptitHrlMd r«a«» (itrwAirrlH, ipplM wid pMr(). MmI >i»t.
iRduitrlil BI»-TMt UH. Inc., Jum JO, t9SS, U.S. At>. En*f«r COH. Mpt
CaO-t»»-1, 143 m>.
nai, J. D. lad t. I«rck. I9W.
MM* of giMH Imdiitlon. Ik:
nutrltlonil quitlly of mihrooaii.
CASJIS-BUILU IWtl. H. IMS. «p»1lcit<0M of flvclHr Mivv ta •frICaTMr* M
■1*0. Roililld*. Otimrk. In: Con*. Iiwt. Mc. Iiw«. n^rm. , t^*rt4.
IWI-64, pp. 111-1!'.
CAKILl. J. C R. D. Cook*. 0. J. Itooro, S. J. flotd, antf H. C. N»u>. MJ*. Tl
■Hi«o (Nimlfro Indict L.|. HtrvMtlng (nd ii*s««Mnt himlllng ind trocm
Iti imobud blbliognptiy. Itopt. , Trep. ^rod. Imt. No. £107, 124 vt-
CHWHtN, 1., '
chalci)
»:101-I<
CHKHIN, K. 11
■roHth of ■lcr«-MW<l» (Dd c>N
Jtp. SOC. Hort. Ser 4C(U:9l-97.
CMCHIi. t... *.. O91M, and H. HonjB. »». teUtlOMhlp Utaam umt raAKlof
MMn In onion buds ind ttm oTfoct of *fr«iit fnOlbUIOH br •» Imdiitlon.
J. Food Scl. ttch. 23(8) 351-ISf.
•I. 1970
_ _ . «fT(tlon.
•tlvlon* praAietlon, ortule >
Itrtlttt pMri. ' *•- '"
ILVTZ, E., E. C. Millie, ind i. F. SoHr. 19fS. TT* InUrKtIon of gMW
Imdiitlon. SHitd psctiati ind contraHod ttniphtr* on incldtnca of BotrytK
TBt In itnoborrlti. In: RtdUtlon Tochmlogy in Conjunction with Pnthirvtit
PrDccduros 11 1 Ntini of Eitndlnv Cht Shtlf-llf* of fnilti wid nofitobl*!.
U.S. Adi. EiMTV Co«. Rtpt. Ho. UCD-J4PW-3, pp. S-M.
Soc. Hort. Scf. BI:MS-3ri.
CMPKE, V. G. . N. N. Shindt. wld 0. C. Urkt.
fnilti (nd irigitiblt production ind prttv
bi. J. ](I]:9C-99.
CHOUOWn, S. U. (nd N. «. HMld. I9C*. Sana iipKti of tho rat* Of ippoiruico oi
In Imdiitod buHMt. Food Irrld. I0:l>-14.
CHU, K. H.. C. L. Til, H. C. Hw. «ml S. L. Lo. 1)80. Effict of COCo
Imdiitli ■' ' ■"" -"—•—• t-.it. ir..t..~ —
Acti (Ot«(
Imdiitlon on thi itorogi of ChlMic cboitmit fniitt (Ciitinoi MlHwl— ).
- - ■ - 4):404-4Dfi.
CLMKE. I. 0. 1961. Effocti of lonliing ridlitlon on tht itorog* proportin of
frultt. In: Pnscrvitlon of Fruit ind Vcgatiblci by HidUtlon. Int. Ata.
bwrgy Kftncy. flonno, pp. 1S-9Z.
,y Google
ME. 1. 0. 1971. Itodlitin tMlnlquM mt tta avert af — gaw ffn th*
nmipplm. In: BlilufnUtln Of Frwit »r Irnfitlon, Int. Um. Emtjt
<«tKr. llwiM. pp. S9-M.
SS:10I}-IDI5.
an, G. I
cm, K. C. ItTI. U£M r«»rch n IrndliCiw te solv* quarinttnc frobloK in
fruit. In: DlitnfaiUtlDn of FiutC by IrrtdUclon, [nt. AUi. Catrar Agmcy,
ViMM. pp. 23-25.
Cun«S-RUII. J., H. D. tovkta. «n4 >. R. Lm*. Iiri. Ghm rtdlitlon affKU wt
MoclMilctl covvMnu af Puerto Rlcan Mngoi. J. A«rlc. Unl*. Puerto KIce
A SltVK. C. J. fi. C. J. P. H. I. S> JwilDr. I. V. di Sllvalri, I. K. d« X1iicl<
N. 0. Goday, ind «. Dill'Ollo. 1175. Efftcti sf guM 'idfttlan sn itorn
or virfetlti of «nlan (KlIliB <«Ptl <■ th* Su Frinclico rtqion, Pamirtuci
(>»qul» ItgropecuarU t;i*mi^7V«M>U tO(ll];U-!7 (<" PDrIi.9tM «ICI
H. AhMd. I9«. EffKtt of loa 1H*1 tmdtitlon
ood pmducu. In: Elghtli taml AM. Eoern Con.
-I HMlInf lUpt.. thiKlngto*. D.C., OEt. 1C-17, pp.
U.S. Ato. EMrg/ Cih. , Iiet. Itad. TKhnol . ORO-UO.
DEIMISON. I. A. iKd E. H. AliMd. 1975. Irridlil
VHtUbln. I«: SwpMlia: PoKKsniMI Bloloqy and mntllng at Fmlti
•i<i V*«M«blM, N. F. Hwrd ind 0. it. S«1unkM ((di.). AVI Pubt. Ce., Inc.,
HiitpoTt. pp. ns-i».
DEMIIS(M. 1. A., n. S. Hertliy, E. «. Ummi, »ni G. 0. Kuhn. 1965. Efhcti of low
U»e1 irrvdUtio* iw the prOMrwtlsn of food producti. Univ. of Florldt.
April. 1)65, U.S. Ata. Enwfy Com. Rcpt. No. TIO-IZMH, M pp.
DOSE, P. H. IMS. Oironlt toaldty Ml"l feedlno itudUs of Iw-don IrrtdliMd
itnitMrrtM. In: Elghtti Nmual Ata. Energy Com. Food Imd. ContrKtOrl
NMtlng Kept., Uihliqun, D.C., Oct. I«-17. pp. 155-158.
,y Google
DMRKM, S. 0.. K. *. SloigMn. *. X. Spl^ngjrijM. ind *.
ImdUtton Of Mugoti. I. Radii t ion- Induced d(1*y ti
Hngoti. J. Food Scl. ]1:U1-B69.
OHMW, S. P., K. «. S«»9um. *. N. Splnntirajin, «
IrrUlitiM of MnsOM. II. NtdUtlon afftcti O
mtnqott. J . foot id . iJ -.trO'tlT .
OHMKM, S. 0. •BdA. Srccnlvixn. I9«. lrr»dl»lton
itgtUblH. In:
pp. <i«-«sa.
W«K«. S. 0. iod ». SrenilnnB. 19Ca. R»dl»llofi- Induced de1»y In ripwiliig of
Alpdonw MIMMS Blth tni wUhout ililn-co*tlii9, undir wrloin 9*iMM
(iBOtplirrM. In. Prcicrvatlon of fnilt (nd VtgtUbUi by Rtdlitlon, lit. AtB.
En«rgr Atcncy, VIcnM, p. I (iMtrict}.
DIM, J. F. I3SI. Imdlittd fsMt " Ar« thty s*r<T In: Iwact of Toilcalour o>
Food Pracciilnf, J. C. Kyrn ind J. C. Mrtctein (Edl.K AVI P<AI. Co..
Wtitport. pp. Hi-XM.
DOeRAT. E
S»1l
1S7I. Prtunii In the ihort M~
■nd wlnler slorige of t*ble gnpit.
mtlAR, A
by 1
l^'X
•Mak>, indG. A. NcCllth. 1971.
dlilnf«t«d by lonlilng ridlKlon
n. [Bl, AtB. En«r« Agency, Vliim*
Bniflt-coit inilyiU fOr
tn: DUInfMUtlwi Of Fnil
pp. 1S7-IW.
DOLIAI, A. H. , N.
food ImdUt
St. Dtpt. Agr
■MGlu. G.
on pni,r»
c. Homlul
A. BcCllth, E. K
for tht period J
«. ill pp.
Akw
»U
nd J. Hoy. igTD
■ Jim JO, IM.
MMl
HMlf
DOLLAR, A. H. , n. HanaoU G. A. McCIHh. E. *. AkaBlnt, end J. Noy. 1)70.
food Irrtdlatior progrMi. Ren diti <pptndlcM for the period JuiM I, 19
June ». IMS. Kaoall St. Dept. Agrlc, Honolulu. SOI pp.
DOLLAR, A. «., M. Himoki. G. ». HcCllih. and J. H. Hoy. 1971. Svl-cMHOrc
icele Itifdloi on Irridleted.papiya. In: Dtslnfcttitlofi of Fruit hy
Imdietlon. Int. Atp. Energy Agency, »tenn», pp. 117-IM.
■ imdlitlon of table gripet o
IMS. Radlatlon-peitcurliing freth itraiberrlei end othor fr**
«, I. L. 19M. Phytlologlcal aspecti of ridiatlon procewtng of cltrui ai
■vocodoK. Radiation In Food Procoiiing, LOi Angelei, June <-lD. Tram
Ibid. 5oc. 41:30-31.
EAIOH. S. M.. C. Mteben. and R. Turner. 1970. $V* physical effect! Of pMtharveat
BMH radiation on the fruit of loeet cherry, blueberry, and cranberry.
mdlen iMt. Food Tech. J. 3(4):1S;-1Si.
L Haiiey, Jr. 1970. Effect of i radiation on
0«1I, I, I,. A. S. Abdel-Kader. 1. A. Mill, and A. f. El-Owlly.
Coiparatlvc effect! of gaau Irradiation and Hlelc hydrazlde a
garlic. J. tf*T. Soc. »ort. Set. 9t(S]:637-t4a.
,y Google
EL-SATED. S. A. 1978. Clwiigci In kttplng quality Of tomito fnilu irttr
pDiUur-mC tmtBtflt Hltli S«w IrrMtitlon CMfaliKd alth hMt. Egnitlin J.
Hort. 5(I):1(7-I74.
EL-UtED, S. K 1S7B. Control of pMt-h«rvtIt itorig* d«iy of Mft-typ* diu
fruits alth spKliI r*f(r«n» to tht effect of SMOH trradlitlon. Egyptlin J.
Hort S{21:17S-IU.
EL-S*>ED. S. A. «nd S. n. E1-Wi*rl. IIT7. AMllotlOii Of ui liMkicH phytMlniln
foraad by (wnwr fnilti to control rot liKldtnct In Irr«dl«tt4 pot«tOM.
Eg»tUn J. Hort. 4{Z):IST-1C].
EI.-W«MUKI, I
EWKSOM. J. A., R. H. GoMdinsfr, P Phriukit, *. C. Nlcholii, md L. l. Ki
1966. Irr«dl>tlan procmtlon of fr«iti-Mtor flih *nd Inland fniltl
vrgoUblti. FlM) Rci>t. HIchfgan St«t( U»1*. . E«it Ltnilng, M pp.
Z. t. , 1. II ComU, and R. F. Rinl. 1970. Dr(tnol*ptlc MMltMnt of
Irradiated Granny Salth tppUl frw UMttrn Auitralta. Food Toch. hiit.
tz-.tK-xa.
evnm Irradiation of potatoci to
17-131.
■MUK. 1.. F. Al-Charchirchy, M. H. Al-Shalkhaly, J. I
'AftlMS, J., I. Kill, and E. Andraiiy. 19*6. Afttr- ripening of rod popper
I Cam low anw) ai affected b, 1r-— " — -- '-■ '—■ •—■"■
Proc. Int. J)Bp. Food Irrafl., Ur\:
1H7. Irradiation of potato**
■«fSI. a. i. R. Chaie, and L. M. Miltoy, Jr. IMl. Tlie Offeet of lontiing
radiation 4nd dlphciylaalne trNtMflt on glucoM ntaboIlM and •||*rant
,y Google
EWUNOel, J. and *. Agulrrc. I97S. CwHrliDn of tht (bIm «cld cwiUnt of
pOUtoBS, prn«rii«4 by dirftrent wtliadi, lUtr ttorigt ror five ■ontlil.
An*)« d( Irontologli 77(2):IIS-IH [In Sptnlili Kith En^Hlh iumr|>].
tn>p*ritiirc ind fin trndUtlon
oM potato •artetiM durlnf itora
■Ith EnglUh iiMHiy].
I. Var. Licatsn Phi tppfn* Phrtdwtli. 9(I/I):I9-ZS.
Hlstdchcnlci i]Hf<rrnt<itl9n batHcm Mn-lrratflatM
iu« In lonwrttjl Hit of Hnw irradiated vc^Mablu.
ilM on Food Preservation by Irradiation. Uafanlngcn,
luttablllty of pouto producti prepand froa Irradiated aiv
_ _ _ ted potatoei. Ueitern Nudeor Corp., U.S. Atn. Energy Coi
Rept. He. IDO-IOOt!. 37 pp.
UND, G. A. 19eS. Current ttatui and potential of Irradiation to preieot
potato sprouting, Addendua. Hesum Nuclear Corp., U.S. «!■. Energy Com.
(tcpt. No. IDO-liaOO, It pp.
irZER, E. and F. HeiMnger. 1964. Influence of «-rayi on sprout growth and
wltrlal changes tn the potato. Atompruls ia(«):2a7-MO (In Gervn].
INOER, 0. S. and «. f. HicOuem. 1965. The ettecl of qanu riys on itorige
Hfe and cMpplnS Out tl»i oi Ontario grown KenneSfc potatoes. Potato
Chipper i*:iS. *l, *t. 5D. M SB.
IDS, F., f. Dldevar. L. Hanldl, and B. Nalekghaiseeil . 1976. Effect of gaaia
Irradiation on poticoet and onlooi. Oeterainatlon of vltwtn C and
carbohydrates Mfare ard iitrr Irradiation. Lebeniai. Emiihr. 2t(4):ai-a4.
BILL, N. J., R. C. NIcholai, and P. Harkakls. 1969. Irradiation of cultured
lllittlon of apple slices. Food
ISIURG, L. I9W. Considerations On n
horticultural products. Dec. Fruit
lURDHUN, S. 197B. Aipacts of potato
potatoes under ambient conditions.
Hiurlce S7(3):95-100.
,y Google
202. COlMLi™. S. ». 1964. The whDl«oii«n»ji of
pmcnt sutut, tntfrnittorul iipicti, ii
20{;):»-98.
J03. GONZALEI. F. J,
Spjnllh].
20*. IXHZna. D. ,
g A. «. Airaro. 1976. Study af tM
Uto tulxri by four dWf*r«nt netMdt of
m. Junta at Cncrgia NuclHr, ritdr'-- "
20S. GIWHAH,
I ndlttlon on pNiwts. o
Luia. and J. CMvr.
: Eighth Annual Htm. Entrqy Conn. I
Meeting HfPt., WashlnglOB, T ' "' " ~ '^
JEN-331. $7
U^^r, PI
Food Scl
207. GRIERSON, U. i
ZOa. SRIFFITH,
. 98(3/41:
Irradiation
u.i „..,~=.. .n: Radiation technoloay In Conjunttton with PoittariMt
Proctdurci at a Meant of EiUndtng Vie Shelf Life of Frulti and Vegttlblei.
U.S. At". Energy Coma. Repl. No. UCD-a^PSO-*, pp. 71-74.
ino. F. P. and E. C. Hixle. 19M. Hobll* gaont Irradiator. Calif. Agrlc.
tmdlition on oi
In Conjunction with Poitharvast Procadures ai i Mmb» of Eitdnding Iha
Sheir Life of Frulti and Vegetahlei. U.S. Atai. Entrgy Con. Rcpt. No.
UCD-34I>80-S, 00. U5-1SS.
58-005 0-86-26
,y Google
I, J. *nd C. Friyiilntt. 19TS. DlilniKtliitlofi or AfrluR carMli tntf layaM
y UBH Irradtitlon. Stong* p«t control, offtct »■ nutrltlv* nlw Of faod.
till. Soc. Icl. Hn. Allamt. fi3|4);»S-Z7f.
, N. H. 11*4*1. k. Hululn. uti A. M. Huiioln. Wt. Effort Of tM»
itlon Mid pocking on tho poittarvtit Ilf* of 9»it (FiUtilO auojoot L.l.
pplno J. Scl. 101:71-80.
, A. Stttir. D. HinulO. fl. JMtl. N. A. FinMMil, tiul A. H. HiUMtn.
■ p*yjl6cfi«olc» c)iingoi In ImdUtod t - ■ ■ ■ • ■•--• "-
rtponlnl. PohllUn J. Scl. Ind. Aoi.
SOM ptiyitochMlc* Oungoi In IrradUtod bcr (Zlt.ptwi Jujubol dwrlni itoroft
AWCD, [. M. and R. A. Oonnlnn.
I»66. t. Abitroct •». SIS.
WCD, £. N. and A. A. Oonnlnn. 1)70. Effocti of 1oH-lt*al Irradiation i«ea tho
proionatlon of food product!. Annual Rapt., July 1, IM9 - April U, 1970.
Otpt. of Food Scl., Florida Univ. , GalntivlHa, 111 pp.
AHNED, I. M. and A. A, Dtnnlun. 1971. Ta.luro proflla of Irradiator ■ingocs and
paacM*. J. rt«t. St«l. I[4):«M-496.
AHCD, E. N., A. A. DMnlion, and A. C. Fluck
and Irradiated pOKhoi. I. Flnmtss. .
AHCD, I. N. , A. A. Dnwluii, and G. F. Gran
MCD. t. M.. R. A [Wfifilion and H. S. Htrklay. 19U. Effect* Of low Icral
Irradiation i«»n tht proitrvitlon of food producti. AiMuil Rapt., April IS.
1967 - April 14, 1968. Oopt. of Food Scl., Florida UnW., SilnMvllla, IM pp.
AWCD. E. M.. R. A. Pannlion. ind M. S. Ntrkliy. 1969. Effocti of lOH 1«<r«1
Irradiation upon th* prcMrvitiM of food product). Annual Rapt., April IS,
196a - Juno X, 1969. Dtpt. of food Scl.. Florida Univ.. GtlnMTllla, MO pp.
. fgim-M
ED, H. S. H., Z. S. Al-Hakkak. 5. K. Al-lblllv. A. A. KadhiM, and S. B. Lavoio.
1981. IrradlitioR dlilnfaiUtion of dni datai and th* poiilbllltr of i»l*«
coi*lMtlM tr«atwnti. In: Cortinatlon PmcHin In Food Irradiation, Int.
AtB. Entrv Agency. Vienna, pp. Z17-;2S.
,y Google
MUHINE, S. K. I9e7, HlMorj of tht hot mWr trMflMM of popiyll. Hw»H Fa. Scf
!ej3):«-e.
AlUMtNE, E. K., J. L. Brwbckir. ind I. luddcnhisvi. I9U. Doitattrjr. tolaranct,
«nd iMIf Hf* Mtciiilon roUtM to dllfnfiiUtlon of fnilti iM nfstttblil br
WW ImtfUtlON. Anwil Rwt-. >1<m 1. I96S - My II. 19U. C0II19* Of
Trap. Mgrlc. HmII Univ., Homlulu, IOC pp.
WWINE, E. K.. J. L. IrwlHlwr. I. euddnhigtn, D. MlUtr. ind 0. Ktnch. 19C?.
Doilaetry, totinnci. tid ihtir lift citenilon r«1*tc<l U dtilnfnUtlon of
fruit* iM •(^(Ublct by g«n« IrndHtlon. *nnuil Rept. , Jum 1. 1966 -
My JI, 1967. Collect of Irw- *9'<c-- "»•'' Onl... Honolulu, 1« pp.
MCMINE, E. It,. J, BreuUbcr, [. BiidilenhdijBn, D. Klidl, wd J- »oy. 19S9.
OoilMtFy, tolcnncc. *f>d M«lf Hfe MtmHor relitrt to dUlnf.lUtlon of
fnilti ind vncUblct by gwPW IrndUtloi". Aimiil (twt. . >luM 1, 19«7 -
My Jl. I96S. Con*9« of Troo. t^rH., HmH Univ.. Honolulu, IM pp.
MUMINE, E. K.. J. Brartuker. C. C*.il*tto. D, Hllker, ind M. Lin. 196S. DoslMtry.
tolarinci. ind shflf life uccnilon rtUtM to dllloffstillan of fruit ind
TcgetibiM by gasu lrr»d1»llon. Annwl Rept., June 1. 1964 ■ My 11. I9S5.
Collcgt of Troo. Hgrli. , HimII Unl», , Honolulu, 78 pp.
MCMINE, E. t. ind T. Goo. 1971. RMplntlon of si«M-(rrid1il«d fruih fniltt. J.
Food Scl. X;1O7«-1077.
utOTilofl of ff»ih pcpiyis ICirlfi pimyl L. «r. Solo). Roi. Bull.. Hwil
kgrlc. E>p. Sti., MmII Univ.. AonolulL. No. 16S, t3 pp.
HIK, E. K. tit T. 900. 1977. EffKti of swn IrrodUtlon on Ilwlf M't of
frtih lychoo* [LItclit dilwntll Sono.). Rti. *uI1.. MmII *V*C. Eip. SU
IMiNll unl*. , HMofuTu, Ho. T«. 20 pp.
JIKMIK. E. *. iod T. Goo. 1977. RMplrition, ithyltn* pro*Kt1on. ind ihtlf lift
Ontcmlon In IrridliCM papiyi fruit (ftor itorog* mtfcr ilnuUttd ihlpplni
condition. Tech, Bull.. Hi-tM Agrlc. Eip. St». , MmII UiiI». , Honolulu,
M. 93. n pp.
WWINE. E. K. ind t. Goo. 1979. Effictl Of lonlilng tmdiitlon on 'Hoden" HngoM
R«. Rept. H1.KI A|rlc. E>p. St*., Hm*1I Unl*.. Honolulu, No. 20S. 11 pp.
AKWIINE. E. K. «i4 R. T. F. Hong. 1966. Eitondlng tho iHtlf llf* of pipiyii witb
gMH Irridlitlon. Hwill FB. Scl. IS[1):4-6.
RLI. H.. H. h. Firooql. (nd A. Hutiwtd. 1968. Pnitmitlon of lungoM (Mnglftri
Indic* I.] by vmu rodlttlon. Food Irrod. 9(l/Z):B-n.
U.I. H. «t al. 1910. Inhibition of iproutlng In onloni by gHN rodlulont. Food
IrTil.~T0(4) :T0-I4.
M.-J1ISIH, H.. F. Mrbkli. and R. C. NIcKoIh. 1966. Kola of colclia In wftw)lng
«nd nflralng Irrodlitcd pl*F<t tltiun In: Prtunotlon Of Fruit Md
Vogotoblci by RodUCIon, Int. tta. Enn^ Agwicy, VIomm, pp. 1tS-lI7.
MKZqUITA. R.. E. C. Mile, ind t. F. Johnson. 19tS. Effect of (•■w Imdiitlon
on riponino of 'Gros Nlchel' bininii. In^ Rtdlitlon Technolotr In Conjunction
■(Ut PoitMrvMt Procedural ii • Hitns of Eitondlng the Jhtif lift of Frulti
4nd Ve9«t«lil«. U.S. *»- Eiwrjy C<w. R«pt. *i. UCD-34PSO-3, pp. M-Sl.
WEIOUIH. R.. E. C. Hill*, ind C. * Johnion. 1966. Effort of MMi Imdtitli
on the poitMrvMt beht.lor of 'Groi Xtchel- biMN*. In: Radiation Toctm
In ConJwKtIon with PoitliarvKt Procadurvt ai 1 Mam of Extvidlng th* Shalr
llfo of Fnilti and fogitiblts. U.S. AM. Ermrv &»■ "w*- *■ W0-J4PBJ.4,
pp. l-M.
,y Google
Iiei. Fungil rciponi* M Irridlatloii. tn: UdUtlOn Ticknalogr In
Conjunctlun otth PoitMrvMt Proctdurn «i ■ Htuii of EitMdlng tM Slwlf LIf
of Fruitt and V»9«Ub1«. U.S. AW. Eiwrv Cam. Dcpt. No. UC0-34na-l .
pp. i;t-n7.
1963. Ridlatlwi technology In conjunction Kith posthirnit pr«c*dur«i *i ■
Mini or oitcndlng the ihelf-llfe of frulti and vegoublo. Amuil Rapt.,
Fe6. 1, ]m - Jin. 30, 1W3. Dept. dF Powlogr, Univ. of Cillf., DmIi. U.
«tii. Entrfy C<:ii>. R». ind Dt*. R««t. No. UCCI-34PaO-1. 181 pp.
NtHtl. 4(1-2):* 1S.
I9«]. Simiiry of the tttKt of gwi
In: Ridt*t<on Itchnology In Conjunct
of EitmdlM tut Shelf Life or FnilU
■ept. No. Uto-34P80-I. pp. I19-IZ5.
■■ radiation on teitura of fnlti.
on 1.1 tn Poithirteit ProcedurM oi a Hmm
IJ64.
Procedure
U.S. «•
Cherrlei. In
I 11 « Hnnt
Enerji- Com
: lUdUtton TKhnolOV ^n
Of E>tend<nq the Shelf LIfa
Rfpt. No. UC0-MP80-Z. pp.
conjunction with PotthM^it
105-108.
I9H.
Procedure
U.S. *t»
Oe«berr1e».
s IS > H«ni
Energy Con>
"RepJ
ending th
MPM-'.^Dp'
Conjunction
of Frultj an
103-104.
d'v(g.tab1ei.
1M«.
Irradiation of ohi
c potalDe
Eng. Cent
for ipreut
r. U.S. Mm
Inhibition ■
Energy Co*
Rept. Mo.
1964. Report on the reiulti of the Canadian pilot icilc potato Irradiation
pragran 1M1-19U leason. KtB. Energy of Canada Ltd., Com. Prod. 01*. Gaaa
Irrad. Cinida i:*Z-Si.
1164. Study of applicability of radiation (witetirlutlon of fnilti In the
South. StMthtm Intenute Ibclear Noird. U.S. Atm. En*r«y Com. Kept. No.
TID-ZWtOllH.. 110 pp.
. NO. 1271, Z pp.
AEVFU, Coloitio, I
I9BZ. Food Irradiation:
1962. Ii 9
Ready for >
■ tubttitu
mback. food Eng. 4:71-00.
I far EDOT Cltrograph 67(B): 180-185.
'. NattutlU, byi-
,y Google
diui. J. Agrlc. Food Chn.
W, H.. Z. mUf. ind J. tnrjm. 197). Effact of fima Irndlatlwi on tin uair
and prauin coaiKnltlon of Inql dita*
b; IrradUtlon. Vol. 1. yigoiilngM, No
M. 4M-4U.
W. H. and I. K. MHitr. IMI. CMiteal ttudiM on Um laflutnc* of ( coAfncd
proMtt of hMt and Irradiation on cdrtehydratoi, pt«tili», and aalng acldt of
datai. ta: Cooblnatlon ProcniM In Food Irradiation, Int. AtB. Eiwrgjr Aitncjr,
BALDT, R. U., N. f. Som
PlClt Htfsiol. 4J(Si
BAlIir, R. M. . «. F. Sown . . - . ,
radiation rnlsunc* by fiHt-lnJurM conldta of NnlitlllM
Tim. J. Bact. II»(7):514-5Z0.
BM.OCK, J. N., *, t. Burditt Jt. i. 1 U
radiation ai a quarantlnt trtatmot fi
S)(lhZOZ-»M.
UUUU.DI, 0. and C. Htucclo. I97S. Sprout Inhibition by radiation and clwilcal
. . . ._ .... — .<_ ,.. ToS. ^"- ■"•- "- "
... ,„. , m». Set. ToS. «11«. Ihtr. Ik. »
« [In Italian].
itlon on (itondlng the
of qinu Irradiation on th*
Sinarlti L.ctuFiVTst riraelCilsr. Plinl Pith., pp. 9«-«,
BMHUl-GOM, R. and B. S. Whan. U7l. Th« effect of ndlillon on th«
pathHontcity of fungi and vMiti causing rot \n ttorod grapti. Ilrwl J.
Agrlc. Rts. 11(4) (abttractl.
BARUI-GOIM. R. . R. i. Uhan. and R. Padava. IW9. SjFnonlitIc affnti of gana
radiation and hoat on tht dovalofMnt ef Nntllllwi dloltatw In vitro and In
storad cltrui fnilti. Ph/topath. S9(7);*ZI->».
BMMI-GMJW, R. ai4 R. Fadova. 1*70. Coftlnad Irradiation, h«at and blphenyl
tnataanti for tht (ootroi of Panlcinii^ dlQlUf In Inoculatad eltnii fruit*.
Iiraal J. Agrk. Re>. 20:lM-l!?. "
117?, A radial lon-chnlcat approach t»
of Irradiated frvilti: Firt I — Th*
Food ChB. a(;):131'14I.
BtlL -OWIII! ». I. iiid 0. Baraldl. U77. Ralatlanihip b«t«*n peel daM|* and th*
accwwlatlon of llnonana In four *arl*ttai of Irridittod ortngat. tnv. bip.
Bat. 1 7(2/4) :ltl- Its.
BEUI-OOdllll. H. I. and N. ». Stontaluolo. I9«. Pattin chanoai In tha HpanIng of
Irradiated and itorod itranbarrlai. J. Food Set. J4!S09-SI4.
,y Google
M, T. I. IW7. ShallM trndlitlon of oringn by flKtrwii. In: R«dl*t1on
lYMcrvatlon of foodi. E. S. JOMphian *nd J. N. FrMikfOrt Udi.). rnc. Aiar.
Cliai. S)^., Atlintlc City. Sept. IS-17, \HS, pp. IH-138.
Id Is- Inhibition at iprogtlnv In p«tata tubli'l.
n polyphangl ccint«M, MlypMnalaxIdiM
tenia.-UUi. Tech. >J2}:n-90 [In Frend
179. Gmh Irndlitlon or lubtroplcll fnilti. «.
... t prMHit In mdnqoet, papayai, *n<t lltdili durlni
nnlng. rretiing, «ik1 9MIH trridUtlo". J. Igrlc. Food Ch«. I7(l):48-S1.
BEIEK, N.. A. C. Tbiwi, and *. J. Vin Tondtr. 1979. Gmm IrndlitlM of
(ubtn)|il»1 rmti. 1. Cciv«1t1on>1 tibltf of Mngo. V*f)*, itrMbtrn', «nd
IftchI fnilM of tht edfblcrtpt sttga. J. Agrlc. FoM Om. Z7(l):17-4l.
BWKESLET, t. N., J. G. Looti, L. H. du PUisls. and 6. Brgyn. 19rt. 6«M
Imdiatlon af lubtnplul frulti. I. Volitll* cnMpdncnti, Itpldt, wid
ulna acldi ef Hngo, pipiya. >i>d strnbtrry pulp. J. Xgrlc. Food Omb. 27(1):
OOCK, R. J., R. N. UoUard. R. *. Dtnnlion, (nd E. «. XTnwd. 197D. Imdiatlan-
lnd«ie«d chtnoci In tm roUtlK conitltutnti of 'fileMlj' oringn. J. tmar.
SOC. Hort. Scl. 9S:4]7-MI.
IRODRlCi;, H. T. and «. C. ThcMs. 1978.
frulti In South Ikfric*. In: Food
Ata. Entrgr Agency. Vltnna. pp. lfi7-17S.
BROMICK, K. T., k. C. Thous, F. Vi»cr, ind H. Biyen. 1*7t. nudles on tht in«
of HB* ImdUtlan and hot ntw treaewnti for iMIf life Mttniton of
pcpayai. Mint DU. Reptr. «0(9J:749-7S3.
•ROORICK, H. T. and H. J. van dtr Lindc. 19fi1. Technologtci) fMilblllty ttudin
on CMfalMtlan trtatmnW for iiibtroplcal frutta. In: C^lnitlon ProctaMi
In Food Irradiation, lot. Urn. Entrw Agncy, Vlanna, pp. 141-151.
lUCKlET, P. H.. J. H. Sort), and N. F
recovery aiong fungi folloalng fi
SC(I):14S (abttrictl.
. J. A. Coon, M. Dally, and t. C. «l
n of Rhlropui ttolonlfer sparangloipart* by tingi*
trNtMAti of hcatlngT chilling, and jaam- Irradiation. Fnilt, vcgctiblM.
itond praductl. Radlat. Rm. 40(l):n-36.
,y Google
BUCKLn, r. M.. H. F. iammr. J. H. Urtt, «n4 E. C. Mil*. 1M7. Effcctl of
ehMt»1 ^rstKtlon -on rtp«lr sf potcntltlly UUal IrrMUtlofl Injurr (n
Dhliopin itolonlftr iparinalmporei- Riddl, Ht. 30:Vi-tt2.
lELAM, H. 4971. [mdUtlon of pfltjtoei hilfMy through th* iti
(Rfport an Invcstlutlont In 1971.) Initttuiit nor Bmrfn) en
LdiHUauHDrodultcn. >MMc1lii«M, No. 3B6. 9 pp. [In OuKk].
TEUM. N. nn. Stortf* tHali Hitk IrrkdUtid poUtMt an ■ n
mil (II70-I971>. Initltyut voor Nmrlng « VcriMrtfitg nn li
IMtdillngM, No. »7, 10 pp.. [In DHtdi].
TEUMN, n. 1972. StDri9> Crlili lltti 4rr*dllU4 poUtotl on 1 si
:*ti 1 {I971-I97i). IniHtuul tear SmiHng n Vtnwiiing mh
indboiMprcKhikUfi. ■edrdtllnqtn. No. «0. 27 pp. [In DHtdi].
1975. Jrocmlog of li
li uid crlui. 1,
TCUM, H. 197*. Tht cullMrr Wi4 pncMiln) quality of potitoci tmtod olU
llMtran radUtlon. Instltuut Mor Ivwrlng tn Vfrvfrting van
lindboiMpnxJuttcn , MedcdtllngM, Mo. 4M. 17 pp. [In Dutch].
■URDITT, A. K., Jr 1987. fianw mdUtlon ai a qgarantlne treatmnt of frwIU.
Radiitlon In F«od Procaiiing, Lo* fcigtiM, JuM t>10. Trtnt. ta. Hucl. Soc.
«1:3I-1I.
BUtOin, A. K. , Jr. , M. G. Moihonai, T. T. Halton, D. H. SplldtM,
D. L. von Mlndegutfi, and P. I. SfiH. IM1. loit-daic frradlitloH (( a traatntM
for grapefruit and nwifDM InfMtad wit* CtrlfabMR fnilt fly lirvoo. U.S. Dopt.
Atrtc. AgHc. DM. Son.. MI>S-IO.
BURDITT, A. K., Jr. and S. T. S«o. t97t. Dou roqolrwonts for quirantlnt troitntnt
of fruit ft1(s ■<!>! qanu Irradiation. In: OltlnfMtotlon of Fruit M
[rrmlitton. Int. liJii. Encr^j Agency, «l«nn«. pp. 31-41.
eUlIDlTT. A. K., Jr., S. T. Seo, and J. H. Balock. 1971. lOlU for dovaloplng
quaranllnc treatments for fruit flloi. In; Olilnfntotlon of Fruit by
Irradlitlon, int. Atn. Energy Agency Vienna, pp. 27-JI.
BURTON, H. G. I97S. Tht iDMdIaU effect of aaeH Irradiation upon tht tutar
content of potatoti provlouity Itor*d at Z. 4.S, 6. 10 and 1S.S dtg C. Pouto
Rat. 1B[I):I09-IIS.
euniON. H. G. and H. H. de Jong. T9S9. Tht Irradtation of Hart potatoei. Int. J.
Appl. Radlat. Isotop. e:lfi7-I70.
BUSSa. J. and E. C. Ikxic. IMS. G» tichanga In 'Sartlatt' pean In roUtlon
to gaiM Irradiation. In: Radiation Technology in Conjunction ulth Poitharvatt
Procadun* ai a Means of Eitcnding tht Shelf Lift Sf Fruttt and Vefeabla).
U.S. At». Enargy Cam. Rept. No. UCD.34PB0-3. pp. Z7-47,
lai exclunge In Bartlttt pean In roTatlon to
„GoogIe
MOM, 3. C. (M n. Int. \Mi. NlMty-diy tubacuti onl toilcltf ttutlwt M
ndUtloii-p*tUHrl»d fooih (itrMtorrlti. ipplM wi* pMr*), riiul Itpt-
tnduitrlil Il0-Tnt UM, Inc. , Aim 30. IMS, U.S. Mm. Inerw CoBk Kvt. Ka.
coo-nia-1. iu pp.
PKU. J. 0. and ». (trtli, !»««. Iiicr»».lBg tM iter*K lift Of wthMK to
Man* of jaiwi trrtdlttlon. In: Proc. 17th Int. Hart. Cmgr.. IknriM*, IH<.
1, Untrtct No. W.
_ _ __ LOfEI. H. IMS. Appllutton of nuelMr tnww ta atrlevltan M
IIh, Itoikn*. OmmHi. tn: Omt. Intt. Nic. tnat. Agrwi.. Ibdrl4,
IK3-H, pp. 111-127.
UWILL. J. C, B. D. Cost*, D. J. Noora, S. J. Rwd, and H. C. r«*M. IfT*. Tk*
. -. ■ • — ..-- — - -- 1 — ii^j TmidHna and (^ '—
. Nb. GI07. 124 [«
(MaiHtfara Indlca L.l. HirvHtfng (nd iiAuqumt iMndKns and praceiiM:
ila'tSd bTEHogriphy. Rapt.. Tr«9. ""— ' — "" '"" "" ""
KHIN, K. and I. birvukl. 1)71. Effacti of (awi radiation on wraM lidilkltlan.
■rwt* of ■Icra-orainlMi and clmtlcal covoiltlon In Shonan Rod o«Imi. J.
Jap. Soc. Hort. ScI. «l(I):11-97.
KHIN, K., K. OgiU, and H. Honjo. 197fi.
. _, aaturatlon chanoti In fi
laHilngTaaratlon. VI. Effacti of 9mm T«dUtlon on tha iMplratory ratal,
•tlvla«* production, or^Mlc acldi, protofn and toul Hboiwclaic acid of
Bartlatt paan. J. Jap. Soc. Hort. Scl. ]9:1}-9a.
CKWun t. £ C, Xi.t , and N. F. StMor. IMS. Th* iHUractlon of gawa
IrridUtlon iMlad packigel and contrnlled itmotplwrt an fncldOKC of BoCrrtlt
rut In ttraitarrlri. In: (Udlttlon TKhnolofy in CwijuFictliin with PotUiarvMt
(•rocadurn ai a Heint of Eitandlng the ^Mlf-Hff of fni'ti ind lafaublai.
U.S. «■- Enar^j Cam. Rfpt. »o. UCD-MPSO-S, pp. 9-;S.
dULUTZ, E.. E. C. Nile. iM N. F. SoMor. IMS. Intaracl
and control rI atnosphtrti on Botr/tli rot of ttraiibari
Soc. Hart. Scl . a8;36S-371.
Rol. J. 3<?):9S-99.
'ood Irrad. )a:)l-M.
CHU. K. H., C. L. Tal, K. C. Hiv, and S. L. Lo. 1980. Effact Of SOCo gaMa
Irradiation an tha itorigi of dilnai* clwitnut fnilti ICaitanaa MlHiilna).
JtcU totanlca Sinica i2i*):*M-nt.
OJUn, I. D. IIM. Effacti of lonlilng radiation on thi ttaragi proptrtlot Of
frvltt. In: Prtiarvatlon of fmlt ind Vagatablai by Radiation, Int. Ata.
tnargy Agancy, Vicma. pp. SS-9t.
CUUKE, I. D. 1971. Effect! Of radiation trMtamtl.
,y Google
CLARKE, [. 0. 1»1. KidlUlon UcMlquM wid tht twort af m»imtt fnm tiN
ninipplnci. In: OlilnfnUtlon of Fruit by Imdiitlon, Int. AtM. EiMrgy
Agency. Vttnn«, pp. 59-U.
COUET, H. N. and U. J. Brailt^. ISSS. EffMt of ipen popuUtlon and ig* Qf
InrKtIon on th* mpons* of totrrtli clrttni to giaH ridlatlnn. PlqrtopiUi.
M:1011-)01S.
COI, C. E. 1960. GinH rsdlattc" of poUton, S^tlon A, Dtttm ol
Gtn« Irrtd. In Ctmda, At>. EMrv of CuMd* Ltd. topt. 112D, pp. 14-ie.
cm. H. C. 19T1. USOA rtiorch on ImdUtlon to uilvo Quarintlnt protlsn In
rrwit. In; DlilnfeiUtlon of Fruit by Irrodlitton, Int. Ata. Entrv Agency,
VIcnM. pp. ii-a.
CUEVAS-RUU, J. , H. D. SrihH. and R. A. lus«. 1971. Gin ndlatlon iffacts on
bioclMilcil iiiii Miti or Piiarta Rlcui nngoi. J. Agrlc. UnW. Puorto Rlea
CIKVAS-RUIZ, J., R. A. Luio, ind H. D. 6r«hw. 19H. PrtHTvatlon of troplcil
foodttirfft by ImdUtlon. Proc. Trop. Rtg. Hmtr. Soc. Hort. Scl. tJ:24t-15«.
DA SUVA, C. J. G. C. J. P. N. E. S« Jwitor, S. V. di SHiftlr*. I. H. dt AlMldi,
M. D. Godsy, And A. Otn'Ollo. WS. Effccti of guau ridlltlon on itorig*
-of virlrCl-H of mioii (Alllia CMl) In th* Sio FrtKlIcO rfgian, ^enriiAuco.
PftquUi AqrDpKiurti Bni I III rtTAgronai < ■ 10(n);53-S7 (In PsrtugMi oltn
DPMISOH, R. A. and E. H. AWtd. ISM. Rovlm of tbt lUtui of Irradlitlon iffccti
on citrui fnilti. In: Food Irradiation. Proc. Int. Sjup. Fopd Irrid.,
Kartindic, pp. 619-634.
OEMISON, R. A. and E, H. A>Md. 1961. Effocti of 1m> l«v«l Irradlitlon upon tht
pr«itrvtt1an of food product*. In: Eighth Anmw! Ata. Emroy Caa. Food
Irrad. CcntrKton Nwting Rept. , Uihlngton, D.C.. Oct. M-Vl, pp. 13S-119.
DEKNIMP*. P. ». and €. M. AhMd. 1«1, Eff«t( of Iw Urtl Irraatailoi. upon tho
preservation of food product!. Final Sunwry Dept., Hay 1961 - Pferch 1970.
\l.%. Atn, EntrlyCOOT., Isot. R«d. Technol . OBD-KO.
DENNISON, R. A. and E. H. Al»»d. 19?S. Irradiation treatment of frolt* and
■aocubln. In: Syivoflui: Poitfurveit Biology >■><< Handling of Fruitt
■nd VegiUblM, N. F. Hurd Md D. K. Salunkba (Eds.}. AVI Fubl. Co., Inc.,
Hiitport. pp. 1I*-IZ9.
DENNISON, R. A.. E. M. AlMd, and F. G. Harttn. 1967. P«tlnMttra)* actlilty In
Irradtatid 'Valencia' oranges Proc. tatr. Soc. Hort. Scl. t1:163-l6S.
OENHISON, R. A.. U. Grttriofi. and E. n. Alaad. 1966. Irradiation of Duncwi grapo-
frvll, pincappit iM Valencia orangoi and Taaplci. Froc. Fla. St. Hort. Soc.
79:ZSS-i92.
DENNISON. R. A., M. S. Ntrtlty. £. N. AHotd. and 6. D. Kuhn. I96S. EfftctI of Ion
Uwl Irndlatlon upon tht prticrvatlon of food (irodutts. Unl*. of Florida.
April. 19«S. U.S. Atat. Enorgy CO", "ept No. IIO-;!509, 89 pp.
OEIISE. P. H. 1968. Chronic toxicity anlaial feedino jtgiH« of Iw-dose irraOlattd
Uraubtrriei. In: Eighth Annual Atn. Energy Com. Food Irrail, Contrition
Meeting Rept. , Hiihlnfton. O.C. Oct. I«-17, pp. 155-15S.
DE ZEEUU. D. 1963. SuMry of fruH Irradiation at Uagenlnaaii. In: Food
Irradiation. Eurapean Info. C«itr. for Food Irrad.. Saclay, <rtr1y. Int. NchI.
4tl-Z}:AZ9-A3a.
,y Google
RMA, S. D.. K. A. Sivagaon. X. N. Sptringtnjin. and A. 5r««ii<if»*n. 196C.
Irradiation or NngoM. t. Radiation- 1 nteccd dilay In r(p«n(<i9 af 'MplnMO'
■angoti. J. Fo»d Scl. l1:U3-a69.
RKM. S 0. , K. k. Savigaon, A. N. ^pfrangarajan, and H. Srvcotvaian. 1966.
Irradiation of nanjoM. II. RtdUtton ttttct* or "■ -■ '»"*■
mtiqott. J. Food Scl. ]1:a70-Brr.
Alpfionio Hn9D»
atBOiphdnt. Ii
Energy Agency, >
Iviian. 1MS. Radiation- Induced delay In rlpMlng of
and xithout ikln-natlng. under (arlout 9MM1B
tervatlan et Fruit and Vagetablei by IMIatlon, Int. Ata.
p. 1 (abttract).
OlEM., J. F. 1981. Irradiated roodt -
Food Proce»1ng, J. C. AjrrM and J
Weitport. pp. 786-304.
HULAR, A. n. . M
POLUW. A,
food I
Jvn* 30, 1969. HaMll St. Dept. AgHi
LMl, A. n.. n. Mnaota,
icale itudiM on Im
Irradiation, Int. Ata.
DROGE, J. H. I96S. Radlatlon-paiteurlilng
frulti and vegtuble*: (ttlmatei of
Ktg. £con. Dl*.. 12 pp.
EAKS, t. I. I9SZ. Physiological aip«ti
avocadoei. Radiation In Food Proc«s<
Ibcl. Soc. 41:30-3).
EATON. G. U.. C. Htehan,
ECHANDl, «. 3.. B. R. CKiie, and I. M
polyMCCharldei and cilclw ditt
OtM. IB:a7B-e80.
EL-OKSH, I. t., A. S. Abdel-Kader. V.
CoipirttWe effecti of gaaa Irramai
garlic. J. «iwr. Soc. Hort. Scl. 96{'
. HeCllJh, L -, .,
Raa data appendlctl for the |»erlod JuM 1.
- • ■ . Honolulu, 501 pp.
orag* of tabid gi
. analyili for
„GoogIe
Hort. S(2):I67-I74.
Hort S[Z}:175-1U.
EL-SATED, i. «. and S. H. EI-HikH. 1977. Appllutlon of «■ lnduc*4 phytMlH
formd by p*pp«r frvlti to control rot (ncldMCC <n IrrtdUUd poUtoM.
Etyptlin J. Hort. 4(Z):IS7-1(].
IMMWKI, A., I. A. Et-Mdidy, R. EI-ShObMhy, and A. I. SlUM. 1978. Effect
ttm* ndlatlon of the free mIim kIA Of girllc bulbt. Hm. Sull.. Fic. i
In Shan UnW.. No. 949. 7 pp.
EHEnQM, J. A.. R. H. Gndedlfigcr, 9. IkrUkU, R. C. Nlcholu, and L. L. Kv^w.
I9«. IrradUtton pmorvitiM of frci
•*9Ct<bl«. FIra) Rtpt. mchlgan Stit
EMERSON. J. A. ft (I. )9M. Irrtdlitlon pr«iirvit<Dn of froh-MUr fllh 4i«d
Inlirul fnTTt ind ttqtUbUt. FliD tnd Hlldllfo Son., Buruu of Cam. Flib..
U.S. AtB. Enorgy CiMi. Rept. No. COO-I283-1Z, 8S PP.
EMRSOR, J. A. et •!. 196S. Irrtdtitlon preiervitlon of frMh-Mtor flih ind
tflUnd fniTts and Mfttibln. U.S. AD>. Energy Qmm. Rcpt. No. 000-1183-17.
7«PP-
ERIC, ».. J. It CoapU, tnd R. F. Rmv*. 1970. Or9i«o1«pt1c «iM*M*nt of
ImdIitM Granny Siilth appUi fna Untin Auitratl*. Food Tach. AuM.
22:290-900.
roN, R. F. and K. F. >t(c<|iM«n. 1961. 6uM Irradiation sf potatOM to
nhtbit sprouting. GaHa Irnd. Canada t:Sf-6S.
kMpIng c|uaH
127-nS.
FARMS. J.
ty of 'P»r1 Harbor- tOMtooi. Agrlc. R«. R«*., Cairo 4CtJ):
FARKAS, .
Ion
FARKAS. J.. I. It1»i. and E. ArdrMiy. 1966. Aft»r-i
(UbHom tmiiim) ii *ff«ted by lonliing ridHi
Froc? Int. Sy?. Food Irrad. . (arljruh*. pp. 60
FAUST. ». , I. R. CMie, tnd L. 1. MaMOy, Jr. 1»«. Tht Offoet of lo*iilng
radiation <fid dlDheniHalne trNtMiit on glucoie ■it*0llw a»* •J^rlM
I. Proc. tav. SOC. Hort. Set. 90:21-9.
„GoogIe
c^rn
dc Brwiilol09H ?7(2)rnS-lM [tn'sptfillN -Ith Engllih lu-wryj.'
fESUS, 1. L
■911 Nl
tidgi, Diul t. KilHn. 1381. Pntectlun Df oringti by 9«« ridlitlon
Ctrimui npHin uled. »CM *11»enl. 10{4):»1-2M.
FIIEP. G. i
on cKt
Hoveny
d *. KapoiiUiiy. 1971. Effect of tnwtDturc ind givu Irndlitlwi
9« In c.rbohjdr.H cwnpoilllw of lOM poUlo MrlctiM Airing itorige
cnwKi 20«)-;69-)01 Cl" Hunwrlin Kith Engllih tuwry].
1. Vilcncli. 1975. Effect of gun rtdtatlon
aullng alcroorftnlMis In binini under dlffarcat
Vir. Licitin. Plidtpplnc Phjtopith. l(l/t):19-H
Ft»
*nd
In;
IrtlrMtlof
-IS.
1977. Hluoch
ted ttitu« in
t S/-^iim on
wtCil dlfforentlltlon
cmercis us* of lOM
Food Prt»r..tlon t.
betHtvn no
Irradiated
rradlatlo
n- Irradiated
vegetablM.
. M9eninven.
FW
E., R. Joiu. ind
on loft fruit c«
R. VdUnla.
1 lalli. En>.
MO. Hlitochnilc*! iffecti of 9
E>p. »0t. 20{n:47.54.
!■■■ radfatfon
F«UIIO. 6
»pro
7B p
ting. *;t
Current ititus
ind potential of Irradiation to
.. U.S. Ht... Energy Conn. Ptpt.
k>. ini-iiioo.
FUEUW. G
. im. Nvci.
Sultiblllty of
Soc. 7(Z):315.
poUto producti Hde
row irrad
Bted potatoei.
FREUHD. G
Chen
)t.pt
H. 19M. Sultibfllty of
cilly Inhibited potetoti.
No. ID0-1DO4Z. 17 w.
potato product! prepa
Witem Nucleir Corp
ed fn» Ir
. U.S. AU
radlatMl and
. Energy Con.
UNO. G. k. 19GS. Current itatui and potential
potato iproutlng, Udendua. Hetterfi Huclear i
Rept. No. ID0-11JW, IS pp.
GMNDER, D. S. and K. F. MlcOueen. 19CS.
1 1f* and rtlpplng qu
Chtpper U:3t. *Z. 46, SO, '.
GHODS, F., F. DIdevar. L. Hanli
frradlatlon An potal
carbohydratii befon
, and B. HUekjhiiiail. t97t. Effect of oaia
onions. OctemlMtlon of vitamin C and
:er Irradiation. LobtnM. Emilhr. Z9t4):ei-e
Harkaklt. 19«. Irrad
Food Technol. 11:385-388.
on of apple tllcts. Food
aniiwrt and Irradiation of
t at Sucrlirt de I'll*
,y Google
zaz. GoiDaLi™, s. ». isee. ii* nhotMoiiwtii of i
preicit mtui. tntcmitlorul ispicti, (nd
M(J):93-9B.
20J. <XSHlN.ll, F. J. and *. ». HUiro. 1976, Study of tl» fret and prottlc mliio icldi
tontent In potato tulwn bjr (our different aethodi of prtiervitton and ttortd
durtn9 i month]. Junta da Enargla Nuclaar, thdrld, JEN-131, ST pp. [In
Spantih].
2M. GONZN.EI, 0., L. B. Dtaaunahan, L. H. PI1ac, and V. Q. Mabaitra. 19'Z. Effacti of
gaaaia radiation on paanuti. onlont, and gtngtr. PhlltppInt J. Scl. 98(3/4):
20S. GRMAH, M. D.. R. *. Luit, and J. Cuavai.
foo<litiiffi. In; Eighth *nr -' '— ■
Meeting Kept., Waihlngton, 1
ZOG. GREEN, G. F., E. H. AIned, and R. A. OannlMn. 1969. An autoutlc Mnpllng lyitea
for reiptrator* fatal i - -- . ---.-. -. ..... ...-
Food 5c1. H:6Z7-6».
fooiHtiiffi. In; Eighth Annual AtB. Energy C<
on'the anatomy of the nango Qhnglfera Indlce) tuUWjr «
Fruit J. S26:1J-" Iln Afrikaani witTrfSiTTfR iiewfy].
lirridlited'onlonj
he, No. 2. 93 pp.
orangei' in- Radiation Technology tn Conjunction olth Poitharvcit
Ktiam 11 i Meani of E.tendlng the Shelf Life of Fnilti and Vegetabln.
i. Atn. Energy Com. Repl. No. UCD.3«l'80-4, pp. 72-74.
KAIIt gama Irradiator. Clllf. Agrlc.
■RRERO. r. P.. E. C. Hanfe. C. f. Johnson, I. I. EaU, and N. F. S
Effctti OF poitharveit gwiH Irradiation on orange fruits. Pro
Hort. S<l. gD:SI$-S2S.
«ERO. F. P.. H. I. nae. C. toyd, and E. C. Hanle. 19*7. _. . , ,
radiation doie for thi inoblle gaen Irradiator. In; Radiation Technology
In Conjonetlon -Ith Pntharvtst ProcedurM ai a Heem of Eiteodint the
Shelf ttfe of Fruitt and Vegetatlet. U.S. At*, tmr^ torn. R«pt. M.
UCD-34P80-S. Pp. IM-ISS.
58-005 O - 86 -
,y Google
GUCnEK, F. P., D. Ointto. ind E. C. ItaxU. IH7. Air tMt iMpmit of
Imdiitid (tnabCTTUi. In; Radlitlon Technologjr in Conjunction Hlth
taithintit Proctdurci « ■ ne«n$ of Eitending th* ShcH lift of Fntla *i
VtgcUblM. U.S. Ata. Eior^ Comr. dml. No. UCD-MnO-S, pp. H-41.
WW Irradiator. In: Ridlttlon Ttchnologr
rroccdHTti *i i Hnoi or Eitmding inc Siitif
U.S. KM. EmrgyCiH. Rcpt. Ho. UCD-34Pai]-S,
I COTJunctton iiltli
If* or Fnitti «nd
■p. 12(-IM.
Hw rayt on onloni gran* In
WVIMjmiJA, P. S. HitHur, ind I. Una. 1971. Efl
tilt itoragc bohtdour of girllc bulbi *
Indfin Food Pick. K(S):10-n.
HAtEVY A. K ind J Shoub. 196S. Ilw •ff»cti of 9>BH-lmdUC<on and itari|(
tannturt on tht gronlh. flotwing >nd twlb yltl.1 Of K-' ' '-'- ■-"-'
■at. S;I»-37.
HMSEN, H. and T «rvnnMld. 1M4. Dapondtnc* of th* ridlitlon Aim r*«ilrid U
Inhibit 9»rmiwtlDn Ik poMloeJ on Uw «rl*ty of poUton. 0«il. Lcbrnn.-
hmdKli. ea(Zl;K>-SI I<n temn].
HXMIA. J.. T. (Hinil, »nd T. OUnoto. 1970. Efftcti of *"(» giM rodlltlon
T, T. G. and 0. Salth. 1M3. Potita «i>1lty XtX: A prdlnlnory ttitdy of tit
browing miction In poUto rtlpJ wing rjdlophoiphonii. Imr. Potato J.
40(Ul:4;i-429.
SMI. a. H. tod E. C. Htil*. 1967. Effact of naclMnlc*) Injory —* V"*
ImdUtlon on rlpHlno Of binini frulti. In: fttdl«tton Tochnology In
Conlunctlon "Uh Poitl»r»«t fi " " ■" ' ■-— '— •>- "-"
life of Frulti IMl Vl9*t*bl«l
pp. l-».
an, H. 1. Md ". K. Sirtlwrford.
*t«r*|* 11f* of frtil" itr»i*«ri
Oltorle, ttpt. Ho. AEa- 9M.
W(»):«74-en.
,y Google
MtNe, N. IHa. itfKt of InvdUtlon ni th* wlatn* caapowdi of ippll Julc*.
In; RadlitlOR TaclMsIog)' In Coniurc^v o'tN PMtMnnt PrvceAirM ■■ • Hmm
0/ Eattndlng tM SMlf Ltf* ef Fnitts and Vig*tiblM. U.S. Ota. Entrgy Co*.
Rept. Mo. KO-MnO-6. w. U-ST.
IH>. Ctilcory ttorsf*. MitnintwIehUii U:4«J-WC.
HCniEGOOS. R. 1971. Ir»»t(gat1i>n on tnpn.tnq the It
taiilbliutti for cMllof, packing *nd lm<Utl«n
429-430 tin Outck].
ind n. Dc 1>roott. 1K3. Tht tffcct of ivm» Irrtdfatlw on tiM
prci(rvit1o« of itrnbirrlH. In: Food iTridltClon, lunB**n InfO. Ctntr.
for Food Imd., Sieliy. Otrly. Int. N*Ml. 4(1-2):US-IIM.
ffccti i>f rr*dUcl'»i sn froth frvlu Md vofiUblot, F
Auq. t, 19S4 hi9. S. 1H«. Mt. Dilnr Prod. Corp..
. fnpt. w-njj, 9 pp.
MiMoo* 11 doten
tr. S(I):n-?S.
HOnvtJILX, k. t9C8. T)i« InfliMnc* of foniiing ndtatlon on nrameld pIVMoU Of
MM barry fnilts. tn: FrCMnatfon of Fnitt and VofiUbIti by XdUtlWi.
VIOflM, Int. Atik Enwv Xgtncy, pp. S7-U.
HUMIER, J. E.. I. W. Buddenhiitn, ind E. S. Kolln. 1978. Effteity of AmglcldM,
hot Mttr and gwau-lrradlitlon for control of poitMrvMt fruit roti Of
papaya. Plant Oli. Mptr. Sl(4]:i79<»4.
IHTEWUTIDNM. *TOH
1 1 2. Int. .
IMtIL, F. k., i. I
tnt rcgulat mi and mtrlctloni and thtir ifftct on
it nteria and cmwdltlii In: OlllnfMUtlon of
:. At». Entrgy Agtncy, Vldnta, pp. 11-21.
preblwi Hltli amca*t. Cltr. Jubtrop. fruit J. ttS:
JACOeS, I. J., H. T. Brol
poithanoit docay ol
17]- 1 76.
,y Google
ZS4. JIWVATMU, V. , J. CwvM-llylt. <Ml H. D. (irihM. 1970. CMwtilw of itartffi 1tf«
Of pipajri) gnm In Piwrto Rico by giBM ridlitlo* trMMMts. J. Iterlc. IMI*.
riMTto Rico 54:314- lit.
IK. JIWVATJUU. v.. S. Strtkuldtini. K. Tlrimt.
wm Imdlitlon on Okronf •nd Tcng Diai
Cwa., No. 7S, 88 pp. [iMtrict )n Eng1 s
2Se. JOHNSOR, C. F. 1968. e>HW IrridUtlon for procoiilng of *pple Jufci. In:
R4dl4tlen rochnoloiy In Conjunction iitth Poitharncit Proctdurti ii ■ IkOM of
EnUndlng th« Shtif Lift of Fryiti ind VcgcUtToi. U.S. Ita. Eiwrgr C^.
R*pt. Ito. UCD-HPeO-S, pp. i9-3C.
257. J0HN5W. C. F., A. «>di)-Md*r, L. L. Morrli. *nd E. C. Mill. I9C4. TiiU piMl
mlmtlon of taatton. I": tiadutlan TKltnolou I" ConjMictlon Kith
PoitMi-vnt Proctdgrti it * Wfjni of Eitendlnj tM iMfU LIfi of Fnilt* nd
Vegoubltt, U.J. Aim. Intrfr C«h. R«pi. No. UC0.34F8O-2, pp. 48-53.
J58. J0KM5ON. C. F., C. Boyd, and t. C. Ikili. 19U. FIgt. tn: Ridlnlon TKhnology
In Conjunction with PostMrncit ProcHluni h ( Niini of Eitmdlnf th* Sholf
life of Fruitt ind VigeUblcs. U.S. At*, tniru COB. Rtpt. No. UCII-MPSO-I.
pp. 114-117.
259. JOHNSCM. C. F., C. Boyd, inU E. C. Hi>lt. 1965. Ctwrrlit. In: RidUtlon
Technology tn Conjunction laltb Potthariittt Procoduret n a Hcani of Eitondlng
tht Shelf Life of Fnilti «nd Vtgitiblai. U.S. Atn. Entrgy Con. Rtpt. No.
UCD-J4P80-1, pp. 48-51.
260. JtMNSOR, C. F., C. Boyd, ind E. C. Hulc. 1967. Effict of hut and Imdiitlen
alont ind In cei«lnatlE« on color ckanget In p«*cht( and nocurlmi. In:
Radiation Technology In Conjunction with Pottbamit Proctdurcs at a Hwnt
of Extending the Shtif Life of Fnilts and Vegctabtn. U.S. Ata. Eawgy Omt.
Rtpt. Ho. UCD-3tPS0-5, pp. 42-55.
261. JOHNSOH, C. F., t. C. Niile, and P. Stalliiin. 1968. Effect of h«t and Irradiation
alon* and tn civtinitlon on tht teitur* of anett chtrrltt. In: Radiation
h Foithirvcit Proctdurti ai • Hcani of Extending
I, R and A. Ariont. 1979. Control of Rhaoolttia c«ra»t in (poitharvtst)
cherries by qtna Irradiation. J. Mori. Sc<. U(31:'t6T-ITa.
tUllan
JOSEPHSOM, E
10 Bft PORTE. J. « al. 1970. Tht effect Of ginw In-adlatlon On the control of
cltnn frolt blSeTbtd. Rt». Agrle. , Plr.clciba 45:79-85.
AS, L. end B. Kalatn.
tout physical and cha
189-294 [In Hungarian
,y Google
HtlDK In
hironl. (tid S. F. litUr. 1M1. fhreKBlMry (MMrwinU of
0 «■« rtyi on 1' " "' •'- -. —-- -— --.--
._ Food [rndUtX
qtrty. Int. NtMl. 4(I-Z):U;-
trfict Of *°Co oawi rtyi on tHt rtspintlon rtti of ShMOutI Or>n9«$ «fUr
In: Food [rndUtlon, EurepMn Into. Untr. for Food Irrad., Sacliy.
Litlar. ISM. SOM afrecti a/ Co^ r«yi on
grttn and rip* Snawut orangci -Ottobfr 19M Acpt. IA-999, II M>.
MUM. ». S., r. Aharon iml S F lHUr. 1«S. E«Kti Of Co* gMM r«yi on
rtiplrotlon rat*, loii In Wight, and appaaronn Of grttn and rtp* Shaaoutl
ora»9i fmlti. Isrial J. Agrtc. Ras. IS:IOI-IOS.
UWAH. R. S. and «. Bar(ui-<Olan. 19W. Cortilnad aclion Of wdlia orthOfiMnyl-
phcnttt and gaMa radiation on tha In iiltr^ d«*«1opMnt Of fungi ffathofinlc
Id tltrut frultt. PItftopaMi. Se-.TOB^BT
EAHWt, n. S.. R. Gorcn, amt S. P. Moniotiia. 196S. The cffact of Co-CO gaiwa
rays ajwlltd at 1oa dos* r>t« on una Juice conitlCvtnti and Che paal colour
Of graan and npa frulti of tocrat citrui varlatlM. April, IMS, Report
IR-tOI5, 1Z pp.
KAHAN. R. S., S. P. HoiHtlse, J. Rlov. J. van Koojf. and K. Chidalck. I96S.
Coinariion of the oFfect of radiation of varloui penetrating pMen on the
dauge to citru* fnill peel. Radlat. Bot. 8:4IS-4Z1.
KAHAM, R. S., n. Iladel-Shirnan. N. Tcukin-r-Drodtiikl, i. Elicnbarg, G. ZauberMn,
and T, Aharont. 196B. Effect of radiation on the ripening of bananai and
avocado pcari. In: frtitrittion of Frvit and Vegetable* by Radiation, Int.
Atm. Enargjr Aqency. Vienna, pp. }-11.
iJMAH R S and N TciKkln-Gorod* Itkl. 1WB. storage teitl and iprouttna control
on up-to-date variety potitDo and on in aiperlMntal onion variety (Belt
Alpha) [fi- Preservation of Fruit and Vegetablei dy Radiation, Int. Atm.
O K and K Chachln. 1170. Studle) on Mturatlon change! In Fnilli Induced
by ionlilnj radiation. V. EffetH Of g«n radiation on reipiration and
ethylene production of toaatoei. J. Food Scl. Tech., Tokyo, I7(3):t7-10).
,y Google
n. Nucl. Init. Rgrtc. Ilol..
MTO. t... K. CMcMn, tut K. Ogit*. I9». Studlci on Mtwritlan dMn^M in fnitti
IndiKtd «y tsniilnt ridlitlon. [I. Effect! cf gaaH ridlitlon w rMplrat1«ii,
(thvlmt productton, tamt constltutntt tnd erginolcptlc mluttlon «f tSMlMl.
J. Jip. inc. Hart. Scl. X^4SS-U1.
ick m ttortd ippInT
■* Irradlitlon Of IPplM.
pnehtl. TM Nucltui 8:1IT-1i2.
IN, 1.. ». SitUr, H. »H. •I'd *■ "u
. S K. and N. P. rtrk. 117$. Studies o' thr pnimitlon ef potato iitth a
eottlnatton of gani ridlitlon and a chdnicil. Uraan J, Food Set. Tccti.
7[JI:IS9-167 Iln tortin].
AGMU, N. 1965. Effect Of t
aitrtngmcy tn lUkl (Orient
43(l):M-t3.
UnKi E and t. Vu. 1974. f(Kt o' (onitlns raddHon on poit-hantit
rtpentns proceiies of ii.Ui.r«a muihrooms l«oarlcui bliporuil. trttli tPtcIa]
refertnce to the ralei of resptration and of ethyl »n» p'oductlon. Acta »M»
Acid. Set. Hunjiricae 3II):19-25.
M S. and G. D. l^uhn. ^S6i. The effect of ndlatlon on nld pepulatloni
n frelh 1rch*». Proc. fla. St. Hort. Sot. 77:436-438.
L and B. J. Honanl . 19'0. Ihe HboiOBei of pair frutt — Their lynthnli
urino the tllmclerlc and tht aje-related conpeniatory rctpsnia to fonlKng
adiatton. ntnt Phyiiol. 45:401-407.
,y Google
KUHE, T. , H. Tichltin*. S. taki, K. VmM, *nd T. Site. 1177. Cffaet oF dot* «iM
dof rate of awn* radUtlon m iprout limtkltlon In onion. J. Jv. Sac. food
Scl. TKh. I40hl'-M.
KUROSAKI, T. ItTO. Effect of gnm ridlitlon on tM Mcorblc ccld conUnt In
itrwberrli) and Natiudaldal frultt. Food itaragc. Saljo HlrothtH Agrlc.
Coll. (u1l. 4(1]:SI>-M.
1968, Effecti d» .
of Itorod potitset for f'«h markei and prottssing uiagt; Una
Pilllbury Co., »li». Energy Cunn., Di«. Iwlop. Mv.. » p».
LiWSfWI!, 0. 1. U7S. Tht fn'
qu»Ht)f Of propackod cut i
Huogirlcac 4<;):IZ3-1U.
lUtNMD. E. and H. .
iwachci. Food
LASSOWIERE, A. 1W3. Thi papaa. 'art 9. Harvcittno. handling, export and
procMied producti. Frwiti d'Cutr* Har »:49l-Mt.
>. H. and F. 1. Francis. 1973. EffKt of ga
lavonol pigiwflt) In cranborrlit (VKCjnlw ■
ort. Scl. i7(l):liB-tM.
LEE, M. S. and H
i igilmt Queaniland
ult"?1yr AgMc. Gai. , lew South W»l« 7fi:?74-Z7B.
. a. Nithur. 19C3. Eit<
- «ppl. Ri
J.. I. 0. CUrKo, and n. S, Swton. 1962. » Jtudy Of the foaitblllt
It United ILIiigdoB of a radiation proceii for the Inhibition of iprouf
ored potatoei. Rtpt. KUt-t-Xll , ZO pp.
HAWNU, p. 1971. Btcaot rotnrcti on the Influenct Of Irradiation of ei
tropical frulti In Thailand. In: DIslnfeitatlon of Fnilt by Irradlatloi
Int. Atn. Energy Agency. Uienni.pp. 11J-I24.
llcl. 1966. irradiation of Sulf Coait
,y Google
Control of th* {juMfitUnd fnitt fly ky ttmt IrrMlttlM.
4-aa9.
trrtdlitton ti ■ comdltr trcitMnC agalnit fruit rijr In
McguEEN. K. F. . R. U. ToIbIc, >'
poUtMI, SfcttoR B, Irridll
R*pt. AEa-lUO, p. 17.
MAUUCM. G., E. IflthlKil, H. L.
stiXly of cirUtn iiptcts of
foUMtng gaou ridliclofi it
ilailtit. Ilotop. Z7;307-318 (
MHHMD, T. 197Z. Ui« of Cd60 91
ptthoQCnt of citrui fruit In
Z68-Z7I .
WHWOO, I. 1973. Uie of lonli
of citrvi fruit and prolong
Fikultttl NeoMtt (lurkty)
IWHHDUD. A. A... t. K1I1UM. md J
In onion bulbi -ind their In
In: PnK. Int. ifV- Food
Ndv. 1977, Int. HtB. Erer^r
MKINEN, Y. . H. D. Uptdhya. and
utracti fra> i-lrradlatcd
B. Itni*. I960. Gaiwa radtatlon of
or potato taapln. Gasu Irrad. C«Mdl
l-Donlnl. and 0. Baraldl. 197e. Coapai
onscrnatlon of pantano ¥ir1*ty toaatow
*»li>* itign of rtptnlnq. Int. J. Ipp'
« 10(1):ZD9-Z3].
Farkat. IV7B. I> study of ion* chaalcat dunge'
. iffKtFit by (-radiation and itorag*.
in by Irradiation, Vol. 1, Waganlngin,
enna, pp. 99-111.
19t7. Cytotoiic cffKti of
Nature 2I4:«13.
HLO, J., C. Boyd, C. F. Johnion, an^ E. C. Ha.l*. I9*S. Effect of pulp
tBnperature during irradiation of quality attributes of ShaiU ttraxberriei.
In: Radiacio'i iKhnDlagy \fi Conjunction ultK Posthanot Procedures is a
Urtnt of E>Itnding tiie Sheir Ufa of Frulti and Vegat(b1*s. U.S. Ata. Energy
Co™, Rfpl. I0, UC[)-i«PaO-3, pp. 78-83.
lation of frulK and vegetables. In:
St. Agric. Eip. Sta. , Gcnei
iology of I
. 1964 - Se
radiated fruits and
NASSET, I. M. . Jr.
freih frulti a
Radiation. tnC
968. Tissue teiturt and Inteniediary attaWlliai of irradiated
I vegetables. In: freiervation of Fruit and Vegetables by
Atn. Energy Agency, Vienna, pp. 105-123.
NASSEV, L. H.. Jr.. D. F. Tallaian. and I. 1. Kerteii. It
radiations on plant tissue). V. Scne effects oF gi
leeves. J. food Scl. !6:3e9-»«.
,y Google
WR, P. B. 1963- Iw-doie gun
Irridlatlon, Eurofiiin Infg. Can
4(1-Z)tUC-A2B.
esUr of gibbertlltc tcld. ntvrt Z07(4M}):ZI2-Zn.
HATSUSHtm, 1.. S. KiMkltM. and N. Hi«m. 197*. Iht affaet of stsraat duritton
•nd uMa-lmdUlloii on tli* davtlOHmt of dl-n-proPv1 dliulphldt In onion
iHilbi. J. Food Sci. Ttch., JiMD fl(B):tOO-«)2.
WTTHEE, F. N. (nd '. 6. tHrali. IM). rratcrvatlon of food bj Mam of giiaa
rays. In: Food trradlitlon, Europun Info. Cantr. for Food Irrtd. , Siclay,
Qtrb. Int. N«Ml. 4(I-2|:*ia-RI7.
•UXIE. E. C. 1964. lonliing radiation — Iti tfftct on plaat grooUi. Dapt.
PoMlOV "•Pt'i Univ. of Calif., Dav1i, 4 pp.
MiiiF. F. C. ItM. Ririiitlon tfchnalogy U conJaMtlon trith poithanitit procMurat
ifii] tne incU 1<r« of fnilti and vagatablai. In: Elshth
osn. Food [rrad. Contractor! Maattng RcpC, Uaihlngton,
. IZ1-IZ6.
Prult and Fruit Tach. »tt.
ai related to fnll»l1lt]r of tha tachnology.
lUXIE. E. C. R. MwiqulU. t. H. HatMn, and C. t. JolMian. I96S. EffKt Of
ginaw Irradiation on thi ripaning of banana frulti. Proc. taar. Soc. Hort.
Scl. H:2JS-254.
KIXtE, E. C, 1. Mtciqulta, C. F. Johnton, C. Boyd, and H. L. Rat. 19K. Effrct of
gtfva Irradiation on rfponlng of 'VaUry' tananai. In: Radiation Technology
In Conjunction with Fotlharwit Procadiirti ai a neani of Eitanding the Shelf
Life of Frultl and Vegetablai. U.S. An. Enar^ Cem. Ra?t. Ho. UCD-34PB0-4,
pp. 49-61.
Mtlt. t. C, I. L. Eati, M. I. «K, t. tejl, 0. davetto, and G. nllloy. 1»«4.
Lenoni. In; Radiation Technology In Conjunction Kith Poittiarvott Procedure!
at a Neani'of Eitendlng the SHelf Life af Frulti and Veg«t«(i)at. U.S. «ta.
Energy Con*. Kept. No. UCO- 34980-7, cp. Iie'122.
HAXIE E. C. F. P. eucrrero F JDl<nsoii C. Boyd, and H. L. Rae. 19C6. Effect
of avniH irridlatlon on nrciir^nei dnd peaclm. In: Radiation Tachnoldgy In
Conjunction attlr Pottharvo^t Procedurei ai a Hnni of Eitendliig the Shelf life
or Frulti tnd Vegetablei. U.S. 4t>i. Ener^ Coni. Rept. No. UCD-34PaO-4,
pp. 6i-71,
MAIIE. E. C, F. P. Guerrero, C. F. Johnwin, H. Rie, and R. Stallwn. 1966. Effect
of gama irradiation on itrauberry frvtti. In: Radiation Technology In
Conjunction with Pojthirveit Procedurei as a Heani of Entondlng the Shelf Life
of Frulti and Vegetiblei. U.S. Kts. Energy Coi«. Kept. Mo. UCD-MPW-6,
pp. 1-ZS.
MMIE. E. C. C. F. JotHiion. and C. Boyd. IK4. Ortngei. In: Radiation
Technology 1n Conjunction with Poithar«**t Prticadurol ai a Haani of fxtondlig
the Shelf life of Fnilti and Vegetables. U.S. »t». Energy Con. Rept. No.
UCD-34raO-2, pp. I»-113.
,y Google
MIIE. {. C. C. r. JohMon, ixd C- Boyd. 1HB. Effect Of gam* trridlitloii on
frtsh pruoH. In: Ridlitlon TKhnolOfly In ConJuKllon iilUi PotUunott
Procrturtj 11 ■ HEffii of Eitwding th« Shelf Life of fnilu Md Vtfttoblei.
U.S. «ta. Energy CoiM. Rept. No. UCO-34PBO-3, pp. t»-U.
HWrE, E. C. . C. F. Johnion, C. Boyd. H. I. Il«e, and H. F. itmKr. IBM. Effect of
g«a*i tmddtlon on rtptnlng ind quillty of iwctirtnti «nd pnchtl. J. Mar.
Sac. Hort. Set. S»:91-99.
MXlt. i. C. C. F. Jotmwn, C. Bciyd, H. I. "if. ind R. f, SUTIM". IMS. £ff«t
of gHM IrridUtlon on iwacliti. In: Radlillsn lechnalagi Conlonttlon iritli
Poittannt Prncodum at * Nun) of Eitending the Sftlt life of Frtiitt Ind
«090t(b1«. U.I. Its. Entny Com. ftpt. No. UCD-34PSC1-J. pp. «-M.
tWXK. E. C C. F. Johnton, ind K. E. Nelun. IM3. Gripn. I": Bidletlon
Technetofly in Conjunction iifUi Pmthinwit Practdurts u • Ftant of Eitendlnf
tht <:h>lr Life of Fnifti ind VegeUbto. U.S. Xca. Entriy C«>. Rtpt. No.
-1, pp. 9fi-in.
MXIE. t. C. , C. F. Johnton. H. L. Rie, end C. Boyd. 1»67. EffOet of 9>bh
ridletlon on nihrooM. In: Ridlition Tochnology In Conjonctton mitti
PoltMrveit Procedvm ii ■ Ifconi of Extending tlie SH»1f Lift of Fnilt* and
VC9tUli1«. U.S. Atii. Eo«T^y Ccpbi. Rept. No. UCO-MPBO-S, pp. SS-M.
MXIE, E. C, C. F. Johnon. B. J. Roblnion. H. L. Ro*. and R. StdlNo. IWJ.
Straiiberrles. In: Radiation Technologr In ConJuntHon -un Postntrvwt
Procediirtt as • Hoini of £. turning tht 5hflf LHt or Frulti and Vtgcttbln.
U.S. Rtai. (norgy Cca«i, fiept. No, UCD-HPBO.l . pp. 38-«.
NUtE, E. C L. L. Horrli. 0. Ravctta, C. F. Johnton, *nd H. Rm. 1BM. Effoct
of gamu Irridlit on Dti luthnant. In: Radiation Technology In Eonjonctlon
Htth Pottharvett Procfduret ai a ntans of Eatendlitg the Shelf Life Of Fruit)
and Veteublei. U.S. *ta. Energy Con. Rept. No. UCB-MPSO-S, pp. SS-71.
MXIE. E. C. C. J. fcller. 0. Raiotto. and R. Stallwn. 1»6J. Pean. In:
Radiation Technology In Conjunction with fottharvoit PrvcoAim ai a Mont
of Extending the SheU Llfo of frulti and Vogitoklci. U.S. «(■. Energy CiM.
Rept. Ho. IKO-MPBO-I, pp. Sl-SO.
MXIE. E, C. H. L. Rae. lod C. Boyd. IKS. Effect of ganaa Irradiation on Ivon
fniitt held In eon- refrigerated ttorage. In: Radiation Technology In
Conjimctlon olth Poitharveit Precediiret at a Beoni of Eitending the Shelf life
of Fnilti and Vegctabltt. U.S. «U. Energy Zom. Kept. Pto. UCD-IVIO-3.
pp. 7S-77.
PUUIE. E. C. H. L. Ra*. end C. Boyd. IWt. Effect of gateu Irredlatlon on the
-■ — -1 NtcheV banami. In;
Radiation TechnolMy In Conjunction Hltli Poithar*
Extending (he Shelf life of Fruitt and Vegetabln. U.S. At». Energy Om. Npt.
No. UCD-MPBO-a. B». 17'*B.
lit. E C. H. I. *it. I. L. Eakt. and N. F. Soiacr. IBBB. Studlct on ndUtlon-
Induccd tth/1tr4 pmductlon by 1eMn fniltt. In: Rodlatlon Technology In
ConJwKtlon Hllh Poitharvett Procedurei ai ■ Heani of EKleodlnj the Shelf life
of Frvit* and Vejeublei. U.S. «t». Energy Com. Rept. No. UCD-HPaO-4,
. IIS-IM.
PUXtE. E. C, H. L. Rw, 1. L. Eaki. and N. f. Soiwr. 19«. Stutflei on radUtton-
Induced ethylene production ky leann frulti. Radial. Bot. t:MS^SS.
PWXIE. E. C. H. L. Rae, and R. 5ta11«»n. 1968. Effect of dote rate of gano
Irradiation on loion frulti. In: Radiation Ttchnelogy In Conjunction irlth
Peitharveit OroceduTM at • Nnnt of Eitending the Shelf Life Of FnilU end
VegeUbtei. U.S. IkUk Energy Com. Rept. Ho. UC0-34P80-fi. pp. «-4S.
,y Google
Hnn. In: RidlitliHi
iKhnoloay tn Conjunctlan ulth Pmthimit Proc*dur«i ii i Hum 0/ Eit*n
ttw Shtif lilt of Frulti ind Vtg«tibl«. U.S. JIM. Entrgi' Coai. tapt. No
UCD-3«I>80-1, pp. n-H.
, t. C. *>M N. F. Sgmner. 1969. Dadlitlan (ltd ptiUurliitlon of frulti
vtwUblM. In: RidlatlM PiitMrlutlon of Foodi, Report of Third Annu
Contricton Meeting, Haihlnften, D.C., Oct. ti-H, pp. »-42.
1964. Hitiattoi technologr ^i conlunctlan wit
pOltMnatt proc«dur«» at 1 •mi of eitefxIlTig th» ihelf Mfe of fnitti <
M^UblM. In: bdlitlon PiitMiriiatlo" of Foodi. Hepart of Fourth Ann
Contnctsrs MMttng. Wiihlngton, O.C.. Oct. !1-H, pp. »2-4S.
litloiiT w*it. GrtMcr ind
. SoMMr. 1964. Uhit Ol
Shipper 3S[S);13-U.
C. and N. f. Sc«r. 1965. IrridUtlan of fnilti ind vMiUbltl.
lUdiitfon Preitrvetfoa of Food*, Mt. And. Scl. •• Net. Rei. Council,
Hathlngton. D.C. , Publ. No. 1271. pp. 39-ii.
Progrtll SjBp. Serf
. Avr. Init. Cliea. E119. 64:fi]-GS.
■d v«9*Ubie)
Chea. Eitg.
C, N. F. Sonvr, ind S. i. BroMi. 1964. bdlitton t<
conjvoctlon Kith poitliirveit procedure! n ■ MaRi gf uten
life of frulti end vageublei. Annual R«pt., Feb. I, 1963
Dept. of PoBlogy. UMv. of Calif., Dav1i, U.S. At>. Enerqjr Com.
Oiy. Kept. No. UCD-HPKI-I, 166 pp.
C6. Radiation technology In
a BiMn* of eitendlH tM shelf
., Fet. I. 1«4 - — " ■-"
iXtE, E. C. N. F. Sgiper, and 0. I. Broan.
conjunction «lth poithtrvcit procedurei a'
life of frutti and o^eublti. Annual K^
Dept. of Poaolow. Univ. of Cillf. , Davli
Dev. Rept. No. UCD-34PSa-l, 1M pp.
iXlE, E. C, N. F. SoMar, and 0. S. BroMi.
cOAjwictlon mth poitharvoU procedum a* a bMHI of nteKdInf
life of fniltl and vevetiblei. Annual Rept.. Feb. 1. 1966 - Jan
Dept. of Penology, Un1«. of Calif., Oavii. U.S. An. Energy Com.
Dev. Rept. No. UCD-34P80-4. 13S pp.
C. N. F. Saver, and D. S. Brawl. I9CB. HadUtlon technol
conjunction with poitharveit procedurei ei a fieani of extending
life of fruits ind vegeteblci. Annuel Rept.. Feb. I, 19C6 - Je«
Dept. of Ponlogy. Univ. of Calif., Davli. U.S. Ata. Energy Coia
Dev. Rept. No. UCD-34FaO-S, 177 pp.
C. N. F. Somr. and D. S. BrOM. 1970. Radiation ttctnc „
conjunction with poitlunreit procedure! 11 e eaani of extending the their
life of frulti and ngeublet. Annuel Rept., Feb. I. 1967 - Jan. 30, IMS
Dept. of Fonology, Univ. of Calif,, Davli. U.S. Ata. Enw^y Com. R«l. and
Oev. Rapt. No. UCS-34PS0-6, 173 pp.
lOlooy In . ,.
. _ jlielf life Of Fruit;
UCD-34pea-l, pp. 4-37.
end. y«glt«blM.
63. CltnH. In: RedlatlOh
Procedurei ei e Naanl of E^tMdlng
U.S. Ata. Energy Cihk. R*pt. HP.
. Eakt. 1969. Effect of 01
. 3. pp. 137S-l3a7.
,y Google
J(IE. E. C , M. F. Sotmr, 4nd F. P. Gutrrtro. 1»i. RidUttM tachnology fH
conJUHCtion utth poitrMmit proccdum ii i mttn of nttndlng tin thtif III
Of fruttt and VHtUblii. [n; Radlitlan P»tMr1»tlDn af Foodi, Rwort SF
-■- tors Ikttlng. Wiihliato", D.C., Oct. Z0-?1, p«. 3«-38.
Firth Jtnnittl Contractor
'. Sii*rr«ro. ISM.
d F. P. Gutmro. ^96>. Rne
■nd v*gttabl«. In: Stitut a
fl Rti., DC*., and Had., Joint
Matlof
radiation
. Johnion. H. L. Da*, and R. SUIIoan. 1M4.
Radiation iKhnolDsy in Conjunction with Fotttarvtit
an of Eitondfng th« SlwlF lift of FniUi and VtgtUblai.
OH. Drpt. Na. tiCO-MPSa-I, pp. 7(-BS.
F. Johnson, ind R. StillMn. 19W. NtctarlnM and
T«hiio1oj> In Conjunction Kith PHthiiTMt ProcodHr**
he ShtU Life of FnilU and V*9*t<bUl. U.S. Aim.
D-»«0-i. pp. B9-1M,
■ Ntani of EitCTHJlnq
C, N. F. Senior, and F. G. Nltcholt. 1971, Chwlcal, Konwlc, phyilcal,
and phyilologlcat llaltatloni to Irradiation of fruUi. In: DIllnfMtatlon
of Fruit by Irradiation, Int. JIta. Enorgy Agency, VIonna, pp. 9I-I00.
freih fniltt and vegeublet
_, E. C, N. F. 5«mr and F 6. Mltchtll. 197). Rtdlatton tochnolow In
conjunction vith poitharvii practdurK ai a oaani of oiit(ndln9 tht thcif )l
of frulti and **9*Ublft. tanual Report, V" 'S. 1970 - Jtm. 1, 1971.
Dept. of Ptm^eg), Univ. of Calif., Oavii, U.S. *tB. Entrv fMm. Rept. No.
UCD-Mraa-9, Z34 pp.
. under nartLCtln) ci
iXIC, E. C. and R. Stallinan. I9t3. Fapams and pinoopvltt. - .
rechnolosy in Conjunction with Poitharvest Piocedum at a Means of atonding
the Shelf Life of fruitt and Vegetables. U.S. Am. Enerty Om. Kept. No.
UC0-34P90-1, pp. 89-91.
HIE, E. C, R. St
on tWtuPt of
Pracedurei
_ _ atlon Technology li ._ ,. . .
I Ikant of Extending the Shelf Life of Frulti and Vegetablei.
Effect o< aanaa trrodlatio*
In Conjunctfon olth PMthariMt
U.S. *ta. Energy Cow. Rept. No. UCO-34FaO-fi, pp. W-dl.
ylor, and H. L. Roe. 196J. Internal ataoipheret and Otono
d to radiaton injury to fniiti. In: Radiation Technology
th ?D*thBr*eit Procedures •■ a Neeni of Eitending the Shelf
d Vegetable). U.S. Ats. Energy Com. Rapt. W. UCD-HPOO-I,
,y Google
HkTMI, H. F. and M. S. H. MiMd. 1970. rrogrMi rtport on prtxrvatlwi of ditM
by g«Bii-r«d1itlan. KM. Energy Can., Raghditf, Pkicl. Rm. Int., Rtpt. No.
B-e, to w.
WUHAR, H. N. *nd H. Mhld. 1979. Studlti oa the varUUl lulMkiHty of girllc
Qllly ntHm I.) for Irradiation pmorvatio*. Proc. inl/>»II PoklsUn
Set. EonTT, Uhort, Pirt 111. MC (ibitrKt).
MAZON WTAMZO. N, P. ind J. Feroindei Gonialii. 197*. CoipiraKw Itudy Of th*
prctirvitlwi of pouto tuberi treittd aith IPC, twpnpyl ptMitylMrbaMU, and
g^H ndlitlon. t. SprouMnq and Might Ion during itorag*. hn. IroHtol.
28|4):37S-3BB [In Spanish .llh Engltm iiimtry].
r of protein In fMmt
(tlTI. *. n. 1977. Ilopathologlctl *ff«eti of lonlitng radiation on onlom.
Rculti of th» flrit yoar'i (wrlanti. Fnrttlcoltura »{lO/1l}:St-5I [In
ttillan].
HERCIER, R. G. and K. F. HicQiic*n. 1966. teiM- irradiation to (itind poitharvoit
Hf« of frglM and itfatablM. Rap. Out. Mort. E«p. SUtt Prod, lab.,
pp. SI- 72.
HERW.ET. n. S,, G. I
IrradUUd {'
MESSIHEN, C. H. I
NETirT^KTJ L V 1971 Cann] Irradiation of pototoeii vogatablcf and frultl for
th* aitcnslon of ptrlodi of their iCorage. RadUtilonnali ObrabotU
Plihcbnykh Produltoo. Dohltdy, pp. 5-18.
linLirSWJ, I. V. and 1. P. F«r«li. 1967. Variation In r«plratlor proctM
during gwiw radiation of plant titiut. National Aeronautlci and Space
AdBlnlslnllon, Wshlnston, D.C.. Kept. Ho. MSA-n-F-46i, 9 op.
KllLER, L. »., R. Praiad. and R. J. RoaMhl. ISfiJ. Hltochondrltl r»ltt*nee to
iMSsKe Irradiation In vWo. II. Binillj-gradlnit dHtributlon nf lb«
il fraction afiniolated eniymei, Sadiat. Bot. 7 J7-S4.
nt, u. I... .. B. faili, *. C. Thoaiaj, and D. H. Suarti. 1977.
nango leed HCnll, Starnoche tu i Mno I f iri* . by giwa Irrad
Subtrop. Friilt J. Ho. S18. pp. 11, IJ-IS.
NOVA K and S Haltieva. 1979. Iffoct of trlnlatory doiM of gliM rayi
soiie blochaalcal character lit Id of tOMtotS. Radloblol. l9(S):7B6-790.
MNSELISE. S. P. and R. S. Hahjn. J«S-,^""«;S5.»',f "fl* '
,y Google
MONSEIISE. %. r. ind ■<■ S. «Mil. It«6. CMi
acttiltttt 0' f1i>*do tnd Juke of Shiia
Hidlit. lot. t-.US-ZJ*.
HMStLISt, S. *■ *n« ■>- i- Kihin. 1968. Effect Of vmt rtdtitiM on
cowotttlDii and tnijiwtlc ■ctlvlttci of cttrus frulti. In: frMri .,tiQn ot
Fruit 4nd Veqeublci by Ridlitlon, Int. (n. Energy Agtncv. Vlanu, ^_ 93-104.
HOMSILISC. S. P J. »1Q» *>"i "■ S- <»Mii. IMS. *«" eli»ng« U nimatlc
■cttvUfn of cltnii pitl ttiiuci *fUr fruit IrriilliHon. In: TtBc. FU/IUA
P(n«l on Em. AipKti Food Irrtd.. VUnM, pp. 71-Sl.
MWUttlPGE. K. 1968. CVoflft tufclty aniwi f»«dtn9 itudln on Ioh-Hu^
Irndlitld Mwnit. In: Eighth Inmwl Km. Energy Csh. Food Irrad.
Contriclort Mrtilng Kept., WiMngtsn, D.C., Oct. ie-)7, pp. 1«9-l>,i.
HOmU. L. i.. A. S. Abdtl-Kidtr. ind *. E. tl»t*d*. 19H. nvitalo^l,.! roipoH*
of hirxit«d iipingui to 9H« radiation. In: Radiation Ttchmtl..,, f.
Conjunction iiltli Foithimst Procodvm as a Mmhi of Eitwidlng thr -^hclf Llf*
of fnilti and Vtgttanlti. U.S. Xta. Enirgy Con. Ript. No. IKO-Ufha.I.
pp. S4-«4.
HORRtS, L. L.. R. Mnttr. and «. S. AMol-Kider. 19U. Studlai of ga>iM
Irradtatfon effocts on itorigt Ufa af cuci«nA«ri. In: Radiation Inhnolo^y
In Conjunction "Ith Roitharvtit Proceduroj ii i H«ni of Eittndln.t ihr Smlf
Llf« Of Frultt and V*9itab1«. U.S. Atm. Emrgjr Cirni. Oopt. No. WW-ttPtO-Z.
pp. SS-73.
HORRIS. L. L. and *. Hatada. I96J. «»para9ui. In: Radiation TKhnol.,,,, <„
Conjunction iiltb Pottharvoit ProcMuros at a NHnt of Enttndlng thr '.hclf Llf*
of Frulti and Vcgttatlti. U.S. Iln. Entrgy CoM>. Rapt. No. UCO-34liiii.I,
W. 81-92.
HO5H0MS, H. G. and P. E. Shaw.
9S8-960. 9t4.'
ttOY. 0. H. 1971. Ooilmtry, tolerance, and thtlf Ufa ertanilon rdalnl to
dliinfcstitlon of frulti and vegrtiblei by gama Irradiation. Flh,) ji^.^
tept. Collase of Tropica! Agrlc. Kai«H Univ., Honolulu, « pp.
HOT. J. H. 1972. Problani and proipecti of ndlatlon dlilnfoitatlon ai>d ihe1i
•xtenilon of tropical frulti and vcgctablei. In: Itpacti of the Introdin
Of Food Irridiation tn Developing Countrtei Praceedlngi, pp. iJ-tO.
mi, J. H. 1977. Potential of ganna Irradiation of frulti: A revl««. j, f^
Tech. 1Z(S):M9-4S7.
HOT, J. H, E. K. Uaalne. J. L. Brcwbaker, 1. M. RuddenOagen. E. Roii, l>. Sp|,]
of Fruit by IrradHtlon. Int. Atn. inerg/ Agtnt, snia, pp. «3-!,/.
, J. H., G. Chang, ind S. T. Hi1a. 19Ce. Orginaleptlc otluatlon of gaxH
rridliteil lythee. In: Doilmetry. Tolerjnce, and Shelf Life Eitcn^iM
Related to Dldnfutjtlon of Fmlti and Vegetiblei hj Gima Irrodlallpn.
Radloliotope and Rad. Uppn. , pp. 1M-I6e, Nuc1. Sd. »»i. 23(21 );4Kiat.
' J H. and S. T. Hila. 1968. The Influence of radiation doie, degiM. gf rtpnwii
and poit Irradlttlon itorage tonperature on the dtvelopvcnt of flowt^ anMa In
gaiMi Irradiated Solo papan- In: Doilaetry, Tolerance, and Shell life EiMnHon
Related to Dlilnfaitatlon of Frulti and Vegetabllt by GaaM Irradiation. le4lo-
Uotope and Red. «ppn.. pp. I1Z-I)«. Nucl. Scl. Abi. 21(23):*S29>.
,y Google
J. H, S. r. Hila, (ltd n. SoMto. IWa. Orvtualtptlc •xliMtlon at qim»
<rrad1it*4iMn90. tn: Doilwtry. ToKrinci. Mid Shtif Lift EitMtlcm
<l(l(t«d to DUInfesutlDD of Fruitt and VtgcUMn bji Sww ImdUtloo.
didlotiotopt iM Ud. Appn., pp. 1M-1». Nucl. Sc1. «bi. 23{Z]):«B]Oi.
1K8. Orgiralipttc eva1u<t<on af gamK
)try, Tolcrinn, ind Sne1l Life Eitintlon
11 and V*9*Ub1» by Gdmu Irridlitlon.
IU-1W. Nucl. Id. tbi. 23[;i):4a304.
...... I. Stouts. 1968. quHty •vdMtlon of
,„,.,. -n shipping itudUi. In: Onimtry. Tol»r«nM.
Llf« Eitcntlon tt»Uttt to DlUnfMUtlon of fralll and V*g*Ub1«
6anni Irradiation, ttadloliotopa and Had. Appn., pp. 3-t. Nucl. Sci.
. Z3(Z3}:«8nS.
tetaCcd
HadloUo
T. Hsia, and H. SiMto.
to niilnfeitation of Trul
top* a»d Rsd. Appn.. pp.
Irraaial
Re la tod
h\'. Abi
Ron, T. Soo, a
a Dlilnraitatlon
Enirgy Cm. . 1
i3I 6)1 101*4.
d S. T.
DoilHt
of Frul
ot*p.-I
J. H.. I
Roil. S. T. Htl
radlittd papaya 1
'ihlppi
:t of ganaia-radlatlan on tht mlltanco
A. %. K.. I. E. Abdal-AI, and A. B. Adian.
control tprouting of SudtiWtC onloni vndi
Agrtc. i. S:2E-3i.
OniRI, K. S., B. S. Sooch, and K. S. RandtiaM. 1H9. fftoct of
guN- Irradiation on tho storago Ufa and quality of onion bulbl ui
ordinary Itoraga conditions. J. (!«.. ludhlana. t:7SS-7».
of onion. Agrlc.
bulb. Bull. Inst
TO. I., J. Harata. and T. Dtaital. H
differont atmOtpMrlc convoiltlon on
app)(i. Bull. Ftc. Agrlc, HlroHliI Unl
I. Harata, and T. Oianal. It:
n respiration, organoleptic |
:o1or of applt fnilti during <
In In tht potato tub)
'. 37IV6}:«»-«X.
Cwtennlnatlon of CM iffoct of
«iallty of cold ttorod Irradlitod
,., Ho. IB, pp. 7-21.
11«d atvitiilHrc (CA) s
,y Google
. tt ■!. IMl. StHdiH of tbi tmtmtlan at feodi and tM chwigM af
' niiFrTmt ccHtxinwiti by qwm-ray Irradiation t. EffKU Ml tm» frulti
liotopes (roitfol lMl):sa-*7 [in Jaij»"e« f't" EniH»h »»»'T].
. (t (1. 196Z. Stud1» on the preservation of foodl and the cnan^ei of
) 11(1)^68-90 [In JacaiH* with Engltih (i^nin']-
lopei (Tol-Io) U(?l:101-110 [In Ji
Ibt poillbl* Butag»nit effect of •
, ,_ _ i 0* HBt of *uiri9« iHit cuHrury
1:7B-ai [In (luiiKiiHlth Enfllfh iMMry].
OSIPOVA, [. «.. T, I, Sti111l"9*r, (nd *, K. Salofrr. U7S. Effect of itortg* •■<
cullMry pr«|Mr«t1cn af irndlitw) poutoci on the cytogviMIc Ktlvltr af
ntroctl. Vdpraiy Plunlyo 4:S4'57 [In hiiiUn Dlth Enjllih lumnr].
0TA6IUI, K. t. 1J71. H««ll dmlopnent IrridUtor -- « tool In tropleol fniU
proCMiliW. I": OlilnftiUtlon of Fruit hy ImdUllan, Int. *!■. Entr^y
Agency, Vienn*. pp. 7-10.
K. «nd *. n. Oaller. 1968.
"U-U,
t dtitlorawit Irndlitar pragm. In:
Eighth Annul Kta. Energy Om. Food Imd. Contncton Nettlflf Rdpt. ,
Mlhlngton, O.C. Oct. ^' " - '" "'
nd U. I. Cirdtiio. 1971. Senory, ctmlul ond
n tht ofFoct of lonlilnt ndlitlon on MngoM
). Carabao Vtrlttr- In: OlilnfoiUtlon of Fnlt bjr
ncrgy Jtgency Vlonn*. pp. 101-111.
Jirood'sti. jTj
iU am, i., n. H. HercavlcX De Plliliu. ft. V. «. fiilwraln, (nd C. '
1971. Ippllutlon of IMM rodlitlon to potato pnitrvitlon. Co*. I
EnergU Mm., Bucnoi Mrn, It pp. [In Spinlih].
, ». r.. t. H
Inhibition of girl
Agrtc. Ch«a. Soc.
i(p«r(t*1y or ti
«5, N. H. l9Ca.
Irnd. Canidi, i
ind ). H. Kin. 1HV. Efftct of gi
, ind 0. H. Lm. 1970. »udlM
utorUU ccnblnod with gum
J. Kort. sci. a■.i^-Si [m n
•ffocl af 9««i«" Irradiation On the itorog* of Chanaiyprang p<
(tort. Scl. S:»-4S (In Konin with Engllih iximry].
■lUi Engllih iia
StudiM on appio itoraff*.
!■ ifrapplngi «
l):ai-S7 [In n
,y Google
lI(T];JiE( [lbs trtct )
1966. GmU
iHc. PirbMnl Mg. f:j-ll.
I. 1. ind P. N. Ulr. I»4. Alttritlwn In Saliiw ti
polyvtiBWl BildiM activity Indvcad by 9MM IrradlinMr
1373-1 37 J.
_ IMKM, N. {
(Ml] In 9MM Irridlitcd ooutoM.
PEROOHO. H. *-. J. H. Hanundu, ind J. Sinin. 1964. Sunn-radiation prcMrvatlon
of ooUtMI. In: Proc, SWi Int»r-»mr1cin Syiip. on th* PeaMful Application
at NucUar En>r«. Valpiratw, Chill. Pbrch 9-13, 1164, Rtpt. IAN-l-1.
pp. !77-»] [«■ SpMilih].
■ PfTUSH. I. P. and t. ». "MHelilJ, 1»S*. CHimm In tiM rtiplratory prvcMl diw
to gwH IrrMlatIo* of plant tliiiiM. tokl. Ikad. Muk. SS» 170:711-71]
tfn Ruiilan].
POllAH>, L. H. and 0. t. SalinkHt. IH7. Studlai In radiation pmtrvat
fruit and veMtabl* product*. Annual Mpt. No. 6 far D«. 1. 195C -
No«. 30, 19S7. Utah Stat* Unf*., Logan. IIZ pp.
R, H. T., P. S. Ellai. and H. H. eottschalk. IMI. Fso4 Irradiation
infonHtlon. Int. ProJ. In th* FItM of Food Imd., Np. 11. 106 pp.
t and th* itortgi of •igaUblai and
• a:6»-CZS.
d I. C. nitit. IMS
hnology In Conjunction Kith
nq tht SheU Lire of FniltS and
I. UC0-14PBO-3, pp. 5!-S4.
, U. l., C. Bo/d, and £. C. Ma.le. 1967. Eff»ct of gtrma Irradiation on
aicoriiic acid content of itravberry frulti. In: Radlitlen TKhnoloqy In
Conjunction ■ " " " ^ - — ...— .1-
I. Enargy Cmb. Rept.
Ho.""lJCD-i*PB0-6,
RWErrd, 0.. L. L. HorrU, C. F. Johnion, and t. C, *iU. 1967. Effoct of gam
Irndlttlsn on potthirocit 6*h*«lor of tiN cantaloup*. In: Radiation
leclwologv In Conjunction ultli Poitharvnt ProcaAim ai a Hum of Eitmdlng
tltt Sbclf Life of Frulti and Vtgttibln. U.S. Aim. Enwgy Cam. Ropt. )W.
UC0-34PaO-S, pp. 6S-9I.
,y Google
RAVETTO, 0.. I. L. Norrfs. ind E. C. "iJilt. 1967. Effftt of g>M> Irradlttlon o«
the luictptlMllty of tuoata fnifti to trinitl Injgrjf. [n; Udiulon
TMhnolow In Co.vH*ietlon tilth PoiUnrwit Proct«ir*i it ■ Hmki of Eattndlnj
thi Shelf Lift of Fnifii ind ftfrttblti. U.S. *ti». Eiwrw tarn. »«pt. No.
UC0-34P8O'S, pp. IM-123.
H«EITO. D. . L. l. Morrli. jnd E. C. m«1«. I«'. Effetti of 9«M Imdlitlwi «n
posthirveit bthivlar of hoMydnr lelans. In: Kadlitlwi TKhnologr I"
Conjunction alth PotUMrMit Proetdurn ii j Hwni of fj-— '■— •■-- "
_. ,_.... __. „___._>.,. .. r .^ Entrjjf €<»■. Rwt.
RAWrrO, D.. L. L. Morrli. ind E. C. Mill*, 1968. Effect of gim trridlillon on
poithirvett b*hi*for of b«ll peppers. In: HidliHon TechBoloB/ In Conjunction
■tth Costhtrieit Procedurei ii * Heens of Eitendin) the Shtif life af Frglti
*nd VegeUbles. U.S. kfw. Energy Ccmi. Rcpt. No. UCD-34PB()-6, p«. 1Z7-I1S.
. Effect af goM Imdiitlon on
„, ,,. , ,. ..It Injury. »atfljtlon
Tethfiolosr In Conjunction with Poithtrvtst PrtKedum » • NhM of Eittnllng
the Shelf Life of Fnilti ind Vefttiblet. U.S. ktm. Energy Com. Rept. No.
UCD-34raO-6, pp. 80-118.
RIO». J. 1971. 6,7-DleiethoJiJcoilMrlB tn the peel of g<«»iii-trr»df»ted gripefrult.
MiytochM. 10(B):1921.
RtOV, J.
Ht-lrndllted citr
RIOV. J., S. r. FtoflftllM, end ft. S. Kihtn. 1968. Effect of g«M rtdlltlon on
pXenyUIenlno uiianl*-tyiM Mtlvtty ind ecciMletlon of plwiDlIc etnpoundi In
citrus fruit pttl. Redlet. Bot. 8[8):46]-46G.
Ii«raved nethod for storing ym (Dloscore* t_
iB[4l:'S6-«5.
MU-
of Cellf.. Oivis. U.S. Rtii. Energy Con. Rept. Ita. UCD-34P1U-I8, V pp.
RONMII. a. J. 196«. Ridloblologlcil perniieteri In the lrrid1»tto« of frulti ti
•egeUblts. *d.. Food Res. 1S;S7-10].
RONUI, «. J.. R. W. Bretdtnbach, ind J. .»n Kooy, 19«S. IioUtlon. yield, irx
fitty icid conpoiltlon of Intraceltultr pirtlclei fro ripening fruUs.
Plint niyslol. «):S61-SC«.
ROWII. R. J. end I. L. Ku. 1)70. .
tystoi In reeltlan to Intercelliiler
41:Z17-ZZS.
ROKMII, R. J. end M. F. Scneer. 1961. Ridletlon blochtielitry, physlalogy. end
■Icroblotoay of fruit. In: Radlttlon Pesteurlietion of Foods, Report Of Third
Knnmt Contractor* Meeting. Niihlngton, O.C. , Oct. Zl-24, pp. IOS-107.
,y Google
RflNWI, R. J. wd t. K. U. IMC mulian*Hil rMtKwci to a»t*t IrrMtitloa
In *lva. Itt. SupprMilM ud raeowry of rMplratory csntrol. Arck.
fTacKa. Siophyi. n7:EJS-«U.
RONUI, R. J. <nd I. K. Ta. IfM. HItochMidrlil mlltinc* to niilvt 1rr«dUtlM
In » Wo. V. Rtpilr <n« Uit rtfir ovcnhoot. Rrck. BIocMb. Rlopkfi. 1»:
R(MWt. R. J.. I. rt. U, I. L. tm, L. E. Flskcr. *nd n
itiwlcMC*. ndittlM i»Mg» ta Bdnchondrli. iihI
rlpMlitf pMr frnlti. Mint PhyilDl. U:1DS9-I(Nd.
ROSS. E. ind J. »toy. 1W, DDilnCry. taTerincc, *M ihtlf-ttfi tit«MfM raliUd
to dlilnrcsutlon dI fru<li ind vegetable) hy qtma lrridUt)on, In: Elgkth
tmmutl «to. En*r^ Cov. Food Irrid. Cwitr«ctari nntint <t«Mrt. HMM*tUa,
0,C.. Oct. 16-17, pp. IM- i.
I of M^tublM bjr Irndlitlan <« trtn. Food
ISE, *. H. I). «. OlHilIon, *nd C. D. Atklni. 19M. Imdiitlon ifftcti oi
JulcH cttrKCed fr» trwtcd ValMcli oraagM Wd DuKan yvpafniU. Pi
fU. St. Hort. Soc. 79;?K-»7.
', M. K. 1975. RidlJtlan, h«t tod cfaatcal coAliM* In th* nrtanlMi of
lift of ipploi InfKted ilth blm aeld rot (Pilcllllia yipiMi^). Plan
Oil. RtPCr. S9(l):tl.M.
, n. t.. n. s. Chatratli. and P. n. PMtMir. I*n. fam ndlitlon ti
utansfon of ilwlf-l1f« of ipplM Itifactid altb Awf— "- -' — "
9hyto(uIh. Zctt. 7$(I):1I-I7.
IPF, a. \91Z. G»i dhroutagni
0OClto« treated by Irridlit
Hn. 1S(]):235-2*S [In Gerrui
RUSSO, J. St. 1902. Food lrr*d1itlon — Raidy for a coMbick. Food Eng. M(4]:
71-83.
SKID, U. I., H. H. Wain, and S. B. SaliH. 197}. Sprout Iflhlbltlan of poutot*
for 1o«l coniiapcloii by traatiwnli alth dlff»rwit iprout miilbltwi, AgHc.
Rci. R*«. SI(S):)I-M.
SAITO, I. ind T. Igarathl. 1970. Efftctl Of fMM Irradiation on changat In
acldltr. vltMin C. and non-protil* nitrogan of appla*. Bull. Fic. Agrlc.
HIrouM, No. IB. pp. 1-9.
SAITO. I. and T. Igaraihl. 1973. Effacti of gaaaia Irradiation on changM In
acidity, vltaaln C, and non-protein nitrogen o' applat itorad In coittrollad
itiTOSpnere. Bull. Fac. Agrlc. HlroMll Unly. Ha. M, pp. IJ-19.
,y Google
SARWENTMTS, *- HM. Appllcit. _ ,
lOM-Un (ton)*. Hith^MraAyl S*l-]lnEtniy«litv«Mqr1 Itainiil 1:4}.4S [!■
SMUVKOS, e. and 1. Hicrli. I9t3. lUdlitlon prM«rvttl«n ot jripn tiK ta« otiMr
eratk fnilU. lit: Fao4 Irri<IUt<«n, tunxmn tflfo. Cvitr. far Fa»d Imd..
Sicliy, Otrly. Int. IIM*I. <( -t :II19-U1.
pMttarvnt bihivlor af toutoti. Food IrrwI. ia(4):Zt-Ze.
SWICHMM, V. F. and R. S. KMhwihki. 197*. Eff*ct of lai (MvinturM md
gwM-lrri4liIlon »f tub«n M Um pradiKtIvltjr «nd pnlanfitlM ef itorift
kHpIng af iwtitMt. Haiti) ti«. Sar. S-th. Muk Hlmk. lalinM Jltod. Hmk.
SAVITSKIt. S. (ltd F. Hiktanlk. 1976. Efftct of lonlltng radlttton and tMMrttwn
ragliM durfn) itonga af patata tubtri «n ictldty af radoi anzavl. Sbonill
Muchiykli Trudov, MIoniiitix SBl-ikokhatyilitvanMyi Rkad. 19:II7-123 [In
1H6. Faad prcianatlen by ImdIitlM. Food
, R. n. Kabiyiihi, 0. L. Chindiar*, H. H. Dallar. ind
1«n fralt flln In pap*)*, ball pappcr. ud aggplant:
tmm Irradlatlen, J. Ecan. Ent. 66:I37-9».
:. M. KoMyiihl, D. L. Chw^an. U F.
*. 1974. lUngpintvll: CoMlt-M 91
J. Ecan. Ent. t7(«):504-SOS.
SUM, J.. H. C. Lindgraf. <nd £, C. Hi.tt. 196S. HingaiWK Hn?*) In Co" fumm
lrr*dl>t*d itraibarrKl. In: Pidtitlon Tcclinolisy In CenjunctlOfl Kttk
Poithtrvtit Precadarai is 4 Heani of titcndlng the Snalf (.If* Of Fnilti ond
V«9*UbIti. U.S. AtB. t'wrqy Cesm. RcpC. No. UCO-MPeo-J, pp. SS-S8.
SHUI, J. and E. C. Mil*. 19CS. Ettiylan* fanatlon In paa aplcotyl tlHuM _
falloifing Irradiation ulth Y-r«y* fnm "%«. Phyilol. Plant. ia:IIIS-IIia.
SMH, J. and E. C. Milt. 19CS. Gww ray radleiyntlMili of Otona fraa air. In:
Radiation Tachnology in Conjunction iiltli Pottharvait Procadunt ai a Nnm of
Extandlna tbt Shalf LIfa af Frulti and Vafttablai. U.S. «ta. Enargy tarn. R«
No. UCD-S4P80-3, pp. S9-U.
SHU, J. and E. C. Mila. 19W. GaMa-ray and radloiynthaili af oiona frta air.
Int. J. Appl. Rad. iMtap. 17:115-159.
SHM, J., E. C Hailt, and U. C. Landgraf. 19*6. Nanganaia frt* ridlull In
cobatt-fiO g«nM-<rradtitcd itraHbcrrlOt. Ratura 210:110.
JHMMI. A., k. J. Shrlkhandt. S. R. PidMl-0a»*1, and S. *. NadUml.
Inhibition of anotonln-pr-'-'-- ' — * "- -""' — *— ~* — '
gunna-lrradUtad poutoai.
,y Google
UCWFEIT, N. L.. E. H. MMd. R. N. OmnliM. 1»M. «M« r«dt«tl«i «n« tttTM*
tnabwiti fi^iiMKt M pKtIc lubtUnet* In »HClnf . Fool TkImI. 11(6}:
ni-iii.
., .. , I. n; D« AlMtdi.
_ _ _ _ Thi trricti 9l 9MH In-idUtlM on th*
itortg* of milan cultlnrt fn th* Sm FrtiKliM n«lM of P«niM*uca. Ptiqutu
XgrepKiwI* InilUIn 1{Kll]:S3-57.
J, J. r., K. toch. ind I. LiMditwi. 1974. EffKt* of tanlzlHl ImdUtlon «•
■Jthraiai ■■ Innuncad by plvilaloglcat and ■mrlrnMNnul cMMftlom. tadlit.
B»t. I4:ta7-»f.
TJ, a. H. IDd A. H. Dollar. t«t4. Rodfatlon lurvlval of EnilnU itrnltptie*
ind tmlntt ctrotovort lo '"Co ^tnM ri/j. food IfTid. 5(l.!);AZr»jr
■ Imdtttloa In
ellt^.
SOLAMS. dnd A. Ddrdc
Jreiervitlor of Fru
VImni. pp. 13-17.
SONCR. R. F. IHB. Th* radiation plqrilalaw and alcroblolov of fnlt
dctarloratlon. In: EltMk Annual Atjik Enargy Com. Food Imd.
mating Kept.. HiiMngtMi, D.C., Oct. 16-17. pp. 141-1(6.
SVWER, N. F. 1972. TM afftct of lonlilnt radiation on fMtfl. In: MriMl of
Ridtatlon Starllliitlon of Hidlcal and llotoglul Mtarlali. Int. Ata.
Entrv Agoncir, Vlanni.
SOWER. N. F., P. M, Buckley, 1. V. Bradley, ind t. C. Haal*. 1*66. Th* rodUtlon
pnydology lid •Icrablology of fruft dderlontlon. In: Slith Amuil F**d
Irrad. Contncton Meeting Rcpt.. Uitninglon, Q.C, Oct. 1-4. ft. IS4-IS6.
SQWCR, N. f.. f. N. Buckl*/, H. V. Bradley, ind t. t. Hul*. 1966. Th* radiation
phiilDlD^y and ■Icrolilalogy of fruU deter loratloi. In: SUtut of th* Food
I — J D — |, Heirlngt, Subcn. on Rai., Dt*.. *nd Rad. Joint Cmb. «n Ata.
S. Consr.. July T^-l*. U.S. So*. Print, OTflc*. UaaMngton, D.C.,
Cneroy. U,
pp. ix-m
, p. H. Buckliy. R. i. Fort1*9*. D- A. Coon. E. C. Nixlo, and
tcholl. " — — " * — ■ -' ■■' "
tranbarry fnil
6. Hltcholl! 19(6. Haat lanaltlHtton far contral of grw aold of
t> by tMU Irradiation. Radlat. tot. It():44l>44*.
,y Google
SflNCR, N. F.. P. n. Bucli1*y. R. J. FortUg*. 0. A. Com, E. C. Hixla, wd
F. e. Hitclwl). I9CS. HMt itniltlutlon far control Of grty meU of
ilrHtarry frvlti by Imdiftton. In: Hidlitlon TtchnolDgy In ConJiWCUOM
■ttn PoitMrvtit Proc«4«r«i ii a NMni of Eittndlni tM Sha1f LIf* Of Fniltt
tna VegiUblfi U.S. «tt. Entrgy Com. Itapt. No. UCO-HMO^. W. 1H-)CB.
SOWtB, N. F, tod n. T. Cr«**y. 1»W. Il«£8»«ry of Bhlipnui italaotfor
iporinjloipom iftor pottntlttly lotlul fMM ImdUtlon. R>d1«t. la*.
I. F.. H. r. CfMiy. E. C. Hiili, iitd R. J. Rownl. 1961. Productloi Of
n Conjunction altti PoitlMni
Procodurci ■! ■ Mowii of Eitondlnf tho Shi1f LIf* of Frvlti ond VtfitOblM-
U.S. Hm. Energy Com. Rtpt. No. UCD-34K0-I, pp. IM-ITO.
J. Rownl. IM3. Production of
g«aii Irndiittd RhlMpul stolon1f»r iporinsloipor*
of ganalnittoii. J. Ull. Zav- Phyi'o'. 61:93-»8.
SOWER. N. F., M. I. CrMly, R. J. Bcwnl, *nd E. C. tbill. H«, M oxjrgwt-
dcpandtnt pntlrrtdUtlon rtitoritlon af BMmpmi itolonlfor i poring I oiports.
Ridlit. Pil. I2:Z1-n.
SOWCR. N. F. , P. Dupuy, ind A. RaMtu. W1. Tho effect of chailcal t«i«ltlUtlon
on ropilr of pottntlilly Icttiil Irradlltlon Injury In Rhtiopw HBlonlftr
s poring I oipom. Ridlit. lot. n:36)-3U.
SOWCH, N. F. , J. H- EcUrt, ind M. T. Croity. 19U. Rnponii of iporn of
scltctcd flUimtoui fiingl to guaii Irridlitlon ii (nflumcid ^ itigi «
gcninitlon ind madll. iWr. J. lot. 49[6]:CG7-66g dbltrict].
SOtCR, I. F. ind R. J. Fortligi. 196e. Ionizing rtdUtlon for fontrol of
SDWEII, N. F. , R. J. Fortlige, I
HER, N. F., R. J. FortUg*. P. M. luckily, ind E. C. Mile. 1M7. RidUtlon-
hut lynarglM for Inictliitlon of mrUt dliMii fungi of iton* fmltt.
Phytopltn. S7;4;B-4]3.
H. Rldllt. lot. IZ:»-1D1.
SONIER, N. F., R. J. FortUgi, P. H. luckily, ind F. S. MItchill. 19C7. Ridlotlon-
hul Intonctlon In poithirvut troitmnt of itrwbirry fruit*. Phytopith,
srW:t3t (ibitnct).
,y Google
SOttCR, M. F. . I. J. Fnrtlag*. Hit E. C. Hul*. I9S4. todUtlon ivca)og]>. Int
RidlitlMi TcchMlagy In CMjuKtlM Kith PotUiirmt PrwMurai ii ■ Hhm <
EiUAdlni tM Shtlf Lira et fnilU ind VigtUttln. U.S. Au. Enarv Com.
Rapt. Iki. UC0-3IPS0-I, pp. )Z4-I3f.
SaHCR, N. F. ,
IrrvlUUd
lynthnli.
SflWKK. ». F. •
fruit dtttrioritlon - —
Xnngil ConCrictDriHMtIng, HiHilngton D.C. Oct. 31-12. p*. 110-111.
SOftCR, ». f. ind E. C. "wl*. I9«6. «*tent reiHrch on th« Irridlitlon of fnilU
■nd .ntUblM. U: Fm4 lrr*4l*tloii, Proc. Int. Syi*. Food Imd.,
MrlinA*. pp. S7I-H7.
SCMMOt, N. F., E. C. HmI*. «4P. IiKlilar. IMS. Tlw rMUCIon phyilalour ■<i4
■ICr^lelOW «* '™U -WterlOMtlon. I" RidlHlon ?iit»ur1Htlon of FoodJ.
Dipt. Fifth DmmhI Coatrtctort HHtlng. llKMn«ton, D.C, Oct. tO-ZI,
pp. 101-IOt.
SOnKR. N. F., E. C. IIUU. P. ". Buckley, ind f. G. Hiteholl. IW. Smm
radlitlon *ita hMt for therapeutic treatnant of fnilti Ut vtgctiblai for
poithirvMt dliMiei. Ifi: lladUtlon rachnolojy In Conjunction itltk Poitbirmt
Natal Df EitaniKfig the Shalf Life of Frgtti ind Vagatittlti.
rCi^. Rapt. No. UCa.MFaO-S. pp. 190-171.
StWER, n. F. . E. C. Hiila, and ft. J. Fortliga, 14S4. QuiHUtlM di
fnawH fnilt dKiy funfl to ^ama Irradiitton. In: Radlatloi Tadnoloo l«
EonJwKtfO* Httli PoiUiarvMI Pnicaduret u a Heani pf btandiM tho Sholf Lift
Of Frglti ltd Vaglttbln. U.S. Ita. Ener^r Ccn*. Upt, No. \XO-3*nO-l.
pp. IIMSI.
SOMCR, N. F., E. C. Hixlt, and K. J. ForUaW. tH*. QuintlUtlM dait-nspMiu
Of Pnnwi fruit dicty fiiii»l to gawit Irradiation. Rtdltt. tot. 4;109-]Ii.
SCNKR, N. F., £. C. Kult. i. J. fortltflt. and J. H. Ecktrt. 19M. Stnilttvlty of
cltnit fruit dactr fwifl to gvM IrradlttlM. In: Rtdlttlaa Ttdiaelew In
Conjunctloa «1tll Potthtrmt Procodur** at t MnH of Eittndlna Vm Shtif LIf*
at FniUi %iit Vtgttablti. U.S. At*. Enernr Coaaa. Rtpt. No. UCO-HPflO-I.
SMIGTI. J. C, F. tspp, and K. Trautner. t>7S. Tho Influtnc* of loalilnf
rtdlttlon and choilcil iprovt Inhibitor on germination. lugar canttat ti
practising quality of potatoM. Xl tttt 1 uman Geblate Letenua, Hy|. tH
117-140 (in Genun Kith Eojllih lunry].
Int. AW. tnerqy *j»iicy.
SPMENBERG, N. and N. Bulttlair. 197t,
■nd critpi. Init. tax '
No. IN, > |«. [In Dutt
,y Google
SP«RENBERG, I
dirkenli , - ,-.- .
LtitdboiMprodukUn, No. 307, )5 pp.
%n, V. I9<4. Effect of i
chingtt In cell pcmai
SttEEHIVUM, «., P. TAonii, •nd S. D. Dhirlur. )i;i. Pliytlalagkll tffacts of
ianu rtdlitlon on torn trcpkil fnilti. In; DlilnfiiUtlon of Fruit by
rridUtlao, [nt. ttM. Energy tgcncr Vltnn*, pp. 6S-)l.
STAMN, 0. L. 1SC4. Irndlittd auihrocm Uttt better. Euritoa tull. ](3):1S-19.
SHOEN, 0. L. ISM. Exporlmcei ulth Uie trridlitlOA Of voseubles In the Nithcr-
landt. tn: Food Irr*di>tla<i, Proc. Int. $>•«. Food Irrad. . MrltTvlit,
pp. 609-eiT.
SnOEN, 0. L. 1967. RidUtlon prosenitlon of frcih Mihreora. Huihr. Scl.
6:4S7-Mt.
STAKN, 0. L. 1971. « revlto of th* potentlit of fnilt *nd iwgtttbl* Imdiitton.
Scl. Hart. t(*):M1-308.
SIEINER, L. F. 1966. GmM IrrsdUtlon for dlilnfeitillon of «port fnilu (nd
njcUblei. HiMlt Fn. Jet. IS0)M1-tZ-
<tlon treitntnt In crop itorage. Prof. Food
SIOYTYOm, I. K., K. Undner, t. tadri»«y, tna * HtmiiMei. 1971. Th« effect of
cSi™wtl''of^Wr' El.l™ls«r/i^aUt/KoiTB^nJel 17(1):101-11J.
TMIN l! M. H. jnd H. k. Wduii. 97a, Conplowntirr effectt of 9MM r(dl(tlon
. on PUnt Patbogente Ncttrl*. Vol. II,
pp.mu
■nd K. Ogiti. 1973. Studies M tht
radlatton. J. tnfluinc* of cultural
lltlti on the broHnlng of Irndfeted potito ttiberi. J. Food Scl. Tech.,
n 20(4):1»-12t [In Japanese].
T., K. Chachln, and K. Ogata. 197!. Studlei on the broMiInq of potato
rs b^ ga'nu radiation. 2. Ihe rtlatlonihip b*tHe» the browning and Uie
qti of o-dlphenol, atCDrbIc add and actliltlei of polyphenol aildOM and
■tdate In Irradtatad potato tubers. J. Food Sc1 . Tech., Japan 19:508-513
„GoogIe
TENTOCVH, S. Md t. Pivlon. MA. EfTaet of ImiUtlW M frMh fnrit *mt
MOMMU itor«9l. Scientific »¥*». OMlag l«. Intt. riovif* 7:1I«-1«S
{tR aulgirlin].
•vH prablH. Uotfnli Agrk. J.
MPLS, A. C. tni K. B«y«ri. >9J9. fiUM IrrKtitlon Bf liAtnflul fnilti. ). N
connrUon or the chmfc*! chin^i occurHng durln) ngml rlpMiln of BHtgoM
ind (iipay*t xUh chants preducM by stanw IrridlitiM (mitrlttOHl qullty).
J, Agric. Food ChMi. Z;( 1 ) -I W-161.
NU, P., S. 0 OhirUr mi A. SrMdlviMit. 1971. EffKt of )M«i lrr4«lit1on
on t)io poit-hontit Rliyil«1ogy of fix binuti virlMIti groM In Indlo. J.
Food Scl, 3«:Z4J.»7,
THONU, P. vid N. T. Jutin. 1)75. EffMti of gnu* Imdtltlon «ftd itoragt
toBiraturt on cirotcnoldi and iKorblc icid contlnt of Mnfon on rlMolng.
J. Scl. Food Agrlc. i6IID];IM»-l$1Z.
THOHU, P. and G. W. Aahillur. I!
donaHi. Oicui lucurblm -
«TiTT:77s^^77Br
. N. SrlrangarUan, N. R. Joiht, and H. T. Janav*. 1979. St«raf*
atton (n g«aM-lrradlatcd and unirradiated Indltn potato cuICIiar*
frlgerjtlon and troplcjl trnperaturti. PoUtO Rw. I2(«):»1-i7g.
. Scl. 36:Hft-35fi.
« th* thlobartlturlc-
_ -ontofit and eartain tnljOM of 'Mrlo'
It Phyjiol. 1J(I/ 1): 179-19?,
a Irradiation on tht
nngoci for control of
1978. Food Irradiation. Ad«. Food Rm. 24:l5S-2It.
,y Google
irriddtlon. An. Entrgy Cona., Dt«.
US5UF, K. «. ind P. ». Njir. 1974. Effect of qumt Irridlltton on th* Indolt-
iMtlc ictd lynthettiiiig syitM ind Iti ilgnlflcanc* In sprout Inhlbttlan of
poUtOH. (tidtat. act. I4:ZS1-I56.
UZEn«V, E. N. and l. G. (Mlirmko. 1969. Son* ctangM 1j oro-th ind tfvrala^wnt
of 9l«dlolui under tm tffttt of i ■ --■-■■-- • — '-"> '--■■ »— '-—-
UM. K«i* t- "" ■'-■" " '"'- '
VM KOOr. J. G. 19fiS
PrutrviHon of ?■
VlcniH, pp. l;9-1<
VEWW. S. C. and e. S. R. Hiirtl. I9M. Prognll
the pouio production ind utiliiatlon In Ind
t(l/!):«-S9.
:. Shimi. ind P. Thonwi. 1976. Storage of gama-trradlatcd
VIOAL, P. 1963. Preservation of laft frutt by radlopaitnriiatlan. In: Food
Irradiation, European Info. Centr. for Toad Irrad.. Saclay, Otrly. Int. NeMl.
I ve9ttab1ti In France, In: Food
ad., Karliruhe, pp. 589-S99 [In Freni
VILLtSAS, C. M., C. 0. Chlcheiter, I. C. Rijwundo, and It. l. S1»e!on. 197i.
Effect of ,- irradiation on the blosynthtili of carotenoids in the toeiato fi
l>lant Phyllol. S0(6):694-697.
, and *. B. Trutor. I9JS. Effects o'
<f gmna irradiation and itoragt on tlit
f tMH irradiation
UATANUE, H., S. tokl. and
Part I. Effect of 5"i- — -. '-■- ' -'
of spoilage during storage. J. Food Scl. Tech.. Japan i3(7]:)00-3l
Japanese Kith English swawrji].
„GoogIe
«a
IS. ?. k. IMS. So*i> affKti of gan« radiation on icrcral varlattM of
TaUHiiUn potatoci. Z. Blochvlcal diai^M. Hint. J. Cup. AgrlC. hiXm. Huib.
S(1B):2a«-»S.
L5, f. «. 1«S.
bum. Httura »)T(4«Zl:iai)-10l.
HIUS, P. «., J. e. Clouiton. and N. L. Gtmty. I97S. mcrablo logical and
cnuaoToglcal aipocta of tti« food Imdlatton provrw In AultralU. Jluitrallan
Rta. Energy Co*., Sutharland, ih>. ni-Jsg.
UURSTER, R. T. and 0. talth.
radtslran !• tM potato luoar ana
toor. PoUto J. 40(II):«lS-«a).
«?!):"
UUUM. H. . K. ChacMn, and K. Ogata. t)71. Studiot On frt* aalno acfd
■italMlls during tht maturatlo" and rlpcnlitf of tcaato fniltl. II. Changtt
1i tin actlirltiM of glutaale acid dacarboiylai* and glutaalc acid
dahydrogdnat* In toiiato fmlti during maturation and rfpMlna. J. Jap. 5oc.
Mrt. $c1. 4DO):2S7-»l.
., R. A. {. and 6. I
radiation. Anali
«UWINE. E. >. and J. H. Ky. I9SI. Delay In postharvast ripening
of fnjits. Chapter 5. In; E. S. JasepMan and H. S. Peterun (Idi.),
' in of food by lonliing radiation. Voluae 3. CRC Prtsl. Inc.,
BUR Din
JOSEPHSW, E. S, and M. S. Petar»i
radiation. Volune I. CRC Pi
JOSEPHSdH, I
,y Google
MtSUYMH, A. (Ad t. Itatdi. 1WZ
t. In; t. S. JoMpritMi ind
lonlztDf radlitlon. VoIum 1
CRC ?mt, Ik.. Boci Ritoii, FlorliU.
, J. H. 1962. Radurliatloii tad ndlcldatlon:
3. In; E. S. J«iH>hion ind H. S. ttttrmn (I
iontilng ridUtlon. Voliai 3. CK Preii. tnc
Sect Utoii, Ftorldi.
iHilon bulbl of iifftntit
648. TIUOI. E. U. ind *. K. BurdlU, Jr. IMZ. InsKt dtilnfciUtton 9t anin
fruit. Chapur 7. In: E. %. Jaitphion <nd M. S. Ptttrion (E4i.).
Prtwmtton of food by loniitng ridlitlwi. VoliaM 3. OK Pr«i», Inc.,
Boca Ritsn. Florfd*.
„GoogIe
Abdvl-Kidtr, R. S. . . Sm b
«M«I-SalM, R. S. . . US
MMlyin, 5. 0. ... 13
MMwt. S. « 14
Mtlm, B. H 469
Mian. K. B 434
iUrlin. J 15
11-Dmlnl, N. L.
. 7«.a3,&B
. 6»
. 77-81,274
. U,M,n.97,5M
M-Ourthtfchy, F
Klfaro, it. it. .
Al-Wkluk, Z. i.
. II7,i5S-;6a.333.
3SI-1SI,3S5-3M,
3(0,3M,3G5,47Z,
•r*dl«, H. V 54Z.H3
■nalaga, H. J M,t5,134
Al-J4tl«, H. . .
B™A.k«-.J.l.
. . 35-38,331,426.607,
Al-Ntllkr, S. K.
. . )3
BrMtrIck, ». T.
. . 96-98,251
n-SMtkMIr, H.
H. . 17S
Bnmn, 0. S. . .
. . 176-380
m-iiioiMt. H. .
. . 68
s™r<. s
. . 91
MNiqulU. B. .
JiMtriisv. E. . .
«olil, S
. . 48.49,350.351
Buckliy, P. M. .
. . 72. 7J. 99-102,542-
545,554- 558, 564, 565
. . 66.305.626
Sultdur, N. . .
. . 35-37.244.426
. , 103-107.573.574
N. .67
Burditt, A. X.. Jr
. . 74.75.108-111,638,
AtkiM, C. 0. .
. . 500
. . 68-70.116
Burton. M. S. . .
. . 112. 113.318
Bddrttt, S ri
Bildy. H. H 72,73
e«It>ck, J. M 74.7S.I11
e«m, Z 224
, J. 0 tlS,ll9
,y Google
Cirdtno. U. «. . . .
Ciiis-BuH1« Lopei. I
CivalatU. C. . . .
cinin. J. c. . . .
438,SB9.590,6M
Dt Proolt, n. .
OwIuU, E 1M.1I7
. «>-I7.».n.».l40-
I4(.206.»7.3O«.4a7,
4K,49»,S00,S2S
. . M9-IS3.SW,59(
CKiptt, V. e 12a
Chile. B. It IH.IU
Ctatnth, M. S 221.502
UlchMttr, CO. ... t2l
, E. H 291,*H-«!
Clark*, t. 0 ni-|}3.3ia
0«1I*r, «. H ISC-ISV.4;
S3S
OMiitt. M. L. B. . . ItO
Dm)*, J. N IS)
Ai flclltl, L. H. . . 91
Oupgy. P SSI
E
Eaki. I. L. .
{■ton, G. U.
Echindi, R. J
Eckert. J. u.
. ll2.Ilt.3U,lt6.3U.
CuCMi-lbili. I
Dili '01 to
Dally. H.
Dirdn-, «
. 1}7.254,46«,4«S
139.S29
139,SZ9
139,SZ9
Ellas. P. S
El-Uiolly. A. f.
E1-0tsh, I. I.
E1-S«y«. S. A. .
El-Mmkl, A.
E1-tMieri, 5. M
Entnon, J. A.
,y Google
F«r«09<. H- A 18.4S.I79-iai
Fiuit. H lej
Ferviton, W. E 1S3
J 1M
■onulez, J. . 399
Fcsoi, t las
FHw. e IM
Ftihtr. I. K 49«
Flick. S. J K3
flor, ^. 0 187
riHck, R. C 23,28,31
F««. S 1B8,I»
FortlHC, R. J SM.S<S,H3-»).
sc»-se9
FriflCl*. F. J 314.4"
Fraakfort. J. H 2M
FrtjnilMt, C IS
Fnwid, S. « I»l
6
Gabiralii, R. V. A. . . . 4S3
BiiitMr, E 194
BirdMr, D. S I9S
Ctmtjr, N. L «3I
•hods, F 196
«lll. M. J 197
tinin, R. A 1M
filnstairg, L 199,221
eiindUn. R. E 604
Gntadlngcr, R. H. ... 170
Goburdhin, S 200,201
Gotey, M. 0 139.S29
G«1dbtlth, S. A 202
Caualu, F. J 203
Sooiilu. H. A 4S4,«a5
Mnulei, 0 to*
Coo, T 39-41,431
Corti, J. M 99,101.560
CottlctMlk, H. H. ... 449,470
GrahMt, H. D 137.138, 205, 2S4
Gtmh, G. F 24.206
Grlcnon, W 145,207
GutHit-RtiCh. '■
F. J 222.221
, P. 1 224
1 587
Htlavy. A. H 225
HHld. n. A 129.iai.S41
HHtdl, 1 196
HwllUii, H. A 312
HuMOta. H IH-1S9,4It.
SI9
Wnan. H 226,227
HtnM. T »3
HinU, J 228,439-442
Mrt. T. G 229
Hir*v. J. H 319
H*M«n, t. n 230.350
Hkttoo. T. T 109
HtyltM, T 211.640
Hmmt, H. 1 232
HtlllngM-, F 194
Htlm. H. G 213
Htlbtr, 0 426
Mmlni. H I3t
IMrcmlcli Dt Fahliu. M. H. . 453
k S8«
J. H 46S
420
R Z»-Z38,60«
Hllkv. 0 ».»
HNt. U. L 140
HtlUhiWM, L. C 209
,y Google
H0»JO. H. . .
... 124
Horttiu, K. .
. . . 241 .W
Horton. e. M.
. . . 2*2
HorubiU, A.
... 241
Hoiutn, M. H.
... Ml
Hill. S. I. .
. . . 4Z7.4J2
Hid. H. C. .
... 130
HunUr. J. E.
... 144
HU()M. H. . .
. - . J4S
Hyiiitn. A. .
. . . 17,18.179
HusKtn. A. H.
. . . 16-18.179
iraihl. r S07.Me
JllUVC. K. I. .
. . . 2S2, 597. 59a. 603
JlMOdl. J. $.
. . . 2S1
. . . 2H.:S5
Johnson. C. F.
. . . 4B.49.216.?S»-2tl,133
3S0.JS1. 153-362. 386,
J87.395.476
Jdm, r. . . .
. . . 188,189.262.263
Jotcphion. E. S
. . 264,265.642-644
Jothl. H. N. ,
. . . 599.603
Julio di PonU, J
Kitfu, 1. 18S,!67
r. «. A.
m, A. A.
U1MI>. 8. . .
KmiH.*. R.
KmmI, T. a. .
K*a, H. T. . .
Mpoiitissy, A.
K»10, K. M. .
XtMtilsM. 5.
KtMlMU, t.
Ulhulhll. N. S
Wlpert. K. .
Hrnpc. I. I. .
llcrttM, Z. [.
Khaltquc. M. A.
KMIId. I. H.
Wain. M. H.
Klo, H. I. . .
Kta' S K
Kli., ». H. . .
KInch. 0. . .
■:<t4!»H, K. .
Kl»ln. S. . .
Kloggirt. A. .
KuM. F. K. .
UMyllM, R. n
l!ok, I. 8. . .
KrvMT, M. 5.
KrIeUr, W. .
Ku, L. L. . .
lUihn, G. D. .
Kuroi4H, T. .
b<l«t. E. V. .
,y Google
. . SZ2.5J6
HlrLkll.!-.' '
■ *" '■■
Hirtl«, F. C. . .
li' 0 1
Hitity. L. H. , Jr
HlMuthlW, I. .
It, J. .
ffetiuiuU, H. . .
Y. I.
HitthM, F. N. .
. . . JM
S. . . .
S. . . .
. . JIS
J61
llS.li6.lZ7.
J19,230.iS7-
282,331,146-
H. . . .
. . 45e-4M
4B0
Uj'sso'sm'
S57
SS9-S69
D. . . .
. . JIB
myM.n. F. . .
. . . JW
N. F. . .
. . 3i;
Niltitr. H. n. . .
. . . JW
J. . . .
. , J18
H)Ion KitinlD. H.
p. . JM
*. B. .
. . K7
fteClts... G. ». .
, , . 1S6-IS»,«6
. . 38
McGIi»on. W. B.
... too
. K. . .
. . sw
MHh... C. . , .
, . . 163
W. J. .
. . «,319
MciMnft, F, . .
, . , SIT
. . no
Hcnnttf. ». ", .
•M, P. .
. . ISS.32l>-3ii
llH-cier. R. S. .
, . . 104-406
J. G. . .
. . 91
HcrtKy. M. S. ,
. . . ?S,?6.U6,3n».307
, R. r. .
. . m
MiisUm, C. M. .
, . , 408
». K. . .
. . SM
H«tm»WJ. L. V.
, , . 409.410.466
1. *. . .
. . n7,i3a.»s
Mlltw, L. «. . ,
mitoy. e. . . .
. . . 411
. . . IH
Nllnt. 0. I. . .
. . . 41t
lant. J. J
. Ki-m
Hlrjln, J. . . .
.^ . 6».17i
MlUhdl, F. G. .'
. . . 3ai-ni.SM,S4i.
460
g
. . S13
MliKcIa, C. . . .
. . . 76
Mliuttnl, J. . .
. . . 437
. . 3ze
Hoh/uddin. H. . .
. . . 181
1. T. . .
. . 3i9.3M
Hoinovi. K. . . .
. . . 41J
. . 331
NoniillK. S. K
. ... i7S.?76,41*.417.
.. T. . .
. . »i
Ptorstrtldgt, K. .
. . . 418
4Z 1.475-480
. J. ». .
. . 4SI
HDihoNt. N. G. .
Hoy. J
. . 109,4??
-005 0-86-27
,y Google
Hoy, J. H )7,lS7-lM.«3-«i.
WihMMd, It 4S.IW-»I.Slt
Wiknwr, K» 50!
Kiklilii, t. » 431
mldcr, N. J ZSI
Millir. C. J H3.MI
Ihrtl. 6. S. R. ... «l«
MiM, S. K 4H
H
■•Mt-ShlfMn, N. . . 277
iMUrnl, 6. e. . . . SZI
Mir. r. n 4U.4M.5U.5B4.600,
C11
RnUI, K H7
HMltl, N M3
HiRtfpaM. K. 5. ... «3S
ntvt.1. H 17
Mtur, L. K 70
MulrMlU), I. G. . . . ElZ
MIUM, K. E ]»
Ntflt. S. 9 «3fi
RIchoUl. K. C. ... 47.l70.l97,33«-]3«
miMbOrt. S M7
Mill
0
OmU. K lU,1Z4,ZS5,]a7.438.
sn,sgD,U4
OtMOto. T. , . . . . Z2a,4»-44I
(WllMHM. S 444-446
Ounil, T Zia.4»-M1
OtIpOM. I. R 447.441
0U9tkl. K. K 44).4W
P
Pablo. I. S 451
P«*n. ■ tO,BI.«l
P**al-0*Ml. S. R. . Zr.4U,U7
PaNttia Ctm*. i- . . *S3
PWMltl, r 160
hrt. R- P 293.»4.4M.4Si
hrtt. R. H 4».4aO
tatMB. M. C Ill
Patn, 1. C 4«l
mil. 3. A *a
Ptvlovi. E SH
PcMlMrtir, R. 1. . . 4t1.4H
PvdMiO. H. 4 4«S
PirMu-Ltrsy. P. ... 408
Pttirioii. n. S. ... «42-«44
Prtraih. I. P 4I0.4M
Phinipi. B. 0. . . . 4«7
Piidid<««*aMl, F. . . U7
pHic. L. H m
Paltard, L. H 4tt
Pott4r. W. T 4».4»
Pr«u<. II 411
PnMlla. • 471
R
itatatu. R ill
Rai, H. L 217,nz.39l-M4.
3S7,15a.MO-Mt.
364-3«a.3M.»t.
3». 396.471 .471
ItaMlkir. G. W. ... 601
llMikrIilinan. T. v. . 474
RMldlWM. K. S. . . . 41S
Maviitn. C. I. . . . SU
Uvnto. 0 t1S.lSZ.3«I.MS.
47I-4M
IMjwndD. L. C. . . . «tl
latf, i. 3 )tl
bmt. ». T 17}
RnMtl. l. H in
■lg>. 3 Z7C.41 7.411 -«1
RIvm. J. • 4M.4aS
ItoM. J. « lU
Rttort*. t. « 1»
R0»lM«*. 6. J. ... HI
RoNiif. ». 3 301,411. 4M-4N.
M7-HQ
Ron. ( 4H.43T .431.417
RooMnlMdM, H. . . . 4M
Rwn*. N. H 4n,500
Rm4*w«. s. «. . . . m
Rer, H. K SOI.WZ
l(W«f. G tll.ta3,S04
Mkm, J. r ns
,y Google
I. F. . . .:.-. 71.71,
m
jiiw. 1. r. n.
c. . i».nt
•N
Spildl-g. 0. M. . . .
101
. . tM.SII>
SpUlMH. H
411
Sr», ¥
S7I
•ywu. R. .
. . vn
ISO-1S1.4M.S7(.
S»6.S«
Srlriii9.™j«i<, ». «.
601
Sto«M. 0. L
577-SM
Zei,]S4,)SB,Xt,
. . . i«.in,iK.iti
]Cl,3M,3Bt.M7,
•M. K. A. . .
. . . isa.in
StanHluala, «. «. .
•, N
. . . tt».*M,m
. . . IM
1. T
. . . n.ia»-iii.m.SM
SniM. t
imrU. 0. »
tarti. H. 0
1ST
1. «
. . M7
1. T. «, . . .
. . «is.aia
T
P. E
. . i».«»
-It. «. L. . .
. . ua
iKhlMw, H
MS
■9". ». 1- .
. . 4«
Til. C. I
110
. N. N. . . .
. . I2S
TtltaM. ».T. ...
}»
TMlal. K. H. 1. . .
T«Mto. V
M7
indl. A. J. .
. . SI7
SM
C. J. a. C.
Dt . Sm dt tttn. C.
Ttwtl.K. L
4«
mwt. T
SM.ffO
Twlor. 0. C
Mt
tn,t7a.s«)
IntiM, I. .
. . I«
TwtClMM. S
ttt
s»
1. M. . . .
. . SM
Mltta. K. .
. . SM
0
. . IZf.S3t.tl]
n«i. d. M. . , . .
jes
ko. t. H. .
. . 5J7
ih>m%. r
!H.S7«.S»a-101.
611
TfltM. t. H
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
anifni
Etkylw* mductlw
FMfl (m« •!*• Otcay)
I trridUtlan-fimnil ll«fw»fl
M. U. ra. 00. 11. 17. «. 10D, 1<U, 1«, H4,
HO. HI, »«. tM. m. SOI, Its. SM, tia.
MS
1H, in, in. Mo-«u. m
11. u. T«. 1ZI. lis, i2r. )«r. ler. J2i. lu.
2S1. ttt, 209, 304. an, SO). SU. S40. S4!.
S4), MS. SM, sri, sii, sn, ut
3S-M, 8S. flS. 2)7, III. 473. 476. 4>T. SH
iH. isi, ni
10. 47, 17S, 7S4, 7Si. 790. 300, US. 3«7. S7].
, UT, tt7
SO, 77. 73. 7S-0I. »-iai. 173, 17S. 177. I»,
1M. l«S. 107, 7M, 774, 786, 307. 3». 330.
SOI. sot. S77. S3S, S40-S52. $S4-SS7, SSI-WI,
564. SM-S69, Sa7, 631
. 74-76, 1S-3S
47
SI-SI. SO-SS, 87,
?!■
7i;
719, 7*
. 746.
1. MS, 404, 406,
**
444. 45
, 460,
IT
98. SOS,
SID. S13,
SIO
SM
MJ.
S61-S6S.
■■ trrtdlatlwi of Sptctflc Cd—iltlti
te.u 117, in. in. IN. m. im. hi. im. tt$.
a7, 43M4t. 4U. on. SOI. sot. 107. M.
n7. S«. MO
ApHcM «3. MO
Artldntl <tS
tapira9»< «». «>. *"
An>ci*> 1«. ISO, OT. m. «
,y Google
m lm«1«tlM «f SrMtflc OMNiitiM ltmf4)
■mmm 41, n, lit. iM. lu. m. no, tn, m,
»D, 3M, BO. m. Mi, 411, 411. tn^im,
H*. MS, Ul
■m (30
■my (tn alM wKlfta 'nriti) ... 14)
CMttlMpi M. IM. 3W. 4Jf
Carrwt 1M, Ml. SII. SK
omty H. io. m. m. Ml. ta
CkMtMt 1)0. IN
CklMTV DC. )10. SM
curut (tM iiM tpMirit fraiti) . . ao. ai. i4o. i(t. ibo, tot. tu, tn. tn.
vt. m, 3)0. )ii. 3s. 4u, 4ir. 4n, «•).
. ff, m, 4»
. n. n-TD, itT. 17*. )H. m
rt| M, ISO, 31»
farltc 16S, in. ZZ4. »«, 4M. 4H
•Inttr 104
wtft n. iss. iw. 16). )», ti)
»W«fni1t (M* *lts Cltrw*) 101, 145, lOT. 4tt, ttl. SOO
■mm 17. ZII
Lmm (m* alM Citrai) ». )1, )St, )M. Mf-3Ea, M
tiM (iM alw Citra*) )1
LychM 41, n. M, )0t. 417
,y Google
m trrMlitton Of SpKlfIC Ci
Orang* (Mt ilu CItnif) .
PMniit
PiMtaIn .
ISO. 3»
1). 2Z. *1, IS. M->1. 96, 109, 121, 133. 131,
IM. 1». 151. 1S1, 179, !W. ?39, 2«. ?SI.
25S. m, iM, «1Z. «», «S1. «M, S20, S94.
^9S. »r. S9e. Ml, sw, soa
M. 11B, 119, I*', 237. 299-101, 309, 160.
3CZ. «01. 40t. S33, $3(, S77, S79. 5SS. 6»
160. 3S3, 3S7, 369, 387
627
9*. 319
46. )23, U*. 139, 196. 201,204. 210. ill. UO.
213, 281, 293. 30S, 310. 317, 322, 343, 402,
403, 4M, 43S. 436, 4S4, 462. S09, U9, Ul.
534, S7S. S9I. M7
ZO. 29-31. 77, 7a. 83, 6$. 93, 144. 145. IBS.
207. 214. 21*. 267. 271-273, 31S. 326. 331.
3SS. *I4. 41 S, 437, 445. 500
m. Itt. «1I
313
34, 40, 42. 44. 81-91, 97. 96. 156. 159, 244,
254, 394. 4J8. 432, 519, 595
523
22, 23, 26. 92, 260, 291, 304, 112. 353. 357.
358. 369. 387, 405. 407, 528
204
114, lis, 117. 125. 212. 226, 235. 303. 363,
392, 443, 457, 49«
H, 319, •79, 111
m. 132, 3*«. 430, 607
94, 319
I, 32, 56, 57. 67, 76. 66-88, )03-iaI. )U.
113. 135, 166. 174, 181, 184. 166. 190,
191-196. 200. 203, 227. 229, 231. 252. 278,
288. 289, 294, 295. 308. 31S, 317, 318, 327,
140. 399, 409. 433. 438. 447. 4*6. 453. 459,
461, 463-465. 467. 503. 504, S06. 511. 512.
514. 51S. 517. 527, 530, S3S. S70-S74. 587,
589. 590, 599, 603. 611, 614-516. 623, 628.
629, 632, 633, 636, 6*0, 6*5
,y Google
■ lrT*4Utt«n of SpMlfIc Coaodtttn (ceM'd)
. M7. f»
. M, »>
. S4. to, t1. 117. in. IH. 117, 147. 1*1, in.
2ia. zn, tu. i». t3s. 3M. m. m. im,
HI, iM, m. uz, «7t, 47). sa. IM. SM.
MS. IM. 617. Sa
Tangtlo (tM a
TOMU ...
. I-1I. Z7. 71, W, 17S, tlS. I4S. ZS7, IM.
as, ua. 400, (U. «u, 477. 4ao. t». sn.
fill, U1. 134
iRMct CSiitrol . .
tatno Mel* .
tocortle «cH {iM
IS. 31. 3S-38, *l. 74, 7S, f(a-111, tSi, IH,
Z49. t», 3li. 324. 3», 4U, 413, 4Z4, 4M.
417, Sl». UO. HI. SM, 601, 606, 630, 611,641
Phytlaloglcil ind IfochMtcal Eff*ct*1
. II. I». 340. 34Z. 4». 607. 508. 611
. «8, 70. 169, IB4, 103, 634
qiMllty)
. 69. 70. 62, 1U. 181,166. 1»C, S70, HI, «>
Ncttc Covewid*
. ... 84. 144, 492, 4»f. US
. ... 87, SI. 4*3, 481, 483, S90. Stt. (00
. Ml. nt, 314. IH
. ... 69. 70, Its, 400, 474, SI4, HO
. 91, 93, ZM. Z8S
,y Google
kitntlonil rluilltjr .
Mcortic Acid
. 196, 306, XS, m. SOT. SOt, SW. SM
0 Nutrltleni) Oitllty,
ScniDry EiiliMtton
rautin) Inhibition
• CMtlngi, ?»ct»gn. Lincri .
. Z. 7. 9.12. ia, 27, 83. 87. 137, 16i-16«,
168, 1B2. ISB, 189, ?09. 2Z». JJO. 267. 276,
29J. »3, 103, 33!. 337-340. 3«, 343. 34S.
349. 3S9. 396. 399. 402, 403, 411. 413-41S,
431, 4)7, 438. 448. 452. 461, 474. 488, 487,
481.49), 493-496. Ul. iZ2. S24-»6. $33.
S34. S40, 542, S4J, Ml, 564, 57S, 576, 584.
5a9-S9l, S9«. 597. S99. 600. 602, 606, 606,
611, 614, 6^1. 625, 629, 632. 633, 637
. 67, 107. \n. 166. I7S, 19S, 202. 212. 229.
242, 308-311. 333. 357, 432, 435. 440, 570.
574, 586, 588. 623. 632. 633
. it. 88. 260, 273. ;75. 416. 439. 441
. «ZE, 4Zg, 60*
. 10, 20, 24, 39, 42, 125, 206. 271, 273, 284.
285,300. 410, (39, 441, 466. 494. SU. 635
. 10. la, 19. IS. 84, 125. 149. 150, 153, 175.
113, 230, 239, 272. 277. 284. 285. 300, 503.
328, 350, 351. 357. 391. 392, 419. 128. 481,
482, 489, 496, 595. 604. 634. 637
, 154
. 1, 14. 46. 5(. 76. M, 111. 1Z4, 17*. 190,
191. 193, W, 278, ZSI. 19), 306, 31t. 31B,
399. 4H. 438. 655, 484, 10), 506, 51), 530.
531, 5)4. 570, 605, 111
. 1, II. 13, 14, 18, 15.38. 40-42, 44, 45, 66,
71. 77, B4. IA, 95, 97. 103-105, 118. 11»,
128. 130. 131, 118-142, 146. 155, 165-167.
170-172. 175, 177, 179, 184, 186, 187, 195,
200, 201. 203. 205, 208, 211. 212, 224. 225,
232, 233. 236-238. !45-248. 250. 252-254.
264, 278. 283. 294, 307-310. 317. 330. 331.
343, 344, 346. 364. 371, 376-380. 383, 384,
391, 397-399. 406. 408. 409, 420, 423, 424,
426. 428, 435. 440, 442, 444-44S, 453, 454,
456-459. 46;. 465. 468. 471, 485. 497, 498.
501, 502. 504, JOS-SIO, 512-514, 516-518.
528-530, 536. 572. 575, 582. 585, 587,
591-593, 593. 603. 604, 610, 615, 616, 618,
623, 624. 626-628, 6J6. 647
. 1M, 456, 458
. S2, 117, 147, 41S
. 199, 218, tn. 477, 480
,y Google
REFERENCES TAKEN FRW:
RADURIZATION AND RADICIDAtlOH
or SPIdES
KSFSRBKCSS
,y Google
„GoogIe
re--
ll aiaf. UL,Hl. ti. iiwa.
1 lll*M. Hltltil. Mil.
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
ThmM. K. .
Talata, R. H.
tMlll. U. K. . . . .
. 4M
ViIvkU, I
. IS7.ZM
Wlwrti. 1
. I«,K1
«« 4m- LliMi. H. J.
. N
«MCKk.«. i. . .
.«»
«M uv. J. c. ■ .
. 17«.4M.(IS.iir
Hrtwabt. a. .
MIt, ft. H. .
WmHi, J. . .
HMbliftM, C.
unit, r. A. .
Mf . J. . . . .
MlfWrt, R. y.
ttatt* >■ T. F.
Hi. H T. . . .
Y
T(tM. It. R. . .
lawil, R. [. . .
h). t. K. . .
Z
Zm. r. a. C.
vMi.r. . . .
vnttgit. c. R.
VUmt. c. j. .
VUmt. f. . . .
Ml. r. A I«.«H
ikrta. ■. C m
iktarii. A. t 4»,4tl
,y Google
CWUImTI Mi P*Cto|l<l|
Cwtrsll** W»I><T1|
Faql (n* alM OMar)
■ Irradlitlon-CMMnil ITTicti
la. iH. »«. SSI, m, 4H. (a, 451, «h.
n, a. n. m. ai. «. «. ni. lat. mi, w
MB. til. n4. m, a*, ni. lit. w. M.
m, s«-jii
IH, m. lu. ««o-4ti, «•
II, 3t, 71, in. m. m. itr. in. m, »«.
tfi, fa, m. xw. Hf. r~ — —
MS, SM, SM. Sn. Ml. I
»-». M. III. 117. 1»,
iM, in. m
», «. IK. tW. IM, IM
■r, !■«. &«■■ c^i
. UI. MS. M.
I, 411, 4f7. «•
HT, ttt. 4W, W. 117
HI. sot. SZ7, iX, $40
im: su^sn. w, C3I
. . . 3. 16. II. Z4.M. 3S-39
H. 95. IM. IZO, in.
14«. I4S. 154, 1S7. isa
47. S1-S3. U-GS, H,
31. IK. 136. 141-143.
m, 170-171, 18S,
247, 24t, 2S3, 2M, 26S
257, 311. J1». 3ZS. 334
J70-3eO, J«.3eS. 388-31
4M. 410. 413. 42S. 416
26G-270, Z7«, 280,
33S, »1, 344-349,
t, »E, 404. 406,
4)6, 444, 4S0, 460,
4et; 4C«-471, 4e6-4«l, 497. 49e. M», !
SIS. SZ1. Sn-S43. S53, SSS. SS6, 5S9. SCI-5«S,
S7). sao-saz, m, sta. wt. tie, 6ia, tzo.
«]1, 63S, 64Z-644, 646
m IrrMlitlonof S»«ir<c CoMdltln
taola 117. 173, Itt, IM. ttt. tSt. 1
m. «3M4I. *M. «M. HI. S
M7. SM, IM
Upricot III. 3M
Artldtoka Mt
MMr*)ui 41*. 4n, •»
KvMtda Itt, IH. 177. tSt, n
,y Google
884
M, 4f. i». 131. in, i«7, nt, tn, i
. W, 4I> II>. ■]•• IBIl ••'■ U>> <"• <■>•
IM. )M. JH. ». M. 4». 411. m, IM,
terry (mi (Im w^itte fnilti) .
Cwt«lw*t M. )l*. DO. *H
CtrrM IH. I4a, Ml. Sit
Omrt H. ICI. as. »•. Ml, Mt
OmtMt IN. Ml
Otlcwy m. S», 9N
CItm (tM «lM •fweiriG fraltl) . . N. It. 140, lU, IBS, MS. MS. 174, CTS.
ITt, IM. m. W, 3SI, «H. 4IT, 4n. «•>.
491, Sta, SM
IM, 11*
tetM u. «a-7o, U7, IT*. MS, an
OwMrry S«
t«pl"* *"
EitdfM 110
Ft) M, Z5B. lit
torllc 16$. IH. 224. Itt. 4Da, US
Ul»r to*
Srtpt 7t. ISS. 1«0, ZSl. 1». Sll
Srapafrwlt (m« *Ih Cltnl) m, t4S. ZOT. 4tt, 411. SM
te«m 17. 221
Ugwi IS, 4M
UttUCt IM
iMWi (IM ilM CItrwi) », II, 151, W. MS-MI, 9H
llM (*M alio CItm) 11
tMhM 41, •*. 90, MI. 417
,y Google
m trradlittoa of Spiclfic CoaodlttM (eoM'd)
Hindirlit (im alio Cltnit) .
i>. ti. 41. 4s. ai-«i. N. 10). izi. i», m.
m. iM, III, 1SS. i7f, 109. in. i«t. »i.
m, tn, m, «». tft, 4si, 474. s», sw.
SK. m. 5N. Ml. tot, tot
. ItO. »). 3t7. 3t), 3t7
• (tMOl*a Cttn») .
PHch
. »4. »•
. 4«. in; 124. IM, )M. m.HM, Its, 21). tlO,
m, m. m. nt, no, ii7, m, lu, tot,
401, 4M. 4», «ll. 4H, t«, »>, SIf, 111.
Sit, S7S. StI, H7
. to. n>)l, 77. 7t. «1. M, tl, Itt, I4S. in.
207, 214. lit. 2f7. 27I.27S, lit. ItS. Ul.
Its. 414. 41S, 437, «tS, SOD
. 222, 22S, t12
. Ill
. M. 40, 4t. 44, Sl-tl, «7. N, ISt, IM, 244.
2H. »4. 421, 432, lit, SM
1
. 23. 2a, N. tM. 2n. m. 3lt. Kl. 3S7.
1. 3M, 3a7, tOS. 407. i2t
. 14S. 131. 1«4. 43D. a07
. 94, 31*
. I, 32, H, S7. 67, 7t, Bf-tt, I03>I07, III.
Ill, IX. lit. 174, in. IM. Itt. IM,
1«-19f. 200. 201, 227. 21«. 211. 25t. 271.
tm. t». 2M, 2«S, lot, IIS, 317. 31t. 327,
140. m. 40t, 411. 43t, 447, 44t. 411, 4»,
4S1. 4a]-4tS, 4C7, 503. S04. MM, 511, 512,
514, 5It. 517. 527. 510. 53t. 570-574. HI,
5«. 9M. 5M. Wl, til, tU-filfi, 621, 62t,
629, 612, til. 616. 640. t4S
52
,y Google
* tmdlatloa of Specific C«M»4ltlH (cont'd)
. W7, «»
. M, 31*
. H, 90, II, 117. IZI, m. 117. 147, HI. 177,
tia. I», tst. Z». I3a, 3M, X3, U), ]H,
Ml, iH, Ml. **t, m, 47), nt. m, sm.
S4S, fSB. S17. sn
SHMt POUtO
Tingtto (mo olio CItrui) . .
Tmglrln* (m aUo Cltnii) .
ToMU
. I-12. 27. 71, 1M, ITS. I3S, MS. tS7, 184.
as. ua. 400, m, m, vn, ua. sis. su.
S19, 6tl, 634
. 149, ISI, 20S. 321. 424, 449. S76, «4T
Inuct Contm IS, 13. 35-38, i1. 74. 75, 1M-111, 1M, ISI.
Z49, Zm, 3lf. 324. 3ZS. 411, 421. 4Z4, 4M,
497, SI), 520, S81, S94. Ml. COS. «30. C3I, C4i
HiUbollw (>•• *tia Phytlologlcil ind tfochnlul EffKtl}
. 11. 125, 140, 342. 4m, 507. 508. 611
talHO Acid* .
NtcOTtlC Acid (iM »
CirMqidntM .
. IB, 70, 1C9, 1B4, ni, SM
, 70. 82, 112, 182,1*6. I»C. 570. 583. •»
Pcctlc CnpDindi
PhMOlIc Cnpomdi
Pl^antt . . .
rrotoloi . . .
volitllti . . .
Nlti-«9*n
. 34. 144. 492. 49), 528
. B7. 88, 4«, 482, 483. 590. 5*7. 100
. 243, 252, 314, 591
. 69. 70. 125. 400. 474, 514, 560
. 91. 93. 214, »a
. 19)
,y Google
utrftloiul OMiltr It, M, n, \\», It*, tti, 3lt. 3U, M4-44C,
4S1, 471, S9S
Aicorttc Acid II. IM, 3H. MS. 471, M7. 501, SM, 598
Iiyilala9<c*l ind (tochnlcfl EffKti
[iH aU« Httlballifl] t. 7. 4-11. II, 27, S3, 87, 137, 1U-1t4,
I6a. 1BZ. 1SB, in, Z09, ZZ9, ZIO. »7. 176.
JM. »1. M3. 3U, 337-340. 34t, 343, 34S.
34I, 381, 3t6. 3M, 402. 403. 411. 41I-4IS,
4». 437. 43S, 4a, 451. 4CI, 474. 4M. 407,
*m-»}. 4f]-«M. s», sa, SH-Kt. sa.
■ S34. S40, S41, S43, HI, H4, S7S, S7t, SS4,
50t-»l, SM, M7. SM. 600. 601. 60t, 60C,
en, 614, Ml, CIS. 6Z9. 832. 633, 637
Mllty [iM ilu NutrltfOMl OulUy.
Stonga, (tc. ) 67, 107, IZZ. 186, 175. IH. tX, III. Z»,
141. 308-)II, 331, 1ST, 4K. 4IS, 440, 570,
574. 50*. too. ttl. 611. 631
ApMtnnM/Calar 29. BO. MO. m. I7S. 416, 43*. 441
Atom 411. 420, 604
S«niory EMlWtlM 171. 2S7, 205. 196. 301, 407. 4n, 427.
419-431. «3*, 441. 4SI. S7T. 626
T«ti.r« 12, 16, 21, 21. 2S. 47, U. 91, 281, 330,
M6, 4M. 4J0, 441, Sit
iplntldfi 10. ». 24, It. 41, 125. m, 271, 273, 204,
Its, 300. 410, 419, 441, 46*. 494. 811, 6H
BMing ID, II, It, 40. M, 126, 141. ISO. IS], ITS,
"^ * in, IN. in. 171. m. im, los. lOo. ko,
321, 350, ISI. 3S7, It). Ml. 41*, 42S, 401.
401. 40*. 496, 515, 804. 814, 837
fety 154
roMtlng inlilbltloi. I. 14, 46. 56. 76, ««. 123, H*. I". "0.
m, 191. 217. 171. 21*. 2t3, 305, 115, III,
199, 414. 430. 4SS. 484. 503. 508, 511. 530.
511, 514. 670, 605. 611
or.« 1. II, 11. 14. II. K.30. 40-4Z, 44, 45, 6*.
71. 77. 84. 94, 95. 97. 103-lOS, III, 119.
120, IM. 111. 130-142. 146. 155. I8S-I87.
170-171. 175. 177. 179, 104. 106. 117. 195,
200, 101. 201. 208, 201. III. 211. 114. 115.
232. 211, 218-238, 145-248. 250, 151-Z$4.
264. 170, 281, 294. 307-110. 317. HO, HI,
343. 344. 146, 314, 37), 376>3I0. 301. 384,
39), 3*7-3*9. 406, 401. 40t, 410. 4». 414,
418, 428. 43S, 440. 442, 444-440. 4S3. 4S4.
4SS-45f. 462. 465, 480, 471. 48S, 4*7. 490,
SOI. 502, SD4, 500-510. 511-514, »I-S18.
SlS-530, 518, 571, 575. 582. 585. $07,
591-5*], 590, 601, 104, 610, 615. 616. 618.
813. 624. 618-628, I3f. 647
fici CMtlngi, rtttjgn. Lincri 116. 458. 458
:1t1ty K. 117. 147. 418
«ilt 199. 218. 431, 477, 400
,y Google
REFERENCES TAKEN FROM:
BADUmZATION AND RADIODAtlON
REFiaSllCB*
. M.IL. ii-LiiiW-mi nf.«iii>m.«a
A. I.. BCa. (.. Uimott, U., Imlftlm^lbmltm
,y Google
lUI HADUMC L, t
CL. bxllUt U ■«■< .H||ll >«K ll«. ■■(. a
I - vm QhU> biktiliilajiKf U
.!»..'(. hF>ui,>.iiH4n
■^^„K*,aKtmllMUmi<.tHi
,y Google
■*■ IP tiiiM i«», Hia. a». uaiMiv
■■ Owf lUnva. Mfi vs. Hat. |11
„GoogIe
nit UK. H> Tot. uu. VHHiiinan
„GoogIe
AfTiciiltuciI Vounh 5*rvle*
■c*TTT Rcfion, eai;rrn RafleflBl lasaarc)! Cantar
Lteion Sttrilittd Oiickwi 7a»Icole<r ScuiUt
■niii Studi*! sf Prccoolwd (faiyam Inaccivuai} K"tl7.Sa (Ml}
^oduct* U Vacum 5**l«d CaniaiBars Eipssad If — 14.M (Ml)
of Isniiini lUdiictan SuKieltnl to Achlan
[>1 Starflicjr" (SusmxTj et Supqntlni DociBanti]
ESRC-ARS Docia
Antul Ftaditif Studv Frstocel (or Imdtatlira
Sttrtltiad TaiC foods: Piciiiting M*:*rtati tm Ot
Ouztng Iha loniiini IrradUcisn Sttr-ll lilt tan of
Pr«-PicV4)ed Chitken Produeci; irriJiclon Staril
C^lckin Ptoduc Tichnoloi;', Proaje; Qoilit)',
FaailbiliC)' (TKhnic.l Report)
E<UtC-A!tS Docia
Croup ins)
17313 Chronic Toiicitj', Oneofanictt/, and >hlcl|anaTaCion
Ac:iroduciiV6 Scud/ Uilnf C9-t Hlca to !v>liuta FToim.
Thinully Scerl i:ad, Cab>lC-«0 Irrwliicad, and 10 MaV
Elaecran trradlatad CMckcn ^Kit (Final Raport)
ERRC-AKS Doe^jHnl Nos. «1 Co 54
7B«4-ttTS2a Irradlaclon Scarilliad Oiick
Tonicltif «id Beprnductiv. P.
ERHC-AItS Ooeiatnt Noi. SS to tl
ion Starllltad Chiekan: Faadlnt Sttidr In
,y Google
tlon Sc«rili:e Clitekri TaUcolofT SEmlUa
d lUc T*ritolo|y Studlii
Chickin Produces
t No*. «S, M, «7, mnd U
PU4.|«T0Si Ccnctic Studlii: Ooniiunt Ltlhal Studr. Sh Unkad
4*e*siiva Lathsl, Ami Mutijtnictcr, mi Mrltibl*
TriTistscii'on Tiic of TtieTBtl Prseiiiid, Froicn.
ELeciTon Irr«lt>i«d. ind Guaia Imdtsctd Chiektn
' ERPC-UtS OaeuMBt Hoi. U, TO, 72 «nd U
H3'-13'UI Proitiri Efflelinci> Riilo Dxirminatloni of (rrsdlatlon PC—n-SO (EDI)
SC(rLli:*d Chtckan Produce) W"M.SO (AOt)
E<UIC-US Docuatnt Ml. TI, TI
,^tivi-.iain Studias of Iirultalioa Starlltiod U*t and K--!ia.SO (Etl)
Chiekan, AiieiiMnt of Hutafanlc Actlvicr of Iiradlatad »F— t 4. SO (Ml)
S**f Uitni th* Ami SalMiwlla/Huaollin MiMganlclty
EMC-AJtS Doeiaant Nos. 7S, 7«. 7T and 7)
PU4. 117119$ Ridiot/sii Co^auidi In lacan and Chiekon
„GoogIe
REFERENCES TAKEN "ROM
VflHriesomeness of
irraiOaled food
Report ot a Joint FAO/IAEA/WHO
Expart GommiRM
World Health Organization
Technical Report Series
World Health Organization, Geneva 1981
,y Google
REFERENCES
n </ At fAOtWMOHAEA Mt0t^ am At
1 ~ — p- J- -J- ■
^ .-^ ■ . ., ^ .- ... j
S. ■'^ , - ■ " — (— ■ J.. - .J. ■
■M ««W r^brsn ■■ ■*■« ^awwa airf drifrv. Raped g( ■ ieM FAO/
J — ■ 1
A WHO Tl^ritH mraR VmhM. Nil tOI, I9TT (WtataHM tf ^r^lmiHttA
IMpM ■■(■ JaM FACVIAEA/WHO Eivm CtB^Ml).
.< Illl r ifAtllJ nil) >l*H^>llbwfc»J>M^l/
■■>•«•< l< H(r. Ut Anr (MM R»
' B Nb. DAAKW-ra-R-OMn, April
,y Google
REFERENCES TAKEN FROH:
RADIATION CHEMISTRY OF MAJOR
FOOD COMPONENTS
P.S. Elias
AND
A.J. Cohen
ELSEVIERSCIBNnnC FUBUSHINO COMPANY
AMfflERDAM-OXVORD-NIWYORK 1977
„GoogIe
i(T
Swallow, A.J. (1973). Badtatlon Chaaistry: An Introduction,
p. IS. UmfBan, London.
NBtlonal Roaaarcli Council: Food Protection Co«Mitt«« (1973).
Radlonuclldas in Foods, p. 95. .fatlonal Acadaav of Scl«DC«n,
■■BblDStOQ.
Attlx, F.H. RoMCb, W.C. a Tochllio. K. (IS66-9). andlatlon
Dosliwtry. lad ad. Acadealc Press, New York.
Swallow, A.J. (1973). Radiation Chttsistry; Ad latroduetloo,
p. 99. LongBiD, [Asdon.
Drataniu. I.G. » DragaDlc, Z.O. (1971). Tb* ftadlatloo CbMtatry
of later. Acadealc Press, New York.
Itorfnan, L.X. k Adau, C.B. (1973). Eleactlvlty ol the Hydroxyl
Badlcal tn Aqueous Solutions. NSItDS-.lBS4S , ■aabiaston.
Hart. E.J. k Anbar, M. (1970). The Rrdrated Bleotron. atley-
loteraclence. New York.
,<et>. P. (1972). Reactions of hydrofeD atoms la aquoous
solutions. Chen. He*. 72. S33.
Swallow, A.J. (1973). Ors*olc tree radicals produced by radi-
ation. HTP International Review ol Science, Orfsnlc Cheolstry
Series One. 10. 263.
10. Hiyon, E. a SlDlc , H. (1974). Acid-base properties of tree
radicals In solution. Accounts Chea. Res. 7. 114.'
„GoogIe
3.8 g«fer»ncea
of blsli iatenalt!
flah olla. n Rai
Beke, H. Tobbi
compounds upon gunua-l
Congreaa on Food 3c 1. .
I.e. (1968). CbaractarlaatloB of •«■•
Ha. Oil Cbea. Sac. 4S, 843.
<r*. O., Branch, A. t Huber, ■. (1953). tft«et«
«l«ctroD bursts upon varloua vafStabl* and
17, 571.
1073]. InfliMfuw ot
I tb* lipid* of peaauts and valauta. II. Quall-
:ativ« iDvaaclfatloD of polar lipids. Ssltwn-
98, SOS.
baer. )l.,Doty. D.U. « Scbmralfart . B.S. (1M7).
-bonyl coopounds during Irradlatloa of aaat aad
ra Chen. 5, 700.
EnrtchinaDt. aaparatloo, aad gaa chroaatograpblc
,c studlas of tbs clSBvage products of Irradlacad
■odsl substaocas. Bur SIM d/a/f/l/a M.
Haas. e. (1974). Efface of «aaBa>lrradla-
J. Fd Scl. Tschnol. 7, 291
Uaes, E. (1975). StabllltF of llpldlc
Ldlatlon. ProcBodlngs of tbe -Ith tat.
id Tech., Madrid. Spain.
Banchsr, E., Vasboattl, J. 8 Collar,
■KHta radiation
or heatad fats, t
B«ks. H. Tobback
Burton, V.L. (1943
J. An. chem. Soc.
Champacne , J . H ,
irradlatad beat
. Chans, P.. Younat
loked t
. The effecia of radioactivity on oleic acid.
.969). The volalll* conpoaenta of
J. Fd Set. 34, 335.
B.U. (1961). Lipid oxidation
frlgeratlon, freezing and
itloi
Fd T
. Chlpault, J.R.
Fooda. The AVI Publlshl
. Chlpault, J.R. 8
to the U.S. Qui
Arned Forces, Cfi:
19-139-QII-1390
. Chlpault, J.R. 8 Klxun<
Iha U.S. Quartannaster
Forces. Chicago. Projei
QX-lSaOi File 8-564.
1962).
File S-
IllT.
«.W. (
fats.
8 lati
19, 168
High ene
C.R. (
rojact Ho
.564.
-■diatlon. In SyatpoaluB on
itport. Conn. p. LSI.
Report No. a. December 1999.
Institute tor the
-B4'0t-003; Contract Ho. DA
11960). Report No. 3, June 1960, to
1 Container Institute for the AnMd
.84-01-003: Contract No. DA 19-130-
,y Google
14. Chlpault, J.R. k KttuBO. C.
n. (I960). Raport
. DacMbar 19C0,
'ood and Cont>la*r [aatttuce for tb*
i«ct rio. 7-84-01-003; Contract No.
S-Sa4.
t. (1964). Effects ot Ionizing radl-
[I. AcciiBulatlon of peroxidaa and oth«r chemical
Cb«B. Hoc. 41. 463.
Hlzuno, C.R. (1966). Effect* of lonlzlnB radl-
J. a(rlc. Fd Chea. 14, 3ES.
a Lundberl. V.O. {195S). Final Report
quartermaster Food and Container
;es, Chicago. Project 7-84-01-002;
to the U.S. quarteraastei
Araed Forces, Cblcago. Pro;
DA-19-Iil9-qil-1350: File No.
. Chlpault, J.R. k Hizuno. <!
chanse*- J.Aa
. Chipault, J.R.
Btions OD stabllitF of t'
. Chlpault, J.R. Hizuno. G.R
26 October IBSS to the U.S
Institute for the Armed Foi
Contract No. DA-19-I29'qU-334 ; File No. S-564.
. Chlpault. J.R.. Prlvett, O.S. , Klzuno. C.R. , NlcKell , t.C. t Lund-
berg, ■-O. (1957). Effect of ionizing radiations on fatty acid
esters. Ind. Engng Chem. 49, 1713.
. Clubb, K.I. & Wills, E.U. (195S). Tb* effect of irradiation on
unsaturated fatty acids and sulphydryl enzymes. Blochem. J. 71,
16.
. Coleby, B. (1939). CbemlcaL cbanses produced la lipids by Irradi-
ation. Int. J. appl. Radlat. Isotopes 6, 71.
. Coleby, B.. Ingram, U. , Rhodes, D.H. k Shepherd, R.J. (1962).
Treatment of meats with ionizing radiation. X. Irradiation
preservation of pork sausages. J. Sel. Fd Agrlc. 13, 628.
. Croesley, A., Heyes , T,L. t Hudson. B.J.F. (1962). The effect ot
lieat on pure triglycerides. J. Am. Oil Cbem. Soc . 39, 9.
. Day, E.A. A Papatoannou, S.E. (1963). Irradiation- induced changes
in milk fat. J. Dairy Scl. 46, 1201.
. Diehl, J.F. (1974). Qualitative and quantitative changes in the
components ot irradiated foodstuffs. Suggestions for further
s omen ess . Report of a study ui
of the European Coirmunlties . ' -
. Dravert, F. (1974). Comparisons, qualitative contrasts, and
al discussion ot hydrocarbons and oxygen compounds ■
■vage products of irradiation or beating of fai
stances. Euratom (REP), EUR 9126 d/e/f/1,
, H.F. A Havar, R.W. (1968). Radlolysls of lipid*
.ge in simple triglyceride*. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc.
, H.F. A Nawar
. (1969). Effect
hlgh-c
,y Google
radlfttlon on tha lipid* o( fish. J. agrlc. Fd Cbea. IT, 639.
28. Dubravclc, M.F. fe Hftwar, R.W. (1976). Effect of Iroe tmtty aelda
oa th« radtolyals of trlflycerlaea. Subaitted for Publication.
J. agrlc. Fd Cbea.
29. Ousan, L.R. k Landls, P.I. (1956). Influence of bleb energr
radiation on oxidation of oleic acid and methyl oleate. J. Aa.
Oil Cham. Soc. 33. 152.
30. Endraa, J.C.. Bhalerao, V.R. aKuimeTaw, F.A. (1963). Theml
oxidation of synthetic trtslycerldea. II. Analysis of the volatlLit
condensable and noncondensable ptiasea. J. An. Oil Chen. Soc. 39.
159.
31. Farmer, E.H., Bloontleld, G.F. . Sundrallngham, A. a Suttoa, D.A.
(1942). The course on oechanism of autonldatlon reactions In
oledalc and poly-olef inic substances, lacludina rubber. Trana
Faraday Soc. 38, 348.
32. Faucltano, A.. Locatsllt. P., Perottl, A. ft Paucttano H.F. (1972
Y-Radiolysls of crystalline oleic acid. J. cfaeo. Soc. Perkln Tr*i
II p. 1786.
33. Flllpov. v.. Efimova. U. & Kuanetsova. E. (1964). (Manses In tbs
(als of foods Y-irradlat?d during prolonged storage. Hater. Etauch.-
PrakC.Kon'., Ispol'Z. loniz. I^cuch. Mar. Khoz. 261.
31. Firestone, D. , Horwlla, w.. Friedman. L. » Shue, CM. (1961).
Heated fats. I, Studies of the effects of heating on the chemical
nature of cottonseed oil. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 38. 253.
35. Forsa. D.A.. Angellni. P. Bazinet, U.L. a Uerritt. C. { 19fi7) .
Volatile compounds produced by copper-catalyzed oxidation of
butterfat. J. An. Oil Chen. Soc. U. 141.
36. Fujlnakl, }>.. Uorlta, M. . Kashio, H. t Kato. H. (197.1). Gainna
Irradiation effects of the ant loxldatlve activity developing in
the amino acid-sugar reaction. Agrlc. btol. Chen. 36, 2323.
37. Greene. B.E. b latCs, B.U. (1966). Lipid oxidation In Irradiated
cooked beef. Fd. Technol. ZO (8). 111.
36. Hannan. R.S. & Boag , J.W. (19SZ). Effects of electronic irradi-
ation on fats. .'4ature, Lond. 1^. 152.
39. Hannan, R.S. k Shepherd, H.J. (19M). Some after-effects In fats
Irradiated with high-energy electrons and X-rays. Br. J. Radiol.
27. 36.
40. Hannan, R.S. k Shepherd, H.J. (1952), An alter-effsct la butterfat
irradiated with blgh-enersy electrou. Nature, Load. 170 , 1031.
41. Higman. E.B. . Schmeltz, I., Hlgman, C. B Chartyk. O.T. (1973).
,y Google
studies on the themwl degradation ol naturally occurring Dat«r-
. Products from the pyrolyaia of triglrc«rldes at 400°.
kgrtc. Fd Chwi. 31. M3.
. J.E.. ■ertheln, J.H. t Proctor. B.E. (1959). Radiation
trvalion of milk and ntlk products. V, Precursors to the
ktlon-induced oxidation Ilavor of Bilk (at. J. Dairy Scj. 42.
on. D.R. (1S63). Nature of the products farmed by gairma
Ion of daaerated aqueous potasstua oleate. Radlat . I
181.
S. (19671. Caoaa radlolysts of oleic ai
Soc. §9
Ahmed. A. ft Sayed. K. (196B). Gaimu
oils. 11. E(
7:11.
ahli
IS and fi
peroxy com[
rm. Cairo, Oi
(1971). The radlolysls of aliphi
boxylatlon of normal acid* at 38
(1971). The radlolysls of allptii
lecarboxylatlon of normal scld) In
447.
i KhOD
(196S). Inhl
;curring In meat product fat* under the effeci
ty of f
Bull.
Ic carboxyllc acids:
Radlat. Res. 47, 39.
tc carboxyllc acid*,
he liquid state. Radla
Ic
J»T. Khoz. 49, e2.
of Ionizing radiatltn
ztng radiations. Nauch . Tr. Hosk. In!
lam, J. P. & Na«ar, W.W. (19S9). Effei
one vegetable fats. J. Am. Oil ChWB. Soc. 46, 387.
rl, L.L., Ltbey, L.U. k Day, E.A. (1966). Identification of
tile components of gaana-irradlated milk fat. J. agric
14, 46S.
lapp. F.K. t Tappel, A.J. (19S1). Some effects of r-radlatloo
' peroxidation on a-tocopberol . J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc
38. 151
appro)
. Duong. T.B. k Svrcek. W.V. (1973). A statistical
h to the subjective snd objactlvs awansurenenta of odor*
by t-lrradlatlon of beef fat. J. Fd Scl. 38, 369.
. N., Duong. T.B. k Svrcek, W.V. (1973). v-Irrsdlatloo of
t. Effects on odor Intensity and rancidity. J. Fd Scl.
„GoogIe
n lletfan. Eii;tn ll*iicnil R««amreh C*ni*r
OB SctrtlUtJ Chtek«n Toxiealo;!!' StuJiM
?M4-1I«)10 Miat*sas«i*ii StudUs of PTKoaked CEaiyoi iMCClvatad)
Chicken Produci* in Vacuus Sultd Contilnars Eipoitd
to Doiei of toniiint Radlaclon Sufftcltnt to Achlcn
"Cooa»rel«l SttrllU)'" ISiBmxrf at Supiortltij Doeownti)
AntBiI F**dinf Studr Protocol for Imdlation
Sc*rlll»d T«*t Foodi ricki[ln( HiTtrtils tor Us*
DuEini iti* lent in; Inadiiiian Stctillttilon of
Pro-Pjckijed Chicken Prmlutu; Imlisclon Suriltiod
Chick*!) Ptoduc Tichnologv, Prod'Jc; qiulltx,
FoMlbiJity [Technicit Hraort)
E<UC-U5 Doeanent Moi. *0, »2 «iul IJ (Protocol
';a4-t87'a4 Anlnal Faadinf Studv for IrridUtad Stiriliiod Diickan
ielty. Oncoienicity, snd MuLtlgonotMlon
e Jcuilr Uilnf O-l Hlc* to £y«luata Froion.
C(rlli:«d, Cobllt-AO Emdittad. and 10 HoV
ridLaied CMekan Jfeit (Final Saport)
ERRC-AJtS Doc-junt
PUt-UTOU trradlation Stirllliod Chickan: F«adU| Study In
. lUci
EUlC-AllS Docuaanc 9e. 6*
„GoogIe
8»
n Surtlm Chitlign Toticoloay Scudit
rU4-l>'0S> Gen
Pa94-13;!]6l Proi
PM4-U7079 Anti
PU4-lB70gT Evili
Chiektn Producn
. 66, 67. uid 69
Studlis: Dor
ucion Ten of TTii
1 ImdiaiAl. iRiJ
Dint Noi. n, 71
n StuJie* o£ Imdlition Sceriliied Btnf uwl PC--i2S,S0 (El!)
iieisBcnt of Mutagenic Activity at IiradLiiad HT--! 4.ia (AOl)
Chi Asei SalDonella/Maanollan ''^jcaieniclt)-
Pn4-11TIN; Hadlolxlii C(iap«imdi ia Bicon md Chlckni
»GoogIe
REFERENCES TAKEN "KH
Wholesomeness of
hadlaleil food
Report of a Joint FAO/tAEA/WHO
Expert Committee
0)
World Health Organization. Geneva 1981
,y Google
REFERENCES
1. ibrwl af *• tAOIWHOItAEA HM*« m *•
rvo^Zt-MOmtmltU,- — -^ * —
■>(«* IMh4 NMk 1M3.
2. , - ■ — [- f -J ■ -
— irwJMirfjhi* ri| niiinirnTTinpn-miTTBiiiiiiriMMiii
3. ' • •" i ' • — r"'r f ~ •/ 1 '
■M vdW ngtew IB f^m fimaB md t^tm. Htfon of ■ lnM FA<V
tAEA>WHO Eivm Obhv— -
■« at ■ IdM FAtVIAEAWHO b.
JM.«.l-.< ll I lllln<il«M
AdBi t7 dKHH If MBIT town M Mrf i* M(r. U Anr Nwd M-
rck 1^ D |«iil rfwi. CMano Na DAAlUO-n-K-OOOT. Aprt
)M.
«n af ■ AM nUMAMA/Wtm Adi^Kf Omm •■ r i if f Aiv*-
t If (wjMrf A>* w^foAiM I*** hi*. J« »—*■< a— 1^«
7. vihh. tBHiMigHi ambIc bap AiHqi. I trt (mnn/no).
riv. BMkHfc MD. IBA. 1 *nL
•dwikid b: tot «f wrflaUM i
■•.MD.UU.I*
fmrndM^rtM,
an (tn/ruiMn), f*^ 4i-s2.
Klrck InttlH (lUpon rfa. JAERI-MHMX, 197). fp, M'4T.
EBVtJ rurariiiiiiiiii I«T] (Rsa Rl^Bil Nsl ZMt).
„ Google
REFERENCES TAKEN FRON:
RADIATION CHEMISTRY OF MAJOR
FOOD COMPONENTS
EDlTOia
P.S. eias
AND
A.J. Cohen
ELSEVIBR.SCIENnPIC PUBLISHINO COMPANY
AMSTERDAM -OXFORD -NEW YORK 1B77
,y Google
si?
1 Chentstry: An Inlroductl
Swallow. A.J. (1973). I
p. IB, Longitian, London.
S«tlDn«l Hesesrch Council: food Pr<
RadlonuclldsB In Foods, p. 95. .'4atl(
Actti, P.H, Roesch. N.C. k TDChllln, t. tl966-9). Radiation
Dosimetrii. Znd ed . Academic Press. New York,
ShbIIow. A.J. (1973). Radiation ChemLSCTy . An Introduction,
p. 59 - Longman. London ,
DraganlL-. I.G. a Drasanlc. Z.D. (197l>. The Radiation Cnemisti
of Vater. Academic Preaa, Mw York,
Dorfman, L.JI. It Adana , G.E. < 1973) , Reactivity of the Hydroxy]
Radical In Aqueous Solutions. .NSRDS-NBStS , NisbtnsCan.
Hart. E.J. ft Anbar, V. (19T0). The Hydrated Electron. Wlley-
Interselence, Hen York.
.Jeta. P. (1972). Reactions ot hydrogen atoms in aqueous
solutions. Cbem. Rev. 7£. 333.
SwallQB. A.J. (19731. Organic tree radicals produced by radi-
ation. HTP International Re»iBw of Science. Organic Chemistry
Series One
10,
,y Google
3.8 B»fT«iiC««
1. ArtfflkD, H.a. ft Alexander, J.C. (1968). Characterliatioa of aoae
beatvd fat coaponeata. J. An. Oil Cbea. 3oc. 49. S43,
2. Astrack, A., Sorbye, O. , Branch, A. ft Hubar, V. (1993). Itfaet*
of blgb Inteosit)' electron buraCa upon varloiu vacatable and
flBb olla. Fd Re*. 12- ''!'
3. Bancber, B.. laaboettl, J. ft Goller, B. (l>72). [nCIueoo* of
(ama radiation on the llplda of peanuta aad valouta. II. Quftll-
tatlva and quantitative Inveatlgatloo of polar llptda. Salfvn-
Ole-Fette-Wachae iS, 309.
1. Batzer, O.F., Scrlbnay. •t.,Dotf, D.H. ft Schoalgert . B.S. <1M7}.
Production of carboo]il coopounda durlns irradiation of Bftat and
meat fata. J. agric . Fd Ctiea. 5. 700.
S, Beck. B. (1974). Enrlchoaat. aeparatloD, and gaa chrooatotraphlc
maas-speclrooetrlc atudies of the cleavage products of irradiated
or haatad fatft. oila and nodal subataocaa. Eur 9138 d/a/f/1/o »9.
8. Bake. H. Tobback, P.P. ft Haea. K. (1974). Bflact of gaau-lrradli-
tion at free fatty actda. J. Fd Sci. Technol . 7, 391
7. Bake, H. Tobback, P.P. ft Uaes, E. (1979). Stability of llpldlc
tdtatton. ProceedlDfe of the 4tb Inc.
i Tech. , Uadrtd, Spain,
effects of radioactivity on oleic ftcld.
. Soc. 71,
117.
, a.w.
1989:
. ft lattt
Chaiapfiie , J . H .
irradiated beal
. Chang. P..youni
in pre-cooked beef pref
irradiation. Fd Technol
. Chlpault. J.R. (1963).
Fooda. The AVI Publiah
. Chlpault, J.R. ft Mlzuni
to the U.S. QuarternuX
Aroed Forcea, Chicago. Projeci
19-139-011-1390; File S-S64.
. Chlpault, J.R. ft Klxuno. G.R. (1960). Report Ho.
the U.S. 4uarternaater Food and Container Inallti
Forcaa, Chicago. Project No. 7-84-01-003; Contrw
Q3I-1390; File S-5e4,
The volatile conponant* of
Fd Scl. 34, 339,
e.U. <1981). Lipid oxidation
rtgeratlon, freezing and
High energy irradiation. In SyaipoaluB on
Company. Westport. Conn. p. 191.
l.R. {19S9). Report Ko. 3, DeceMbar 19S9.
Food and Container Institute tor tlia
14-01-003; Contract No. DA
. June 1960, to
> for the Aroad
No. DA 19-139.
,y Google
R. (1M0>. Rapmrt No
'ood aad Contkloar lasti
|«ct ilo. 7-84-OI-OOa^ Contract
S-H4.
B. (I»e4). Stfect* (
ilatloD of paroxtda*
. Chtpault, J.R. ft Hlauoo, Q.
to th* U.S. Quartaraa*t*r 1
Aroad Fore**. Cblcaco. ProJ
DA-ie-139-qH-13S0 : Fll* Ha.
. Cblpault, J.R. h Htiuoo, C.
atlDoa on fata. II. Acciaii
chaniisa. J.Aa.Oil Cheo. Soc. 41, tea.
. Chlpault, J.R. fe Mlzuao. C.R. (IMS). Eflacts t
attona on stability of fats. J. a|rlc. Fd Cb«n.
. Chlpault. JR. HIZUDO. C.R. ft Lundbert. >-0. (ISU:
36 October 1953 to tba U.S. Quart eraastar Food
Institute tor the Amed Forces, Cblcago. Project
Contract No. DA-t9-13g-«l-334; File Ho. S-S64 .
. Chlpault, J.R.. Privett. O.S., Hlzuno, G.R.,NlCko
berg, t.O. (195T). Eflect of loolzlns radiations i
esters. Ind. EaEn( Cbea. 49. 1713.
. Clubb. H.W. & Wills, E.O. (IBSS). The effect of
unsaturated fatty acid* and aulpbydrrl enzymes. B
14.
. Coleby. B. (193S). Chenicsl chaatea produced In 1.
atlon. Int. J. appl . Hadiat. Isotopes S, 71.
. Coleby, B., Ingraa, K. . Rhodes, D.N. a Sbepherd, I
I. Final Report
Container
7-B4-0 1-002;
I.J. (1963).
23. Day, E.A.
of meats with ioolztDK radlstlon. X.
Ion of pork sausages. J. Scl. Fd Agrlc
A.. Heyes, T.L. 1 Hudson, B.J.F. (1962). The effect of
ure triglycerides. J. Am. Oil Cbem. 5oc . 39. 9.
k PapaloanDou. S.E, (1963). Irradlalion-loduced changes
nC, J. Dairy Scl. i6, 1201.
(1974). <]u>litatlive and quantitative changes lo the
Hiponents of Irradiated foodstuffs. Suggestions tor further
L studies as a contribution to the evaluation of ahole-
Report of a study under contract ellh tbe Copmlsslon
of the European Coimunltles.
. Drawert. P. (1974). Comparisons, qualitative contrasts, and
theoretical atscusslon of hydrocsrbons and oxygen cooipounda as
cleavage products of Irradiation or beating of fata, oils sad
model substances. Euraton (REP). EUR 9126 d/e/f/1/n. 109.
. Dubravclc, M.P. k Hswar, V.R, (1968). Radlolysls bf lipids: Node
of clesvage lo alaple triglycerides. J, 'An. Oil Chea. Soc. 45.
656.
. Dubravclc. KF. k Nawsr, l.«. (1969). Effects of high-energy
,y Google
ruHktion on ttia lipids ot tlah. J. agrlc. Fd Chaa. XT. 6».
28. Dubravclc, U.F. ft HanLr. a.I. (1976). Eltect of fr«* fattr Mtda
oa tha rkdiolyala of trlglycvrld**. 8ubBltt«d for Publlc&tlon.
39. DugaQ, L.R. ft Lsndla, p.l. (1956). Influence Of hlgb eoarnp
r&dlfttioa on oxidation of oleic acid and nethr' oleat*. J. Am.
Oil Chen. Soc. 33, ISa,
30. Endrea, J.C, Bhalerao, V.R. ftKuiMMroo. r.A. (1963). Tbenlftl
oxldLtloD of synthetic trlslycerldes. II. Analyaia of the volatile
condensable and Doncaadensable phases. J. An. Oil Chea. Soc. 39.
139.
31. Farnier. E,H. , Bloomfield, G.P, . Sundrallnghan, A. ft Sutton, D.A.
(194Z). The course on aiechanlsm of autoxldatton reactlooa Id
oleflnlc and poly-olef Inlc substances, including rubber. Trana
Faraday Soc. 38, 348.
33. Faucitano, A.. Locatelll, P., Perottl, A. ft Faucitano H.F. (1973
Y-Radlolysls of crystalline oleic acid. J. cbea. Soc. Perkln Tra.
II p. 1786.
33. Plllpov, y., Efimova. U. a Kuznetsova, E. (1964). Changea in tha
lata ot foods v-lrradlated during prolonged storage. Uater. Hauch.-
Prakt .KoaF., Ispol'Z. loalz. [zcuch. Har . Khoz. 361.
34. Fireacone, D. , Horwitz, v.. Friedman, L. i Shue. G.U. (1961).
Heated tats. I. Studies of the effects ot heating on Che chemical
nature ot cottonseed oil. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 38, 2S3.
35. Forss. D.A. , Angelini. P, Baiinet, U.L. i Merrltt, C. (1987).
Volatile compounds produced by copper-catalyzed oxidation of
butterfat. J. An. Oil Chen. Sac. 44, 141.
36. Fujlmakl. St., Morlta, U. , Kashio, H. t Kato. H. (1974). Camna
Irradiation effects of the anttoxidatlve activity developing in
the amino acid-sugar reaction. Agric. biol. Cheo. 38, 3333.
37. Greene, S.C. b Malts. B.M. (1966). Lipid oxidation in Irradiated
cooked beef. Fd. Technol . 30 (8), 111.
38. Hannan, R.S. I> Boag , J.W. (1953). Effects of electronic Irradi-
ation on tats. Nature, Lond. J^, 152,
39. Hannan, R.S. ft Shepherd, H.J. (1994). Sane after-effects In fata
Irradiated with high-enargy electrons aad X-rays. Br. J. Radiol.
«, 3B.
10. Hannan, R.S. ft Shepherd, H.J. (1952). An after-effect In butterfat
Irradiated vtth high-energy electrons. Nature. Lond. 170, 1021.
4I. Hlgman. E.B., Schmeltz. I.. Hlgnan. C. ft Chortyk, O.T. (1973).
,y Google
on the tbaraal dacr&datlan of naturally occurrlag natar-
. Products froa the pyrolyala of trlilycerldes at 400°.
agrlc. Fd Chtm. 31, XQ2.
£., lertbvln. J.H. t Proctor, B.E. (1999). Radiation
tlon ot allk and Bilk products. V. Precuraora to the
n-lnduced OKldatlon Ilavor of Bilk fat. J. Dairy Scl . t3,
i.
(ton, D.R. (1963). Nature of the products fomcd by gaimia
ion of deaarated aqueous potasslua oleate. Radlat . Res.
20. 161.
. Kovton, D.R. ft Vu, C.S. (1967). Ganna radlolysls of oleic acid.
J. An. Chen. Sac. 89, 516.
. Ibrahim U. , Said, F.. Ahmed. A. » Sayed, K. (196B}. Gamma Irradia-
tion of fals and tatty oils. 11. Effects of gsmia radiation on
the fatty peroxy confounds and on the stability of fata. Bull,
fac. Phara. Cairo, Univ. 7:11.
. Jonea, R. (1971). The radlolysls of aliphatic carhoxylic acids:
The decarboxylation of noraal acids at 39°. Radlat. Ran. 47, 39.
. Jones, R. (1971). The radlolysls of aliphatic carboxyllc acids.
On [he decarboxylation of normal acids in the liquid state. Radl^
Res. 48, 447.
. Janes, R. (197:^). Tbe radlolysls of aliphatic carboxyllc aclda:
On the decarboxylation of normal acids at 77°K. Radial. Rea . 90,
41.
. Kastornyka. U, U Khomutov. B. (I96B). Inhibltlnf tbe oxldlxlni
proceaaea occurring In meat product fats under tbe ettecca o(
ioalzioi radlBtiona. Nauch . Tr . Kosk. Inst. Nsr. Khoz. 49, 62.
. Kavalam. J. P. b Nawar, «.«. (1969). Effacta at Ionizing radlstldl
on BoiTie vegetable fata. J. Am. Oil Chea. Soc. 46, 387.
. Khatrl. L.L.. Libey, L.H. A Day , E.A. (1966). IdentiticatlOD ot
some volactle components of lansa- Irradiated milk fat. J. agric.
Fd Chem. 14, 465.
. Knapp, F.K. A Tappel , A.J. (1961). Some effects Ot T-radlat ton
on Ilnoleate peroxidation on a-tocopherol . J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc.
38, 151.
. Kosarlc, N., Duoni, T.B. t Svrcek, W.I. (1973). A atatlBtlcal
approach to the subjective and objective ■•aoauremants ot odors
induced by T-lrradlatloa ot bssf tat. J. Pd Scl. 38, 369.
. Kosarlc. H.. Duong, T.B. ft Svrcek, IT. (1973). y-Irradlatloa ot
beef (at. Ettects on odor Intensity and rancidity. J. Pd Scl.
33, 374.
,y Google
, Lang, O.A. & Proctor, B.E. (1956). Some effecla of loaizln)
radiation on lipids. [. Monocarbonyl production in vegetkbla oils.
J. Am. Oil CMem. Soc. 33, 237.
:r. P.R. b Mavar , N.H. (1972). Recoisbiaatlon products
radlolysla ol tricaproin. J. Am. Oil Chen. Soc. 49, 259.
?r, P.R. t Nawar , *.u. (1972). 2-AlkylcyclobucaQoa*s Iron
IS of Lriglycerldea. Lipids 7, 75.
>r, P.R. k Nawar, W,W. (1972). Primary radlolytlc fraf-
1 in tricaproin. J. agric. Fd Chem. 30. 129.
tr, P.R. ft Nawar, «.W. (1974). Secondary products (rom
Jlysls of trtcaproln. J. agrlc. Fd Chem. 2!, 693.
. Lien, I.e. i ,lawar, H.M. (1973), Thermal decomposition o( trl-
, Am. OH criera. Soc. 50, 76.
. LuecX, K.. Deffner. C.U. & Kohn, R. {£9Q3). Detection of radicals
I lata via ESR spectroscopy, Z. Lebensmlttelunters .
. Le Tell
. Le Tell
. Le Tet
l:i3.
ck
H
, De((iier, C
U. t Kobn
R. (1964).
Elec
roo
a or
adicals in f
irradiate
fatty acid
. Fe
le
Ana
m
el 66, 665.
K
H
a Kohn. R.
1939). Ac
ion of lonl
ing radl
tata-
[1
General chemical changes In elect
OQ I
rad
Z.
Leb
en
mittelunters
u. - Fors
ch. no, 43C
Lue
k
H
i Kohn, H.
1961). Th
effect ot
onlz
ng
fat
[[
. Changes in
the physic
o-chemical
rope
tie
Sei
Lue
en
H
t Kolin, R.
I9<i3). rh«
effect of
oni2
ng
Communication Formation of radicals. Fe
te Selfen Anstr^
66, 249.
Lueck, H.. Kohn, R. L Sach (1964). Radia
ion-induced poly
ization. Fette Selfen AnatrMlHel 66, 106
3.
Lueck. K. Rahman, Q.N. a KoHn , R. (1966)
Effect ot lonlz
acion on fjta. VII, Formation of ketones
and hydrocarbons
■nedium chain length. Fetta Selfen AnstrH
ttel 68. BSl.
HacFarlane. J.J. a Sweeting, J.W. (1965)
a-D«hydro diner
major product in Irradiated methyl laura
e. Nature, Lond.
„GoogIe
Raporl Ho. 10 (I
•003; ContrBCt I
> R&dlo]
'. ft Grlltltb, ■.U. (IS56).
taraaater Food and Contal
Forcea, Chicago. Project No. 7-84-01-
139-QH-3e»; Flla S-51S.
J. (1975). Raactloa Hechi
,a. Ph. D, Theaia, Unlvara
C. , Angallnl, P.. Bazlnet
lOD damaga In lipids. Adv.
C. AngellDl, P.. lierblcki,
changes associated ■
Fd Chan. 23. 1037.
C. , Forss, D.A. , Angellnl,
compounds produced by 1
Oil Chen. Soc. *±, 144.
. Herrltl. C. Jr., Valsh. J.T., Bszlni
Breanlck. S.H. <196S). Uydrocarbona In Irradlatad b«e( and
methyl oleate, J. Am Oil Chea. Soc . 43, 97.
Ii Klasaen, G.A. (1965). Infrs-T«d spectra and ohrooa-
■ctloDs of irradiated llnolelc and llaalenlo acids.
Loud. 305, 1106.
. Uoroaova, T. ft Itlkltlnskays, V. (1970). Eftact ot
on sunfloKer oil pboaphorous. Tr. VNtt Zhlrov. 2g,
. H.L. t MeAdoo.
Chea. 8er. S6,
ft Shulta
( 19es ) .
(1975).
(1987).
K.J.. Tappel, A.L. 1 Cronlnger, U.S. (1961). Carbonyl
npounds of Irradiated
tf. (19S9). Thermi
Fd Chem. 17
N. b Balbont
treatment in foods. J. An.
Ne»ton, A.S. (1957). Note
of liquid acetic and propi
. Nichols, P.C. A Holmaa
rlglycertdes . Lipids ;
. Psrtman, a. (1963). Report
ited Foods, FAO,
B.U. 1 Head, J.:
and antioxidants on Irrad
llnoleate. J. agrlc. Fd CI
. proctor, B.E., Nlckerson.
Cathode ray irradiation o
shell lite. Fd Res. 21, I
. J. agrlc. Fd Chem. 9. 55.
. (1970). D*
ectlon of irradiation
Oil Chem. 5
c. 53, 72fi.
on the hellui
-Ion radiolyaia product
onlc acids.
. chem. Pbya- 28, 1764.
T. (1972). P
rolyals ol saturated
73.
on the Heet
ag OD the Vbolesotneness
Rooa, p. 75.
F. (1954). Bf
ect of certain vitamins
atlon-lnduca
autoxtdation of methyl
a». 2. 199.
J.T.H. ft Lie
isrdallo. J.J. (1956).
chicken mea
(or the extension of
„GoogIe
87. RusseLl, J. (1973). Radlolyala of aliphatic uarboxrl'-C acids.
Decarboxsrlatlon ot norm»l aclda at 77°K. Radlit . Res. SO, 41.
58. Selke, £.. Rahwedder, W.K. t Dutcon, K.J. (1975). Volatile
conponenta from trlstearin heated in air, J. Am. Oil Ch«n. 3oC.
52. 233.
59. S«n CuptH, A.K. (1SB6). Radical reactions on the thermal treat-
ment of oleic acid tiethyl ester under exclusion of oxyiea. Pette
Setren AnstrUlttel 6B. 47S,
90. Sen Gupta, A.K. ft Scharmann, H. (1967), lovestlgatlons oa the
structure ot dlmerlc tatty acids. Fette SeKen AastrUtctel , 69.
90 7.
91. Slovar, H.T. & Dugan, L.H. (1957). Influence of hitth energy
radiation on the oxidation of oleic acid and methyl oleate.
II. Sites of o.tygen attacK. J. Am. Oil Chem. Sac. 34, 333.
92. Srlbaey, M.. Lewis, U.J. 1 Sctinelgert, B.S. (195S). Effect of
irradiation on meat fata. J. agrlc. Fd Chem. 3. 958.
93. Tarladgls, B.C., Vounathan. U.T. & Watts, B.V. (19S9). Anti-
oxidants tn irradiated cooked pork. Fd Technol . 13i 63S.
94. Tipples, K.H. & Morris, F.W. (1965). Some effects of high level
garnna-lrradlatlon on the lipids of uheat . Cereal Chem. 43, 437.
95. Truby. F.K. . O'Heara. J, P. a Shaw. T.U. (1975). Report So. IG
(Final) to the U.S. Quartermaster Food and Container Institute
tor the Armed Forces. Chicago. Projec
No. DA t9-129-()M-37a, File No. 5-338.
9S. Vijdl, M. (1976). Idem I Iicat Ion o t F
Beef. Ph.D. Thesis, Lnlverstcy ot lla<
U.S.A.
97. Kertheim, J.H, , Roychondhury . M, , Hoi
Proctor, B.Z. (1957]. I rradiat ion pre
products. J. agrlc. Fd Chem. 5. 944.
38. Wills. E.D. i RotblaC, J. (1964). Foi
tissue lipids and unsaturated fatty i
J. Radiat, Biol. 8, 531.
99. Hills, E.D. (1973-5). Studies ot irn
reference Co its lipid peroxide contc
Interim Reports, submitted to Intern!
of Food Irradiation. Karlsruhe. Cermi
100. Witting, L.A. ft Schwelgert, B.3. (1958
volatile carbonyl compounds Isolated
gamma radiation, J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc . 35, 413,
III. *u, C, ft Howton, D.n. (1974), Product yields vs. chal
in t-radiolysls ot normal saturated tatty acids. Radt
102. Wu. C.S. ft Howton, R.H. (1975). f-RadlolysLs ot stear
Studies ot nongaseous products, Badiat, Res, 61^, 374.
No-
7-84-01-003, Contrac
loU
chus
etcs, Amherst, Mass.
J,.
GoldbUth. S,A. ft
rvat
Ion of milk and milk
tion
of peroxides In
ds b
y irradiation. Int.
ited food with special
and carcinogenic potentlil.
.onal Project In the Field
„GoogIe
the •olid
"
p. 77.
«i
i>K r"*!!-
V
Pr«H«-
3
UK htm
1.8 References
Garrison. H-G. (1972)- Rkdlic Ion- induced resctlonsoC amino
acids and peptides. RadLaC. Res. Rev. 3, 305.
Llebster. J. 1 Kopoldova, J. (1964). The radiation chemistry
ot amino acids. Adv. Rad. 81ol. 1, 157
Bacq, Z.M. t Alexander, P. (1961). FundaMotals of Radiology.
PergamoD Press. New York.
Prledberg, F. (1969). The affect of lonlilnB radiation In solid
proteins. Bad. Res. Rev. a. 131.
Bacbman, 3., Galant, S., Gasyna, Z., VltkowBlit, S. > Zegota, H.
(1974). Effects of lonlzlns radiation on gelatin I
state. In Improveinent of Food (Juallty by Irradiat
Idternatlooal Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna.
Clew, G ft Hansen, P.t. (1963). Some effects of Ic
at lona on aqueous solutions of beta-lactoglobulln .
Inary observat one on structural changes. AERE-R-3S
Energy Authority, Rantage, England.
Rosen. H. (19S9). Intermolecular and intramoleculi
human serum albumin after its X-irndlatlon la aqi
Blochem. J. 72, S97.
Guzman Barron, E.S. k FlnkelBteio. P. (1953). Stud
mechanism of action ot lonlalng radiations. X. Effect of X-rays
on some phyaicochemlcal properties ot proteins. Archs Blochem.
Blophys. 41, 212.
Carroll. W.R., Mitchell, E.R. k Catlanan, M.J. (1952). Polymer-
ization of serum albumin by X-rays. Archs Blochem. Blophys, 39,
232.
. UcArdle. F.J. A Desrosier, N.W. (1955), Influences of ionliing
radiations on the protein components of foods. Fd Technol. 9,
327.
. Ambe, K.S. A Tappel , A,L. (1961), Oxidative damage to amino
acids, peptides and proteins by radiation. J. Fd Scl . 26, 448.
. Kumta. U.S. » Tappel, A.L. (1981). Radiation damage to proteins.
Nature. Lond. 191. 1
. Drake, U.P. ft Giftee, J.V.
Preservation of Food. p. 13
. Goldbllth. S.A. (19S9). Dlr
In Proceedings of the Inter
atlon ot Foods by Ionizing
ot Tech., Cambridge, Hass.
. Radola. B.J. (196B). Radlat
Blochem, blophys. Acta 160.
. Desal. I.D. ft Tappel .
oxidized lipids. J, Lipid H
. Laoton, E.J, 1 Bellamy. D.E
VII. Problems In using hlgt
Hucleonica 12, 51.
. Banner, T. a Phil, A, (19691. Fundamental aspects of enzyme
Ing radial
. (1957). Action of 1
1 nucleoproteins. In Radiation
}. US Army, Wasblngtoa,
set and indirect effects ot radlatlcns.
lational Confsrence on the Preaerv-
tadlations. p. 91. Hassachuaetts Inst.
hybridization of proteins.
(1963). Damage to proteins by per-
. 4, 204.
). (1994). Radiation sterillaation.
i-uoltage electrons for sterilizatlc
„GoogIe
tnaciLvaclon by lonizlag radlaclon. In Enzymo logical Aspacta
ot Food Irradiation, p. 33. Inlematlonal Atonic Energy Agancy,
Vlenn>.
19. Brown, W.D. 4 AkoyuDoglou, A. A. (19S4). Gaima Irradiation at
purified myoglobins. 1. Effect on ptiyslcochenilcal properties.
Archs Dloctien. Bloptiys. 107, 339.
20. Anbe, K.S., Kumta, tJ.3. ATappel, A.L. (1961). Radiation
damage to cytochrome C and hemoglobin. Radlat. Rea. \i. 709.
21. Satterlee, L.D., ailhelm, M.S. ftBarnbart, H.». (1971). Low dos
gintni Irradiation of bovine metmyoglobln. J. Fd Scl. 36, 5-10.
22. Clddlngs. G.C. 1 Uarkakls. P. (1973). Characterization of the
red plgiiient9 produced from ferrlmyoglobln by Ionizing radiation.
J. Fd Scl. 37, 361.
23. Tappet. A.L. (1956). Effects of radiation on henatln coopounds ,
Fd Res. 31, 6S0.
2i. Casaretc, A. p. (1968). Radiation Biology. Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Englenood Cliffs, .N.J.
25. Uerrltt, C, Jr. (1973). Qualitative and quantitative aspects
ot trace volatile components In irradiated foods and food
substances. Radlat. Res. Rev. 3. 353.
26. Merritt, C, Jr., Angellnl, P., Wlerbickl. E. k Sbults. O.L.
(1975). Chemical changes associated mlth flavor In Irradiated
m<?at. J. agrlc, fd Chera. 23, 1037.
27. Iterrltt, C, Jr., Angellni. P. Ie McAdoo . D.J. (1967). Volatile
'jumpounds induced b)' Irradiation in basic toad substances. In
Radiation Preseriatlon of Foods, p. 26. Advances in Chemistry
Series 65. American Chemical Society, Uashlngton.
23. Kauffman. F.L, & Harlan, J.«. (1969). Effect of low temperature
Irradiation on chemical sensory characteristics of beet steaks.
Technical Report 69-64 FL US Army S
[ck Labora
tor le
s, .N.ticlc.
r Irradlal
ed me
at .ith the
and thin-
layer
isoelectric
. Radola. Q.J. (1974). tdentlflc
help of thin-layer gel chromatography 3
focusing. In The Identification of Irradiated Foodstuffs, p.
Commission of the European Comnunltles. Luxembourg, iteport E
3136.
. Altmann, H. , Klein, I. a Dole, J.S. (1974). Researches on th
Irradiated Foodstuffs. In The Idaatlf Icatlon of Irradiated
Foodslutts. p. 61. Conoisslon of the European Communities,
Luxembourg. Report EUR 9136.
,y Google
. RonslVBlll. L.J., Ampola, V.a., King, F.J. ft Ho la Con, J. A. (19
Study of Irradlited-pasteurlzed fishery products. Bur. Connl.
Flsherlea. U.S. A.E.C. TID 2425S. Vashlnstoa.
, RoaBlvalll, L.J., Kins F.
Brooke. R.O. b Holalon, J
Ized 9ei.f oods . Bur. Comnl .
Washington .
, Hendelsobn, J.H. ft Brooke,
and storage erfects o
Fd Tachnol. 32. 1162.
Underdal, B., Nordal .
t ot i
,2 tog ral
LebeasiD.-Dli
., Mendelsohn. J.M., Gadbola, D.F. .
A. (1967). Cheolstry at radlopaateu
Fisheries. U.S. A.E.C. TIF aM33.
R.O. (196S). Radiation proceaslng
head ga> component* in clan meats.
Lunde, C, ft Eggun, B. (1973), The
on on the nutritional value ot tisU
u.Tech. 6. 90.
(1990). Effect of high-voltage
in fish muscle. Fd Technol . 4,
radiation. 5. The ej
Gadbola, D.F. ft Steinberg. MA.
ih unfrozen fishery products by loa-
'tecta ot radiation pasteurltalton on
haddock fillets. Fd Tecbnol. 20.
8). Deterolnat
11. Agr. Vet
, Tokyo, pp. 1-B.
Vakil
i Sreenlvasan. A. (1974)
in dehydro- Irradiated sh
'Imp. J. Fd
and composltioi
Scl. 39. 807.
. Anonymoua (1973). Color regeneration of discolored frozen tuna
meat, [n The Use at Isotopes and Radiation for Agriculture In
. 28. Ulnlstry of Agriculture and Forestry, Tokyo, Japan.
, Landers, H.K. ft Sinnhuber. R.O. ( 1S69 ) . Bromnlng
llaed seatood products. Fd Technol.
reaction
in ra
latio
23. 224.
SavagaoD
processe
shel
(1974
fish
42. Slebert,
Biochemical studies on ganv
Thesis, UbIv. of Boabay.
C. ft Husch, K. (1969). Sosm experiments o
Ity of proteolytic enzymes ot fish tissues
Aspects of Food Irradlatio
, Vlenr
. ft Stadelii
, W.J. 11957).
inlzing Irrsdiatlc
„GoogIe
sftell eggs. Poult. Sci. 3fi
Ball. H.R. b Gardner, F.A. ( 196B
pertles oC gamma. Irradiated llqu.
nation. Fd Res.
F, D. ft Rood, F.
.[hydrytB conter
J. 5, 191.
¥.C. (1956). Ti
Fd Tectinol. 10,
Pape, C. (1973)
Physiol aad [unctlonal pro-
.d egg while. Poult. Sci. 47,
ig, R.S. t Friediunn, T.E.
oillk proteins by gums and
as, 372.
1972). CaoDia Irradiatloo
Skimnllk pasder. Cao.
nent of wheat with loDlslog
naklng and ralBted properties
52a.
1 Radiation Preservation o( Food. Bombay Symposium, p. 311.
iternational Atomic Energy Agency. Vienna.
. SrlnivaB. H. , Anantnaswamy, H.N., Vakil, U.K. i Sreenlvasan,
A. (1972). ECIect ol gamma radiation on wheat proteins. J. Fd
Sci. 37, 715.
. .lene. S.P., Vakil, U.K. & Sreenlvasan, A. <1973). Effect of
gamna-lrradlatlon on red gram (Cajanus eajan) proteins. J. Fd
Sci. 40. 815.
. Pratt, G.B. ft Kneeland. L.E. (1972). Irradiation Induced head-
space gases in packaged radiation sterilkied food. Technical
Report 72-35-FL, US Army Natick Laboratories, Nattek, Uass.
. RonSivalU, L.J., King. F.J., Anpola, V.G. ft HoUton. J. A. (1970
Study of Irradlated-pasteurized fishery products. Bur. Coml .
Flsberies US A. E.G. TID 25312, Wasliington.
,y Google
Dim. 3.
Galaalar.
ebr«Db*rg,
a daroatt, J.L. (1963). ChCMf Od. p. 40a.
G. (194*). Z. LabansnltCeluntara. u. -Poracb. 125. 452.
A.. Ebranbarg. L. k Lbfrotb. G. (1H3). Acta cbaa.
Ebrenberg, A.
Ko. 16, [>. as.
Ebreabars, L. k Lafroth. 0. <19«0}. Rlao R«p.
. k BvdoklBOV, V.r. (1963). Trudy
Kbaaokb. H.A., Kulcbava,
vsa. 3ovaahcb. radlats, Kbln. p. 406.
lioodr, S.J. • Pbllllpa, CO. (1959). Chaar Ibd. p. 1347.
Starodubtaav, S.T., Ablr>*v. S.A. kCanaralova, V.V. (1959).
lev. Akad. Hauk uibek. 33R S«r. Fli. Hat. Kauk 1. 75.
Lofroth. 0. (1967). Acta cban. acaod. at. 1M7 .
Lotrotb. C. (1973). Int. J. Radtat. Phy . Cbaa. 4. 377.
Lofrotb. C. k KtB. C. (1970). Acta Ch«B. aCBild. 34, 749.
IbraglBtDV, A. P., Sultanov. A.. Sanaav, B. k Tulcbla*. A.V. (1967).
Dokl. Akad. Kauk uibek 8SR Ho. 4, p. 36.
Uorl, T.. Htyaka. C. L Sana. T. (1965). J. cbaa. Soc. Japan
(Pure Chenlatrr Ssctlon) M, 346.
Pbllllpa. CO. k Baufb. P.J. (1968). J. cbam. Soc. A p. 370.
Pbllllpa. CO. A BauKb, P.J. (1963). Hatur*. Load. 166, 383.
Philllpa, CO.. Baugb. P.J. k Lotrotb. C. (1966). J. cbaa. Soc.
Phillip*. CO. A J
Dim. S. k Garni
KkUlama. D. , Schnidl
UcCabe. L.J. (1999.
Phys. 33. 1884.
Lofrolh, C, Ehrenbe
[Dternational SynposI
P,J
(1988). J. cbaa. Soc
(1963). Natur*. Lond. 19E
Wolfron. U.L.. Ulchelakli
p. 393.
uo OD Pras Radlcala
Ikaall (1961). (Froa aynposiun, 6-7 July ]
. (1981). 'Fiflb
, Stockholn. AlBDqvlat
. k Harkavlcb, 3.V.
1971)
i.I . . Sbarpat
L SSSR 301, 133.
t Uada. H. (1961). J. Poljra. Scl. 90, 349.
C (196a). C.R. Acad. Scl. 3S4, 3534.
G. (1961). Areb. Set. 14, 304.
, H. (1969). Bioplvlkaa, 161.
Nsubacber, H. (1970). filopbyatka 7, 47.
Ueda. a., Kurl, Z. k SUlda, S. AEC-tr-8316. pp. 573*6e.
Htkltln. I. v., Hlroahnlcbeako, I.V., Kudryaahov. L.I. k Dyalklni
K.E. (1973). Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 304, 387.
Uada. H. (1963). J. phya. Chan. 67, 966.
CoUlna, H.A. (1962). Katurs. Lond. 193, 1061.
Wollroa. H.L., Blpklsy, V.I., HcCabe, L.J., Sben Han, T.K. A
Hlcbfllakla, A.U. (19S9). Radtat. Rea. 10, 37.
. HolfroB. M.L., Bknkley, ».«. k llcCabe, L.J. (11
9). J. An. chM.
lyGoogIc
35. Woltrom, H.L., Blnkley, W.W., Shea Han, T.M. , McCab*. L.J. *
Uly>d», D.S. (1954-S). PB 131310. Projact no. 7-84-01-003. Con-
tract DA 44-109->]in-lT7Z. Raport no. 9(20 April 1931-19 Octobar
1959).
36. MoltTom. H.L., Shen Haa, T.M. , M'rCabe , L.J. k Mlcbelakla. A.
(19»-7). PH 131967. Project no 7-B4-01-002. Coatract DA 19-
129-9)1-515. Eteporl no. 6 (20 October 19S5-19 April 1957).
Woltrom, H.L. (1997-8). Project no. 7-84-01-003. Contract DA .
19-1S9-Q11-932. Report no. 4 <20 April 1957-30 Septenber 1998).
WolfroBi, U.L., Btnkler. *-*. . Shen Haa . T.X. , XcCabe, L.J. h
Hlyada, D.S. (1996). Abstr. Pap. Am. chem. Soc. 130. 10.
Zagrodiki. S. A Zaorska, H. (1965). Int. Sufar J. 87. 15.
Herlltz, E.. Lorroth, G. A Wldmuk. G. (1965). Acta cbem.
scand. 19. 595.
Phillips, CO., Uoody, G.J. A Uattock. C.L. (1958). J. cbea.
Sac. p. 3922.
Maeda. H. A Uurakuni . 3. (1968). Scl. Rep. Saltaraa tmiv. Ser. A
6, 5.
Rlgouard, A.. Berger. G. A Salnt-L^be, L. (1979). C.R. Acad.
Sci. Ser. D 280. 763.
Reuschl. M. A Cullbot, A. (1966). Die Starke 18, 73.
Rtgouard, A. (1974). Thesis: "Acidlti radloformee dans le
glucose en phase solido". Marseille, 27 June 1974.
Llggect, R.K.. FeazeL, C.E. A Ellenberg, J.Y. (1939). J. agrtc.
Fd Chem. 7, 277.
Phillips, G.O. i Worthinitton, N.W. (1970). Radlat. Res. 43, 34.
LorenzoU, J.Q. A Beech la, .4. (1973). Soil. Laboratorl chla.
prov. 24(4), 137,
McCabe, L.J. (19G0). Diss. Abstr. 20, 3597,
Khenokh. H.A.. Kuzlcheva. E.A. A Evdokimav, V.F. (1960). Dokl.
Akad, Nauk 3SSR 135, 471,
31. Enrico, C. (1974). Thesis: "Etude do la [ormation ds I'aldabyde
malanique au course de 1 ' Irradiation gamra du glucose". Haraell'
7 June 1974.
52. Von Sonntag, C. A Dlzdarogtu, H, {1974). V. . Naturf. 28b, 387.
53. Kawakiahl, 3,, Okumura, J. A Hamlkl, U. (1972). Nlppoa Nog«l
Kagaku Kalshl 46, 499.
54. Okumura, J., Kawakldhl, S. A Hamtkt, 11.(1970). Fd Irrad., Tokyo
5, 20.
., H.L. (1973). Sugar J.
,y Google
Terada, J., Hat*. K., Houri, T. , Haablda, W. fc Sliisa. I. <l»fi8).
Fd Irrad.. Tokyo 3, 160.
ft Kato, H. (1974). "ImproveBWDt of Food
Proc. Ol a FAO/IAEA Panel Usctlns
, IAEA, Vienna, p. 9S.
, KalBhto. H. k Kato. H. ( 19T4 ) . Agrlc.
. Fujlnwkl, U., Horlta, H.
Quality bF Irradiation".
(Vienna 18-23 June 1»T3:
. Fujlnakl, U. . Horita. H.
blol. Cbam. 38, 2333.
. Phllllpa, CO. a Bau^, P.J. (1968). J. ctian. Soc. A p. 383.
, TsradB, J., Hata, K., Hourl , T. . Rashlda, K. k Shiga, I. (1969
, Tokyo «, 47.
)., Sawant. P.L., Bamakrlsbiiaa , T.V., Core, U. a Kunt!
"Basic Hacbanlama In Radiation Blologyand Hedlcli
omlc Energy. Bombay, pp. E79-293. (From Symposium oi
nisms tn Radiation Biology and Medicine, New Dehll,
1971).
Fd I
rad
BbuB
an.
U.S.
(19
Dept
o(
Basl
Me
11 Febru
Dale
».
39, 1897.
HlKlttn,
H.E. » Kochei
Nlkltln, l.V
U.E. t Kocbei
Sauk SSSR
B p. 1482
Ulri:
ov, N.lt. (1972). I>
ulrosbnlchenko, I
ov. N.K. (1972). Dok:
Ershov, B.C.
K. (1973). Agrlc. blol. Cben.
., Kudryashov. L.I., Dyatklna.
1. Akad. Hauk SSSR 207, 113S.
v., Kudryasbov, L.I., Dyatklna,
Hauk SSSR 307, 871.
(1968). IZv. Akad.
Kb Id
No.
A,K. (1972). Iiv. Akad.
CO. (1970). J. ehem. Soc.
V.A. k Sultankbodzhaeva, H.N. (1973). Dokl . Akad.
:oa, 1157.
Vecll, A. (1971), Int. J. Radlat .
lllpe. CO. (1969). Nature, Lond.
Crippa, P.H.
Pnys. Cbem. 3. 483.
ibaw, X. fe
221, 1138
Lee, C.C. b Chink-Hong, Cben (198S). Cereal Cbem. 42, 573.
Adanlc, K., Cevc, P. k Korotcbanko, K.A. (1967). Die Starke
336.
Korotcbenko. K.A.. Adamlc, K., Sbara. H. k Cevc, P. (1988).
Izv. vysah. ucheb. Zaved Plsbcb. Tekool . S, 31.
Abagyan, G.V., Krutova, Yu-N.. Putllova, I.N. k Yu-Butyagln,
(1967). Blotlzlka 12, 830.
58-005 0-86-28
,y Google
. Ehrenberg, A. ft Ehranbarg.
. EraolMv, V.K. h Vciavodskll
S«coiid Tlbany Syfflpoalum on
Dabo h P. Hadvlg. Budapest
. frlCacb, C. ft Bauldoir«a. .
uotars u. Uyg. 60, 34S.
. Truby. P.K., O-Hsara, J. P.
DA L»-ia9-QII-37S. ProjKt i
19SS-18 Octobar 1997.
. Ulahlna. A. (1963). Nippon
. DletiL, J. P. ft Holaani). S. <
. DLebl, J.F. (1973). Labsnsii
. Bardcley, J.. Bau()i. P.J
J. Chen. Soc. p. 890.
. Ntkltln. [.v., Mlroatialchsol
Jl.E. ft Kocbstkov, N.K. (19'
. AdMlc. K. (1968). Dla Sxii
. Bardalar, J., Bauih. P.J. ft
3*. 1335,
. vtllliuB*, 0.. Geuslc, J.E.,
Proc. natu. Acad. Scl. U.S. A
. Zlmbrlck. J.D. <t970). Radl:
(1998). Ark. tjm. If. 133.
V.v. (19«7>. Procaadlaca ot tha
Radiation Cbaalacrjr. Edltad hj J.
AkadsBlai Klado, pp. 221-23.
P. (1969). mtt. Gab.
Shaw, T.H. (1999-7). Contract no.
a. 7-S«-0I-0aa PB 131 966. 18 Hair
Nog«l Kagaku Kaisbl 36, 630.
.968). Labaoaa. llaa. Taebaol. 1^, LB.
Has. Tacbaol. 9(3), SI
Coodall, J.I. k Phillips , CO. (1974).
I. v., Kudryaahov, L.I., Oratkln*.
Dokl. Akad. Hauk SSSR 208, 880.
:a 30, 3.
IpS. a.O. (1973).. J. Chwa. Soc.
. J.F. ■
. Dal:
Symposium on Current SCkMllei
Mexico, 1 Oeceinber 197^
no. 78.
. Davlea, J.V., Grlfrithi
olyala. Edltad by U. El
. Orant. P.U. l Ward, R.i
. (k>tlieb, I. ft Markikls
. Kawaklshl. S. ft Mamlkl
. Khenokh. H.A. (19S9).
Involved In Blochenlca
. Buechl. J. ft tconoBou, N. (
. Hills, P.B. ft Johnson, R.A.
Eaargy Authority Raaaarch Gi
ag« Hesearcb Laboratory
. Hills. P.B. (1984). A£RE 9
Raaaarch Group, laotopa Bast
Laboratory, aantags,
Wolfron, H.L. ft VeCaba.
L.J. (U9S).
R«s. 43. 396.
le, K. ft Jakublf:k, V. (197S).
>a cha rbenlstry at Food Irradlatloa.
34-01-022. Contr
i (Ni
b Phillips, G.O. (1969). Pulas Radl-
pp. iei-191. AcadWDlc Prass.
199). J. chea. Soc. p. 3871.
19SB). Radlat; Ras. 38, 99.
1973). Agrtc. blot. Chan. 36, 2017.
>e Effect of Radiation on Xatsrlals
". p. 173.
.965). Phara. Acta Halv. 40, 374.
<1»61). AKRE - a 3T90. D.K. At«atc
'oup, laotopa Raaaarch Dlvlalos, Vant-
tavs, Ssrksbira, logland.
IMO. U.K. AtOBle BBarn Autbortty
aroh Division, Vantaga Raaaarch
ra, Eaglaod.
Processei'
„GoogIe
A. (1955). DOkl. Akad.
Kotclietkov, H.K., Kudryasbov , L.
E.t. <I9e&). Zb. obsbcU. Kbtn. 3
Kotchetkov, U.K., Kudryasbov, L.
E.t. (1965). Zb. obsbcb. Xblo. 3
Rusaell, tt.D. (1970). Int. J. ap
Kawakishi. S. k Hamlki, H. (19^
K»aklshl, S., Kilo, Y. • Nanlkl,
Blndsr. C. t Vtocze, A. (1957).
kul. IntSz. Kozl. 5, 364.
Hauk SSSR 104. 746.
., Taravaya, S.K. k Bortsova,
, 1191.
., Tarovaya, S.M. k Bortsova.
, 268.
L. Radlat. Isotopes 21,, 143.
. Carb. Res. 26, 2S2.
H. (1973). Carb. Res. 30, 22C
tagy . tudom. Akad. Kotp. Flz.
r-fly, C.T.
1957). Radlat. Res. 6. 302.
. Pd Irrad., Tokyo 4(1), 29.
». (1975). Carb. Res. 39, 263.
Kawaklsht. S. b Nanlkl, X. (1969!
Kawakishi. S., Klto, V. A Nunll
Laurent. T.C. (19S8). J. Am. Chem. Soc. 78, 1875
Chen-Chang, L. (1963). Kagaku
.O. (19S4). Nature, Load. 173, 1044.
Lloyd, t.R.L. a Stacey. If. (1962). Radlat. Res.
a Uoody, G.J. (1960). J. chea. S(^ . 61., 754.
A Hoody, C.J. (1960). J. Ch«m. Soc. 61^, 762.
A Hoody. G.J. (1960). J. Cl)«B. Soc. p. 3398.
A Crlddle, W.J. (1960). J. cbeo. Soc. p. 3404.
(1963). Radlat. Res. 18, 446.
14). J. cheoi. Soc. p. 205.
A Chlenov, M.A. (1964). Bull
Barker. S
■ ■
17, 619.
Phillips.
CO.
Phillips,
G.O.
Phillips,
0.0.
Phillips.
0.0.
PhllUpa,
G.O.
Phillips,
G.O.
Acad. Sci. USSR Dlv. chem. Sc
Kochetkov, N.K., Kudryasliov,
obshch. Kbtm, 38. 79.
Kochetkov, N.K., Kudry
Akad.
Scberi. H.
Scherz. H.
Phillips,
, 2021.
.1. A Chlenov, U.A. (1968).
, U.A. i Chizlov, O.S.
. Res.
13, 12.
:.0. A Ricki
Phillip*, G.C
Phillips,
PblUlps.
Coof, Peace!
Phillips
topes 6, 78.
Halk-Kurade .
1969). J. chea. Soc. p. 455.
(1961). J. Cbeo. Soc. p. 3796.
(1961). J. choB. Soc. p. 3763.
;, O.L. A Hoody, G.L. (1958). Proc. Int.
lercy. Geneva. 29, 92 - P/4T UK.
(1059). Int. J. appl. Hidlat. Iso-
A.G., Livingston,
A Fag* re
,y Google
I.S. (1959). Fd Has. 24, 613.
130. Bftlazs, E.A., Davlsa , J.V., Phillips. CO. kSchaufole, 0.8.
(1968). J. Chen. Soc . p. 1420.
131. Phllllpa, CO., Grllfiths. W. ft Davles. J.V. (1966). J. cbaa.
Soc. B p. 194.
132. Scherz, H. (1970). Carb. Hea. 14, 417.
133. Kaaaklsbi, S., Okumura. J. b Hanlkl, It. (19T1). Fd Irrad.,
Tokyo 8(1), 80.
134. Kotcbetkov. U.K., Kudrraabov. L.I., Yarovaya, S.U. ft VoEasseas-
k*ya. S.V, (1970). Uv. Akad. Hauk SSSR Ser. Khin. !_, 301.
135. Kudryasbov. L.t., Varovaya. 5.U.. Voznesenskaya. S.V. ft KotcbaC-
kov, U.K. (197L). Zh. obsbch. Khlm. *l, 449.
136. Pbinips, CO. (1972). Radlac. Res. Rev. 3, 33S .
137. Streull. H. (195G). HltC. Geb. Lebensmit teluntera. u. Hyg. 47.
331.
138. Streull. H. (1957). Mltc. Geb. Lebensmitteluntera . u. Hyg. 48,
224.
139. Uorre. J. k Uorazzaal-palletler, S. (1966]. C.R. Acad. Set.
Ser. C 262, 1739.
140. Uoore. J. (19ST). C.R, Acad. Scl. Ser. D 265, 482.
141. Scherz, H. ft Stehllk, C (1968). Mh . Chem. 99, 1143.
142. Kotcheikov. M.K.. Kudryashov, L. [ . ft Chlenov, )I.A. (1964). Izv.
Akad. »auk SSSR Ser. Khlm. U, SUa.
143. Schubert, J. ft Sanders, E.B. (1971). .Nature, New Biology 233,
199.
144. Anonymous (1969). Fd Cosmec . Toxicol. 2> 1^1-
145. Kawaklshl, S. . Klio, Y. & Hamlkl. U. (1974). IV I ale mat tonal
Congreas o( Food Science and Technology. Madrid. 22-27 Septaaber
1974, lb. 76.
146. Scherz. H. (1974). In "The IdentKlcatloa of Irradiated Food-
stuira". Proc. ol an International Colloquium (Karlsruhe. 24-23
October 1973), Ccinnlsaian of the European Conununltlas, EDR S126,
Luxembourg. 1974, p. 169.
147. Kawaktshl, 3,, Klto, K. ft Mamlkl , U. (1973). Fd Irrad. (Shokulln-
Shosha) S(l), 88.
148. Kochetkov, H.K., Kudryashov, L.t., Chlenov, M.A. ft Llvertorskmya.
T.r. (1973). Carb, Res. 28, 86.
149. Ssnchenkova. T.H., Danllov, V.L. . Kudryashov, L.I. ft Kocbatkov,
H.K. (1973). "Synposlua on Radiation Cbeaistry of Aquooua Sya-
tems". Uoacoa, 10-13 December 19T3, Tezlay dokladov. Moacow.
Nauka, p. SO.
,y Google
. Xorra, J. (1970). "Tbs Idsntlf IcftttoD of Irr*dl>t«d Foodatuffs".
Proc. of ft Colloqulun (LuxsMbourg, 27 October 1970], ConnlHlOQ
of the European CoDDunltlss, EUH 1693, p. 149.
Upadhya. H.D. ft Brsabaksr, J.I. (19T3). Curr. Scl. 41(1), 25.
Barker, S.A., Llovd , I.R.L. k Stacey, M. (1903). Radlat. Dee.
16, 224.
Barker, S.A., Grant. P.H., Scaeay, M. « lard. B.B. (19S9).
Nature, Load. 183, 376.
DUdaroglu, H. ft SonntaB, C. von (1973). Z. Naturf. Mb, 635.
Dtzdaroslu, X., Schsrz, K. ft Sonntag, C. von (1972J. Z. Halurt.
27b, 29.
Kudryashov, L.I., Yarovaya, S.B., Bortaova, E.I. tSherpatyl,
V.A. (1971). Zh. obshch. Xhlm- 41, 239e.
Harlmann, V., Sonntag, C.V. ft Schulte-Frohlinde, D. (1970), Z.
Naturf. 25b. 1394.
Burchill, C.E. ft Glnna, 1.8.
Bassoo , R.A. (1968). J, ctaen
Baquey. C, Roux, J.C. ft Suti
Ithaca 74, 4210.
Phillips, G.O. ft CrIddU. V.J
Uishlaa, A. ftNlkuni. Z. (195:
Res. Osaka Univ. IS, 21S.
Barker. S.A.. Grant, P. II., St.
J. chem. Sac. p. 2S4B.
Schubert, J. ft Sanders, E.B.
Zakatova, N.V., UlDkhad£hlddti
I2v. Aliad. »auk SSR Ser. Khlm.
Phillips, G.D. (1968). Enargel
Biology, pp. 131-132. Academic
icheva, E.
Akad. Nauk SSSR 131
5c he
H., ;
Selbersdorf Projec
Scherz, H. (1973).
Scbubert , J. ft Esti
Irradiated Foodati
(Karlsruhe, 21-25 October 1973), Ct
Coonunitles, EUR 9
. Thinulln. C, Basi
1970). Can. J. Chen. 48, 2628.
Soc, C p. 1989.
in, J. (1970). J. pby*. Chen.,
, H. ft Ward, R.B. (19S9).
1971). Radiat. Hea . 47, 213.
□va, D.R. ft Sharpatyl. V.A. (196
7, 1633.
lc« and Kecbanlana In Radiation
Praaa, London.
ft Evdoklnov. V.F. (1960). Dokl.
G., Xalndl, K. ft Bancbsr. E. (1968).
Report 16.
Z. Naturf. 3Sc, 14.
bauer, H. (1974). "The IdenClf IcatloD of
:a." Proc. of an International Colloqulun
of t
I European
36, Luxenbourt, p. 7S.
:e, 0., Hoore, J. ft Cunont, C. (1966).
ton". Proc. of the International Synposlun on
on, lAEA/FAO (Karlaruhe, 6-10 June 1966). IAEA,
,y Google
Vienna, p. 1S7.
72. Khenokh, H.A. (1950). Zta . obsbch. Khin. 20. 1360.
73. Bachmui, S.. ZcEOta, A.. MalafleJ, E. t Kaznlerciak, ». (1973).
prob. T«ch. Med. 4(3), 295.
74. Scbubsrt, J. (197-1). "Inprovemeat oC Pood Quality by trradl-
atioa". Proc. of ■ FAO/IAEA Panel Meeting (Vienna, lB-32 Juae
1973). IAEA, pp. 1-38.
75. Eaterbauer, H., Schubert, J.. Saadera , E.B. a Sweeley, C.C.
Radiat. ftea. Id press.
76. Dlzdaroglu. H., Heaneberg, D. , Schomburg, G. k Von Sonntag, C,
197S). Z. .Valurt. 30b, 416.
77. Stewart. A.B. A Hlnchesler, H.V. |1975). Die Starha 27, 9.
78. Winchester, R.v. (1974). .tgrocheoiophyslca 8, 53.
79. Scheri. H. (1970). "The Identt (icaclon of Irradiated Poodstutra".
Proc. of a Colloquluni ( Lu.xeoibourg. 27 October 1970). Comilaslon
ot th* European Conraunltes. EtiR 4695. p. 27.
Scherz. H. (1973). Chemle lagr Tech. 43, 1047.
Scherz. H. (1975). Die Starke. 27(2). 46.
Zhbankov, R.G. , Komar, V.P. b Koriitchenko, K.A. (1970). Zh .
prlkl. Spektrosk. mi). 149,
Abd Allah. U.A., Foda. Y.H. & El Saadany. fl. (1974). Die Starke
26. 89.
Akutova. I.S., Puttlova. [,s. I Tregubov. S.M. (1969). Hocb-
scHulnacHr. Nahrungsmlttel . TeO-nol. 4. 25,
Akulova, I.S., Putilova. I.N. * Tregubov, .V.N. (1969). Hoeh-
scbulnachr. N'ahrungsmiCteL , Teuhnot. 5, 30.
Sainl, V. {t96fi), J. Fd Sci . 33. 136.
EL Saadany, R.U.A., El Saadany , P.M. L Foda. V. (1974). Die
Starke 26, 422.
(1959). Die Starke J^, 2S5.
Samec. U. (1960). Die Starke 12, 99.
1958). Die Starke 10. 76.
1961). Die Starke 13. 2S3.
1963). Die Starke IS, 83.
Samec. U. (1960). .^ovi Prolzv. ll_, 277.
I.H., Traubenbarg, S.E., Korotchenko, K.A., Komar,
V.P. ft Zhbankov, R.G. (1966). Prikl . Btokblo. ITikrobiol. 3, 133.
Radley. J. A. (1960). Dla Starka 12, 201.
Oreshko. V,F. (1960). Zh. tU. Khln. 34. 2369.
Oreshko, V.P. t Korotchenko, K.A. (1958). Hauk. Ookl . vyssb. Stk.
Khln. 1 Khlm. Teknol. 3, 445.
,y Google
1B4. 1867,
■7). Acll
Purllov*. I.N. k Tnubenberx. S.6. (IMS).
Mikroblol. 1. 538.
Hishlna. A. s, Nikunl , 2. (1959). Nature, I
Cierhards, K.P. (1961). Thesis' Rhelniache
University, Bonn,
Ebrenbers, L. . Jiarma, H. i Zlmner. E.C. (
scand. U,, 950,
Putllova, I.N.. Traubenbere, S.E. ft Korotchenko, K.A. (1966).
Iiv. vyosh, ucheb. Zaved. Ptshch. Teknol. No. 1, p. 48.
PisansklJ, A. P. A RomenskiJ , N.V. (1969). Hochschulnacbr .
Nkhrunismlttel. TeKnol . 5. 24.
Oresbko. V.F. » Korotchenko , K.A, (1959). Izv. vyssh . uclieb,
Zaved. Mini. Vyssh. Obra, SSSR 5. 29.
C 262, 345.
Deschrelder, A,H. (1960J, Die Starke 12, 197,
Keiaube, H. (1968). Hlrosakl DatSBku Nagikubu Gakujutsu Hokoku
KorOIChenko, K.A., Putilova, 1 N. A Haslova, CM. 1 1966 ) .
Sakb. Prora. 12, 44.
Oreahko, V.F,, Gonn, L.F. ABudenko, N.V, (19621. Zt. llz.
Khlm. 36, 1084.
lakovenko, I.A., Homenskii. N.V. A MaEenRo, L.V. (19(J8), In.
, 42,
•amy. K.N., Vakil, t^.K.
33, 795.
iko, K.A. k Seminov, A.
Lsbch. Teknol. No. S, p
V.F. A Korotchanko. K
SSSR 133. 1219.
Vakil, U.K. (1969). "Food Irra
Centre, Trombay. p. 9Z . (From Si
Troabay (Bombay) 13-14 Janu
Oreshko. V.F. l Korotchenko
Zaved. Plshch. Teknol. No.
Oreshko, V.F.. Chernenko, L
Akad. Mauk SSSR 134, 636.
Renner, K., Setferl. J, A G
120, 81.
:no1. I
11963). Die Starke IB, 444,
A Streenlvasan. A. (1970). J.
. (1988). Iiv. vysah. ucheb.
25.
. (1960). Dokl. Akad. Nauk
stion". Bbabha Atomic Research
ulnar on Food Irradiation,
969).
, (1959). Izv. vyssh. ucheb.
Shakhova. N.C. (1980). Dokl.
As. K.P. (19631.Strahlenlherapie
,y Google
dea RayoonMBaac«
en France 1, 209.
Tolller. H.T. k Gullbot, A. (1966). Die Starke IS, 309.
Tolller, M.T. t Gullbot. A. (1972). Die Starke Z«, 285.
Tollter. U.T. a Cuilbol . A. (1970). Die Starke 33, 296.
Tolller, M.T. 1 Gullbot, A. (1971). Annie Technol. msrlc . 20,
61.
ReuBchl, H. t Gullbo
Leach. «.»., Cowen.
36, 534.
Traubenbera, S.E., Korotchenko, K.A. fi Pulilova, I.». (1969).
Izv. vpssb. ucheb. Zaved. Pishch . Teknol . No. 6, p. 34.
NiahliBura. A. i Takaota. K. (1961). 4th Proc. Japan Cont. Radio-
isotopes, p. 405.
NUhimura, A. (1961). Nippon Noffei Kagaku Kalihi 3S, SIO.
Kercesz. Z.I., Schulz. E.R., Fox, G. k Gibson, M. (1999). Fd
Rea. 24. 609.
Bourne, E.J., Stacejr. K. i Vaughan , C. (1936). Chemy Ind. 33.
573.
Phillips, G.O. fi Uoody. G.J. (19SB).
Baohman, S., Zegota, A. k Zegota. H,
i. 331.
Sachnian. S. , Zegata, A. a .Antoslk, B. (1973). Nucleonika ^, 239.
Saohman. S. b Zegota, K. (1971). Roczn . Technol. Chen. Zywn.
21. 29.
236, Bachman, S. b Zegata. H. (1974). "Improvement of Food Quality tv
Irradiation". Proc . of a FAO/IAEA Panel- Ueetlng (Vienna 18-33
June 1973), IAEA, Vienna, pp. 61-75,
237. Scherz, H. (1974). "laipravement of Food Quality by Irradiation".
Proc. of a FAO/IAEA Panel Meeting (Vienna 18-23 June 1973), IAEA.
Vienna, pp. 39-50.
23S. Achinassladls, H. b Berger, G. (1973). Die Starke 35, 362,
239. Berger. G. k Salnl-Lebe, L. (1969). C.B. Acad. Set. Ser. D 368.
2620.
240. Berger, G., Rostan Woodhouse, D. fc Salnt-t,3be, L. (1971). C.R.
Ser. D 373. 1064,
, Roatan Woodhouse, D. k Saint-Libe. L. (1973). Dl«
Acad.
241. Berger, G.
Starke 24
243. Berger. G
993.
k Salnt-Ube, L. (1970). C.R.AcaC
,y Google
i Saint'Lebe, L.
1970),
. Sci.
. D 273
1455.
. Berger. C. , Dauphin. J.F., Alhinassladls , H. ft Salnt^Ldbe, L,
(1974). ■'TJie Identification ot Irradiated FoodstuIfB" . Proc .
an International Colloquium (Karlsruhe, 24-25 October 1973),
Coinnlsslon of the-Europeaa Comnunltles , EUR 5126. Luxemt
E.
155.
, Agnel, J-P. I
b Glew, G
Saint-Ube. L.
. Die Sta
. Berger, (.
29. IBS.
. ChBudhry, a. A. k Glew, G. (1973). J. Fd Teehnol. 8, 295.
. Dauphin, J-F., Athanassiadis , H. , Berger, G, ft SaUl-Ube, L.
(1974). Die Starke 26, 14.
. Varovaya. S,M, ft Kudryashov, L.I, (1973). Symposium on Radlftllcn
CneiBistry of Aqueous Systems, Uqscow. 10-12 December 1973, Teziay
iklac
250
Derllk
pharm.
251
El Saa
(1974)
2ja
Umeda,
253
iilcne
23J
Farkas
253
Hofrel
236
Horuba
257
Berger
203.
25B
Berger
259
Uichel
Die St
260
Hamidi
261
Berger
262
Sclierz
263
Bigler
(1969)
264
Scherz
2G5
Korotc
( 1968)
26G
Dauphl
20 7
Nene,
3w, Nauka. p. 54.
J. (1974). Dte Starke 26
. , Szyszko. E. ft Zagorskl
. 23, 253.
278.
(19:
. DlBI
, R.U. , El Fatah. A, , El Saftl, A. ft El Saadany. F,U,
9 Siarke 26, 190.
Hayakawa, 5. ft Toyoshima. H. (1970), Rep, Fd Res.
fo 25. 11,
, R.V. (1973). Die Starlte 25, 230.
hung, tl.
, Agne
4J_, 63.
(1974). Die Starke 26. IS.
1970). Priem. spozyw. 24, 391.
L. (1973). Die Starke I
Agnel, J. P. ft Satnt-Lebe, L. Die Starlie. In
., Rlgouard, U., Berger, G. ft Salnt-lJbe, L.
rke 27. 363.
Dauphin, J.F. Die Starke, la press.
Saint-Lebe, L. (1969), Del Starke 21. 205.
(1972). Chem. I
Valbel, S. Kn
Prlkl. Biokhlm. HI
H. (1971). Die Sti
enko. K.A. , Staniml
Prikl. Biokhlm. Hi
, J-F. Unpublished
ikrob, Technc
il. 5,
329.
ivlch, D.L.
ke 23, 259,
nlrovlch, S.G. ft SI
likrobiol. 4. 721.
1 data,
k Streaoivasan. A. (197S). J. Fd Scl.
,y Google
268. Cranath, K. (1960). Biso Rep. No. 16. p. 23.
289. Tlyna, J.H., R>11. L.A. a Morrow, t.L. (1967). J. Rej. natn.
Bur. Stand. 7U(L). 35.
270. Vorita. M. . Tajima, ». a Fujlmakl. II. (1969). Fd Irrad., Tokyo
4, 24.
271. Tajlna. H. . Vorlta. U. fc FuJLmakk, M. (1969). Agrlc. blol.
Chem. 33. 1277.
272. Ahmad, U. . KuSBain, A., Hadcea, H. ft Sattar, A. (1973). PaklSC.
J. aclent. ind. R«s. 16 (3/4), 132.
273. Aboad, H., Naqul, U.U., Huasaln. A., )l<diyuddlD , ». . Sattar. A.
> All, H. (1973). Paklst. J. sclent. Ind. Res. 15 (4/5). 314.
274. Ahmad. H. , Sactar, A., Uussalo. A., Jamil. U. , Farooql. V.A. k
HuaaalQ, A.U. (1972). Paklst. J. sclent, ind. Res. 19(3), 163.
275. Auda, H. (1973). IAEA - R 941 F.
376. Azanar. J .A. .Cabrera, L. , Carrasco, H. , Guastl, V.V. a Loyola,
V.X. (1974). IV International Congress of Food Science mod Tacb-
noloiy. Madrid, 33-37 September, la, 87.
277. Bachman.S., Gasvna. Z. , Smlerez, T. k Zesota, H. (1971). Blul .
Cent. Lab. Technol., Przet . Przech . Zboz Warszawie IS, 52.
27S. Bachnian. s. . ICrzywaez. 1. (1971). Blul. Cent. Lab. Technol..
Przet. Priecb. ZboE Warsiamle 15, 87.
379. Baldratl, G. k Cassara, A. (1971}. Induscrla Conserve 46, S.
280. Bancher. E. . Washuttl. J. ft Stachelberger. H. (1970). Hlcrochin.
.»ota .No. 2. p. 413.
281. Bancher, E. . Staohelberger. H. k Vashuttl, J. (1973). Mum* 110.
77.
282. Bancher, E. , Vashultl. J.. Schmidt, 8., Vurst . F. k Rledarar. P.
(1974). L u. E 37(6), 139.
283. Baraldl. 0., (iuerrieri, G. I Hlucclo. C. (1971). Induatrla
Conserve 46, 369,
284. Baraldl, D. , Cuerrterl, G. ft UlucctO, C.F. (1972). AsrochlBlca
16, 538.
389. Baraldl, D. (1973). J. Fd Scl. 38(1), 108.
as«. Belli-Donlnl, II. L. k Taggl , R. (1970). Induatrla Coasarv* 4S( 1),
33.
387, Betll-Doalni. H.L. k Paosolll, P. (1870). Fd Irrad. , Pr. 10(4),
14.
288. Belll-Dontal, H.L. (1973), IAEA - R 874 F.
389. Bollt-Doalnl, X.L., Baraldl, D. k Hagaudda, C. (1973). Cob. Nu.
Enarg. Muct. Kotii 19(13), 87.
,y Google
181
. Bernades, B. , da Siquat.
S. (1973). ilPIA-T-Oa, pp. 7;
. Bvrnadea, B, , da Sllva, S.H
T-Og-Ol-O03. pp. 61.
. Brady. C.J., O'Connell, P.B
Biol. Scl. 23, 1143.
. Burtoo. ■. (1973). Potato Ri
. C>br«r*. H.L. , Loyola, V.V,
PreservatloD ot Food". Proc.
13-17 Noveaber 1972), (AEA.
. ChBChlD, K., Kato. K. > Ogal
77.
396. Ctiachtn.
K. ft Kurosakl,
, da Sllva. S.H. k da Sllva Horaaa.
t Sllva Horaaa, 3. (1973). APIA-
I., Soydzuk, J. ft «ada, H.L. (1970).
B. 19(1), 1C9.
k Carraaco, A.H. (1973). "Radiation
of a Bynpoalun. lAEA/FAO. (Boabajr,
VUnna, p. 47.
a, X. (1969). Fd Irrad., Tokyo 4.
1971). Engel Gakkal Zasahl 40(1),
■d Irrad., Tokyo 6, 11.
t Ogata, K. (1969). Fd Irrad.. Tokyo 4, 85.
I., Craban, H.D. 1 Luaa, R.A (1972). J. AEric.
. AgTic. es,
A.R. (1970). "Tbe IdantltlcBtloD Of Irradiated
Proc. of a Colloqutua (LuxenbourE. 27 October 1970],
' the European Conmun i I I ea . EUR 4695, p. lOS.
A.R. (1963). Fermentatio No. 3, p. 125.
A.R. (1969), Lebensmlttel. Kiss. Technol . 2(4), 90.
A.R. (1970). Eur. 44I7-f, pp. 22.
E. A Uabeva, V. (1972). Hauchnl Trud.
Konaerva Pron. Plovdiv 9, 85.
E. t llBheva, V. (1973). NauchDl Trud.
Inst. Konserva Pron. Plovdiv 10, 101.
a, E. A Uaheva, V. (1973). HaucM Trud.
. Konaerva Pron. Plovdiv 10, 89.
a, H. k HcCllab, C.A. (1970). NVO-3e4-17
901
A Stornalnole, H.R. (19B9). J. Fd Scl.
A Panaolll, P. (1970). Fd Irrad. 10. 15.
Baraldi. D. A Ta«|l, R. (1974). Radlat .
. Belll-[k
Bot. 14,
. Etaeabars. E. . Lapldot, H. A Mannheim. C.H. (1971). Contructa
,y Google
18, 388.
314. Eric, B.._l* Coopca. J.. KlsiD. S. » Krlckar, W. (1970). Fd
Tochnol. AuaC 23(13), 664.
315. FBCaCIl. J.F. » Colun. B. (1969). P.R.N.C. - 139, pp. 113-llS.
From Rmdlatlon aod Isotopa Tscbnology In Latio AaaricaD Davalop-
Dent (4-8 Mar 1989).
318. Fllep, G. ft KapaaltaaajF , B. (1971). NovaDytamalaa ^(4). SW.
317. Floras, H.C. PBtz, t. , M Ortaga, II.. Ortla, J., Dcsbpaada, S.
ft Rola, C. (19T1). RevCa Asroqula. Tachool. Alloaot. 11<4}, S94
318. Gaaco, L. , Barrera, Et. ft da la Crux, F. (1987). lot. FFuehtaatt-
Unton Bar. «las. Tacbn. Kom. 8, 357.
319. Vakil, U.K.. Aravladakahu, y. , Srlntva*. H. , Chauban, P.S. k
Sraaalvasan, A. (1973). "Radiation Preaervattoa of Food". Proc.
of a Symposiuoi. lAEA/FAO (Bonbay, 13-17 November 1973), IAEA.
Vienna, p. 673.
320. Horubala, A. ft Szprynfer , M. (1971). Rocxn. Technol . Cban. Zjwn.
30. 43.
331. Sonner, S.T. ft Maxia. E.C. (1966). "Food Irradiation". PcOC. of
tbe International SyngioBlun on Food trradlation, lAEA/FAO
(Karlaruhv. 6-IQ Juns 1968). IAEA. Vienna, p. 571.
332. Jaarma. U. (1969). Acta cheo. scand. 33, 3435.
323. Khan, t.. Sattar, A., AH. H. ft Uuhasned, A. (1974). Lebensnlt tol
Wl83. Technol. 7, 25.
324. Kim, H.S. ft Choi. Y.R. (1969). Korean J. Fd Set. Technol. 1_. SI.
325. Kim, H.S., Kim. Y.S. ft Park. K.T. (19E91. J. nucl. Scl., Korea
(1, Pari 2), 9, 119.
336. Kim, H.3., Kim, Y.S. ft Park. K.T. (1969). J. nucl. Scl,, Korea
(1. Part 2), 9, 125.
327. Kim. H.S.. Choi. Y.R., Kin, S.K. ft Uarn . I.J. (1970). Korean
J. Fd Sci. Technol. 2, 113.
328. Kim. H.S. (1971). IAEA - H 593 f.
329. KovacB, E. (1974). Acta aliment. Acad. Sci. Hung. 3(2), 111.
330. Kurosaki, T. ft Ogata. K, <1971). Eniel Gakkai Zaaahl 40(1), 85.
331. Kao, B.I. (1971). "Olslnfastatlon of Fruit by Irradiation". Pre
of a FAO/IAEA Panel Ueeling, (Honolulu. 7-11 December 1970).
IAEA. Vleana, p. 125.
333. loaharanu, P. (1971). "Dlalnfeatatlon at Fruit by Irradiation".
Proc. ot an FAO/IAEA Panel Heetlng, [Honolulu, 7-11 December
1970). lAE. Vienna, p. 113.
333. Lee, C.C. (19S9). Cereal Chen. 36, 70.
334. Lee, 3.R., Kin, S.K. ft Lee. K. (1973). Korean J. Fd Scl. Technol
,y Google
lad. 6(«
87S
k. 95.
335. Lea, U.S. k Kin. H.L. C1973). Korean S. Fd Scl. Tachaol . 4, 39.
338. L«a. U.S., KlB, H.L. h Jmoag. J.B. (1973). Korau J. Fd Scl.
Tacbnol. 5, 69.
337. UBiatrenko. S.H. k Kercha, S.F. (1974). TovBrowdsnt* No. 7,
p. 6.
338. Baodyopadnya;, C. . T«warl, G.H. t Sraaalvaaao, A. <1973).
"Radiaclon Preaarvatlon of Food". Proc. at * SyapoaluB lAEA/FAO
(Bonbay,. 13-17 Nav«Bb«r 1973), lUA, Vlenaa. p.
inner, y. (1963). Blochen. Prloclp. Fd Ind. 8,
loDselUe, S.P. A Rlav, J. (1970). Report IAEA-R-1
. Horre. J. (1973). RayoaneDants losla. Tvcba. Ilea.
. yorre, J. (1974). Annals Falalt. Expert, cbla. 67.
. Uumtaz, A.. Saccar. A. A yubaomed, A. (1968). Scl.
381.
. Hair, P.H., Thona*, P.. Uaaut, K.K.. Surendranatban . K.K.,
Liaiaye. S.P., Srlrangarjan, A.H. h Padaal Deaai, 8.R. (1973).
"RadlatloD Preaervatlon at Food". Proc. of ■ SyapoaluB, lAEA/FAO
(Bonbay, 13-17 Novenber 1973), IAEA, Vienna, p. 347.
. Nanlhi, K.. Kurahaabl, K. AKawaiiahl, 9. (1969). Fd Irrad. ,
Tokyo 4, 104.
le, S.P. (1973). Thesia, Bombaji.
.ta, K.. ChBChln, K. , Kato. K. A Vananaka, H. (1968). Fd
■ad. . Tokyo 3, 138.
ta, K.. Nakayama, H. . Kato, K. A Chacbln. K. (1989). J.
Fd Sci. Technol., Tokyo 16, 391.
wa, H. A Urltanl, I. (1970). Fd Irrad., Tokyo 5, 106.
. Okazawa, Y. (1972). Proe. Jap. Conf. Radloiaotopea Ho. 10, p.
419. (Tokyo, 16 November 1971).
lonez, R. A Contreras, J. (1970). Technol . alineat. 4. 3S .
352. Tobbsck. P.P., Clandlan, R.E. , Blockeal, A., Uaes , E. A
Herregods. U. (1973). "Radiation Preservation of Food". Proc.
of a Symposium, lAEA/FAO (Bombay, 13-17 Novenber 1972), IAEA,
Vienna, p. 137.
353. Park. H.P. , Choi, E.H.. Lea, O.K. A Kim, Y.H. (1970). Korean J.
Fd Sci. Tecbnol. 2. 81.
351. Park. H.P,, Choi. E.H. A Lee, O.H. (1970). Korean J. Hort . Scl.
8, 55,
355. Park. N.P.. Choi, E.H. A KlD, Y.K. (1989). J. Korean airic. Chtm.
Sot. 12. 83.
356. Paulm, A. (1970). Revue Eeo. Frold 61, 987.
,y Google
- P«na«r. H. , Gruanewald, T. , Runpt, G. , Gehsa, M. k Volf, V.
(1972). Bar. Bundastorscbungs*nstmlt Leban^alttaltrlacbttkLtuat
KarLiruha No. 3, pp. SI.
. P»p». O, (1973). "R»dl»tion Preaarvatton o( rood". Proc. of «
SynposiuB. lAEA/FAO (Sonbay, 13-17 Hoveober 1973], IAEA, Vleaoa.
p. 311.
Una. H. . Klda, K. a Pujlmakl, 31. (1967). Agrle. blol . CtMm.
31^, 935.
. Rtov. J., SloDsallsfl. S.P., Coren, R. ft Katian. It.3. (1971).
Abatr. Pap. An. chsm. Soc . 161. ACFD 67.
. RoKachsv, V.I. ft al. A/C<WF 49/p. 696.
. Ruopt, G. (1972). Potato Res. IS, 236.
. Runpl, G. (1973). Potato Res, 16, 396.
ikova, Z. (1973). Bull. Slov. Pol'nohoapod. Akad. Vyak.
idrat, F. , Cullbot. A. & Sure. J. ;i9e0). Acta cbln. tiuDc
23, 513.
. Sattar, A.. Muntaz. A. > Hubanmad. A. (1970). Pd Irrad. ^. 21.
tar. A., Muntae. A., Kban. I. k Hubamned , A. (1971). ScL.
. 8(3), 330.
ant. P.L., Ranakrlshnad. T,V. ft Kunta, U.S. (1970). Rftdtat.
Bot. 10, 169.
, Scherz. H.. Stehllk. C. , Stocklnger, F. ft Kaindl, K. (1968).
SPH-21,
erz, H. (1973). Fd Scl. Technol. Abstr, 5(4A), 23« .
. Scherz, H. (1974). "The Identification ot Irradlatad Foodstufra' .
Proc. of ao International Colloqulun (Karlsruhe, 24-2S October
1973). Coornlsslon of the European Coonunltles, EUS S126.
LuxembourB, p. 193.
, Schubert, J., Sanders. E.B. , Pans, S.F. ft Wald, N. (1973). J.
Ic. Fd. Chen. 31, 684.
nna, N. , Slnsh, U. . Vart. A. ft Hatbur, J. (1973). Potato
Res. 16(1), 53.
. Shlbata, 3.. Imal. T. , Toyoshina, H. , Umeda, K, ft Ishima, H.
(1973). Fd Irrad.. Tokyo 8, 112.
Shlbata, S. . Imal, T. . Toyoshina, K. , Uneda. X. ft Ishima, T.
(1974). J. Fd Sci. Technol.. Tokyo 31, 161.
. SreealvasaD, A. (1974). '*Iniprovaneat of Food Quality by Irradi-
ation". Proc. of a FAO/IAEA Panel Uaetlng (Vtanaa lS-33 Juna
1973). IAEA, Vtaana, pp. 139~ISS.
,y Google
382
Surendran&than. K.K. (1973). PhytocDaifiiStr;. G.B. 12(2). 341.
Szilviuyi. A., Klchaelson. H . . Brunner . H. t Puspoh. J. (1873}.
Mitt, VersStn GarGew men 27, U4,
Szotyori, L,K,, Lindner. K., Andrassy. E. ftHeroaodez. A, (1971).
Elelmiazerv. Koil . 17(3), 101,
Takai, Y Yiwatari, K., Stilnoniura , K
II970), Kokurltsu Elyo Kenkyusho Kenttu Hokotau p. 79.
Tak«no, H., Tanaka, *.. Lmeda, K. » S
Kenkyuj-Q Kenkyu Hokokii 27, 64,
TahaD
I Trud
(1972), Shokuryo
(19711
1 In
(19E9). J. Fd
1 Food
Tokyo 6(1), 107 ,
, Tencheva , S, 11956)
Konseri-a Ppoit. Plovdiv J, 203,
da, K.. Kawashtma, K., Takano, H, k Sato.
Scl. Technol,, Tokyo 16. 515,
lols. P., Zonz, H., Slehlik, G. 1 Kaindl, K. (
Irradiation, lAEA/FAO (Karlsruhe, 6-10 June 1966), IAEA,
Vienna, p. 219.
3E6. Dennison, B,A. S. Ahmed, E,«, (1966), "Food 1 rradiat ion'' . Proc .
ot the International SympOBlimi on Food Irradiation, lAEA/FAO
(Karlsruhe, 6-10 June 1966), IAEA, Vienna, p, 619,
3d-. Moy, J,H, et al. 1 1971). -Dlslnfestation ol Fruit by Irradiation".
Proc, of a FAO/IAEA Panel Meeting (Honolulu, 7-11 December IBTO),
IAEA, Vienna, p. 43.
iX'OOgIc
.L. (1961). CompariaoD of the ridloMn-
sltivltlea of the fat-soluble ultunlns bji gairanB IrradlaCloD. J.
agrlc. Fd Ch«m. 9. 430.
Lukton, A. k UacKloney G. (1956). Effect of Ionizing radlBtlons
on carotenoid stability. Fd Tnchnol.lO, 630.
Franceschinl. R.. Francis. E.J., Livingston. G.E. ft FagersoB,
1.3. (19S9). Effects of gamoia ray Irradiation on carotenoid
retention and colour of carrots, sweet potatoes, green beads add
broccoli. Fd Tecbnol. 13, 358.
Snauwaert, F. . Tobback. P.. Anthonisaen, A. k Maes, E. (1873).
Influence of gaona Irradiation on the provitamin A (beta-caroten«
in solution, [n; Radiation Preservation of Food. p. ■^D. Pro-
ceedings of a Symposium. Bombay 1972, I.A.E.A., Vienna 1973
3TI/PUB/317.
Kung. H.C.. Caden, E.L. ft King, G.C. (1953). Witainlna and
enzymes tn milh; Effect of gamma radiation on activity. J. agrlc.
Fd Chen. I. 14Z.
Tobback, P.P.. Snauuaert. P. ft Uaea, E. Unpublished data.
Snauwaert. F. . Tohback. P.P. ft Uaes, E. (1974). Studies on the
carotenoids and carotenoproteins of the crustacean Crangon
vulgaris Fabr.. In relation to their stability upon gamu
irradiation, ivth Int, Congress of Food Science and Tecbnology,
Uadrld.
Kontamioation von Lebensmi cteln . pp. 71, Steinkoptf , Darmstadt.
10.
Cauaeret. I. et Uocquot , G. (1964). Themo ec radiosenslblllt^
des vltamlnes. Annls .Nutr. .Ailment. 18. €267.
11,
Causeret. J., Lhulssler, .U . et Hugot , D. (1970). Les vltamlnes
dans les produUs laltters: Lail en nature, cr6mo. beurre.
fromagea (travau.x rScents), Annls Nuir. Aliment, 24, 6169.
12.
Keller, ». i Uelss, J. (1930). Chemical actions of lonlalng
radiations In solutions. Part VI. Radiation L-hemlatry of sterol
The action of X-riys on cholesterol and 3i-hydroxpregn-5-en-2-
one. J. chem. Soe . p. 2709.
13. Keiss, J. ft Keller, U. (1950). Chemical action of Ionizing radi-
ations on steroid compounds. Substances produced by the actloD
of X'rays on cholesterol and .1 -pregnenolone In aqueous srstens,
Experlent la 6. 379.
14. Hardegger, E.. Ruzicka, L. u. Tagnann , E. (1943). tJntersuchungen
uber Organe.xirakte. Zur Kenntnls der unverselfbarsn Llpolbe aus
arterlosklerotlachen Aorten. Kelv. chin. Acta 26. 2205.
13. Haslewood, C.A.O. (I941J. 74. Metabolism of steroids. 3. Tha
isolation of i.hole3tane-3 :5 ;6-trlol and other substances from
ox liver extracts, Btochem. J. 35, 708,
16. Ruzlcka. L. u. Pretog. v. (1943). (.'nterauchungen von Extrakten
auB Testes, Zur Kenntnla der Llpolbe aua Schnelnetestea. Bel*.
3, Google
Organextrakte. Zur Kenntnls der unvarBaltbareo Llpolb* aus
Schwelneml Iz . Helv. chin. Acta 26, 2222.
16. Prelog. L.. Tagnann , S. , Llab«nnann, L. u. Bucleka, L. (194T).
Untersuchungon ubor OrgaoextraKts. Ober Keto-aterlod* aus
Schuelnatestes-Extrakten. Helv. chlm. Acta 30, lOBO.
19. Uerrltt, C. Jr.. Aniellnl, P. k UcAdoo, D.J. (1967). Volatile
compounds induced by Irradiation In basic food substances. Id:
Badlatlon Preservation of Foods, p. 26. Advances In Chemistry
Series 6S , Vasblngton D.C.
20. Dlehl, J.F. (1974). (Jualltatlv* and quantitative cbanges in the
components of Irradiated foodstuffs. Suggestions for turiber
analytical studies as a contribution to the evaluation of
iiholesoBieness. Heport to the C.E.C., Dlrectgrate-Ceneral tor
Social Affairs, Health Protection Directorate, V/F/t.
21. Knapp. F.W. k Tappel, A.L. (1961). Some effects of , -radiation or liuo-
leate pero.-cidailon on ..-tocopherol. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc . M, 151.
22. Dlehl, J.F. (1970). On the effect or irradiation on vitanin E
in foods, on tocopherol and on tocopherol acetate. Influence of
different radiation condition*. Z. LebensOilttelunters. u. -Forach .
14Z( 1 ) , 1 .
23. Dlenl. J.F. (1969). Coaibined etfecta of Irradiation. Storage and
cooking on the vitamin E and Bj levels of foods. Fd Irrad. 10
(1-2), 2.
21. Johnson, B.C., Mameesh , M.S., Hetta, V,C. ft Rama Rao. P. 8. (19601.
'vitamin K nutrition and Irradiation sterlllzatloD. Fed. Proc .
Fedn Am. Soca exp . Biol. 19(4), Part I. 1038.
25. Krayblll, H,F. (1962), The effect of ionizing radiation on
v-itamins and other physiologically active compounds. Report of a
FAO, ncO, IAEA meeting on Vholesomeneas of Irradiated Feeds.
Brussels. 1961.
26. Proctor. B.E.. Lockhart , E.E. ftColdblilh, 3. A. (19SS). U.S.
Amy Q.U, Report Contract no. DA44-109-qU-tT49.
27. Coleby. B. (1957). Formation of ascorbic acid by Ionizing
radiations. Chemy Ind. p. II.
28. Ogura. H.. Uurata. H. t Kondo, H. (1970). Radlolysla of ascorbic
acid In aqueous solution. Radioisotopes 19(3), 26.
29. Uneda, K., Takano. H. t Sato, T. (1970). Radiation d*conpos 1 t Ion
of ascorbic acid in various conditions. !lippon Shokuhln Eoayo
Gakkal-Shi 17(3), 9S.
30. Fujimakl, 11. k Uorlla, H. (1968). Radiation chemistry of loads
Part I. Reaction rate constants of soise food constituents with
„GoogIe
hydrated electrons and hydroxyl radicals. Agrlc. biol. Ch«a. ^.
571.
31. Uorlla, H. , Tajlma. ». k Fujloiki. U. (1969). Radtktlon chamlatc;
of (ooda. Part [I. Reactivity of some food constituents with a
model secondary radical. CH^OH. Agrlc. blol. Chem. 33, 230.
32. Ebert, X.. Keene. J.P. . Swallow. A.J. b Baxendale, J.H. (19«S].
In Pulse Radlolysls. p. 117. Academic Press.
33. Saito. Z. > Igarastil. V. (1970). EtCect of gamna-lrradlatloD on
changes in acidity, vitamin C and non protein nitrogen at wples.
Hlrosakt Daigaku Nogakubu Gakujutsu Hokoku 16, 1.
34. Lee, C.V. A Salunkhe, D.K. (1966). Effects ot gamma radiation on
Creeie-dehydrated applea (Pyrus Ualus) . Nature, Lond. 310, 971.
35. Garcia de Uateos Lopez. A., fllvas Garcia, A., Ort In Sune , N. ft
del Val Cob. U. (1967). Preservation of foods by irradiaCiOD.
VI. Preliminary investigations on strawberries. Symposlua on
Application of Radioisotopes, Madrid. Spain. June 19-31.
36. Kim, Hyong Soo , Kim, Yeun Sok k Park, Kyong Tai (1969). Studies
on the storage of fruits by irradiation. II. On the storag« of
strawberries. J. nucl. Scl. (Seoul) 9(1), 111.
37. Kurosakl. T. (1970). Effects of gamna radiation on tba ascorbic
acid content in strawberries and natsudaldal fruits. Hiroshima
Koguo Tanki Daigaku. Kenkyu Hokoku 4(1), 50.
38. Maxle. EX.. Sommer. N.F. ft Brown. D.S. (1966). Radiation techno-
logy In conjunction with post-harvest procedures as a means o(
extending the shelf life of fruits and vegetables. Annual report.
1965-1966, (California University. Oavls. Dept , of Pomology.
Contract .■tT (ll-l)-34.
39. Siddiqui, A.K.. Amin . M.R., Matin, U.A., Ahmed. U.U. A Hossaln,
U.A. (1968). Effect of gamna irradiation on the ascorbic acid
content of Arnrltsagar bananas. Atomic Energy Centre, Dacca
(Pakistan). A .E .C.D./RB-IO.
40. Uusitaz, A.. Sattar. A. k Arair, M. (1968), Effect of gamma radi-
ation on Harlchal bananas. Sci. Ind. (Karachi) 6. 381.
41. Monsellse, S.P. k Kahan, R.S. (1966). Changes in composition and
In enzymatic activities of flavedo and Juice of sbamoutl oranges
following gaama irradiation. Radial. Bot . 6. Z6S .
42. Blood, F.R.. Darby, W.J., Vrlght, U.S. ft Elliott. G.A. (1966).
Feeding of Irradiated peaches and whole and peeled oranges to
monkeys. TokIc . appl. Pharmac. 6. 247.
43. UacFarlane, J.J. ft Roberts, E.A. (1968). Some effects of gama
radiation ot Washington Mavel and Valencia oranges. Aust . J. exp.
„GoogIe
. Anim. Husb.
BCta of low
evel irradlatloa
upon the
proser
vat loo of food
products. Progres* Report: Florida Agrl-
cultur
al Experiment Station. Galneavllle. Contract
AT(40-l)-3a97.
Larmond. E. k HUiUIod, H.A. (1968). The effect of
low level
ganna
irradiation on
peacbes. Fd
rrad. 8(4>. 2.
Aluned,
E.U. . Dennlson
R.A. k llerkler. H-S. (1969)
Effects of
low le
vel irradiation
upon the pr
eservation of (oo
products.
Annual
Report . April
9«B-June 1969. Florida Univ.
Gainesville.
Depi.
o( Food Science
Contract AT
(40-1)-3097.
Dennis
on, R.A.. Ahmed
E.X. t Herkley, K.3. (1967)
Effect of
low le
vel irradiation
upon the pr
eservalion of food products.
Annual
Report. April
966-Aprll 1967. Contract AT<
0-n-30»T.
Uaxle.
E.C. , Sommer.
fF. k Eaka.
I.L. (1968). Effect of gamma
radial
ion on citrus f
rulta. Proce
edlDga of Interna
lonal Citrus
Sympos
luiB. Edited by
n.D. Chapman
Graham
H.D.. Lu>e. R
A. ft Cuevas
J. Radiation pr
servatioo ot
tropic
al foodstuffs. Puerto Rico Nuclear Center. H
yaguet.
Conr-68100S. pp 117-Z
Tengun
muay. C. Radlat
on prewrva
ion of limes and
mangoes .
Ofdce
of Atomic Ener
gy for PeaCe
Bangkok. Tbal .
EC-9. pp. «-ia
Weokam
, .N.S. k Hoy. A
P. Nutritional composition o
irradiated
fruit.
I. Hango and papaya. Hawal
Univ., Honolulu
Coll. of
Trop.
Agrlc. UH-235.P
5-5, pp. 126
35.
Dharha
r, S.D. Radlatl
:>n preservat
on of so™ fruit
and vege-
tables
Atomic Energy
Eslabllshme
t, Trombay, Indl
. STI-DOC-10/
54. pp
.115-22.
Hllker
. D.H. k Young.
R.L. (1966)
Effect ot lonlz
ng on some
nutrlt
ional and biochemical prope
rtie« of papaya. Hawal Farm.
Scl. 15. 9.
Fa root
1. W.A., Huolaz
A. A Anlr.
U. (1967). Effec
a of gaoD..
radial
ion on guavas (
B.A., Kamel. T
avo L.). Fd Irrad.
8(1-2). 37.
rahmy ,
8.B. (196SJ. Ef
set of radl-
at ion
on the heaping
quality of ■■
Pearl Harbor" tomatoes. Agr.
Res. Rev. , Cairo 46(3
, 127.
Sattar
, A., Humtai. A
A Amir, M.
(ISTO). Ganna radiatioa effect
on the
behaviour of h
»rve»tod ton
ktoe*. Fd trrad.
.0. 21.
Kandpu
rl, K.S.. Sooch
B.S. ft Ran
ilha*a. K.S. ( 196B
. Effect of
gaoma-
irradiation on
he atorag*
ite and quality of onloo bulbi
under
ordinary storage condition*
J. Rea. Punjab Agr. Oolv. fl
„GoogIe
llllU
cgp«
Maracay, Venez. 20<2>, 109.
. Wills. P. A. (1965). Sons effects of lamna radii
varieties of Tasmaalaa potatoes, II, Blochemici
J, exp. Agr. AnliD. Husb, 5, 3B9 ,
V, Korableva, .N.P, A ShaUnova, R
sting of gamma- exposure o( potato!
(1968).
For prevention
1,
Stone, G, .
Uenzles
J. A
irradlattu
Qn pota
toes
toba Agron
pp. 56- 3
Boffi, C.
Ferrari
L.
ft Campbell
izing radiation on the change
potatoes. Mater. Nauch.-Prakt
. Ktioi. pp.137. Edited by P.G.
. : Tula, L'SSH,
inn, Z.Z, , Krayblll. H.F, ft
:2^h, A. u, Mucise, D. ( 1957)
ii«n blologischen Etfekt von
raple 102, o35.
G, ( 1969). Effect of gunmi
I, (Milan) SL, 173,
.nova, R,T. (1967). Effect
(1957). Vltaoln con-
Wlrkung lonlstTender Stra
'itaniLnen der B-Cruppe, Stt
. Kuber. V. 1 1951 ). Ergebn isse und Analyse untersctiledl loher
Mechanlsmen der Strahlenwirkung bet elnlgen biologlschen Systemm
.\'alur»i3senschaften 38. 21.
. Luckey. T.D. , Bengson, M.K. k Smith. U,C. (1973). Appolo diet
'^valuation: A comparison of biological and analytical methods
including biolsolatlon of mice and ganoa radlatioa of diet.
Aerospace Med. tt. 886,
, Ebert, M. & Swallour, A, J, <1957), The action of X-rays on cocar-
bo.xylaae. Radiat , Hea . 7, 229.
. Dlehl. J.F, (1975), Thtanin In bestrahlten Lebenamicteln. I.
einlluss verschledener Bestrahlungs bedlngungen und des Zelta-
blauls nach fieacrablung. Z. Lab^nsnltteluaters. u. -Forsch.
157. 317.
. Luc^ak, U. (1970). Eflscc of low and high gamma (cobalt-SO) ray
dosea on some btologlcally actlva cooponents of wbol* atlk povikr
„GoogIe
, &nct blotia).Rocz. loat. Przan, Hlcci. 13(1), 71.
, GronlnBBr.H.S. k T>pp«l. A.L. <1937). Th« destruction Of tbitaUM
and In kqueoua •olutton by gwou radlatloD. Pood Baa.
33, 519.
(1963). Changea occurring In milk powdar subjected to
gamna rays. Zeaz. Probl. Proatepow Hauk Roln. 80, 497.
, Kennedy, T.S. (1985). Studies on the nutritional value of toods
on. I. Eftecta on aoaa B-coaplex vita-
nlns Id egg and wbeat. J. Sci. Fd Agrlc. 1«, 81.
. Abdullab, Nazlr.. Slaglan, E.G., lanaenl, H. k lanaehtn, X.(1971X
ratory activities on food Irradiation In Indonesia. N.A.E.A. .
Djakarta (Indonesia). Conf .-710901-1S9. Dep. NTtS.
. Potekhin, E.V. (1967). Vitamin content of grain expoaed to dlsln-
ilzlng radiation. Vop. Gig. Pltan. 44-S.
It.. Cahagnler, B. h Laelerc, J. (1967).
.rradlatloo of ebeat Hour on Its microflora
. re Irrad. 8. 3.
. Dlehl, J.F. (1975). Tbiaoln in beatrsbltan Lebenamlttaln. 11.
Komblnlerter Elntluss von Baatrahlung, Lagerung und Erbttzen
den Thlamlngehalt . Z. Lebeasalttaluntara . u. -Porscb. 158(2).
83.
. Gounell, H., Culat-Uarnay, C. et Fsucbet, ■. (1970). Effeta dea
s sur la teneur de divers alloents en vita-
mines du groupe B et C. Annls Kutr. Ailment. Z£. 41.
. Brooke, P.O., Raiesi. E.H., Gadbols, D.F. ft Steinberg, U.A.
(1966). Preaervi
radiation. 5. Thi
amino actds and
Kennedy. T.S. fc Ley, F
of gamma radii
t freah unfrozen fishery producta by low-
t effects of radiation paatnurlsatlon on
I haddock ttUets. Fd Technol. |0, 99.
F.J. (1971). Studlas on the comblaed affect
i cooking on the nutritional value of flah.
146.
ly. D.H. (1961). Nutritional value of de-
hydrated tcJds. J. Am. diet. Aaa. 39, 105.
. Calet, C. h Blum. J.C. (1970). Vllamlna In the egg during its
. Annls Hutr. Ailment. B34, 301.
iyunyakova, E.H. ft Karpova, I.N. (196B). Comparative study of
of cobalt-60 gaoDa raya and tharmal sterilisation on
loflavln, nicotinic acid and toco-
In beet. Vop. Pltan. 25(3). 53.
'ilson, G.U. (1939). The treatDent of naata with lOQlaing radl-
s. 2. Observations on tba destruction of thlaaloe. J. Sci.
„GoogIe
Fd Agrlc, 10, 295.
85. Tappel, A.L. (1956). Relationship o( radiation Induced tat oxi-
dation and flavor, color and vltioiin changes in meat: Pinal
report. Chicago, Quartermaster Food and Container tnstttuC* tor
Armed Foroea, 6pp.
BE. Uaurer. H.J. fc Hell. E. (19»B). The action ot loniiing rara
upon vUamlns. I-I . Ribotlavln. Strahlentherapie 106, 294.
87. Coldbllth. S.A, ft Proctor, B.E. (1949). Effect ot bigti voltage
X-rays and cathode rays on vitamins (riboflavin and caroten*).
Nucleonics 5. 50.
38. U.K. umistrf of Health (1964). Report of Korklng Partr oh
irradiation of Food. p. 58. H«30. London.
89. Markakls, P.C., Coldbllth, S.A. ± Proctor. B.E. (1931). Effect
of ionizing radiations on vitamin B^^. Mucleonlcs 9{6), 71.
90. Richardson, L.R. , Wilkes. 3. ft Rlchey, S.J. (1961). Cooparatlv*
vitamin B„ activity of trozen irradiated and heat processed
foods. J. .Sutr. 73, 363.
91. Uatschiner. J.T. ft Dolsy, E.A., Jr. (1966). Vitamin K content ot
ground beet. J. .Vutr. 90. 331.
92. Mameesh. U.S.. Boge . OJ . , Uueklestad, H. ft Brackkan, O.R. (1968).
Radiation preservation of fish. The effect on certain vitamins
in fresh cod and dogfish fillets and in smoked cod and herring
rillecs. Fiskerldlrektorat . Skrifter. Ser. Teknol . Undersoek.
i(10). I.
93. Oancher, von E., Washuttl J. u. Riederer. P. (1970). Die Ausalr-
kungen einer ■,-^'^ Co-Bestrahlung aut den Vltamln-C-beiiehungs-
wLeae Carotlnoidgehalt in verschledenen pflanzlichen Produkten,
II. Spinat (Splnacla oleracea) Lebenamlt. u. Ernahrung 33(1). 4.
94. Rancher, von E.. Washuttl. J. u. Rllderer. P. (1970). Die Aus-
wlrhungen einer i -Best rahlung auf den Vitamln-C-bzw. Carotin-
oidgehalc in verschledenen pflanzlichen Produkten. III. Paprika
'Capsicum annuum) . Lebensmit . u. Ernahrung 23(3), 11.
■tin, D.C. » Hells, C.E. (1985). Caroteoold
t corn. Fd Techno 1 . 19(3) .
toe.
oy Google
REFERENCES TAKEN FrOH;
BUCROBIOLOGY OF FOODS PASIEUBISKD BY lONMira
RADUTION*
AtuHuuVK. K.. MoLH. N. 1* De 8n.TA. X. X. Otms n^rUium tLhMmiim. ijw E,
■■ (OatiH (o iifbliiriiin iRvRml gf IMi fM. *i(h Hirctel »*nw la UoBinl
ogodiiion. -ia: AMulimiim al liai irratithni N AnbHf nwririM. fTnliDit^
Rmwm Snin. .\^ Ui IAEA. X'in-Ui. STIfOOCf IDA! pp. W-ltn.
Ann, E. U., DntsMin. R. A. ft MsuLn. U. 8. |l«»|; Slfiu */ fw hrW ;m4i-
ntiM a^M M« pnwrniliga sj foot prWurta. AiBud Rtfion 0RO-(T1, V. i.
AMniE &«r;)r CbiiiiiiIhIbii.
Amm. R. t KaKjue, R. IV. (IMtl: CnWm'hifJUtfc* Typmyhtrwi iWr nwtiaiw
uad hillTiBrtialntnt AunatniibnunutuHni bri StrrMiit muurttctHt CVlrvt iind
Aniu.K.fcUiTAU.K.IItUI: AfUtnui aixl Mm tmiKmrttitMlj.-iK: Kmdb^itK tntU.
•'nh tf ruw '».rf'.».>K.rr«.».i. (Piw. Pwri. Buiffcok, 1W*)[AEA. Vlnnw,
(fr£i>CB(iH,ni. tt-«i.
Auiroup. II. C. t: liiKD.i?:. D. C. Il*'''): A[iiMnnt almi
npait «f fiiHilc^fruiil bmb in DNA iwl ■iiami-r
„GoogIe
R mUb): Efr«t. of M Co ■■mm* itwIiaUoD a
:lkin bv Aiptra.llit flaiKit. MinUgia. M. 43*-4«
nE», t D. (IMI|: J. ilu.ry *i. A, I3t»-ISM. -
|IMTI.|>p.TT-»a
■ Infectf^ tnim^la. ^tn: Mtcrebiof'igicnl pnybimn in food irimtt^itiim hlf
■~ ■ ~ '- — ■ - fiei.
of foot-«Ad-a0utk
na, STI/PUBlieS!
cy "X" dHrur. Ttirtti/t (J. Bril. Txrliy Tcdin
Bahiii-(;->un, R., Kabax, K. s. Ii Pakiv*. R. (IMIli Synerpitio ttlrft of (■mink
citru» fmiti. PtMop-aMoat. W.'^MI*. ■ '' "" "
BABKauT. B. .r. k Cai, S. H. (IftSH): RmdiMnn-Hinilivr anil rHliuion-nHMnt
muono nf Hwnapjtfjyj m/tknucK. J, BflM , M. ItW-IM.
rivirf tn-li«ol..'il. 30-3(. 74.
~ ■ - - - - ~ ,|9flg]. o™bin».I hral-TSjilt
BuiCSI, W. P. (19*1): Turkey
BKII«es.'A. E.,'Ouvii. J. P. « Ckaxdleh, V. L. (leJK): ltrl>i»p n^Btum oT mioro-
or|Wun« to cuhwlB ra>i. II. Vn.li and maulik'. .4j>ii'. .U'rnAiat., 4. UT-IW
Bbidccs. B. a., AaHwimii-Riinn. M. J. & .Mos.k, R. J. (IMI): ConaUiioD of baa-
■rlill (rnilivilin to inniiing radiuion an<l mLkJ heUing. J. gin. HitnUeL, St,
\a -KH andHaml'cii'ind.'j. «...,!» F,"lOJ^I "."""'
BrciLEV, P SI . »)«<■». N. F.. C.WM. D. A.. Dauv. M. fc Uaxi
arliiaiiun of ShUnpvi KoIom/crMJOtangiOBpiiiT by lirulr a
nwriti of hraiinE and Ramnia irraduKion. R'ulM. Btt.. M, X
Bt-LLERUAN. L. B. 1: HAdTL-KC, T. E. (I9<4): Eflrvl of tow tVitr gaims
r.r*!..^.. 37. 4W-»m" ' "* " ■
Be-llehhin. L. B. Barkhut. H M. 1 HkiiT<-N<i. T. E. (19;^): I'v
ii> prrvrni aflatoiin prwlurlinn in brrad. J. Faai St,., 3i, IUlt-1240.
Caveti. / J. (ISA"!; Tlv rrfrcM of nrwrr roniB III p«<liaKii>« im llvr ■nkmM>1ney and
HWiAj^ lir« of mnii. poultn fl lirh- fiuj. /wf. MicnivJ., I, :;-■«}.
Cmiaiuls-, L. p. & ZAHEXH'ir. 1^. [136111: StuilM on induelion of miitalioM by bral
in n»m III a-irJIit luMiViV. C-wiil, J. JlKnituiI.. It, 41-40.
Cmov, T. tr. i<(M>ii. B, Salvhehe, E. K. & CAUrsELL, VT. F. M97n|: EITnil* ol (niiuna
mlialion on PrnicilliHrn rrpiuum L. I. Some bcion innundnii ihr (miilii-itr
III thr fungii"- Btrfial. B«.. '0. SIT-.'iia.
Cmamsas. E. A. {IM4): Kaihiiilnn muianw of rntrracocci ilwl in nir, Aii-i p'M,
CmilTEKlEX. E. A. (1>B?): DiliciEHirin in: R-i-liinUriIiinlieii of mt^-eil pradiirU,
lAajniarrulieali itnd iitiModnai. (Trchiiinl Rrpana Srcin, No. 13) IAEA,
Vi»nn«. STIfDOr-'lO, ;i. p. 19.
CaiuTEKSEH. E. A. (10741: ThF vtKtian of trat Mraini an<l thr ihsier oTmrthodi
for preparation of liiuLopical monitnn for flxiVrol on ndiatiwi Meriliaatiad.
-in: ETptritne/t in rHtT^vuioRanritimilioii of mtdieltl pr«(fiir7t. (Prw. vnrlcillf
Eroup nxTlinit, Riul, Jun-. 1971) Trrhniral Rrpnrta SWiea, Ho. lit, IAEA,
CinunEMEX.' E. A. t Kjchs, E. (19eS): Thr railialinn mitunce of luibiirMni Iran
alily ddrif^ iHoragp of Htrriliiir
„GoogIe
nm-M.O.iEa.) FMni hod. Vol. IV. pp. 4IS-tU.
CoKN. F. B.. BAOn. F. L. A Srxu, L. R. L {IITIJ^ Liltn
A. OUR
i. E. L. fr ROIKBT*. T. A. (IVW; A nata «n Ua ihvrlapnHnt of RWUni
■ -- -....,.-.- ^-.. ... . .... ~ K<„ U, T3J-7JJ.
5^*
inoia LTt: dtvclopnMnl and dunetniulion. J. Ban.. IIS. 133-lM.
R., SlKUtev, A. J. t WaITO, D. I. C. (lM9|: Rji|iid mHlMd far tl» dM«l
gwnnw ndiatioB miManI ilnina ef Srdmmilla MJtinwriHM. BoK. iVw.
R.. SlKtcn'. A. J. 1: Biinnni, D. (IVTl); DMIIvnbDniKleiD acid rnwr i
ndlMioii-nalilant Mnin oT^afiMMOa (ypMnurum. /, Boo., /If. a
DmxB. V. L. (IMS): EnvinniuHKal baton afTrottw (Iw pnduetioa
of >f1Uaiin.-in: Toxic mUn-ortaiitm: U.S. Dm. Inlerior. Wishuiitcw, D. C.
t»TO. pp. «J-4T. ^^
Datis. .\. S., RlLVEHAK. O. J. Ii UiUCaOtrsiT. E. B. (IMl): RslUUaa-nHUlIt,
piimrnlnl coceia i»l«Fd from hmMm^ limur. J. Barl.. U. IM-IM.
DMXnoM. R. A t ARMID, E. U. 'IM«|: lUvitw of Iht ■••••■• of iirKUUion affRU
on nilrut fnitlt. -in; /'ml/nnlinfiwilPnn.Synip., Karknibr.ltMjlAEA.Vimna,
STI/PttB/HT. pp.«ia-eM.
DiiAiEAii.3. D. Ic SitccxivAux. A. (IWW): [miliation of Inpicalfruiu and v-cgclabk*.
.in: Food IrTaiioik,^ (Pnxr. Symp.. Karlaruhe, i>H)UEA.Vi«na. STI/PUB/117.
pn.eai-eiw.
DiiHi, J. p. (ISia): Onboard raduriiMion ot imi osnn fMi. PrrpwMiona for aom-
nwnialiulion in th* Grrmui PMaial RapuUic. Attn AtimiiOatia. i,
Duu.S. D.. Etahi, J. B. fcNim.C. P.. Jr.lltUtiMiamMairiDnafpHkuHlfnnk-
funrn and Ihair raiiiation raalatansa. FvA Hi:. tS, MI-IH.
ti^ an tha mii^nflora of «>in«H 'hww Food Ha.. It. 1I0-i:il.
Di-yx. C. G.. Lahiell. IV. L.. Pbau, H. k Htircmw*. A, (IBU): BiologkMl and photo-
thrmical affftta of hijch anartfy alKtroai ■vitally protlucnf Boantnn rava and
caIho.ta ra}*. J. -ippl. Phvt.. ». B(U-«il.
EcEenr J. W. 1- Hcihher, X. F. (IM7V Conliol Dfiliiaawi ofCruiu and vagFtabka Ur
- r. Fk^opaHol.. :
Edc
IV. B, P. l- iKnHAX. M. {1002): Tbr uHunrnca ami crouth of itanhyliHOHi nn
Eb.:
aci.b. B^artifu. »inp«y<. Arli. SI. IB6.
Rapi Conf BT09U. np. M-G3.
Raporl. (irri«. .Va ISO) IAEA. Vianna, pp. M-41.
Es»OB«. C 1 EaiKiEx. »'. M, (IB74bli Radlallan liiaclit-alion of clriH praparai
tion alcriiiialion pfocailuraa. Xitptrititn tit r^imiOH uttrili'mtion ot mt
predum. (Taahniral Raparta Sariai, No. MB) IAEA. Vianna, in. HB-M.
Em. .V. A. L Ideiak. E. S. (iftIO): RaiiialiDn lii'atmnil of Fsadi. If. PuUia hi
•igninranaa of imdIaliDn-rKiTclad Sal«mfH«. Apfl. .VitnUtl.. It, aw-
Ebdmaic. 1, E., TBATTNia. F. 8. t McQuuk. K. F. (IHIa): StudiM on Iha irrailii
of niicmoinnitnit [a ralation to food praaarntioB. I. Tlka aanearatlvaamailiv
otapHinaliacteriaarpubliiihFaHbabnifioaow.Caniiif. /. .VieratM.. 7. IM-
Ehdhak, f. E. Tratcseii. F, !>. kUcQirm. K.P. IIMtbliSiudiHonllHimlla
lanr>. C'.... "j™/;rr.Xv.. 7. SOT-Iis!**"^ ™*
,y Google
Fuua, J.. Kim, I. t Behcu-BOc*, J. (l»Tt|: Rrdurtion of nuilasa In
bmin far isniliiiE ndictioo. Arta Alimmla'U; I, tOi-tit.
FabeU. J. t RuU. A. irM7): Tnnpiialur* rthnt ia miereaTfrnnimtm. Ah.
Fiunw. V. U. k Leievichli. E. K. (19731: Siudy dF U^'-Uui*emn
Fiuuiu. L, FuwH. iv'r.'t FlUi. H. L (1«»): ClcM^cir MWa^.i,
r/^rff Wf bialiigmi tvalrma. Aculvflnk Pma, XfH York.
MfTi 76 ijrr Miriftmnibr dn Bundn fOr LrbenuitlWlrHl ' '
kuiul- B. Brhr'i Virlu. Hambura.
m»Kii. H. K A (:iit)sm*u>7T (l»;0)i Toorf /nwf . H, IS.
FitNK. H K.. Ml-Kin. R. t Diui. J. F. (I«'l|t Hnpaw of icniifHiie hhI kb-
Fkehin, B. M. & Biiiiii;e>. R a. (IBM): SuitahUit) of vwiuiH platine mnlia for
munibig ktcirm after n(|in*urf ■<■ gaimtia irrailiaiiui. /iJ. J. "piil. RitJhtr
tiATta. F. L. Iltsai: Thr iraMkHi of inilli'i'llHl hait.ria 1u Irra.l
OiKuu, W. <ISr>7p: TbF rfTrdi of lonli<iMi niliaiiDn nn nnelrii- 1
ami barinia) »lll. jIuh. Htr. K^mjLiU., 3i. Its-3nll.
CuEfTEn.J.U t Bwuu. R. A, (It6«): Hw rHniann' of ^hImshcHii fj«i>«M »,■■■•
andXa'>iMii())>i>rnAEi^inv''IWinmUkliK»DllI<'.AlMil.JU>rrs('»l.. If.lnt-IUO.
Ouuaum. «. A. (I»:i): Thr inhlbiiion anH dwtn— ~ -• •' ■ — ^"> ~" ■-■
ladiariOM. -in: HuED.W. R.
AeadnnJf- Pm*. Londun. r
GnoHUi. L. " ■ " '
:ti, .\.. rriDHVAvrJ
•]»rr> of CI Mol
\Vnii.. f^.Pl™*
■:<, L t V;.. 1...1IWJ4): III- TVrnwi
^. Uimibnl., U, I ...
Hnua. C. (ISW|: T«in pradiKlion by CfwIrtftKn WhIIihim lyprEuil
Nshvinil proWrm ill foul jtmm iti jm tjv <nilrfi<Hicw (I'Uii
Vimn*. isdni, IAEA, Vimiu, KTI;I>l'B/l«R, |lM:|,pp- 17-«
HiiiH. G. (IMN): PnifHIn for Ihr rliniinalioa of CluMridium Miii:ui,n
„GoogIe
•mi l—d t» irnHlMtioi. (PwH-l pRmnllnai, Zein. I
PUBltOO, 181-IOT.
HkLLADDE*. a. (IB7t) (&t.|: C^rmir«l »wnfe«, privipltt .
Idbae. E. 8. |<Sn): EfT^i;! of n>Katian> on aacrn
IHM, /. ll-S| tb-B>.
Iduae. E. S. t Ista. K. (IIMNI: RkliMion Irralnmlof ftnb. I. 1
n-JMnUol paullr)'. Apul. MirnAiil., It, lOsl-IOas.
iDutll. E. 8. t TlUTCinat. P. B. (I«U): f<oni> phMiokigkBl ann
Etrhairkii cod< mklmni to gamma imdiwian. CiW. J. Mirn
IlICU. H. Il Itv. H. (IMO: CkwiI n«., «t. S(U. RipDrtrd hy Mai
l^'l:lull. M. (IWt): Mtoiobiokigical pruKiplH in prrpacking nwata. J
/nm. /•.nf.ar,
lAH. Jl, (1971):
nmlrl. |CUl»liai«t Svniaha
,<..^i s 1.- f„, f KonKTi-, ronkn. RafipoR Sr. in.
IM;*AM, II. k DA»nv. R. H, (l»7l): Chugrl rauv.1 hy inicnibn in iinilaav of mratt.
IMIHAH. JTt Ri«ii*T*.'b. a. (IMHl; MimhiDkigicalpnnF4pbrtinraa.licnHillian.-ln:
/•ow# Ur^i-gi-m (Pmr. .•*vin|>., Karliruhr. IWifil. lAE.*. Viri.na. .■"TIPVB.'IJT,
|i|>. KT-tM.
IsiiBAH. M. L Thiibslzv. M. 3. (IMt)- Changn in ipoilu* parimi of chi^m rartx
■a ■ nwill of inwliirion. y, «vfl. Rniial. Italnaa. i, IM-IM.
Ito. H. & Iiiciu, H. (lail)! AfT. Blti. »<».. ». am. Rrponf l bv Mwauranw f ICtl.
Ikn H,. Iim*. H.. OuUHA, Y. k Watanark H. (I*;(I; Aar. BM. Clitm.. M, III.
Knonnl by JIMWyama (I97t|.
Ito. H . riniBAM. 8. k IlB-KA. H. (IM
Irrrid. JtpHH, /. I . RpporlAl by Maliu-
r-.-—t -,~.«ilM, ffarai nu t'apHiiirfc dn ailruni
liR itn IDiinn. Reunion OAIS-PAO-IREA, (On^-r. *-n Atiil) (Vo'
_» II9T»(.
J, M. k <:dIU<.t. .a. (IM»*): Condi
JESJIALI. V. k tH-lti.rr. A, (tSTObl: Influfn«. .If
afarimn rPHxnu i».(i'"j and M.i.,prn-Hui 1//.1.
KiLLEEEEW. R,. BnNSE.. F L. B.UWE, D k GRODNEi
W Co {samnia rajn) ot haid Haul (o -Introy t<
KtTti-AMA, S. k MATirVAKA. A. (IMgli B^-rhrm. Bl
iii. Rt|»r>»j hy Bainl'PvkT k Hohlhiook
ilim. (Abdr.l (.'onRrM Incr-
..;. £>«>■•(•■. l|->«. K, TttiH-A..
in •nnliFd riUi. J. fd ,Vri., ».
I'ngal upon* ani< toiint. T"ni:
nphg. B... C..»i-..i-... M. 4m-
in! Hiigo. W. B. (E.i.1. /nji-
otsaniina 10 talhode myt, I, N'omporr.farminj
; baclrria. .Ipp/. .lfiFn*,<V . *.
„GoogIe
Ayf il^r-A.-*. li. «4-UT
■uf'M sf nWvol pnduiU (Pnic. nikiBK (nnv MilJu. IliA, /■■■ tViai
Tpchnnl RnnRm Smn. No. Ij>, UEATVinu, pp. u^^
Lici
-;,t"a
. Vau.:
». A. F. (I9«:i: Efl"'
th- J..
.r-«l,.H.
.^na In nymli
ILIWl. .t.
(IWI);Uhm.i>iiv.-i>
miuflbrd
"»"
, Lond. Wf,
LI-.-1
: Rninlivil
V of Emh,,
sb"
li i.-.aTi
..Ifro^by
oTp^fdin
ItlLl
, DruiL
, .1, F k S*iu>
■LHI. D K
(isc;): "ii
• r,.,4^aium 'tiui .lipiiTiHiu ftfiru tu yj-imJiatuHi.'fj^
'■f s>t-nth AnroalSiiniMHiun, l»Owihrr ISTJJ. Sp«>i«l R»t">n ^o- "■ Aukihi
l»:». "-n \r» Y'lik .\i:ri«lriiral EaprnmrBial S^IMkni, IJ«wi». U.S.A.
Mm-w-i-wv. r.. B.. V.iv. ,J S l; liiiimna. ^ A. IIMl|t CIihwh in ihr rnHniflcm
'■r h*Mock IMnm and ihui^nl suft-ibillnl clant iTur irmJiwiiMi wilh Co'*
uuhuh r^( uiri '•lorw u 0 'C apd « C. Appl. MltrttM.. II. Ktt-tM.
M>T«.-TA]IA. A. (I1>;i): Pnwnt •talia n( l«>< inadiuien mrairll in .Fafan wilh
■f.TV.», ,^ /«< iPr-B, Synv. Bamba)-. I»M) IAEA, Vanina. STI.PUMIi.
,y Google
, -in: BaiiiMioK grtmrmim tf hat (Proa. Rrmp.. Pgintwy, Itlt) 'l
-int Radiatiim iMtmi'HttivH tf hod ,_
h sn/puB/sn. (i>;i), 110.411-40).
IkliUiqn - phj-iMan of ftultl ■
II59I: SlutagmH Mpowe during •paniliikn af BaeOliu
r. <I*M): RHOBUrunisn "in vira" af imdii
n7V.~(l*Ti|;~liikit)liiD)«iKlir PrDblnnI bri drr BnmhliBW yon Tmt*i. F
«..>H.jN«.;f»-,. ;j. 74i-:«
■EKEK, H. D. & Eluiitt. B. p. (IMt); Uinunmn growth trmprntuTH Tow R
pMmim!- f*c«Mi>i]k«tDr, iimJ pty(4irophilic mJoro-orgiinltiitf. ^t^'. Trf. ^f*..
■ El. II. (IMl): Some rffiKti of khiutib irmliuion on Ihr biochmited dongc
*■■. K.. Antu. K. » Mtuu. R. | IMT): RHiitww of (fliloiiB to chmuesl uvd
liiDhjeifwl chugn by nnuna imdiAtkni. -En: M im^ohfical pruUfm$ h /oorf
iimcrniiiDii ty imdiniion. (PmwI Prafftdino. VbaBa. IMA) IAEA. Vinuw,
nilPUBflM. ([MT). pp.SI-M.
iin-, n E B |IM»): J<h-. JVicntitl Pl,gii«l.. t, (Tl-IM.
ELEV. B. E. B. k Laid. H.n«M): Repair of. \-n;ctam*a> in. V/rrcnmirirfkl-
■(i,™». p™- R .Tor. BMJ. tlO-nil^
nL. D. A. A. t IKOBAH, M. (IKS): Thr (Avliohigy of Ihr rniimbi>l tpeilngi of
fi»l>. J. apgl. Sort . m. iit-tt*.
TON. R. P t TREnAi-. O |I9»): Ei-eluiion miimbioiiiciqur i
phfTiMj p. .run muiont ndiomHtunt 4'£>rj(fr^*»T nJi KII
ctEii. R. t DiEHL. J. F. (IMS): ['atfnuchungm Ohtt'-V
.\-<i. H.. BAvn. H. O. k. Uauuldi, J. A. (IMS); Hmi Minuw or&iI»i<»n
berg TaiW. ^uf. MirrtiM, IT, 1M2.
Snws. C. F., Jr. OmU]: HieniMijnrinI anKli of rajiuim pn*rrrU'
Jhh. Jtn. Mimbi«l. II. Wl^i.
XivEN. C. P.. Jr., BunTKCi. L. R. & Eta», J. B. (IS.14): Thmnd IDlK
"appI .vZ^STil'te-n"' ' "'""«"'""«'<• ™ ■"
Xinin-dll. A. X.. SrEXCEH. J. V. .limn. E. A. t E«UTVD. M W. (in
of Ihr fungal (lota of ipoilnl dilarUimci-ctinr-liHtnl chlekrn
Hxntiul.. I. ail)-32l.
iwAi^Dnu. S. R,. CBiiNEEAa. A
(lAEA.ViMin^ Dk, IHt} STI/DOC/IO/n.
EL PluiCEEniNna (IM7); M>cn>6u>l<vM pmWtnii »
l.sn. (IAEA. Vienna, JiuM l«6«| STUnjB/lSS.
* StTahlnfrmnfimllich'
Atgrjaiiit f-iTHi und
,y Google
: £(«>'>Hi.« al ianmlml m
omnina in i:ul»W rava. lU. BH»n^ >p>rH. ^^. JJ..I i*^.. *. l4S-t41.
Prrms. A C i Hl-SHIMix. H. E ( H74lr Uki-.tmlDficml rrif ■_! «wlml pawi kl
rnvn fr»K. n. rfri-xl. «). 17-44.
P'>U4ia. EC t Ann. P M (l<M«), Tbr ■«» of nwia nHMn o> B_t-iindik-
P'NTEnucT. R D i TH.trao. F S MSTOl: An rtMnMiRunwig^ Uwlr .rf
['■iviVe. .r .r..(H,s:.,Y i ElBiu. k u ar.uu Ei
rkJiwian |w>-in>arii» uK Saliivwlk. II. Inf
Ul-INV.'b J.A^DEIH"!. A.1V IDrn.-T riI'W«);Th>iii«Iivuin«af infrctiwud
Imminlnci micia^mnwo in irmknA. in: J/vn4ioIi«inW pr^tltmrn m /«rf jn-
Ri". D V. I: .t<MEn.'R '|IS;ti: R'lwik. rllKinKy of N^^hrL.V'.utni'X-nitKBa-
Ririiar IIM4>: An 'rlTiFBian uy saWir tMfi* t«»W> /nv •lint-o^n^dit r-.nfu»i-
...rr.on 1./ f«<i \AS-NRr. IVuhinflnn. D. C. PubBmnn II1K.
'"ilry-wr-ri^ .4W )rVA.J,"i.''lMl-l«« ■•«'■ ■ "
Rxcuy. H iTKiTTHEI. f S. (l<W«.i: \>ilii>>wi>lir<iM>n^mfjrni>i»iil'-(E«->r-
r^L,.. ..V, r— wuii 1'. kW-inHirwliai^M r-<'<»f J. Jf,'^.*.'.! . li. :il-:iS
R-.>eiitJ.'t. a. '(IMi|:*Hr.i (»I wliaiinn r«ii»wif> ui.1 tcHivi-v of iixni of Oo-
«r,J,«. .r**., J .v^. »w. II. IU-I4«
R'liEim. T A. (IA70I: Rrcavrnii« nKim ilaina^l In tnt. iDniauic nutisticm or
rlhiVfif •■li'l-. J. tflil AirT.. U. ;4-nt.
Ri<aEiiT«.'T A. Dm-iETT, P. J 1 Ixcuji. M. (I9«i): TTk rlhci of xaJium rhlonla
".Tw^aT*. "" "" "' "™''"' ii™. i» f. uur « ipom.
R'-MKCR R ^MEnrELF E.II*4;j;Lrrh>lu>rf>ubk>ihiUfflR» of X-r>i*on £*■)•■
ru-i... '•J.. J. A.irf.. n. 7:i|.-ia.
. (tB70>: RwlLariDn piTWfvaiioA
»M-»M.
9r"T
n, T. L rArw'iimi. D. (1. (ISTll: Th> rffi^ of i
,, !• t.VM.
rMI-C.iHAIllLLn. R. {IWMI: VsriHitl of Srr
iniJiHTA] by Trywit
r-lwjint. Arii MimAM., /I. Cm-I*!.
„GoogIe
[, J. M. (ini): Tl
U^O.L. kSlTTEl
at tauaibt in
». Pp-«
Soima. N. r, BvcSLn, P. M.. Totmtaa, it. J., Coon, D. A., U
CMUi. F. a. |l««ll>: HtM M—itlMlioa faf wbuqI of gwy »
foliu by nmnw imdlaliiin. ffv^Misa iktona. f. 4<*- "■
SOMKEB. N. F.. CUAR. M.. ROHUII. R. J. k UlSIK E. C, (1
IMI-r
, JB for mm
A4«. r*. H—.. IS, U1-IM.
Lcr. P. U. b Unxii, E. C. CIM7): RsliMion-
r mwkri liitiiM IWigi of ■loiw fndtt. n^i-
h#«t ■yaeraiim for inttctivation o
piriMiw. I7, pfi. 4M-4U.
ftntHEii. S'. r t: M^iitii. E. C. (Itnil): .. - .
STKr^B/in. *TI-M7, " " ""' "" ™'' ' ' """■
n'jum mwiuod., j, M. Sti . jj. SlO-UcT " ''"' "™" "»»■
Smcu. R. R. (IIU): Punhrr ItoHin of tha cKMt oT rklliim lum hKtnw. fxM.
rfU. Rfji. UJ.A. M. ISU.iati.
STjimc. S.. Dicnis. N. k TaAicna, P. S. (IMSb): Etbtn ot >>-imliatni on EriM-
STi.nK^a.. Dnai^ X » TiitTcnii. F. S. (IMMi|! EOki'i nf ^inwIiiuioB on E<rtt-
itrsmlBti^ sf D^ Im. j'ratvt. Biol.. U. «II-4I«.
Stesui. O. (IM7): Fmmiikinorbnad IVRHH ■
by p. S. Bakir, IMS U. S. Atomke taatx C _ . . _..
mc-M.) Seminar, II HanA 1M~. Inalilul* of Biolooy and AorieidtuiT, Sribm-
.iJf !t«t<or C««»., AuMrU ^^
H. C. (I«74): EvduaiHa ol •hori-mw tM r« ^lardaoaniwili-. Tvir<d. ApJ'.
f*nr.«™(,,SS, UJ-ISO.
(tTamMcs (1U(); La bacirnolofi* <lra fnni-Knarnfa -li viaixlr An*. Inn, Pannr.
LiUc. VII
SvilnMivli (IM7): n^ n.rmt.'afiijiy gf /»* ^hJ ««ti .far.'af ftf-.n,..}, H. H. RlallsaHT
SnmiaKTii ilMI): R.,ii<MTiUmiinn ol M^lcal pndun, (Pnic. »ynip.. Bonbav,
IMT) IAEA. ViFnna, STI|PUB|IST.
Snmicu (IMB); rkt MitnMDfom gf dnirf /soA. Fmomtinaa Vllh Int. Bymn. Pel.
Ukrobiol.. CraTiaehii IndintiV Haarinn. Xt-thrrknh. IMt.
Sranncni (ISTll: RaiialHm pni«»f.'>i> tl fga^. (Pno. S.i-mp., Bombay, IITl) IAEA,
ViniH. Tn/FUBJIIT.
Taeebi. H. t BAamui. P. E. (IWl): Eflnt d(X-i«1 on Imnaduclion br Stlmoittlh
phaga PM. P.>o)g«y. (?, tU-MO.
Tahth. E. L. (IHS): Indund biochnaieal mutalion m bictrria. CM Spriig Harbor
Sx^H. 9k«l. K>l.. II. t7S-lU.
Tnainc^ a^POir (IMW): Ap/ilir^iem of food irmdi^iom to iti^apinm ettuitrin.
(Th*i. R«>. Sar. Ma. iit IAEA, VlRuia, Sn/DOC/IOIH.
Tnmicu. ■ekir (IMT|: amditolonUt^Hn ol mtdi^ pndnrlt. plHrmactmllt^l narf
IntftodfiU. rT«th. (Up. Sar. Va. 71) UEA, Viaau. tTn/DOC(IOJ7I.
Tkbhicu. ■etobt |l>70l: MicnMnlatirol tpoeilieatiomt md (•«■■« mtllnidt ftr Im-
iiatot lOBd. Trail. Bap. Sr-. Va. 104. IAEA, Vbvaa.
,y Google
.-hilkd paultij. J. appl.
K. 3. H, IIITS): Sluum at V. S. I>putnvn( of ApjniUiit*
I s/ l<ynt IPror. S)-n»>., Bombav. ItTS) IAEA. Vitnu,
„ »»S-«)T,
;. p. & UAXrv. R. B, (I87to): PrKi-icruliwion fitliiwion or p4iliocniic bikI
inufntn bKtfw. J. Fd. Sri.. 3!. (HS-UI7.
TiwjUU. N. P. blijiicr. R. B. (I«7tbl: Comptniiva growth of xlmoMlUr. colifema.
And other IDflmbf n of Iha niMroflors of r«w and nduriud ground b«f. J^ 3tilk
Fd. Ttrtnol.. SS. US-4S0.
TIWAU. X, P I; ." - - -
Tasac R. J . Btu ,
eical chkngpl during Blono* of vacuum packed b«oan- J. appL BkI.,
iJ^-^M.
VOOEL, ¥. t RdntBOSH. a. (I»T0) {E<b.): l^anainiJ miij<if>n«u in >iii.~i>>dt a*d oi
Sptinnr VtrlM. Brrlin «nd .\«w VoA.
WiTiXARK, H.. Ito. H.. Shiiubi. 9. Ii luDKi, B. (IBII): ERBot of gHuiu imdiali
Weib. B. n , TmiR*. H. D. b RICUBDIOH, L. R. <1Sd>)! Sludin In (nd ■pail«
inhibition of mould growth by gwiuw r*dl(tkin. ApiA. itKntiol., 1. 92ft-l
U'em. S. J (ISe;): Molition of b»irh>) «lli by contnUed dnicolion. .VidiM, Loci
SW, llaJ-1139.
Weib,'s''j' i °»(^iKE™J ""f. (IBBS>- TImi cffHiti of mutaiion uid nD<4«a tiM b<
uialDgun on Ihs Mnlilivily of £. cali to partial dehydration. ConaJ. J, Itic
bitl.. It. M7-5«i,
WllUTOK, E. 1: Pa*TT. O. B (IMl): I
■ -■ Sei.. tl. vn ...
i, J. \V. iiriVl: VariabiUty of
.J, JI4-SI8.
a. J \V.. Wnn. E. H. Ii HonoE. R J {1974): Dmxiafmtitl
iLketin, Troh. Regie. - Xo. 10.
.,._ — _jd toajo produetKHi of aHpnauiv of
BMfiiv u. b<»tr •!■■■■..> uMi»*«H». -jue F to Bub-lethal doaes of ganaaa undfation.
Apil. UierMel.. IT. I3R-IM.
WlHKLE, W. van (IM«): DKUHkin in: SadvMtrilUaliBn of ■Hdicol jmiutU, pilar-
martulittU and bioprahKU. {Tech. Rep. Ser. No. Tl) IAEA. Vienna, STIflXXV
ioy;j. (iMD.p. IS.
Wmm, E. U. (IM^: Inherited diflarenm In •enuUvlly to r«lia«on In E. cali. Fr»-
pKid. Aead.Sd. V. 8.. .
„GoogIe
WuLiN, E. ¥., Evas*, J. B. * Nrraw, C. F , Jr. (1M7): Tlw inkFfit>iaI<wy of rr«h ir
lrnid>4t«l bttr Fi. Krt.. it. «8!-SM.
n-ouiaiDE. E. E. (IMS): Dirrcnntiatian b>t>r«n ndUlian-Hiuiliva ind -nulH
mutanii of EKknirKia coli. ■Inui B. (7a>iail. J. MicnMal.. II, H3-U7.
of £, coli by • proceH of erotrth-imdifttion cjcIm. J. ipn. AfxTa6iDf.» JI. flT-IO
Z^riENJIor, Sr (1M0): ETTect oT hrating dry bacteria uid ipom Qo (heir |^«totji
and genottw. /Vgcndi'Ht .Vol. AcaJ. Sci. V. S.. 41, lOl-IM.
ZtHEMIor.K t: ttEDHT, T. K. R. (IM1); Induction atmuttliani by ultraviolfl icrklii
lion of spam or BariSlin mbliiit. RadinlVM Rtl., 31, Ill-tZO.
Ziimii. R. E, MARcaiAME. D. F. " " ----- - -
.ur.iv.i cunM mulling fret
J Ctii- Ci-«p. n^tM.. 39, lb.
Addreaii of the aulhon:
Dr. Maurice Ixorau Dolabury HouM.ChurcbiU.SonunMBSlB SNN.U K.
Dr. J6zs«r Fabus Central Food Bewuch Inttitiitv,
H-IOZZ Budapaat, Hennui Ott6 it IS.
Hungary
5S-005 0-86-29
,y Google
I In 19T«,
„Googlc
n Entpgy Foundatton on H.R. 616
tlon is claltaa to tasllfy In
io-i l»SlslJtlon, M.a. 696,
I cso'-ar-clsll-E
.rl>1. .> rlio I-
■> «9uld llk« to ricpin^nd thi ^
Its; "irat, ,»» (i»» = rii«tf ')»lo«, ,
ir»or» M*tlanM L.^'iorstory, is r.
.loij-atn-t and It^ iroT-itlsn gSa^li
crjBSSJd Joint ■'Jirs'in: :.oi-l5!
5f Iha Fajt ngulBi
, -hil* -in «itliiBt*d 50 ta f? atreant
ir Brot'ucBtl In much of tn» dsvtlOplng
> intandad :ontLiii>ar liaouta af Iniaci
:30il>ga. In tarni af grain Klona. tt><
iiact*, rBti, und fungi ti 33 lilllsn
P*>d tha sntlra U.S. sapulftlon far ■
Iff* i*
,y Google
3rl.ln .Ion* ■
■ nsl IT .lllion
lit of foot!
on. (At ecvlanti 1<
id irradtalioni
iniflt fr-oB tn
>n. If •• ar*
to incroasa ti
lughout the
ly a -Third
I in ftfrlca J
oeical frulti
I *ucn frulti
ii*d out th. uriBiiry aathod of
■ •r* dilrOBltla sr EOS.
. iJsiilptlsn, not only aould
,y Google
t»ci>nolo9y. 3«»ott« t11» .ffari
Uorla Mar II ahan tn» U.S. iri>|
ealatabl* and n9urii>>inj ntnli
Jt tnlS ;j(.2li^:
;« th« dayi «f
i»ntl-rd of 1.0a(
■ •.ion und tna F<
tl.Kt. hH3 arati
,y Google
»1,. In f;
annsl anO
St 100 to 310 kll<
roil DOultry, i
^11 our chlev.
nonalla lead*
ly ■llialnata*
envlfs-ifl.ntsl
la.i:,jrou; in iJ-i»ral. tns* r3;C.atioi nu
lan.troui liacauis an« ca'i't si( it. 'nO
irsmotln; nan t acHno! 3 ;i-: ir» »vil nnC
0 tn«i» •n«lroi"«nt.-listSi th» sei«ntl
na (iiractor of tn. sn,.r',y .rojaet of f
irouo CrltiCBl -^ass -.tftBd ■lUntly, for
l.^iti.liln) 1
i.n*aulvacf>llv thi
' lobby !>r*
»t» objection* •r.
f-B united Sti
1st lobby Is 1
cHnolo-iiB* art
£Uy I** thli
,y Google
:lathin3 do not 1'
.-inonaleui study :
iBtting l^^r
. fid fiojr, 1'
.Id .lil »try i
toeti and .nja,
'3S*J l*(iisl«<i
iiiy snd it* uplicit "dlthuimn outlook,
tsngir tj t>>i •eonony and Indatd to tn«
Lon. Tn*)a tuall-fandtd >nd (■lf-aopslntt<
tool*" rjpdlly 9d«lt that thay think tha
,y Google
.nvironjisnteli!
In a n?; :
13 oillian ax
o"iolo3i»t,
00 Bl-ny p*ot>l«, that *
D<-(. It It laaful that
ling off -illlon* «f
I of ttcKnology. ODBOiition to
llractly liadi to laurdar. Thai*
lances that rf itfla9*rln«. On*
. h«i *itlniit*(l thut 200 alllion
dir.ctly »nd Indlr.etly of tha
; 3«itleld»» In th» unltad Statai.
<dBtton study. ■• c*leul*t*d that
leaiorlly. noitly In davaloptng
:'!• Unttad Stat** iloalng daan
*ddltloniil 1 oareant groath
t y*t ip*clflc>lly aodalad tha
food Irradiation tachnology,
:r>a** it oroOuctivity lava*
ology, thara alll
in oartieular.
aosraachad th«
ipla, elantiful
-a lalnoupisi
(oori loollt
,y Google
.0 and =«iiuJii-n7 — !
alp/.d s-> Ions ir
that It la not i
,y Google
•lllion, alth an <
Opogria ahaii
irm. Th*
■aenin* at •!
of produeo
■•u»».ll! "If -1 :iflek
fun^l. Eauall/
:lti;«nt. In raont yaarsi t»il»
th* M«ltHu«tj.o faction that BOuld
I ,)'l''iUv» ."yi of tha ITtti cantupy*
jstry for a luosoiidly bucolic utapla
U.re'jl, *.t«t«ne* using Nil autclas
II * nation abdlcotod laadarihtD In
slloj-ij til M.itnuil<ni and thair
, aranoling th*ir "aporoprlata
I snd tn» istncy for Intapnattonal
notiinj hut inttltut ioni for
■ind flctuBl s.noeld*.
(loni US to t»a dallbaratanai* of
n* ''attMuslan p'>ilo*apH*r«i Bartrand
csuld aortna throoahout tha aorld
ui-Kivors could irser^Htt fraaly
0 IjII. Thj itmi of affalri Btght ba
- CIn iTo'ct of Scianea on Saclaty}.
tor» »ei.nc. and ttelinoloqy to Itp
J (39<( irrsdlDtton Hill ravolutlenii*
3 n«tloni undantind fully that th«
n ;j" ii«*»urtd In th» nunbar ef daatti*
■ lagtalattofii
I and
:onoBie policy
„GoogIe
m
LawrenceUvermoie National Laboratory
BouB* CoHiltt** en Aarloultura
IMl LonanrUi Bou» MtiM SulldlM
Wuhlnaton DC 20S1B
Last oMk I raealvada talaphmw call fros Ha. Hujorta
B«ht of tb* FuBloB Eamiar Foundatloo. Ms. Bssht aakad ■■ te
•DtVlMWIt bar tastlwnrof MonalMr IB, IMG bafen Uw Bona*
Ce— tttaa an Acrlsultun br fenHUrdlnc additional Infonutloa to
you ratardlnc >)> raaaareh ob alaartrleallgi pewagad radiation
Flaaaa find aaoloaad coplaa of ralavant raaaanb papara
wUsh daacrlba mrk lAlch I praaaotad at tha Cth iDtanatlonal
MaatlB« DO BwjlatlOD Taoboolocr In Bui Dlato. Ostobar 21-ZB, 1BS4
aad at tba Intanattooal Snvoalu* oa Food Irradiation Proeaaaloa
Id VaaUnctoB. Hareh 4-8, ISBS.
t aa if t san ba of furthar
,,,EA3f,'hax^^
„GoogIe
PImet C. Uguwi-Solar t*) and Suitien n, Matthew ('
Mdittten pocewlrq o( food laquiiu ladiitivi ioiiich nith high inC*n*ltiri pMMcatiillq'.
Tcliitilily, aid the tlcxlbUicy to tc adapted to curient lood rcoca '
apd use efCiclcncy o£ these ■ouicea ate u^itant lectors eEtecting
LuBtelletiori] opmtmtiom «3 ntmrnict of Iai9e-ecfl1e food-pfoceeei]
aneJytis of the adwitfl9eB mti Aiag&rtntajet of these eources is pci
^»cul ettentiai to the cgirent ttetus of toth te<*rolo9ie«, mk! ■
n, ptocMsing, dUtilbution, and utillutlon of out tood awly sn ■ Mrld-wia*
bccsuH of the amnU of food involved nd lu nltieel raletlonAlp to luHn
pfbducing charged atcoic « mleculai ^eciet^ hand 'loriE'. It also produces eidtad ttjlmm
and polecoles. tot this leesrin, loniiing ladiatton ia cepAble of initiating or inducijig
ct»ical chBigefi. Theiefoie. ladiation ptoceSEing o( fool crmsiata of aip^ly iMing icnitii^
radiativi Co infiart cneigy u^to food, causing m/ikjte changes in its chemical coifioaition.
Ifiese chemical ctungea jnodify oi letafd vceie [JiyBiilogical proceeeea in food ulille alBO
effectively elininates or (edixsi the populaciii of ^nilaje >id pathogenii; aici0M9«ila«.
Pood Itladiation, has teen proven to tie a desiraCle processing technique that nith certain
limitations, can be efficiently affiled Co reduce food lossesi extend rtielt liCai disinfect
ftcih tocdi frcB insects; an) to replace oi niiiijri» font additives (chaicale)) uhlle
keeping Che essential mitiitional and wnsoiy qualities of food, Diis ttclnigue Iws been
. heaCin^; chlllingi
ivstion. TOdiv, iiUltc
iBigvits, hn« reultad in
si^ly have ailsen nd ttaivatioi in kik legionx af the Mild has readied * ctitis level.
' cc^Miiaon, I klti Is needed to fiecie 1 lb (1.45 kg] od
e wuit, ehlle sily I.S kt*i It nedtf Cm pre«nlng II
„GoogIe
ckI tri (itacrvinq mJ dUinfanlnq toei nith Icnlilnf
«Id-vidt lit^Joamutloi, howver. Hill b* Ur9ily
d to dtvclip *id i^lnHit Uw rtquiifd raliatiai I
»iHily *
ttchniqiic hu Evbi tcned ■> • 'csld' [>o«u. lu vfftcciwn
pccoldinQ >i"9y alipHt evenly thioughcul ttv irridutt^ tood
■wy wdcre of lugnitud* highvr ^rxntB ol mcroy di?po«lt#d u
Kx 9Bi«al in>lie*U«na at food liradlaticn, h s Cunction o:
11 Imq-l»™ pce»erv»Um In(»i-r«fii9ir»t«!| of foodi ■jch m
FCTVidv product llfv «](t«nQiVL twK
frulu. « uc9eutilH (low town m
iiFed to pfoc«flE v«vinqfu1 m
TF, cinely md r*cc*idry.
i>njclide aouios iCn-U «id C*-l»l ui pTodund Ira prlvat* nd govtmant IkIIIUm.
stir than 9SI of the wrld jxoductlon of C»-«i tMidM In Wrtli Aiwlca (Cnd« md IHIil,
le UK IB ^overrmmi cwrtntly it ttia ■■}« nurc* oT C^iaT,
i> CeUlt-«l Ro-U)
■li-U ii IT utiflcUlly )»
„GoogIe
. - jt lint raoaardi omttri
n •>|«l«ii» vltti iH^t Ce-M fac:
Jtfn, lauUi Milca, toritt ttilon. «d ^nr t—jrn Binp* eountius. in d» ibh, dm
radlMlon nmMlng Indvuy t^KaUB tfout ■!■ 1k«> Ca-M fKUttln U te l.S HC1|,
•ItMitft tm tKllitlH an dnl^Md nd litmmmi far « to 3 NCI.
b) Cm1*-1]7 Ka-DI)
aptrition. Cs-11i Ma ■ tialf U(t or M.li y(u xtiicti iwui ii tiqriificvitlr Ih^k lii«l
chin «>-««. It U «y»iUbl* tn an to™ of iSo.*!/- fncipnUud cmIim. ttilotl* (CWU).
OKHiw OCl u niqMy Blitilt in «ui t Uij( Ci-UT B>irc* wmtituM J potBitUl tulth
(hat Or mTc^muUtlnr al c*-m CaCl provides ■ •uccvatull nJ yrc-co-tairayKn fac aa
utilluti'Si o( C^117 B * radtatiw Bum aitcflal. Ihr qau riy* nittsd ty Ca-117 rwv
mU, Bid inly <» intacch aouie* I'l MCi) at Sndia Mtloial [AMatoiy,
Pood ProcaMing C^Allitiaa oltli 0»-M nd C*-m SoKtaa
lia 1BI -^r c>-i37 bccsm* >i[ its lowr curri^c F<'o«. M la aiplaln btlw, hoHrfac, ttac*
na Hiy iMBtftaintiM cr it» ftituta availability aid final con. Diatalon, ita tnitielal
laa II m A qucfltionibl* of^ioi,
d) PtMtnC and Patantial KvalliCilliy of Co-if vri (^137
li<VI - oi tw other lund. tn* pceaei
■Ci, <*ileh could te utlliicd foi p
day) to ]M licBdB.
Ihe UE tepirtavit of iw-.gy (KKi hai at praamt, capabilit.ea to pcodue* tRUOilaataly 1
Xi of Co-M [SI VTSF, aid to transpnr,, m» cnoiuion 0>-6« insuUations. Ittiii- ;Bllatm
(1-w dmf,. of Ot-6« *ip cui witly pt^ucwt by [he Atoirlc Bwfgy of Canadl LlMiUd (MCLI
i*iich lioB 1 mul ytaily producUw tsfaOility of J«-i5 (Ci and ninillM Ml of tlia
productra ol Co-M with capabilitias to ptodue* H
ta indicated *ma, the pitiant availability of Ca-137 ii W MCi and ita futura avalUbiU
la luijhly qufmiooaCl. In fact. >• tacl that thai* la IcB potential for futui. Ci-137
lllatiw PiagiM' tealui-lll
jyl . This study ii Baaad (Von
disposal could ti*
„GoogIe
1. CUctricdly-D[ti«i Uto»l*[Bto() louiaM
A malar o( ndUUon (rociiwlin vpllcaUoni m biMl gn Um a* of nrlna alaeti*!
tcaUraCMi wltlilii Om U HiV inargy limit inniad ky RK. MM s( Biiw nltcatlco «•
curiad out ly uing (Uctrcn ■onlKaUKi sf (f* Qpi «d duactKlnia diOMi In UU* 1.
■ Tif ■>>• «f (fwatiai
Ugfa voltig*, cadio-
■l«t*-*alU9*' inwlnnd
Mh Eltctnn IKetl«at«i vlch RNwtial Cn Uigr^cala NEVllutlOM.
itM !■■■ Bxcgy **«*4* IMB ■•■■ lyr* Pnatnt lUtuB
IWgiMtti FulHd O* Itadulu Q^omnt*
• Mtlonal Ubocitocy.
poHlblt, for Boat c^lwr ksct of ■cc*l«>t«a In food pctnaalng, cowactiiq alactrsn baHa
Co X ray* (hccuBatiahliaq rBdlatlon) oil! te nacaaaary. Vila la raqulrad bacaiaa «( tba
raya tv tai9*tuig the ba^ to oollld* vith a Jiaavy-atttal ooivartar plaCa aa tfmiii In fig. 1.
la Om hMt ia
t CWI at S
■d cr^>l*tcly, Tha V raya ■
„GoogIe
I. thF rfllcitncy or the «:
IN k[>d». hUI (xiuire ■ S-N>V electron ^mlrcacor olth 111 HH of bca powr ahldi aUl
pcodim i tM ot X laya [R> anvrrlfi SI cocmrtlsn)
Ciiclcil 9Jcsti'Vii rrliccd Co cost dnd -Jay-io-aBy nliablllty in in induitrlal «n»tta«— it
■(I irnHntly W1V1CWCK) COC Dnet of CM tlwtccn KolHstoia. IBVij D.C. ■oalHatari, tte
EynBtcidi. vich Hvecal mv •lictrin tawB ind ifi to 151 M bWB poMt 1***U, 1*
Mcent dwelcpBcntc in acislvcator tectwolfur^ have result*)^ in a mojt nptijiEstic picture tot
develnfied for -nuclcAr itiysics «jc^riir0itfi [31 . IVil£ techml'I^ Mty pt-rjf equally viablv For
■~ ' w^licatiTiE H>' TM LG CBpainvnt of otenK trOC} has pade a subetantlai
a (Utncei at lax con nJ high miacuiiy a real powlblUty (SI.
■ Hd Diiectlnality
mmc ravi to *11 diccctiva, Ktiirq U
lultlpl* pBUFs and ad«]uatc depths. I
Iff JliDl'W «»rjy rang* propostd It
n fiq J "Die I-tay energy ^wctru
(j.e ■hardenini^'l to provide a mn
ivide The TvetM neqaw
«rlii9 CvmbilitLes
M X raya an producx) at the position nhtc* Ow •lacuon bwa csllldH uith U»
<mvtrter plate, the pinriH locacion of cte colliiicn ard nultirq radiation
. , .i_j ^ ^. _. ^ — ...,j, ^ifcxtrma^Kt*. Ihla can nault
:1 C^naC^'Ti*! WftcAKlblllty and M
ceproducad l3ued ifon ifwcif Ir treatiKnt protocols, (twcvei, e
A pngras tor ■micoiing UiMe vaclAtaa, aid for
„GoogIe
jnuiing can^limot to wtt Btandardm ii rtguired. B
on ■ tl»~)iul> are BAllti idUi Cs-13T IX.17 y) t
rc^ln qrMtcf perloflle ■djuitjwiU of tr — ' -
bean IcscLE Birallablc u a ladUtioi aouccr f«( iviy ^«?ifically thin-fiacliagBd t(
d) Dt(ith-DDH DistiibutliM In Feod FKka^M
both the total caeiitiir dose ard on Uw aoee unil«nlty Milch the food [equii» i
•tUlnetile olUiln a pBctaqr. ThlE is lIluBCratHl Iji Fi^. i for *Kh of thEBs eouii
Miauig a l-'tttt thicli package ia filled with fowl of 1T.7S g/iJ denaity. The pvi
and iDiMi diwr^vice <3E electrical ly-^oduced X lays {nrfcirie to peoduc« a m]pecii>
ncil* 3. Mlitlve RaliatKn QMe M a rwErtlvi o( Food Oemity ttttitm
Tla Radlonucllile or Onvntei Platw Sourcn SaparaUd by 2 Feet.
pJ^JHte
Eiadulion Soui
Radionufl Ides
C8-137 Cl-it
ice Type
Bfensatrahliir.,
s-nrv
IX Bay) ItachiiK
Food "*"iti" :
.». ».75, i.S, (top:
1. and ».S, e.3
(botio 9/a.'.
(•■••13 ft;
t U.5 H.2
"'V'?
4.71 2.39
«.N I.t9
e.35 1.83
4.57 3.1B
!.75 1.93
2.43 1.76
13 ft
7 Ji'S 1;*^ ,1
A 57" 2i1 »
3 ^'2 ii" «
1.96 1.S3
a. 4 ft
■l.w'l.7l'
3 ij^jj;*^ „
2.38^,92*1.68
'*"«*1^«-"
1 n^ sil « ■
1.3S l.»
1 is" »" 13
1 Ii" 27^1 21
m" ^'^^
i.iB 1.12
1 12 l.K
'•>' 1^«
1 ii" iil 13
l.M 1.15
I Ii" «" 11
l.« 1.12
).»; i.«
1.11 l.N
l.tl l.N
l.M l.M
l.M l.M
l.M l.M
l.M l.H
CI For al]
1 food d«alti*a,
dowa ar# no™»llt.
.t»Mn plaw..
e) Cc^iatibllity with bilalln; Pood Prooauln^ Kctmlogy
Electilcally^lrlvin accalsEatori ari in prlncipl* acre co^atlbl* with «ilitlr^ ftiod
pTocaaainf Titf nt. Iha aUltlon ol m II~iay iiradlatoi Into m aliaady ailatlng tr
Eiocnainq facility paacnta Car Itwer pcobllH thn vould tli* introduction ot a
■ilti-Hgacucie ladionuclide anum. itia lattai lAild cdriirc aMdn. i^^mviti
all-dliictlaw ihicldlng to pcolect wrtoia nd the icwiinMiiit. Oi tht other hind,
elccTiical accclcratora only require that the Yielding be poaitioned vhan tlia lyata
„GoogIe
cftritlcn. Da X lay'i fomud-acattai ing ctaFKtcrliCic aay alio tMult In iMI on-site
for pliwnt o( th» dxcleotoi lAilc tin alliMlng raduod rtileldlng In f' — *' ' —
Ihu laTtcc Hpectv «1bo vihanccv ttie ■dvantaqeB lor porUblc vyttaia («■>
«l«ctrically^iitfen radiiticn source on/off CA^dbllitv Is alsQ an iifiDrUnl
In cMvft of ayAtot failure ot in inat^ncfH of product -ti«31iri9 pcobl«Ba.
(^livdmc ol HV«a] aiqacuriH of Co-6f vould be very dHiiable tecBiK of itit tlMlblli^r
of «c«tatioFi Hhich it Mould provide- [fccpuae of the jtilelding lequlr^Minti , a ^oct^ilc*
tyre [Bdionuclide aourcc capable at high ptoceuing ttiroualfiut la nUaacly inlUwlyi
althougt • Itobile Gian Triadiatoi [HGD loaded ncn W,HC Ci of Co-«t fJw* ISM). «d
■ — — ■ ■■ ■* ej(iMjility of 5N krad/ti «id Ma
a) Loqiacici aid KMic cvimns of Rodionucl.
nitre ia rot enough Cp>-6I nf/or Ca-lJ7 avallifali
Hie 1W2 UB ocBi^e ciop XH miroiiiaacely ».J Bi
■Ci of'co-««, or 1» Ki of 0-137. Ihese mrts reciesent 2.11 and's.i: CIhs the {CMvit
mrld'a inventory of D)-6I nf Ca-127, reapectlvely. Signifiirantly highei i4^1icm of Co-Ct
md/or Ca-1}7 aouEcea Hill be [x^ired Co Ueac other fondi. even If only a Ball traction
be needed. 9ie latter wuld alao lesult in tn>roiiiiitcly l.BS tiaea the radioactivity of
A liTilfiont ■ndification of current [ublic attitiile en expanduig ttie IE nuclear
he [TeBently operating electrical poMig
e production of CO-6B. Ulla HOuld *!•□
facilitiee. Thti uould require additional tranqnrtatlon and atorage cipitiilitieB, and Bay
raault in increased food loaaaa due tu Mchanical daagt. greater loaaei due to ^ollag*
in thoaa hlghly-perlshntilc foods, and in added coat to cmweri.
b) Public ficotpunce
„GoogIe
911
.1 trctmlfjqy, nor hdVF the rcquirme
r\, maintenimce, flprrMtiln. let^^piy.
aluati^k of the iflpl*nentati'
pTDduccim capabilitiffE, thi
activity Qj-SB ib •IreaJy US
flulta «id vcgetabln.
„GoogIe
■Hy-4ilHn •licttan ■£»!•(■(»[• m at t"uni th* bM
Id IrridUtlai. Mmw. ttmm Kurcn nmA to lie tatOnl
I l^>l<BBiution oC ■Ifcuical i
In aid ■«( k» Blvtd in th» ah
ic dwBlOEVB^ of tlcctricil BourcAi bioid i^cn ip-to-datc C«c)m]09ic«]
sting of dwa* hi^h porr vlvcCiicfel Ketltntoci ■gainst th* uiitinq
I) tilt 1IHI91 oE liraillatian w^ntat that an airiciant, aati, aid fully Intagratad tdtb
cuirant tooa piaeaaaiiiq Eacllltldi
rate, wil doariaiifonltr ■aaaucawit*, ftiyaiaiogieal
■ ■ , nc.li ad
potantial at this
rocd itiKllation arr lllialy K
UUvra c(
laiqe-acala laa of thla tactoiolcgr
orld-^rida baaia. An affgrt bo ivoparly caco^iaa thv adv«nt^aa and ci
liaitatinna oE Uw avail*]* radlatim aourcaa ia, Uicrafon, naeMMty fraa tha a
la the Hain garni of Che rnaent wxk.
Ihe author* Utah to ttunk Pi. Idctiard J. Eclni, Lamm Uwwn Natlanal UtaecMocy, and
Dr. Mel Kader, I^arlaant of taniajf, ttiivaraicy of Calltomia, IMvla, for Glaring
Infnrwtion uaatul tn the prcparatlm of thla Mnuacilpt. in aUitlan w are grHttul tn or.
Halter (kbain toe hia UBiy laatul o^Hnta and dlBciBal<n on the UBiuacrlfit. Vila Hck «■■
pccparad laidar ttia aiiq>lc« sf tha IMiiartlty of Calltarma aiclaar aciannaa naid.
1) Fadaral daglatei. vol. 49, no. 31, «Md<v, Mxiary I*. 1M4-
2} ItialcagavieM of Irradiated Food*, ladnlcal Mpirt W. K9. Ibrld Health Ckgntaatlon,
ameva IMl.
3) Kiargy wd Mdmlogy M
RidlatlBi-. Pioc. «th
() UCI>-34*H-5. iBDtOfiea-Inluatilal TCctnolOfy r.
„GoogIe
Brtmsstrohlun^ FlodiotJon
t royi produced
In conviTttr
plott
Phoron Energy (M«VI
,y Google
FMd Pockagi (Z'k^'k'I
Food Dtntity O.rSg/cm'
77
, i \ ■ Co-60 / / J,
\ \ \ A S M«V i.iax) / ; I
■^X '. \ 4 H(lr4*n«d 9WtV / / Iff
P.:;;
Mftollic converter
/
7
V
5MeV Electron Jl^^Z/
occelerotor ^'^^P^jT^^j
7
occ*
Eltcttofi
« rotor
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
COONKTIVB KOOOC FK^KKS (H IS (BE (F IKmnCUIB (B
DfraticKL sounos kb foco nocBsnc Mm khiiiic iwmTOii
Octctei IS, 19M
nils M«k MM oonducted inter the auBpioM of the Oilvarml^ of CallConda
Mieleu SclMCM Furi, aid will be pifcllAaJ In the Pioeaeaings of the Sth.
Intecnational Meeting «i MdUtlcn Itednology, OBtobcr 21-26, 1984, Sm Umjo,
CallEonaa, m.
,y Google
Hanuel C. Lagunas-Solac, Ph.D.
Crocker Huclear Laboratory
University of California, DavlB
Stephen M. Matthews, Ph.D.
University of California
Lawrence Llvenaore National Laboratory
If irradiation processing of food is to come out of the
laboratory and into the comnerclal world it will be necessary to
provide nunerous processing facilities eaph with a throughput of
.the order of 100 HRad Tons/day. This processing rate is
equivalent to processing 42 Metric tons per hour at the 100 kRad
dose linit proposed by the PDA for «ost foods «b a f unlgant
ceplacenent and shelElife extender.
In order for irradiation processing of food to proceed at the
rate of 100 MRad Tons/day it is necessary to use an intense source
with an output of tens of kilowatts of ionizing radiation. The
PDA has proposed four types of sources. Two are the radionuclides
cesiun-137 and coba1t-60, which each emit ganma radiation. The
'reniaining two sources are electrically produced. These are x-ray
„GoogIe
devices with photon energies up to 5 Piev, and alactron aeurcca
with beam energies up to 10 HeV. Both of these sources raqulr* an
electron accelerator.
Bach of these four radiation sources has different physical
Characteristics Bhich give rise to econoatc constraints llaitiof
their coaBercial application to food processing. This paper will
cosipare these characteristics and esaaine sobs of the •conoaie
consequences which result with a particular source choice. Ttie
characteristics of each of these sources is listed in Tables 1-4.
RADIATION E
CeGiun-137 is a waste product foraed
as a by-product of the fission reacti<
chemically reprocessing spent i
a nuclear reactor
:ion. It is obtained by
fuel rods to separate the
cesiuM fro* other radioactive wastes. The separated c*siu« ii
used in the form of cesiun chloride, a water soluble salt which ii
encapsulated within a triple steel liner. A 1000 HH nucleai
reactor operating for one year will produce approslaately '
■egacuries (4 MCi) of unseparated cesiuB-137.
„GoogIe
lti« site of a radionuclide source is neasuced by the t
of nuclei disintergrat ing per second witLhln the source. One
negacurle (abbreviation NCi) aeans 3.7 X to" disintergratlona per
Cesiu* gamaa radiation Is at a photon energy of 0.66 NeV.
me photon energy determines the penetrability of the radiation
through food and cesiu* produced radiation is not particularly
penetrating. If a pallet slse volune 4'i4'aZ' is filled with IZOO
lbs. of fresh produce and placed between two i' square cesium
source plates separated by a gap of two feet, the pallet will be
irradiated through both square sides. The ■aximum to minimum dose
ratio produced by exposures at either surface and at the pallet
center will be 27 to 1.
The use efficiency of cesiuB radiation Is not high due to its
poor penetrability. Only 66% of the produced' radiation Is able to
escape through the steel liner containing the cesium chloride.
The use efficiency of the available radiation depends upon the
thickness and density of the processed food package and its
distance from the source. Overall, a Cesium use efficiency of 20%
is considered good for food processing.
processing would partially alleviate the nuclear -waste disposal
problem. Pucthermore, it makes good economic sense' to find uses
„GoogIe
for waste »aterlal . Pot thes« reasons, the U.S. DepartBent ot
Energy (DOE) will sell encapsulated cesiua chloride foe SlOOrOOa
per NCI. Since cesiupi-137 has a halflKe of 30 years, • given
quantity of the isotope will decay at a rate of 2.28% annually.
If cesium is used as a food processing source at 201
efficiency t then 17.4 MCi would be required to procass at
throughput of 100 HRad Tons/day. This anount of cesluB is bin
larger than any present single ceslun source and is an appreciable
fraction of the world supply of cesium chloride which currently
totals 90 HCi. Additional cesiun would be available fro* existing
nuclear waste stockpiles provided more chemical ■•paratian
facilities are built.
Cesium has been suggested as a source for processing pOTk
carcasses whicti have first been split in half to decrease their
thickness.'') The pork will be processed to a minimun dose of li
kRad to eliminate trichinosis i4iile maintaining a max/min dot*
ratio no greater than 4 to 1 to avoid exceeding the 100 kRad
limit. The cesium use efficiency for pork processed in this
manner will be less Chan SI.
,y Google
Pood irradiation has been researched for aore than thirty
years and utillxed coBBercially for over ten years. Practically
all oE this cuBulative food irradiation experience has been with
cobalt-60 eources . Therefore cobalt Is favored as a choice for
.food irradiation.
Cobalt-60 is produced by placing natural cobalt netal within
the core of a nuclear reactor uhare It Is exposed to a neutron
fluence lAlch converts the natural n«tal into the radionuclide.
The cobalt, in the form of small Metal slugs , ia encapsulated
within a steel liner for use ae a source of radiation. A large
power reactor can be used to slfiultaneously produce electricity
and cobalt-60 at a rate which depends upon the design of the
reactor and the manner In which the natural cobalt is placed
within the core. Cobalt-60 production rates ot approximately 3
nci per year per reactor are reasonable linits for commercial
power reactors.
Cobalt-60 gamma radiation consists of two photon energies,
each with an energy close to 1 .2S MeV, Since the cobalt photon
energy is approximately double that of cesium, the cobalt
radiation is considerably more penetrating. The sample 1'x1'x2*
pallet filled with 1200 lbs, of produce and irradiated through
„GoogIe
botn square faces Mould experienc* • MaK/ain do** ratio o( 1C to
if a cobalt source is used. This is a considerable iaprovcMen'
over the 27 to I ratio achievable with a cesiua source.
The superior penetrability of cobalt radiation, as e^pare
to cesiuM radiation, rasulta in a better use efficiency and « aor*
unifor* dose distribution throughout the -irradiated saapla. I
cobalt food processing facility can achieve use efficiencies of uf
to 30* with proper Banageaent. Purtherwore, a aegacurie of cobalt
radiates at 4.5 tiaes the power radiated by a aegacuri* of cesiia.
The higher output power, better penetrability and increased use
efficiency of cobalt, as coapared to cesiua, result in a cobalt
source requireaenc i^ich is less than one sixth that of cesiis to
process food at the saae throughput. If cobalt is u««d at 101
efficiency then 2.6 NCi are required to achieve 100 MRad Ton/d^r
throughput. Coaaercial irradiation facilities with this aaount «f''
cobalt are in operation today.
Cabalt-60 can be purchased fron several nuclaar source supplT
conpanies, however ABCL in Ottawa produces approxiaately SOt of
the eo NCi world's supply. AECL sells steel encapsulated cobalt
at a price of Si nil lion p>er aegacurie. This is ten tlaes the
price of cesiua. Cobalt'60 has a halflife of S.3 years, therefor*
it decays at an annual rate of 12. 39% which is aorc than f i**
tines the decay rate of cesiua.
„GoogIe
Cobalt is presently' in vecy short supply bec«ui 1'
current non-food processing uses. Much of the demand for i
nuclide arises from the need to replenish existing sources. There
are long delays between initial purchase order and cobalt
delivery. Each new unit of supplied cobalt creates additional
annual denand because of the rapid cobalt-60 decay rate.
5 HeV X-Rays
X-rays are produced when electrons are stopped in a netal
converter plate as shown in Figure I. The process of stopping the
electrons converts their energy into x-rays and heat. "Pit heart
of the x-ray source is the electron accelerator which suppl ies
these electrons. If the energy of the supplied electrons is S HeV
then a broad spectrun of x-ray photon energies is produced with a
■axixiuB photon energy of S HeV.
S HeV x-rays have a use efficiency of better than 501
however, they are inefficient to produce. Approximately 8% of the
electron energy is actually converted into x-rays. The remainder
is converted into heat which is removed by flowing water through
the converter plate. A I NW accelerator can provide I60*F water
as a by-product at a rate of approximately one gallon per second.
„GoogIe
924
The recent ability to bui Id conmercial grad* electron
accelerators with very hi^h average painter outputs has Bade 5 HeV
N-rays a pronising processing node.
About half of the electrical energy supplied to a facility is
effective in accelerating the electrons. The remainder of the
electric power is required to drive ancillary eguipnent such as
power supplies, electromagnets, and vacuum punps.
A 5 HeV electron accelerator **iich produces 1 MH of electron
beam power will require approximately 2 MM of electric input
power. This accelerator would produce sufficient n-tays for food
processing at a throughput of J46 MRad Tons/day in spite of the 8t
conversion efficiency. In order to match this performance 9 HCi
of cobalt or 60 HCi of cesium would be required.
The 5 HeV x-tay spectrum is mote penetrating than th»
radiation from either cobalt or cesiun. Furthermore, th«
penettability of these i-rays can be increased by filtering the
radiation before it is appl ied to the food . The filter will
preferentially remove the lower energy photons leaving the
remaining x-rays enriched in higher energy, more penetrating
radiation. The process ot increasing the penetrability of x-raya
by filtering is cal led 'hardening* the radiation. Hardening
produces a more unifom dose distribution within the irradiated
„GoogIe
radii
of reduced i
be hardened.
efficiency. Cobalt and ■
Me compare the ma«/min dose ratio produced by 5 MeV K-rays to
the ratios discussed earlier produced with cobalt and cesium
radiation applied to a sample 4-x4'>i2' pallet filled with 1200
lbs. of produce and irradiated through the 4' square aides. The
considerable imptovement over the corresponding ratios achieved
with either cobalt or cesium. Furthermore, the man/min dose ratio
can be improved to 4,9 by first hardening the x-rays with a 1/4
inch thick lead filter. This improvement in dose uniformity would
reduce the use efficiency to 60% of the unhardened x-ray use
efficiency.
in spite of their high pene
available high average power el
required ccanercial celiability
.widely i
food ,
iing
It is difficult t-:
■ arqe commercial scale
consider food irradii
iuppply of both
chloride were devoted <
the PDA approved lOO It
5 MeV x-ray general
>alt-60 and cesium
ous food processing a'
le combined throughpu'
58-005 O - B6 - 30
,y Google
would be 1500 >etric tons per hour. ItiiB throughput, which la
lass than 6 os. per day per US citiien, could be aatched by ten S
HeV K-ray generators costing appcoxinately S' Billlan each*
Induction Linear Accelerators
Induction lin«ar accelerators are the least eoaples , aost
rugged of all high power accelerators. Their aodular design
enables a series of identical accelerating stages to be linked
together to boost the electron bean to the desired voltage, nieir
■cehanical construction tolerances sre siaplKied becajs* thelt
accelerating principle does not require a resonant cavity. Ihey
are tolerant of relatively poor quality vacuum systems because
only modest voltages are present along the accelerating stages
inside the machine. Recent advances in magnetic ewltch technology
have made these accelerators capable of very high average power at
One such accelerator has recently been built mt the
University ot California Lawrence Llvernor* National
Laboratory.' ^' The Livermore accelerator uses four modular,
cylinderically shaped accelerating stages which each boast the
electron beam energy by O.S MeV. The output beam has an energy of
2 HeV with an average power capability of 1 HN. Each modular
,y Google
accelerating stage is 34 inirhEE long «nd 30 inches in diameter.
This accelerator will be used to study n-ray processing of fresh
produce under a University of Cal ifornia pr 091: air uith the Dauis
and Livemcre cai|pijs«s. ' ^'
A 5 MeV x-ray source for food processing has been considered
using existing hardware designs from the Livermore machine. A
conceptual sketch of this source is shown in Figure 2. It
consists of two coaxial 5 NeV accelerators with a 2' wide x-ray
lone between the* for processing pallet sized containers.
The snail size of the radiation zone simplifies shielding and
ozone ventilation and increases the feasibility of inert
atmosphere processing.
to build the design of Figure 2 are listed in Table 5.'*' At
could be built, by those jnfamilar with this technology, is not
known. The costs listed in Table 5 are dssumed Co be
representative and will be used in the comparison analysis between
electric and radionuclide radiation sources.
„GoogIe
10 HeV Electn
electron beans can be used directly for food proeesslnq
without conversion into x-rays. The FDK will allow direct
electron i rrad i at Ion of food at ener9i es up to 10 NeV. Direct
electron bean processing at use efficiencies of 60% are achievable
with no conversion penalty imposed upon the user, as Is the case
when the electron energy is converted into x-rays.
However, electron irradiation is nuch less penetratinq than
the ganna and x-ray photon irradiation described earlier,
electron irradiation is suitable for processing food saaples no
thicker than several inches, even at the naxinun 10 NeV energy
allowed by the FDA. Nevertheless, electron bean proceaalng is
Ideally suited for thin food sanples such as packaged luncheon
The accelerator power requirenent for elect ron beaa
processing is considerably less stringent than Is the power
requirenent for x-ray processing , A throughput of 100 NRad
tons/day can be achieved with bean powers of less than 0.02 MM.
Conmercial electron accelerators are available at this power
level, but with energies below 10 He v. They have enough
reliability at an effective cost such that electron bean
processing of food is entirely feasible within the Units Inposed
„GoogIe
jy the small penetrability of thla radia.tl ; of
snail penetrability of electron beans through food i t
power requirenents deaanded of the accelerator, pro ing
this radiation Kust be considered apart from processing vith 1
three ptioton sources discussed earlier.
It a 1 MW induction linear accelerator were used to process
food in the direct electron Bode, the throughput would be greater
than SOOO M Ksd Tons/day. It is not clear whether currently
available conveyor systens could supply thin aanples of food to
the accelerator at a fast enough rate to utilize its treaendous
throughput capability. A aaaller Induction linear accelerator
with a reduced bean power of 0.1 NH would not be significantly
lower in purchase cost than a I Hw nodel . The advsnt in us.
this type of accelerator at i
ruggedness of the design and i i
II. THE PROCESSING FACILITY
Central Processing Facility
The food shipncnts will be exposed to the radiation source at
the processing facility before the food reaches the retail Market.
„GoogIe
Th« facility nuBt handle both laige voliuaes of food and «n tntenac
cediation source in a safe and econooiical nanner.
A central processing facility consists of a fix«d site «her*
food shipvents are received, processed and shipped out as rapidly
as possible. A central facility will have to process better than
1000 tons of food daily therefore transportation and food handling
Hill be Bajor concerns.
The PDA wi II establ ish separate protocols for specific food
types. This complicates the design of the central facility i4iich
nust be flexible enough to accommodate each specific proceasing
protocol .
A central facility design using radionuclide or electric
sources will consist of an incoming shipping dock where boies of
food are unloaded onto a conveyor for transport Into a well
Shielded source room. The food will renain on the conveyor during
processing. The tertninatlon point of the conveyor will be at the
outgoing shipping dock which should be separated froa the incotilng
dock to prevent mixing processed and unprocessed food.
„GoogIe
Portable Radiation Facilities
accelerator Bakes the attractiveness of a truck rrounied b HeV
x-ray source a real possibility. A conceptual design of a
portable source is shown in Figures 3 and 4. This source is the
same design as shown in Figure 2 and should easily fit within a
standard 48' trailer.
The food processing costs using portable sources of this type
are estimated in the cost analysis section.
Radiation Shielding
Durin9 processing, the food vill be exposed to dose rates oF
hundreds of rads per second while background eiposures to nearby
personnel must be kept below one rad per year. Source room
radiation shielding equivalent to apprommat ely 18 inches of lead
nust be used with 5 MeV »-ray machines. Five feet of concrete or
ten feet of earth will be required while a nuclide source is in
operation. Radionuclide sources will be stored underwater within
a source room pool during non-processing periods.
A source shield nust also be provided with nuclide sources
tor use during source replenishaent and periods of pool drainage.
„GoogIe
The amall radiation volume required with S N*V s-ray ■onreas
of the design shown in Figure 2 nakes the shielding of th*s*
sources feasible using lead plates. This allows tha conaidaratlon
of x-ray sources as processing tools to be iwplaaantad Into
eiisting food packaging lines thereby eliainating tha naad for a
central processing facility.
Controls - Radionuclide Facility
The intensity of a radionuclide source depends upon the
nuBber of Megacuries and type of source nuclide present. Food
packages brought near the source will experience a higher dosa
rate but also a higher Max/ain dose ratio coaparad to packages
processed at a further distance fron the source. The ase
efficiency of the radiation declines as distance fro* the aourcc
incraaaea because a snaller fraction of the radiation Is
Intercepted by the processed package. It is possible to iNprovs
the aax/Bin dose ratios at the higher dose rates close to the
source by rotating the package one half turn and carrying it past
the source for a second exposure.
Ilie total dose applied to a given package partially dapands
both upon its distance frcn the source and tha amount of tlNS It
is processed. The MSX/nin dose ratio partially depends upon the
„GoogIe
distance f ram ' the i
the electric power delivered to the accelerator. The geometry of
the radiation field i^an he adjusted with electric sweeplnq magnets
BO that most of the produced radiation is incident upon the
package to be processed. Both of these adjustments have little
ef t«ct apon the nax/nln dose ratio while preserving a high us^
efficiency. The loax/nln dose ratio can be enhanced if requited by
hardening the radiation at a penalty of reduced use efficiency.
Since the irradiation source characteristics can be modified
to acconrnodate specific dose, dose rate, and max/min ratio, the
conveyor system used with x-ray processing sources can be of a
simpler design than conveyors used with radionuclide sources. The
Simple track path configuration using a one pass, straight through
exposure shown in Figure 2 is sufficient for a gceat variety of
processing protocols because of the flexibility inherent to the
„GoogIe
ttodiatlon Fl«ld Wpping
It will b« necessary to periodically aap the gco««trr aad
intensity of the radiation field by exposing radiation tetsotors
placed at different locations within the source rocB. Vhls MSt
be done each tine a radionuclide source is replenisbsd bvcnus* the
^eld geoaietry and intensity are changed,
the radiation intensity and field geometry of an s-ray ■otire*
are known functions of the electron voltage and currant danslty.
niese paraaeters are aonitored and controlled by tba accalecator
(H>eratoc or by coaputer therefore field aapplng will ba raquirsd
on a less frequent basis if electric source* arc used. Mbm
Mapping Is required the saaller voluae of the radiation aonc will
siaplify the task.
Ventilation
Osone gas is produced trtien lonidng radiation passes throogb
oxygen in the ataosphere or in water. necafoca It will bi
necessary to ventilate the source roo* regardless of tha typa of
radiation used.
„GoogIe
It is possible that specific; protocols may reguj
irradiation processing in oxygen Ctee or inert atmospheres
prevent the occurrence of undesirable tadiochenical reactio
This procedure is easier to implement, as is oione ventilati
Nhen a snail volune radiation zone is used.
The operating expenses for a food processing facility were
approximated by considering a central facility separately fro* the
radiation source. These facility costs without the source are
listed in Table «. * source is then chosen to be fitted into the
facility, and the source and facility costs aie added to obtain
the total operating costs. These costs ace listed in Tables 7-10,
one table for each of the four possible radiation sources chosen.
Bad Ton of food processed. This figure is not entirely
satisfactory howewetr, because it fails to take into account the
variation in source characteristics and operating flexibilities
discussed throughout this paper. Furthcraore, the assuaptlon that
the source and facility costs can be calculated separately and
„Googlc
then add*d is accurate to a rough approKlaation only and nsglacta
the ability to optiniie th« facility design to a specific aoure*.
Neveethalssa, this analysis Method does provide insight into the
relative costs and liai tat ions faced by the dssignec of an
irradiation food processing facility.
A separate cost analysts ms Kad« for the portable facility
illustrated in Figures 3 and 4. These costs are listed in Tables
11 and 12.
Central Facility Costs Without Source
The central facility is assiMed to be siailar to the facility
described in Part II of this paper. It consists of a shielded and
ventilated source rooa with a conveyor which carries food past the
source at rates of several hundred tons per hour. n« food is
placed onto the conveyor at the receiving dock and reaoved at the
loading dock lAere the conveyor terainstes.
A radionuclide source nust be subnerged under approxiaately
IS' of water when personnel enter the source rooa, A source pool
designed to cover the source rack to a BiniauB depth of 15' would
be about 20' deep, 12' long and E' wide. The pooli together with
a lift Btechanlsm to raise and lower the source rack, would be an
integral part of the source roon. A water circulation puap and
„GoogIe
chiller to rMiov« enecgy deposited in the water is also n
equipnent.
If an electric source is used, then the source roo* >
significantly saaller and no pool is required. insteAd, a
machine shop and parts storage area Is placed adjacent I
source rooa to facilitate routine accelerator maintenance.
TTie facility also Includes a control rooB and dosiaeter
laboratory adjacent to the source rooM. nte source operator has
control over all aspects of the facility froai within the control
rooa. n>is includes source and conveyor operation and safety
interlock reset capability.
Tht dosimeter laboratory includes radiation aonttoring i
detection equipment required to map the field,
detectors, determine max/min ratios, etc.
The Initial capital cost •
is estimated to be $I.S million i
This assumption is clearly an approximation lAlch Is uS' only '
provide a basis for a comparative economic analysis of the source
He asEjme that the facility will be operated with an average
annual uptime of 801 by a staff of five personnel. These include
the two f ul 1 time positions of Supervisor and Radiation Engineer
„GoogIe
with annual Balaries of $60,000 and $50,000 respcctlvaly. 1hr*«
hourly enployees operate the radiation source and load food, flie
accelerator operator is paid at the rate of $30/hr and the two
tech-labor«rB are each paid 515/hr. An annual facility
■aintenance factor of $100,000 exclusive of the source imc also
allowed.
This analysis gives rise to an annual facility operating cost
of $560,000 axclusivc of the radiation source. The Initial
capital expenditure and annual operating costs for the facility
without the radiation source are listed in Table 6.
Radionuclide Source Costs
The initial capital costs for a cesiua or cobalt radionuclide
source to process food at the rate of lOO H Rad Tons/day within
the central facility described above are listed in Tables 7 and S.
These coats consist of the source itself (see Tables 1 and 3) ,
source delivery and setup within the facility, a source radiation
shield, and the initial capital costs for the facility listed in
Table 6.
Source delivery to the facility for initial lnstall*ent and
for source replenishment must be made in separate shipatents of 0.2
NCi each. mis linitation is due to the size and weight of
,y Google
m
availabl* shielded radionuclide shipping
regulatioriG iMpoBed by the NRC and i>OT.
A container cental charge of S1000 and a shipping charge of
$3000 is typical within the industry for a D.2 HCi delivery.
These charges are listed in Tables 7 anil B as a source delivery
charge of 520,000 per NCi > but auat be received in separate 0.2
MCi shipnents.
The initial source Bet up charge of SI 00, 000 and radiation
shield cost of $500,000 are estiaated for a 2.6 HCi cobalt-60
source. TTie saae charges were also asBuned for the 17,4 HCI
cesium-137 source estlnated in Table 7. The absence of coaiMercial
cesium processing facilities makes a more accurate estimate for
cesium set jp and shield costs difficult to obtain.
The annual operating costs for the radionuclide source result
from the decay of the source and its replenishment. This includes
the purchase and delivery of fresh radionuclide at a delivery
charge of SIOOO per 0.2 HCi or fraction thereof required.
A source replenishnent charge of 530,000 is included to cover
labor and expenses for installing source Material Into the source
racks. This must be done annually with a cobalt source due to ItS'
fast decay rate. A cesium source can be replenished on a biannual
schedule however, with less than a SI loss in throughput. The
„GoogIe
ccsiuM operating expense in Table T assunea source repl ■nlsluicnt
once every tm years however the annual average costs are listed.
The reaaindei: of the opera t ing costs consist of th« non
source related expenses oC $560,000 to operate and a^intaln tha
facility listed in Table 6 and the payback of the initial capital
investnent t^ich is assuned to be anoctiied at tSI annually over «
10 year period.
X-Ray htid Electron Bean Source Costs
The initial costs specific to an electric central processing
facility consist of the accelerator installation, spare parta
inventory, and related equipaent purchases together with the
installation of the required electric utility capacity within tha
facility. The annual operating costs for x-ray processing are
dominated by electric power charges. Both electron bea» and s-ray
processing require a lot allowance for accelerator aalntanance.
The annual operating expense for both an x-ray and alectron baaa
central processing facility are listed In Tables 9 and 10.
The x-ray facility Is assmed to require twin 5 MeV electron
accelerators capable of an average electron beam power totaling 1
NK. This power, when converted to x-rays, will process food at a
rate of 346 N Rad Tons/day. These twin accelerators will cost
„GoogIe
$900,000 SB detailed in Table 5, and will require an input power
of 2 KW. The facility will require s utility installation of 2.5
HM i*\ich requires an initial expense of SUO,000 for a 13.8 kv
substation, a 2S0O kVA tcansformer and a 3 kA distribution panel.
An electron bean facility will require a 10 HeV electron
accelerator which will produce a 0.1 MW electron beam . Th is
accelerator is produced from the same components as the twin 3 MeV
accelerators listed In Table S, with the exception of the power
supply tAiich is only 0.1 HH. The lower power 10 HeV accelerator
Is assuned to cost the same as Che twin S HeV accelerators since
the number of required coaponents is practically the same for
bothl Tti* 0.1 KW, ID NeV accelerator will require an input power
of 0.2 HW and will process with electrons at a throughput of 519 n
Rad Tons/day. He assume an 0.5 MW utility installation witnin the
facility for an initial cost of S^S.OOO.
Scanning Magnets are used Co shape the geometry of the x-ray
and electron beam processing fields in order to maximize the use
efficiency of both types of radiation. They serve Co scan
of the radiation upon the package regardless of package shape.
Two aaqnetic scanners ore required with the twin accelerators toe
x-ray processing. Only one magnetic scanner is needed with the
electron processor.
„GoogIe
The alcctric power charge. Including fuel ad ju»tB«nt and
denand charges, arc based upon the assuaed 80% uptime for the
facility averaged annually.
The x-ray processor requires cooling water to r««ov« heat
fron the converter plates. If the input temperature of the water
is 60°F and the enit temperature is 160°F then 4.3 liters per
second will be required while the twin accelerators are operating.
This water has been cost factored at $1.50 per 1000 gallona. Ae
water can be used for non processing purposes after it exits the
converter plates if desired, tf » cooling tower Is utillied, then
the water could be recirculated. The 10 NeV accelerator does not
Central Facility Sunmary
The lowest processing cost per H Rad Ton was achieved with
the electron bean facility due to Its high use efficiency and low
povei requirements. This cost was $9.17 as shown in Table 10,
The 5 MeV x-ray facility processed food at a cost of $]}.42
per H Rad Ton as listed in Table 9. This is equal to less than
two tenths of a cent per pound processed to the 100 kRad lialt
proposed by the FDA. The x-ray facility is capable of
significantly lower processing coats than either of the
„GoogIe
rsdionuclide facilities (se* Tables 7 and 6), priaarlly because .
recent advances in accelerator technology.
Portable 5 MeV X-Hay Facility
the operating costs for the. portable S HeV array source and
processing location shown in Figures 3 and 4 have been estimated
and listed in Tables 1 1 and 12. It is assuited that an existing
food packing facility can be retrofitted to acconaodate the
portable accelerators in the nanner illustrated in the figures.
The portable twin S MeV accelerators will have a total length
of approxinately 35', including. a two foot vide radiation tone for
processing pallet aiied containers. Bach accelerator has a power '
output of 0.25 MW to produce a total electron bean power at 0.5
MH. This power is converted to 5 HeV x-rays to procesB at a
throughput of 173 H Rad Tons/day. The only difference between
these accelerators and the ones described earlier is the aaaller
power supply of 0.5 HW required for the portable source. This
difference will produce only minor price variations and the total
cost of 5900,000 listed in Table 5 is used for this estixiate.
Two scanning magnets, of the same type as described for the
central facility, would increase the use efficiency of the
,y Google
radiation as well as contribute to the flexibility OC tb*
The input power requirea to run the twin accelerator source
is 1 HW which is provided by a van Mounted, I NH di«>el qviMratoc
not shown in the illustrations. Under full load, the genccator
will burn fuel at a rate of 74 gallons per hour. Generators of
this type are readily available and cost approxiaately SI 60.000.
The processing location requires construction to provide
earth radiation shielding for the trailer Bounted source and to
provide conveyors for transporting food packages. It Is estiaiated
that 3200 cubic yards of earth oust be excavated to provide the
processing location and entrance and exit reaps for the trailer.
This require«ent could be reduced provided the truck could be
backed into place.
A 5' thick concrete radiation barrier requiring 300 cubic
yards is poured between the radiation source and the ground
surface. If earth is used instead of concrete, then 10' would be
needed thereby requiring a deeper excavation. The cut and cover
operation is estimated to cost $100,000.
At least 10' of earth is required to protect personnel
loading food onto conveyors. It is assuned that aj^pibxlBately SD'
of conveyor will transport food as shown in Figure 4. Ventilation
„GoogIe
will b« required within the excavated volume to remove oEone frcoi
the area. This can be ventilated to th« surface where the atone
disintegrates.
During full power opeiat ion, it is necessary to provide
cooling water to the x-ray converter plates at a rate at
approxiaately 0.6 gallons per second. The water will be increased
in toiperature by 100°F and can be used afterwards for other
He assuBC that the additional construction and retrofitting
can be accoMplished for $250,000, This cost is added to the cut
and cover operation to produce a total estlaated cost for the
processing location of S3SO>000.
The total initial capital investment for both the portable
s-rsy source and the retrofit construction is just under $2
■illion, Thes.e initial costs are sumnarized in Table 11.
n* operating expenses for Che portable facll Ity are listed
in Table 12. It is assumed that the facility processes at a rate
of 173 M Rad Tons/day with aa average annii*l aptim* of SOt. n>«
net operating cost is $32.49 per M Rad Ton irtiich Is slightly
higher than the operational cost of the central x-ray facility
listed in Table 9. This difference is not significant.
„GoogIe
Ute fclnclpal cfwcitlng expenae Cor the poitjblc facility la
Uw oDCt «f the dlewl fuel, tmmminj $ 1.45 pel 9Bllan, the
mukl eipcnae la S TS2,tM.
Vucc laracmel ire neoeasary to operate the facility, Ihcy
Include ton tad> laborers, aach at $ 15/hi mi m acceleiatai
«|wratar «*» is paid $ JBfla . Aeae coata are Included in bble 12.
k total Mlntcnnc* alloMnce Bor the tw> accelerators and tlie
dlaael gMeratoc of I U6,fH la catlaated In tkble 12. Dm
p^back of the Initial o^tal Invwtacnt at 151 MDrtliad over a
II year period is aasiaed In oidei bo be oonalabent with M1tM1i«
t this plfSI.
Ce^arative Cost tot ^st Control
A critical factor for It^leBantlng radiation (coceaslng OC Coed Cor
a certain Intended effect, la the odwative cart wlOi Other Hands.
Ihla la at beat a difficult task because OC the different r*quir«nts ■
cost factoie, tosed ifwn costs for several sethods of pest control foe
raisins^^^ the different radiation processing alternatives ace cost
Ihe radiation processing at IM krad level ■aiiia a- throu^fut of IMf
ton/dv *t>en using radionuclide sources) 3461 tan/Oay (cntral tacili^l
OTd lT3t ten/day [portable facility) «hen 5 MeV e-rqr souros* are used,
nils is ooifiBred with BH ton loade per facili^ In non-radtatlon
requiring aeveral daye. ihls oosfwison is given in Ikble 13.
,y Google
ling I
(2) The D«e Of Induction Llnaca With WonHoMr lttqi»<tlc
Prive *■ High Average Pow«r fccc«l«r«tor«, D.L. BlrK,
B.C. Cook, S.A. Hawklna, H.A. Mcwton, S.E. Poor.
L.L. Reginato, J. A. SchKldt, and N.H. S«ith, Lavrenca
LiveiBOce National Laboratory, August 20, 19B4.
To be publiahad In Pcoceadlnga For 8th Confercnca On
Application OC Accelacatocs In Rcacacch And Industcy,
North Texas Stat* Dnlvacslty, Danton, Hov. 12-14, 1984.
{ 3) Appllcatlona And CoaparatlTe Bttecta Of X-Raya Proa
Induction Linear Acceleratora To Food Proceaalnq By
I Radiation, Appcovad tor funding by Ttic
ilty of California, Office of the Senior vice
President for Acadealc Affairs, Hay 10, t9B4.
(4) got as Off
b.i.. Birz , S.J. Briggs,
Llveraorc Rational (.aboratory. Internal NamocanduM,
February IS, I9B4.
(5) Factors Influencing Econoaic Evaluation Of Irradiation
Processing, A BrynjoHason, U.S. ACTy Waticlt Lab.,
June 1971 :
{6) Economics Of Electron Accalwatocs In The Preservation
fft Food By IrradiatlOtt, I.B. Mor^ansf en, lUdlatlon
DynaMics Inc., June 1971 ,
<T) food Processing With Electrically generated Photon
Irradiation. Stephen M. Matthews, Lawrence Liveraore
national Laboratory, DCIU.-89S25, Novaaber 19B1.
(8) At*t»*lnn Alt>rn«tlv« MethoJl of P*«t Control In K»l«ln Stor«a«.
P.D. Cardncr, E.L. Soderitroa, J. L. KaTltflle, and K. Islan 4*
Louno. Bulletin 19U, Division of AgTicullural Sclancai,
Dnivctalty of Caltforaia. MoMiber 1982.
,y Google
TABLE 1
PROPERTIES Of CESim-n?
Gamma Photon Output 0.66 H*V
Output Powec 3.32 kW / MCI
^°^*- SIOO.OOO / MCi
Decay Rate 2.28% pe^ y,„
Nax/Hln Ratio (see tent) 27 to 1
Appcoximate Use Efficiency 20t
world Supply 90 HCi of eeaim chloride
100 H Rad Ton/day Requirement 17.4 HCi
TABLE 2
PROPERTIES OP COBALT-eO
-Gamma Photon Output
1.17 and 1.33 MeV
Output Po-et
14.84 kW / MCi
Cost
;i Million / MCi
Decay Rate
12.391 pec year
Hax/Nin Ratio Isee text)
16 to 1
Approximate Use Efficiency
30%
Hocld Supply
BO MCi
100 H Rad Ton/day Requiremi
■nt
2.6 MCi
„GoogIe
TABLE 3
PSOPBRTIES OP 5 NttV X-RA! ^OOKCE
X-Ray Photon Output
Output Potwc
Cost
Nax/Nin Ratio (see text)
Approsinata Us« Efficiency
too H Rad Ton/day Requlreaent
Broad apectcuM to 5 HeV
Bt pover conversion
Depends upon accelerator
5.9 to I or better
S0%
0.29 NHf 5 MeV accelerator
TABLE 4
PROPERTIES OF 10 HeV ELECTRON BEAM
Electron Output
Output Power
Cost
Hax/Hin Ratio (see ^e>t )
Approximate Use Efficiency
100 H Rad Ton/day Reguirenen
10 NeV
Depends upon accelerator
Depends upon accelerator
Thin samples only
eot
0.0193 MH electron bean
,y Google
INDUCTION LINAC DESIGN
1 HH Power Supply S 70 ntouBsnd
Resonant Charging Netvoch 100
Switch Chassis (4 requited) 200
Magnetic Switch 12 required) 200
0.5 MeV Accelerating Modules
120 required) 200
Magnet Power Supply (2 required} 20
vacuum SysteM 40
Controls TO
TOTAL S900 Thousand
,y Google
TABLE 6
COST OF CENTRAL IRRAOIATIOH PACILlTt WITHOUT SOURCE
INITIAL CAPITAL COST
Receiving and Loading Docks
Doeeneter Laboratory
Conveyor Systen
ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENSE
Supervisor 6 hr/day $ 60,000
Radiation Engineer SQiOOO
Source Operator S2a/hr 80% up tiae 140,000
T«ch Laborer i5/hc 105,000
Tech Laborer 1 5/hr 105,000
Building Maintenance 100,000
TOTAL $ 560,000
,y Google
OPERATING EXPENSES FOR CESIUH-137 POOD PROCESSIMG PACIUTT
100 M RAD TONS/DAY THROOGHPOT
eO( ANNUAL UPTIME
INITIAL CAPITAL IMVESTHENT
17.4 HCl Source $1,740,000
Delivery t $20,000 per HCi 340,000
initial Source Setup 100,000
Source Radiation Shield 500,000
Central Facility - Table 6 I. 500,000
ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENSE
Cesiun Decay (2.281) $ 39,700
e,ooo
.ing Expense - Table 6 560,000
il Investaent Payback 835,000
TOTAL $1,457,700
ANNUAL THROUGHPUT 29,200 H Rad Tons
OPERATING COSTS $49.92 / H Rad Ton
,y Google
801
INITIAL CAPITU. INVESTMENT
2.6 NCi Soucce
Delivery « *20,0'00 per MCI
Initial Source Setup
Source Radiation Shield
Central PaciUty - Table 6
TOTAL
52,fi00,000
52,000
100,000
500,000
t, 500. 000
5«, 752, 000
ANNUAL OPERATIMS EXPENSE
Cobalt Decay {12.39%)
Beplenishaent Delivery
Replenish Labor and Expense
Operating Expense - Table 6
TOTAL $1,866,800
ANNUAL THROUGHPUT 29,300 M Rod Tons
OPERATING COSTS S63.93 / M Rad Ton
,y Google
OPERATING EXPENSES POR 5 NaV X-RAY FOOD PROCESSING fACILin
346 N RAD TONS/DAY THROUGHPUT
80% ANNUAL UPTIME
INITIAL CAPITAL INVESTHENT
Two 5 HeV, 0.5 MH accelerators S 900,000
Spare Parts 180,000
Two Scanning Magnets 250,000
2.5 HN Utility Installation 130,000
Central Facility - Table 6 1,500,000
TOTAL 52,960,000
ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENSE
Accelerator Maintenance 101 S 90,000
Electricity » $0.13S/kwh 1,890,000
Mater 9 $1.50 / 1000 gallons 43,000
Operating Expense - Table 6 560,000
S90.000
TOTAL $3,173,000
ANNUAL THROUGHPUT 101,000 N Rad Tons
OPERATING COSTS S11.42 / M R«d Ton
,y Google
'ERATIHG EXPENSES POR 10 MeV ELBCTRON PROCESSING PdCILlTY
519 M RAD TONS/DAY THROOGHPUT
B0( ANNUAL UPTIME
INITIAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT
One 10 MeV, O.i MW accelcrnor $ 900,000
Spare Parts 160,000
Scanning Magnet t2S,000
O.S HH Utility Installation 75,000
Central Facility - Table 6 1,500,000
TOTAL $2,780,000
ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENSE
Acceleratoc Maintenance 10»
Electricity t S0.135/kiih
Operating Expense - Table 6
ANNUAL THROUGHPUT 152,000 M Rad TQns
OPERATING COSTS $9. IT / H Rad Ton
S 90,
,000
190,000
560,
,000
554,
,000
„GoogIe
INITIAL CAPITAL INVESTHENT FOR 5 MeV X-RAY
PORTABLE PROCESSIMG FACILITY
173 n RAD TONS/DAY THROUGHPUT
Portable^ Source
Twin % HeV, 0.2S HH accelerators S 900.000
Spare Parts 180,000
Two Scanning MagneCs 250(000
4B' Tractor and Trailer 130,000
Diesel Generator - 1 MW
in separate 48' trailer 160,000
Radiation Monitoring Equipment 15.000
$ 100,000
Construct i
Conveyors
Ventilatti
250,000
'recessing Location Subtotal "% 350,000
INITIAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT SI, 97;
,y Google
OPERATING EXPENSES POR 5 HeV X-RAY- 'PORTABLE FACILITY
173 M RAD TONS/DAY THROUGHPUT
60% ANNUAL UPTIME
Accelerator and Generator Haintenani
Diesel Puel; 74 gal/hr 9 $^ .AS/gal
Hater 9 SI .50/1000 gal
Two Tech-Laborecs e S1 S/hr
Accelerator Operator 9 S20/hr
ANNUAL THROUGHPUT
OPERATING COSTS
50,516 H Rad Tons
S32.49 / H Rad Ton
58-005 O - 86 -
,y Google
ocMmmnvE hocbssihg ass pcb vest consoL di bmsdb
ORRfHI nCCESS OOGT KB NEQUC 1C
Het^l BrcMld* S a. 37
SfMfhim $ 11.75
M H3 hMt recovery $ U.63
(bl sai heat recovery $ 9.77
(c) Ml heat recovery $ 9.6S
llltro9en Ataoapheie
(a) Uquld nitrogen trucked In S 17.63
<b) Liquid nitrogen on-ftite production $ 16.39
mDuncH Bociss
Ca-137 PacUity 9 4.99
Co-U racing $ 6.39
S-Mev X Rv Facility
(«) central eacility $ 3.14
{b) Fortable Eacility $ 3.25
oy Google
9S»
eiemSErrahliiiig Radioi
Electtta been.
,y Google
FIGURE 4
Close up vlcH ol ■ portable two-ilded elc<
Irradiating food. Facility uae* •oil ■■!■]
ahieldlng.
,y Google
POCO MO MXiauTJRE (KMnuTICM Qt WE WTItD wmOMS
anfaaiTtOK. akwc txsct Mxxrt
iwrawTiaw. SBiKsr* « recE dowdiaticn hccessdc
"at** 4-8. 198S, Nishlngtai D.C. , U»
K» n iuuF<ne roao ncnos u k fimcticm cr iwDunai sooci
. uoMu-eotAR, cms f. cmmop, umcm j. hmiius, siEm» h
'"'' •''"*WIS B- SLWDTTOl ("1, CTOckei Hicleu Ubotataty,
«* ^plication of loniilng islUtlon in the procsaliq of food depends
l«9ely on •cokmIc factots, >s -ell w technical ocnsidetatlora (1). The
jbUlty to pcoceu iM^e food ocnUInera with dose r.tloe u In. la poulble
-i!?^'"' *" "*' *° "^leve Sid predict iixifotm cesponaes. n»iy food
lodtcts react waaHwlu tn fr».._J^f. i._- . —rTTi- ^___ ,' r^..
proActs react negatively to treaOwits exceeding a certain dose lewl (31
n™ It la necsGury to ptocesa these foods within speclEted doee levela to
achieve the desired tedmlcal effect t*ille at the a»e tlae caaWtta iilth tl»
-ndatod regulatory .peclflcationa. Becauae of economic reattaii^, it la highly
*. table that thla can be .xoipllBhed .*dle treati;^ large food p.au.j,,;'^*^
Wllet-Blie ccntalners wary in owrall dlaenslcra but rs^e fton 6»- to »~cb
, ^ '^' '^ *™ltle« vary ticm •.! to t.9 g/o,,!. If aliiple calculatlono
of the p*ioton flin at Km dlatanoe May few the radiation aoucce are carried
out hy using the fanlUar Lirtierfa lat. of Btponentlal att*nuatlor (I- I e""")
thm leeults mich are 9merBlly lo. arc obtained with owtestlMted aaxLu/ '
■Inwa. dose ratloe. Ihia Is due to the neglect of the coitrlbutlon of aecondacv
^J^^T^.r. "*™'^*^ tadUtia. consiata of aostly of Cnipton-Bcatteted
pnlaia with less energy than the irlBMy radiation, and to a leaser eitjmt by
'T, "^'^'■"J ^"^ (*»tDelectrlc interactions follo-ed by Auger electrons;
annihUaUon radtatim frc* the pair -production ptooeEs: and bcfmBtrahluno titn
the Honing dowi of energetic electrons within the absorbei. Because the net
jr*^*^' ""i! ?!™"'' ^ " inctMSa In Ok total radiation energy deposited
throughout the at»(ber, this Increase u called "dose buildup-, ,ni dSrSs on
I*otor tnergy; [tiysical characteristics of the abeorbet i and the geCBEtry ol
radiatlon-Bource and food pacVa^e (abeotber) . Thia buildup effect has already
teai auggested as m i^ortant factor in aUowlng the use of Co-6e aa a source
or radiation In the processing of Fallet-else eortalnera vlth accntable dose
M "Jil^ifT"'' " *■ "P"^**' ""t "tt«t .achlne sources of radiation
U-e, > MIeV X ray spectra froa electron acoeJeratoral will provide a aore
unlfota dose distributions In these type of food o
i,?^ ifT '«"1" obtained by solving a Boltanan transport equati«, for
fV^ ^f""*^' radiation In thick food pacKagea, using ar«i sources of
CB-137, Q>-6e, s<d X and electron radiation frta several different enerov
(2 to ta NeV) accelerators, will be glvm. ihe calculations will be ocsparad
to aperiaentally deterainad dose ratios tot Co-«e and 2 HeV X radlatlwi tx<m
a Z H*V electron acnleiatca. Bieae rcaults "- " ■
potantial of the dlfletcnc ittliatlon source
lBr9e-scale radiation prooesslrq of food,
<•) &n«ftri by oavaiBlty ot CallfdniU MucImt SbIwiom FWri.
,y Google
REPEItEVCES
(1) "BvlulccMnU Eat O* IiiadUtiai of Food «i a
Pw«l Joint FNVIADt, Vlem*, ie-22 Haccti 1S14.
tJ) *Pic*mBtian of Foot by lonlztiq RaJlativ)* E. S. Jain«i»i»i «ri H. S.
IMciKn (Ete.) dC Rest, Iik. %1. I. II. III. Sao Mtan, Pla. IMS
O) E. T. O'Eulllvn, k. h. Ojrtv, «] K. K. O'Sulllnn. *DaM Kdldufi
HfacU In btidUtion of Pood ECoducta*. nroc. SUi. Int. Mvtlng <ai
IMUtion Roceuing. a:titet ll-lt, 1W4, Gmi Dtego, Ch., lEh.
(4) H. C. UquiM-GoUx tnS B. H. Hatthewa. 'BaJlonuclldc «id ELoctrlc
Acoalccatot Souccea for Paod Iriadl^tian'. Roc. 5tl). Int. Metlnj cb
ndlaticn RaooMlng. Ortober Z2-Z6, 1M4, Sn I&ego. Ch., Bk
,y Google
L,\ INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGCNCV I
tJ fooo and agriculture organization of V
•^ THE united nations ^
international symposium on fooo irradiation processing
EOSC MTIOG IN »IX£T~SIZE FDCO PNXfCES
AS A fXINCTHW Of RADIATICK SOJKES I')
MANUEL C. UGUNA5-50IAR, OWR F. CAKWCHO and LBMK J. HMIRIS
Crocker Nuclear Laboiatocy
Unlvitrslty of Calllornla
Davis, CA. 95«ie USA
STEtWBt H. HA7THEHS and tfMlIS R. SLMJCmCR
LawretK? Ll«»iiiicirt National Lahotatory
Univacslty of Calltornla
Llvomore. O. »4SSa USA
) SuEVpocttd by the Unlwralty of California Nucl«i SciMicm F
„GoogIe
Mdlatlan da«a dUulbutiotia In i^Im-sIm cemaIimc* of fond tt
calculaUd with tlw SMDIL Knt* Carlo lautliw <n ttw CDC-T6M aa«ut
at ttw Uilvsialty of Calltotnla LMnotca Uv«>oc* lUtlan*! LifaMatac;
bdi calculation caquliad ^^oxlnataly M >inuta* of timmc tlaa.
tHO typea ot tood wbc* aodalad. Ihe (liat type e< food (Pood I) Mia
aaaUMd bo to Ml wtcc (by mi^t) , with Um tmlnlng 2n aqually
dlattltaitad tetwean llpldi, carbdiydiitas, <nd pcotalna. 9ila Qpa ot
'"' ~ " ' '0 be tqicMentatim ot trsA pcodUca, mtS haa ai
■laamtai tmicai cca^oaition oquai to g,, u ...o ,.. a . , ma aaoena zgpm
of food (rood It) conaUtsJ of 111 wtec, with %• ivalnlng wl^t aqually
diattlbutad bstwecn liptdi, carbohydratH, and fcotalna. Food II wa
c(fKeaantaciv« of dri«d foods, «nd has ■ *la»ntal dwlcal coa^naitlon
equal to C ^^B iqjO 22** 1. ■ Although only tM typ*a Ot food wei* Mdalad,
the food denaity uu varied between fl.4- and 1- g/ca^
Pallet-alie food BwriUa of dlaenalona 4 i 4 x I ft. Chick mce uaad for
theaa calculationa. Each tood aapple calculated was sicloaad on all aid— by a
cardiOBid layer tiiiA was 1.12^-111. thick n] ■ dmsity of •.!» 3/0^. Ihe
radiation mulce uaed for the calculation wa either a cadloruclide aourc* oc a
B-ray aouice. In all cases, the radiation aouioe conalatad ot two flat aquaca
aource pistes which weie 4-ft. and 1-in. on aach aide. Ihe CW aourca platfn
■are placed parallel to each other and aeparated b/ a distance all^tly graatac
than 2 ft. with the food package between tha. Bius, the 2 ft. thldi food
saafile was Irradiated from both ildes. Ibe 2 ft. thick dlaienaion of the tood
Bai{>le was nsthoatlcal ly sllcsd InUi twenty equal slices or cosfiartsentB, oach
pacallel to the aource plates and B.l ft. thick ty 4 ft. long. Iherefora, the
reaulta reported in each dose dlatritutlon (dose ratloa) are the calculated
average (taae rates deposited In eadi of the 21 food ciapartaents. Bowevec,
because of the sysnetrlc shape and for alspllclty, the figuraa oily show cne~
half of Che depth doae. Figure 1 shews this food/aouice gecaetxy BOdel.
wuiiKricN axincGS
Mwn an x-roy source was used tor dose distribution calculation*, aadi
plate was asauned to be a l-mi thick Pb K-ray converter plate. IWo hl^
intensity electron accet-cstors supply electrons to the outside sutfacea of
the Pb converter plate; one accelerator for each plate. Ihe electrons wala
asBJBed to lifisct the two plates at a right angle to the plate surfaca and Om
electron beaai Intensity over the outside surface of eadi plat* was aa«i»W>r1 to
to uilfom. nie electron boabaidnait on the outer plate aurface cauaad
arrays to to oiitted fron the Inner plate suttace into the food. In eirery doae
distrltutlon calculation, tto total power of the tuo electron accsleratota «■■
assiaed to t* 1 W, that la e.5 H4 ai each plate. Itie energy ot the electron
b^ was varied between I HeV and 10 HeV, Oiile keeping constant the election
toan power. As expected, higher doae rate and a lore ixilfoia cbse distribution
■ere obtained with the higher energy electron beams.
„GoogIe
IfM-SM-I71/B3p
Wm • ladlonuellde aouice wai uaed. «Bcft •ouic« plat« xas oasiaed
to to •.S-MCl par plate. Howsvei, no Belf-absocpCton In Uwse Bouicea
««• consldwod. ItwcsfBCe, the total (adlonucllde aoulcc Intensity fOI aKh
etlculatlon ma 1 HCl. Ml radionuclide mucea onlC theli cadlatlon
laotra|)ically {In oil dlcectlona). aowevei, Km ulculatlona uare parlocOBd
«aBUilng that oacti [«31o[nx:llde--eBltted (tkitoci mb nBthowClCally conatralnol
to Mdt CCOB the source plate at cl9nt angles to the sutfac«. Ihe leason Coc
partoiBliq thaia calculatloiu was to 9Bln a better iiider standing of the ettect
of fomaid [tiotai scattniing on done rate and dose dlstiltutlon. X-cay sources
4*lt partially In the Corvard direction aiVJ this effect Is enhanced at high
MWcgy. Also x-ray sources aoit over ■ btoad apectriw o! photon eneigles. Cn
Om other hand, radionuclide aouicea nit laotioplcally and at cnly one
(CS-U7; 662 Ml) ac two (CO-fifl; 1,117- and 1.333-l.eW) fftoton enetgles.
Several layers of various iwtacials rapujamtlng tadlation flltar*
and the necessary nater cooling for alactron accslatatot ■ourca* uare placed In
the radiation path totueen the Murce plat* snd the outu wrfac* of the food.
Itm air layer between the source platn and th* food Mas also consldarad and
included in the calculations. Ihe Baterlal out of Mildi these layacs wra aada
depended tfion Outther «i electric or (adlonuclid* miatct ia» used. In every
calculation, however, the distance between the Inside surface of the tM>.
parallel, radiation source plates was exactly 6T.69 at and the geoaatry tas
■yiBetrlc and parallel with the ni4>i>ne tatMscn the plates. Ihe folloHlng la
« list of mater ials placed botwe" — "- ~' -•--- — - — - — ---- -
the food tften a filtered s-cay •
Mter tor cooling (.Ul a
Al electron afaoorbat 1.251 a
Pe flltar 1.635 □
Mr , 1.W5 a
of density 1.19 g/o' 1.313 a
Mioi an infiltered >-cay source wss used the Fa filter ms taplaced with
sir. Wter cooling, Fe filter, or U electron tfieorbec were not uMd with the
radionuclide sources and these asterials were enlaced with air.
DOSE EWTE CKLOJUO'ICMS
Eadi dose rate distribution was produced with 21 data pointsi each point
representing the average dose rate (kRad/s) dtllveced to aacli of the M food
ccBfartiiientB. As the radiation posses throu^ the food, Cosfiton scattering
results in secondary electrons vid photons iihlch deposit their dose as thay
lose energy in tronalt. Some radiation scatters out through the aides at tha
food packages jnd is loat. The confxitec code folliM* the [t»ton and electron
trajectoclea through the food by Monte Carlo techniques keeping track of atiere
the radiation dose ii being deposited. Electrons ore followed vntil their
energy Is reduced to 200 k«V (at iiliich point their range in wter is ~ I.BS on)
khile (tntons are folliMed until their awrgy la S tMI (range In later
• .82S (S). In both latter cases, we ossuned that the renining eloctcon
•nd [tiatixi aiecgy la deposited within that cange.
„GoogIe
nfala 1 wic1m« tb* cMutts g( Am* ut* nd doM diaulfaittkm fK
■ 2-tt. thick pactiag* filled vlth «.T5 «/«> food foe flltai«d ^
unf Utaied X rndUtlon poduoed with 1-, S-, 7-, ard l*-HaV ■lacUon b^^.
Thaae i*sulC6 ue alao Hrawi In flguie I.
Plguca J ihcMB tha affect en doM IM* and [uttlculaily In dOM
dlatilbutlon Xmti «l*e of the elactcona u* all(M«d to «tu tfa* fnod. It la
qulM cl«u that clectton fllteia af« i^efetauy to obtain the lOwMt
pcaalbla dose lacloa, «v«n at ttm ^p«tM ol •Me of the [tiototi pMci.
T<w»e latter baM* ai* Mwwi In tabla 1 •■ a fwK:tlon of «lectian tmm
nbU 2 ai^iclM* tto tMVlt* Of dM* [ate and doM distiUuUcna
lAen radionuclide aoureea {Co-49 or Ca-13T) are ijaad to Ircallata food
of the exact conpoaltlon end qeOMtrv aa eiqiUlnad above, rloura 4 #Kiws
the coparUon of these ceoults for C0-6B and Ce-137 aouice*.
Table 3 ia a capailion of doae catei and doae diatcUutlona fot I.TS
q/em^ food .as treated with the dlteeient radionuclide and accelsratar ■mlTr^
Finally, Figure S ahowi the Ideal case for anisotropic Co-tB ad C>-137
atwrcaa. In coB^ilaon to previously ahown doce ratios for theae aoureea, tha
calculated values (CD-«f 1.19; Cb-137 ).4S) [evaala the Importance arf Um
effect of fonvrd (toton acattarliq In do** dlstrllutloni.
DMa ratas and doa* dlstrllutlona for tso typical foods nd ovsi a
ranga of find dmaltlsa have bMn calculated tor 1 Ml S rays mtS 1 HO.
radionuclide sourcw. Iheaa calculatlona rtMM the follnringi
1) electron accelacatora provide [tntai radiation xitn lower mx./Miu
dose [BtlOE than aiChar Co-€t or Ca-13T sources This Is du*~
primarily to the fomrd scatCeilng nature of accelaratoc-prolund
photon radiation, Ihe higher aiscgy of the accelerator -produced {MtOM
is also an inpir tsnt factor .
3) In addition to the fulmsry photon bean, aacondaxy acattarad [tetona
and electrons produced in the food wtt be included to dstaraina anargy
d«asltlon. ttante Carlo-type calculations ate thHefOre, tha ancopcUts
4) Oonverter plata* that wiljaie X-ray ccoduction allow alactrttw to pMMtiate
the plate. These electrons deposit their energy within the outer Lay«tB of
tha food raising considerably the dose ratios. Ilwrsfate, a low-t vlaCtEOn
«baocbtf should be aJded to stop these alecEiona Hhlle still pavaitlng
large loans of cfioton radiation. Comveitec plat* desl^M AxUd be Cuitbac
Invsstlgatad te nxijiiie (hoton yields.
■OS IM HnilliMI
other Ixradlstion geaBetries, food package*, and [tioton ^ectra aca being
calculated Ming thla ■■Chad. Ihe ceaults will bs t«ottad In the aelntlltc
lltacatura.
,y Google
FI6URE 1. ssrem of mmim source/food pkkaee
Fm SMim. CODE CAtCULATlOHS.
0.5 M ofanoiis
OR 0.5 IICl Co-EO M Cs-137
COHVERTES PUTE (
1 ' — '
FOOD PACKAGE
/
(ZxW FT.)
r
CENTER
1
(PARALLEL
COMPARTMENTS;
20x0.1 FT.)
.....Z-.-.
D.25-1H.
CARDBOARD
CONVERTER F
0.5 m ELECTRONS
OR 0.5 nCi Co-60 OR Cs-137
(*) CONVERTER PLATE! PB COHVERTEH (I-MM)
KATER COOLING {2.£-m)
Al {2.5-rti) AND fl.63;ji(l'FE filter
,y Google
IAEA-M>I»/a3p
TABLE 1. DOGE RNTES, J
VS. unuEtoi X MdJvnCN cm thd-feet nKz nxn nomas.
Pood DMwtty 1.75 9/cm' i Pood P«:kag«- 2k4x« (c.
Kadlatlon Soutoa- Paiallal PUtMt (.S HH «l«ctton ta^/tplM*
Radiation PUuo ■.2S'ln. thick *■
BLECnCM BBM aOCS PIOVCIHG X MDIMTCa
I-HaV S-tW 7-HiV ll-4Mr
rlltec/tto-Filter FUt«/te-Plltu Plltw/Ma-PiltM rUtac/tM-PUtat
WCE (•) DOM lUtaa (ktod/a)
.1
3.1
S.8
9.9
33.4
13.6
88
1«.8
17B.»
.2
2.7
4.3
B.4
11.1
12.1
15
16.4
21.4
.}
2.1
3.4
€.•
9.6
11.3
13
14.5
17.4
.4
1.9
2.8
e.2
B.4
9.2
U
12.B
1S.6
.5
1.7
2.5
5.5
7.2
a.4
M
U.1
14.4
.6
1.4
2.2
S.1
6.6
7.8
9
U.1
12. S
.7
1.2
1.9
4.6
6.1
7.5
t
11.9
12.1
.B
1.2
1.7
4.4
5.6
«.a
8
11.5
i2.a
I.S
1.1
1.6
4.3
S.l
6.6
S
U.t
U.3
l.t
1.1
1.5
4.Z
5.3
6.5
7
9.9
11.2
CCSE
maos
2.B
3.9 2.4 6.3
2.1 11.5
1.9
!«.■
FBOICM
Km
U68
17 t
21 \
16 t
12 t
(•) cutanea 1:
a aadi aide oC lackaga f roM ai
MccapUta
„GoogIe
FIGUPI 2. DOSE RATES, DOSE DISTRIEUTIOHS KITH FILTERED
X RftlATim ON THO-FEEI THICK FOOD PACKAGES.
(food density 0.75 G/cn')
20
0 © 10-HeV X RADIATION
\ O 7-«eV X RADIATION
0 A S-fcV X RADIATION
N_ 13 2-nEV X RADIATION
O ^"^ DOSE RATIO" 1.9
^A "^VTS DOSE RATIO- 2.1
~^A . DOSE RATIO- 2,1
15
- 10
5
[3~^_ DOSE RATIO- 2.8
1 t 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1
0 0,1 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.5 O.E 0.7 0.8 0.9 l.O
DISTANCE (FT.)
„GoogIe
FI6HI 3. EFFECT OF FILTEPEB m UtlFILIEREI! X WIlIATiai FMII
A 1C-I<eV electron ACCELEW.TOE 0» 2-fT THICK FOOD.
DOSE RATE m HOSE DISTRIDUTIOB (Food Demsity- 0.75 e/af)
180 _^
0<=]
UKFILTERED X RADIATION
17C -L
=0 i
i '7
" 10
DOSE RATIO= 16.0
20 - - O
DOSE RATIO- 1.9
FILTERED X RADIATION
H — I — \ — I — \ — I — I — I — I — I
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
DISTANCE (ft.)
„GoogIe
006E MIES MS) DOGE DISIRIHITICMG FCR DIFFDOMr KCD DDGITIES
nCM THO-SICB), FMUIEL-PUOE mOtCHUXHie SOUKZS.
Pood DtnaltUs Iq/at^
DOM MCM (aaa/»i
i.67
•.«3
•.«•
•.37
•.35
t.33
I.St
1.43
•.39
B.Z8
B.14
• .21
B.4B
fl.34
•.3B
B.32
B.U
•.15
».3«
•.27
•.22
•.IB
• .14
•.11
B.3B
•.23
6.18
•.16
•.12
•.•St
••17
•.«
•.IS
•.14
§.U
•.•71
■.2S
•.IB
(.13
•.13
•.•B5
•.Ht
1.33
B.ie
•.11
•.13
■.B7B
•.•51
t.32
■.15
«.!•
t.ll
B.B69
• .•44
•.21
•.14
B.«»e
•.11
•.•6B
•.•43
(*) Food package 2x4x4 ft. DtsUnc* titm ••di side of food pacfcaqe tr
pUti.
(1) tMlonuclld* mrce* tun •.S MCI on vkIi plat*.
,y Google
U1A-M-Z71/I3r
DOSE PATES m DOSE DISTP.tBUTIOKS FOR DIFFEREXT
FOOD DENSITIES FROK 2-SIDED / PASALLEl PLATES
RADIONUCLIDE SOURCES.
0.5 6/c«5 (RATIO- 3.2)
0 g/cb' (luTlo- E.l)
' 1
75,G/cri5{flATIO- t.5)
— (RATIO- 5.1)
Cs-137
O.Oll I I I I I I I I I I
0 0.1 0.2 0.! O.il 0.5 O.e 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
DISTANCE (FT.)
„GoogIe
- 10 - lAU-SH-ZTl/aip
TABLE 3. DOSS MIES (UtBd/a) MB DOS USnUBUIIClG nR DIFIEIBII
lND-8IDe>, MtMUEL FLNIB HUOXmil SOUCB.
( FOCD msmr f-TS q/a^ i kcd pkiugs t**** ct i
DISIMCE (•) UDUaiM SOdnCES
(ft.)
Radiofuclld* SourcM (11 Kcoauaeoc (X my) Soutom (2)
Co-M C*-137 J-MW 5-IMV 7-IW U-MN
DoM RatM (Utah's)
1.63
a.3s
B.43
i.24
1.31
a.iB
6.27
•.14
1.23
a.i2
1.19
•.la
a. IS
a. as
1.16
i.iB
a. IS
6.67
a.i4
a.flT
13.6
12.1
11.1
la.s
u.s
la.a
(•) Distance trim each aid* of food package ta the bouio* plate.
(1) Radionuclide Source irtUi 6.5 HCl on each plate.
12) Acceleratoc a.SHW beaa power on eadi plat* (a.3&-in. F« filter).
,y Google
UE*-st4n/nr
Fm>t 5.
DOSE IVTIDS KITH fKISOTIiOPIC mianCllKSOUKES
(Idealization of fmward scAnERinG effect)
'^S^A
^A
Co-EO (dose rati(^ 1.19)
■^^-~A~£
0.30 - -
I
« 0.20
s
D-Q-i
^^TZT-j-i r-t ^^'^^ *"" MtIO- l.«
»■" ' — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — I — I
G 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.1! 0.5 O.e 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
„GoogIe
h m^ {■*) Oilvenlty of CklUonda L
f Uvcnon, Ok. MSM, BBK.
Hm reaaa^BUaa of the Joint fM^UBt/MO b(wt O^ttn la UM, on tiN
ttnleraccna of trridiatod Pood (1), llaits tta* iidlMlan •onroM to ba «Md
In caution ptoooslng of bnd, bo ndlonclldM {Co-H sri C*-13T) tna
Mddiw aoiKces gneiktlng i^ to 5-HaT I i^latisn nd 19 to If-MIV •Ucuon
bHiN. Ihia iiinM»i>1il li«i la gecmally b«lng MMptod tfcroujwut tb* wtU.
Houaiw, ttieT« U no ■dntlClc bMla Coc wdiJlna tlw «• of qp to M-MtV X
eidlatim oonvwMd frM a U-M*T •Uetnn aoMlMatiif . vtMn «t ttw mmt tlaa
tlw direct un of U-NaV alactron !• pK^ttad. Aa ^oc Cactoc Into
eonaldentlon fix catitilUilng ttaa |»aB«* niiiimlil Ima la claai^ tla naad
to dameaae the poaalblllty of Induelng radloactlvl^ In food via Ftotanicl««
Caactlma. Better (2^ In 1M3 raixxtad that than la no ttoocatlcal oc
•VMlMntal evidence auneatlng that Induoed ndlaactlvlty wltb 19 to If-MIV
•lactron bcaa WMigy la larqei thsi ■■■It of the naCnral ladloactlvt^ oontnt
In Cood. BMmoci food Itaelf , Ita paduglnq, «nd to a mxii laaaw axtant Uie
^ Htotlal adjacent to a It-HeV electron acoalatatot facility, cm act ••
M fceaoitly dellmd will thm to in vlolaitlen wltb tl» Intnt of aMaUlAlng
tttt S-HeV X-ray llalt. Vie peicant of Q» electien anacgy that la canvMtoa b>
X cays iven ocaplete atoffilng of the alectroM In • few aatailala la ^Iven Iqr
BiynlolfBSai «id Hutln {3], nd rinwi In tiU* 1.
Electrcn Beoi bvigy Mtetlala Accent of nectron Bcae Poavr
(•) EURiKtAd ty *i» unlvecal^ of CalUomla NKlear Sclicea And.
,y Google
Urn Cood U MVdMd aottly at ■. O, C, ■, nd othn looc^nlc
■ImW, It la M^r to rMlla* UM flood ItatlC «nd tta ftOu
wvacal pKont oonraraloi to X radiation m awn la tiU* 1.
pcoduction tn amwal typical tbodt vri taekaglng aatarlala
tivcov* conaldmUy the aail«^Wnl»Kw dvUi dow ratio* la las^
vhUa alao addng aadilna BDUicM aon afflclant tn -'
■tBrSRSBCBB
a) 'WwH— MM Of bradlatad nod*. Mfoct at Ua Joint IKVUMMM
bfMCt OMlttaa. lM»tleal Mprt a«tl«a CSS, M3, ^— un.
(2] K. L. Badwr. ■Mama* of Induoad BadloacUvlty tn Ircidlatad nods'.
In Iwnt Mnocea In nod Ucadlatlm. P. S. Dlaa wd A. J. CHmb Oi
Blaavlcc Bi— dlcal PrMa, U83.
(3) «. ttmloltMon wd T. C. Nwtln nt. Int. Journal HsOlad fcJIatlen ■
iMtopea, 22, 2»-4a, l»n.
,y Google
9tl
^\ INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCV (3b
We FOOD ANO AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF \A
•^ THE UNITED NATIONS X
INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON FOOD IRRAOIATION PROCESSING
UEft-9t-271/S2p
OMSimwncNS fcd the use cp it-H^r x-mDUTKH
. LMUWS-SCLMI
Utncitocy
h;w, USA
,y Google
uBt-at-ni/np
Th* ncomdHlm of tta Joint FM/UdbWO nv*it Cl^tw* In IN* a
. u_i j^^ Itr«dl.t.fl rood JJ), llmlu th* rsdUiia, »uic« to
!CLiai 1b prnlttnd. Hf I»11-v« thit Uw Bjoi
II aBt^llshlng th* pieaml isnwwKiatlonE Ii
' th* posaibillly ol Ind^inj laillcactivlty In !
ctlons. Hornet. Uwio Is no thwi.Heal luid lueh Iwi
-o sugqesting Unt indij™! ladloactiviiy .Ith i^ to 1»
IE (BE OF tailKT- EUCnCNS Dl KCB
•ly Ion vitui*! [flijulrliq
J^..;^^ ''^^":. ^^*" fl«^tr«, be^ tt«niw*.« this isolatlai (oi
J,^^4 T i?J^ (ot""l direction wll J*, t» q^i.t«) (br«stiahlunj
ladlAtloiJ. El«ct«» b«M lie thus "mntMiiirHtnJ- -itn a lelatlve aaalt
!!;^^",2I " f^J^'f-'^-.f.^' "■•'"" "' ^^ i"t™lty "nd Ih* photon ™„
y^ Jr. iir!^' '*'''^[' "»=•*« * to Un alaetton «we« |1.., U-mm)
M* ttionqly di^vidait » Ih* type of (on being mIIIhI.
MOO AS W D£CBIM'ro~X DM
f**" t"elf. its pKtagtnq, wd
up to 1* Brtr. Figure i ution ui r-'leiivi sp*^ti«!"dUUitJtim
(fftotdne) pscAKXi O, A 1B-H*V el«t.on b,» In KittBr. ■»« P-gnltude of l*»
•h^ «M co.r*spond» to lb. Itactlon of paun Kith sieigleE ttetyrm 5- ad
li-*ev Ih* (iKtior of > 5-tWV ftatom la <iepsnAmc *, Ow type of HteFtal
Betjq lrt«lieted. In -«ltl«,, table 1 ,«»riie, *d <*p.i«'5e tot-1
•ttlcl<nv foi mnv^rtlnq electcon* of %-HeV and m-n-v to > ladtaUon
l^oton.). M Be«, in thiB t^l- „*ry elawt can a>n«e,t electron, to X
»dUtlon. altnojgh th* itfflciency of the pionM 1> hMily '
llnciaue*) with th* elen-iii-s atanlc night.
BWMM ot these slip]* physical facu, th* •dlltct* L ___„«
M food, •■ prewnUy ifcfined and Inteipteted aHH to bt In rloUUon wiUi
the lnt«t of BstibllKhlnj th^ 5-mv X-i^y Itait.
,y Google
ir&dstry to be ttHf to piac*u U
ar- teing sulyia) by these ButN
• lH> In this iwclng (!«, Ijos- Ratios ln"p»ilel-StK ^ -,
> Fuictlon of Badlailon Souims* l*»-ai-lTl/a3p]
lot a 2-(C. thick food pKkaqe (itensity §.li q/a^ j uBlng X mJIation
■ significant incimitf in pcoduct thcougl^t ca|Bb]litie9 ai the election
tM* eneigy incrMBefi. T*ii» U 4)e to the i*ility to Uanafei note e«tgy
at thr iwTtei of ths pHk>9«. "hi* incioasej fees *.19 hbb4/8 at 5-HeV
to 9.86 wiad/s » ie-*teV, foi a US* incrnue. Ods- diau Ibotions within
tt>- I-ft thick packai,'. aie alec significantly tt&ic^ ulth higl»( owroy
cei»es™tati«e of I
oovMisoi wiiK swvMJOJCE axKxs
Hnally, a coopaiiam of dow rat-E atd dow cHloi itmi the (ai typa of
I-(t. thick, set wit-i (Fmd 1 tvp-: food la Itcadlatad -Ith Co-M oc Ca-137
Kurcn. I*«i usinq th-se i«dianvx:li*? aiuccM, hl^ dDM tatas will
laquice ■iltl-Begacuiie ol Co-«B or 0-U7 In • slngla fKility. Furthenur*.
loRc dose tatioi Bill milt In cn^ailann to vlactrm bMM facilltle*.
asstfahlung ptoduction in aeveial ^jilcal feodi «id pMkaglng Mt«ila
r-i«l othei food/souicB 9«BeUi<!t, and the [lOUntlal toe IncioaMd
lloactiviti-fl in food aca curcmtly teinq maluatwl. niia tnfoiMtion
I be teioitad In the •cientjlie literature.
,y Google
i»ae^^zn/Kp
» DiFmcHT aUBns mMiw
r*rce
nt at Elect
5-«*FEl«t
ion 1«-Nev Electron
f.M t
•.H
1.9 t
1.7
1.) •
2.« %
3.T t
4.4 t
S.1 «
2.6
It.S 1
m: 'labltfE and GEaftu of Ftioton Int«rActlon O
k^V ta IBB-M^ d-iLvsd tcia UL Ev«lu>i*d Nuel«*r Hat* Lltwaty-
. Pl«h»ty « " "
„GoogIe
i*a,-sn-m/ejp
a.i HN ol alect]
rons on uch ilde. Electron atxorbci i.2itn chick Pc.
T A B L C 3. EDGE
[TV ra) s-Hev srI iHMu X Rwutnai (•).
Electcoi Ban EMrqy ProducLr^ x RadUtion
DOS? Rat? DoM Mtio Doae Rau n>» Ratio
(Wad/B) OtRad/s)
11.5 1.6S
,y Google
IMA-9l-»l/«p
StMCU-ttATE IHDlCHJCUDe SQIBCE IMIMIIMICH OF IW-FOT Wit
FOCO HKUGtS. EOSe MIES M (BIIBI ME) WBC DISIRIBUnOe (•
i) canpoc«3 of it X wcec, and equal psics ol lipids, caibctiyiicataa, <
„GoogIe
5-Me¥ 10-MtV
,y Google
Richard H. Conrad.
Ph.D. (Bloeli*aia«ry>
950 Idylbarry Road
San ftafaal, CA, 94903
D*c*>lwr 5, 19SS
Attontton: Tia Calu:
To; Chalraan BarK*:
Tha Houaa Agriculti
on Da parts ant Opi
and Foraign Agricu;
Rooa 1301
Longworth Houaa Ofi
Waahlngton, DC 20S:
ay Badall
iral SubcoBBlttaa
at.lona, Raaaareh,
Daar Consraaaaan Badall:
FOOD IRRADIATION IS NOT JUST ANOTHER PROCESS
Any way you look at. irradiatad food - taxtura, taat.*. •alDO
acid siialvala> alactrophoraalai chroaatography - It. tooka
VERV DIFFERENT FROK RAU, COOKED, OR CANNED FOOD.
Irradiation la dafinitaly not. juat anothar proeaaa. Th«
BOat iJuporlant diffarancaa batwaan Irradiatad and
unirradiated food ara many inviaibla and potantially
dangaroua hlochaalcal chan^aa. Haw ehaalcal apaciaa ara
found in the fata, in the protaina and aaino acida* in tha
carbohydrataa. and xoat likaly in a nuabar of tho horaoDa
pracuraora noraally praaant in feeda. Thia ia tho flrat.
tlaa in tha 4,000,000 yaara of hia evolution that Baa haa
regularly ingaatad catalytically aetiva aaounta of thaa*
coapounda, which era coaaonly called URP'a, or "Uniqua
Radtolytic Producta" . Tha "13" Bight wall alao atand for
Unknown or Unldantifiad or Untaatod. Do you went youraclf.
your feaily, and your conatituanta to b* unwitting gulnaa
piga in a long-tara axparlaantf Uhat an anoraoua
liabilttyt
Raeant hiatory haa auppliad ua with a vary long liat. of
"uaaful**, "irrcplacabia", "wonderful", or "nacaaaary**
auppoaadly haraleaa coapounda which have aavaraly
backfired, auch as buttar yallow, DES, thelidoaida.
„GoogIe
>*atoa, birth contTOl pills. DDT,
KtiT HO ONE can harK^.tty ssy that.
Sicala and alao either unuaual and
poasible IHHUNOLOGtCAL EFFECTS IH HUMANS (consider th*
ltj.ple allergic eeneitlvl t iea) . Th* nawly discovered
gnificanca of POTENTIATION OF NATURAL CABCINO&ENS B¥
•t are the lonq-ters effects of Irrsdieted food on
■ansT If the gov^rnnant dai^idaa ta concatJe to tha Hiahai
tha proponanta of food Irradiation, wa aar find out tha
cluda faw Ufa aeientiata and a very large nuKbar of
ire a larga nuabar of vary concarned citizeni
'taating" on tha ganaral
VERV CAREFUL EVALUATION of all raaaareh. which auat
la into consideration the cradantiala of tha raaaarehai
■ring in aind tha unfortunate fact that a aagoTlty at
Lentific papers are biased towards what thay want to
>va rather than alaply uneovarlng what nature has to ti
iknowlcdgaaent thet the burden of proof of dangaroua
effects liaa not on the raaaareh laboratoriea or tha
tar, but that it la the burden of PROOF OF SAFETY that
Laary, and that thia proof of aafaty la tha
„GoogIe
tlin9 o^ any £ood on t^ht
: percentage oi irradtet
Paraittlng tr radiated or part. 1 ally irradiated food* to b«
aold on the aerket or ••rved in restaurant* without full
diacloaur* labeling would be a violation of our right to
freadoa of choice. TO FORCE CONSUMERS TO INVOLUHTARILV
PARTICIPATE IH SUCH AH EXPERIHEHT AS FOOD IRRADIATION WOULD
r BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Sincerely, ^
\ H. Conrad, Ph. I
llan Cranaton. em
„GoogIe
KovBBbor ZZ, 1985
Depcriment Opsratlons, RcBsarch
and Forsign AsrlculturB
House Agriculture Coonltte*
Soon IJOl
LongBorth Houeo Office Building
V.'aohlneton, D.C. 20515
Attn: 71a Qalvln
Dear Coneresenan B«dell:
Pleaee :tnd encloeBd th» draft of b bill I intend to introduce in
the January, 1986 sasslQn of our atata laglslatui-* vhich vould
reculre labelling of irradiated foods coming into Varnont, Thta
bill la an expreasloa of ay (and rougbly l|000 conatltuenta vlio
signed a patiClOD to that effect) strong objections to tba proposals
outlined in H.K.-696, vhicti la before your coBOittee for considaratlon,
Fron the research our atalf attorney and I have done, I feel the
solontlfic coBBunlty is divided oxer the reaslbllity and ealety Ol
irradiation as a presorvativo. I belleTe the following problens
which'bave either been untested or tneonclusively tested; {a) dilu-
tion of nutrients; [3) unkno- n long-term health effects of eating
irradiated foods; (O nunerous pOBsiblltlea of environmentally
hatardoue apills froo treneporatlon of c»e1ub-137 and cobalt-60
rirticularly in the case of proposed noblle Irradiation units;
5) concern about eventual dlapoaltlon of cobBlt-60 and cealutt-lj?
"hen they lose effectiveness ae food Uradlatora, but alill emit
first, I object to the food industry utilizing such a potentially
hassrdoUE process nerely to extend ahelf-llte ntaen our present
preservation cethods are perfectly suitable for the conauner.
Second, I object to H,B.-696 Ui Its entirety, but especially to the
fact that the ACT i:ill change currant lev so that labelling of
Irradlatred foods to inforci the consuaer will no longer be required
by the Federal food, Drug, and Coemetlc Act. As I recall, the Qnitad
States Suprette Court baa enuaclated Che right of coneuaers to
receive relevant product information as a protectible i
encoEpassed by the First Anendnent of the Gnited States C
„GoogIe
Virginia State Srd. of Phannflcy v, Virginia Citiiena Consumer
Council, Inc., 1*25 U.S. TIiS, 761t-769, 96 S. Ct, 19317, 1826-
1329, iiS L,Ed. 2nd 31*6 (1976)
,y Google
(dr raq B6-1&1 • draft 1) Pat* 1
10/21/BS (1.3}01T7b
Introducad by Sanator Coniad of Chlttuid»n County
It*farr*d Co Calttaa oa
Subjact: Afilcultura; food; iTiadlatloo; labalias
StBtaaant of puipoaai This bill piopo*ai to raquiia laballng of all
liradiatad food* which ara asld tn offarad tot Bala In VaTBOot.
Own Vota UgHlallv* Vota
Cob- ol Copf-
tfllhdrawn
Sign-bT Governor
AN ACT TO REQUIRE UBELIN6 OF UL UQUDIATSD FOODS SOLD IN VCSHOHT
ll li hcraby aDactad by tb* Ganaral Aaaaably of tha Stata of Vttmoat:
„GoogIe
Sac. 1. 6 V.S.A. clupcar 12 ii addad to taad:
CHAFTER Z2. IRHAPIATIOH OT TOOPg
i 201. LABELIWC OF IRKADIATED FOODS
Itt Daf InltloM ■ Ai mad la thli chaptar. tha tolleuiiig
daftojtlona ahall «pplyi
(11 "Food" —am frulta. vaaatablai. aaaf. ponltrT, a«M.
dairy PTodneti and ethar natoral and proeaaaad produeta otfarad far
aala for hu—n or ml—l eoniuaptlon.
(2) "Irradlatad food" aaana food traatad with lenlilnK
radiation froa radloactlga aonrcaa. g-raya. or alaetton ba— «Bd
Ineladaa food containing a coaponant wlilcli h«» baan Irradiatad.
(bl Ratal! aalaa. All Irradlatad food aold la Varacpt At rota^
»b«ll baar. In addltloc to ethar Infogwtlen raoalrad br 1a». th^
(c) Vholaaala aalaa.
All
rradiatad food lo
Id in Vanmt at
wholaaala ahall baar. in addition to
othar lnfoc»tlon r.<mir.d b*
amart
(11
"traatad with
atlnn - do
"traatad -Ith
radiation - do ne
3,Googlc
1 (dl M
thod 6f Lbelin,. Th. no
lice iHuliuenl
nf
2 ihall be
3 (1)
5 m-
"''ri.°.^
ch dlsDlav of en
< Item- Th. .la 4h.n t»
-t l.«t
8" bv 11" «id th
backiroun
S one inch
»h.ll .t.
te, "Thie food i
on t
9 n«,J, h
1 t3)
2 «t.bUs
™,..t. oUcU, .,
3 Che nue
•d food i
ers
othe
S urk «
h nr
6 food i.
■11 include the
_ hes been treat
orw
S ladlacton. "
9 (.) P.n«lrT, E.ch d>
the BIQV
0 vloUT,a
te offense. Ani
U »ore th«
"0.000. 00 or
miTlioned
in si
nontbB nor
„GoogIe
t for
ng bcf
to A
tlesl
t«t«
bill
HR
696 p
0* Ag
init
■ llidl
tindl
1 tl
ii h*
O.E.
■ btii
<qil»c
f pop
Dub
facll
in, C
rch p
■lifer
n C.ll
July
uch •
roject
•cm
CACl
e l*i
• Af
'gT P
odltle
roject
NFPA
■ dlDB
■ ■.
Itjr.
Il'lp.
."Sid
1* ol
""mny"
HOuld
fore*
the f
rg« a
We b*
iroa
to dec
tc tha DepartBSDt Operatloaa
Hbceaalll** af tha Heaae A|
(pared bj L^n Diaalll
■ctlie Dublin oa Novaabar
irlcaltar*
•half at
raquaBE roa
r radiation
>ap call ad
:«atloa ta
;or. 1
af both
>lthc foot
Ultoa
>f tha
bill
lo ba
Slnccrelf.
DubllB Calif. 9456B
Hi 82BSZ&3
Noiaabar U. 1985
,y Google
Cwmltt.
:-:?r""":;:r'""
,.,.X
;■•;.::■ ;;':.-.'.'r2.::;.r=,r,':.;~;.;-s "
of Technical. Public Hoalch. iDil Ecsnoalc CmildicaElDna . It !• th>
product
p.rfor.j
H="\r::d-i-::'":ii^r:i:tLvr;;:?;/r-'
I°I ""
"iX^nt.T ''^ ^"'"™' '" "^ "'■" '"""'"™ <P' —
.^:r...
„Googlc
An Input to an ongoing OTA ■
reflect cha analytical flndlnga of OTA, the Advlaory Panel.
Technology AaaeiMent Board.*
„GoogIe
tIBLE CF CONTCRTS
introduction
Taehnlcal Conildsratlo
ConSMer Acccptanoe. P
Chlomn. Pork *nd Mcf
IrrnJiBtUn Cost Eatla
Hachine 3oiiro«» of P*d
AltarnatKcB U Irradl
tIeBulatorjr Envlroi«ent
Thaflntirnatlonil Sttu
MiJbr F*d*rsl Mnirsh
Uook for Food Irridlatlan and Polloy laiuaa
„GoogIe
EiEcurrvE ajMNAw
a ctBp*tltlTCn«ai
Stgpiilat dtgulatnry ippt
before coinWerlng hi sifetj of Dedlun and hi
dose uses HDuld Include tproul Inhibition, del
or Insects to sstiary quArentlne requlrcmentt, ■
in Hats. Eitendtng scprovsl to the 1,000-)cr*it
tM Cod«> UlHntarlu Ccnnlaslon xould peralt
to 5,000 KrHta (2d io $0 KGy) needed '
been spiroiitd by FDA or any other Bov<
ts and nlcrooroanlB^
inaect or ■toroblal
(Vulta mna ve«e tables.
ts without ralalill
vlni the food
1th alternatire praaarvaClvaa
a, snd thp villlncnaaa oT
1 feBsiblllty, eonataer
'Altillltj, and rasulatory
rt IBO hlghllghta Intarnatlonal
radiation is psgulatorjr i
surrant thiiriilBi la to /
p to 100 krad* {l kOy) /
Irradiation to M
The higher das
aterll* produc
legulatory Wroi
the rood, the potantla
rafrlteratton tn aoa*
tlon, the nead far aupptea
One thouaand rada equal 1 krad. The International Syattm of Unite replaoea
y (Gy). On* KGy equals 100 krada.
tary HBrga<'*t Hacklcr alined a regulation
n of fruits and ngetablaa at doaaa up to lOO krada
doea not baeoM a final rule intil it la publlahad
rollOHlnc reyleu by the Offlee of Hsnaiaaent and
the red i>lth
tb* Cray (C
12. 1985.
parBlttli« 1
{1 kCy). Till
„GoogIe
aprour. Inhlbltars Applied
„GoogIe
tb* flald IF* pcntfttad to b* UMd In th* Dnlttd Stataa, It la lallMlj
that Irradlitlon Mill b* UMd for potMoaa bmauaa of xim OMtlf artr*
handllBi (tap naadad to brlni ttitm out of atoraaa far tlw radlattoa
Highly pari* Ala
Btrenithtnad If
iDothar oonildarattoB 1
tbar* la ■ oon so 11 dating point aarly in tha Mrkdln
dltlonal transportation to tht Irradiator Is not Ine
■oliaaa, a daalrabl* charaotarlitlo la staady. year
qwllty not lobarant to Boat trulta and tosatablaa.
P»Mnd for Banaftta
iFradlatloB'a uaa m fooda partially dapanda on tba futura of eurroBt
altaniatlva traatMnta. la aoFa enealcala sHar* Cha fata af athylana dl-
broMda (eDe), irradlatloa'a futura m a dlnlnfastitlon traatMTit brlfhtana.
For uaaa Hhara rtlnftatatlon la not laportant, aiuA aa la aatlafylas a
quarantine rKjuli'MDent prior to aiport. Irradiation aay ba approprlata.
Inotbar potanclal banaflt of Irradiation la to laaaao Uia Ineldano* of
a foodborn* dlaaaiaa aaioeiatad Kith pork, obiciian, and baaf. lobarta
■ tHnt and lost produaCttity for
toiopUsBOsls salBOflrLloala, OBpylo-
c tha seat of ■
lane dosa sui
: ratio of 2 or aora.
hlBher
liptlght oana or plaitte pouciiaa
required
0 httfi
e of Um
* Kllllnfnaaa to purobiac irradlatad fooda la an
mm, crltarlon. ConauHra lant to ba oonfldant that
ra adaquataly addraaalnf aafaty and uholaaoBanaaa
Irradlatad food'* prUa nat be ao^atltlia with Ita
,y Google
to orrMt 11
labeling roi
or th« bwitnta iirr«r«d tr trritftatlea anfflaiMt
■■ Inttgrtl t« eoiuuMr ■eo^ptanoc 1* ratill
naiBtra riio nat to ba InfOnMd and b* abl* to
mar groH aloitly for a >art*t]r of raaaona and tiill
<na uhara aarkat oondltlona, aueh t* toduatry atriHtir<
a banaflta, and nlua of the produat, ara aonduolH to th«
a eoat ooBpatitltanaaa iilth altornatlTa traataanta
'aotor afCaoMni ooiMrclal d«»lacaant. Iha laat
' tha iaportant pollsy quaatlona aoooapanylni thla
y In tha araaa of firthar aaraty teatlni, oonawar aduoatlon,
raty, laotopa aira liability, Intarnatlonal trada, and othar laaiaa.
,y Google
kcaan.u
dins nliMbla Inftr-
Rabtn N)rrt>
Offls* of Ifrleulttr*
■stDOT tor IntvTBiiloBa
MiMnftn" D.C.
■obM-t JMTCti
Ushard Farry
larloultural ttaamrttt Strrla*. I
Btltairlll*, MrylMd
HtMcll Cohan
Soett Holabarg
Dannla Juranaek
Ntar Sdunti
Rebart Ttuia
lannath Villi
Cantara tnr Dlaaaaa Control
UlaiM, Gaortli
Htlllaa laMnl
llKlalpni*, Pannarl*aali
HuUncton. D.C.
lonild Engal
Man Post
Food Satttj a
MaMnttan, t
Dian Todd
Htalth and Utlfara Canada
Ontario, Cvada
Oirlatr 3elaldt
High Voltaca Oiilniarlng Corp.
Bur llDf tort* MiuBhuHtti
Uli Rhodaa
Eaoncsle laMareh Sari'
Mvaraida, California
Sm Kablo
Enarir Solcnoaa, Ino.
itoi Fiihar
Hiahlnston. D.C.
GHrfi Glddlnia
Whlppany, Nan Jariir
Lmrane* Llvaraora National
Laboratory
Uvamra, Caliromla
,y Google
Hlllta HcLaufhlln
Center for Radlitlon Reaearoh
E. K. XnpelBMlMF
RlJUmtltiMt Vmp VollkienndbaM •
Mllt«ihnl*n*
BlltbooB, The MMwrlanl*
El Hot DaO-irf
Nfutron tToducts. Ins.
DlokerHn. Heryluxl
Orfioe of Tcohnolocy AiBeanen
Jick lr«^n(t(in
, Pilo Uto IMtBil Foundit
Sitttle-IUni Co. Dipt, of Publle
Seettlc, UatMngiDn
Ob fVenkel
•erslty of Kaniu Htdiosl CVnttr
Cindy ifettB
Unlveriitr of H»hlil(toli
Tn« aithora inuld
llaol* Mld|*tti. OiOBt* WrKht, Florwie*
: Rtuapeh S*p«le*. U3DA for •■■latnm*
-•tlon. and T9dd Horrlssn for providing
,y Google
1. INTRODUCTION
Food lm<llaClon li
public
*« f irradiation ean be -ustd to ellalnat* hi(h apolligc os»s :)n tnoaa
ounCrlea. Food prosaaurs and r*t*ll«r> ar* (Ivairi looklnf for leia costly
praaarvatlon aatluds and eiplorlng nau taehnlquaa to acMan daalribla qualltias
In fraili and proocaaad food*.
Food Irradiation
have bean conduct
to Individuals wtio aufgaatad that loni
serve rood Josephaon, 1963. p. 1£)).
tiusetts Institute of Taehnolon dawna
/\ radlatloo's erraot* an food and safe
k rule fTBpoiad by tht Food a
would open the regulatory doo
Tagetililes and to kill Inaect
leial Tor onlj a few fooM.
Ion (FM> in February 19S«
fooda 09 FK STI«-5T22>.
penlnc of ffaaX frulU and
■ of food irradiation dependa 0
oansunars Co buy Irradiated food. Thll report I
by focusing on four feasibility criteria! teohi
aeeaptanec and desand for benefits, econoBle feaalbi:
approval. To provide a fuller content, the repoi
aetlvltlea In food Irradiation and major Federal
aian*t*nr estlaatea of b
and tapewora In I
dlator. The cancludlng
Ity, and regula
aroh and danlopaant
s of public healtl
„GoogIe
«SiM>*W«»BBV
,y Google
hrethold «oat lavgli tbov* Mtilcii ofr^rianon ira prodiHed.
trtataent
their cur
on bcnefl
FetalbllltT CrlterU
e sn laporttnl role In the civBerclaliiKlon of
ough VIII dlMusa theat
oods are
ood candidate
a for radiation prooeaalni. Just a
for (reeling
r oannlng. Crrtaln foods aucb a>
the Irradiation prooesa and develo
n rruU,
ype of fruit
latlon can cause softening and unde
The jact effeola of Irradiation
or vegetabl*. but also vlth the ear
•rtlllMr
tor.. Und
urlt» at harvest, post-her.eat han
es can be ■Inlslud by Uniting the
•ISO tru
ultry, and fleh products. In wny
ton requl
e* speciric p
re or poat handling proeeduras.
first »t
p tn deceraln
ln« the feasibility of Irradiation
product 'a to
lerance and coBpatlhlllty with tha
eetiwnt.
Chapter II dl
acussea som of Iheae teehnleal eon
t various technical requl r*Mn
retailers, and eonauaars auat
fe. publlo health protaotlon.
laportan
■radlatio
ihether I
suner accaptanc* U always uncertain.
d with how coBSuaars will ra»at to
e lawlIUna to rlak the good will
,y Google
cuises innr ot the
other countrlei.
approved by FDH ini). In the csk o
Food Safety end Inapectlon Service
«non., 1985). The re|Uli
n the Federel Beglater followli
(10 to 30 kOy
rewrta Tor per.
ireaant. 1/
NegulBtory CoiMlaaton.
esu lit Ions are
aigned a rogulatlon
aplcea at doaaa up to 3,000 krads (30 kCy)
not becom rinat rule until It la publlahed
•IM by th* orrioe of Hanaiaiient and Budiat.
,y Google
lopaant, adiaoc*!
'vil hlBhllshti
for food Irradl-
I. RFF
RE IKES
non.
198
) HHS N«l.
«. u.s
D«p.rtwn
of M.»Uh and
Huh
n S«r.
ee> Pr««»
PSS-IB, D«
■0*K!tl
n. ProWM
na. ind
Hantfli
>« or
Food.
(19W1
F^?
■ nd
Drug Main
11, 198U)
M>. 57
«-5TZZ.
call
«r «9
(«a. Jl.
"j^r
■ l'
Ednrd S.
r Food Si
(198 J)
An Hlitori
. 5. No. *
■ 1 ttvl
pp. 16
-190.
»d I
ndlit
ioB."
TfT
XATTiPsTc;-,
on F
od
rr«lHtioti
Prooea
ln«, Nishl
gton, D
C. Ml
oh «-8.
,y Google
II. TECKNTCU. CONSIOEBKTIIMS I
.rR«l. p«-tiole3—
rids <D.05 to KGy) inse
shmlcal and plijslolagle
rsnge of l.itm to 5,700 krada (Zl to 57 kCyl In c.
for Hafiy jSafs free (Tm ttie tlir«»t or bolullan.
rM niuala 100 crga of eneriy absorbei] p«r graa of absorber. Ola
1 rada equal 1 Vrad. The International Sirataa of Units replaoea t
h ttie Gray (Gy). One kCy equala 100 krads.
„GoogIe
tb* riald ar* ptralttad to b* ■>•« la th* Onltad Stato*, it la iBllkalf
that Irradiation Kill bo uaad for potatooa boaauaa of Um aaatly aitra
baadllBf atop noodod to brlDf this out of atoraio for tbo rodlatloa
loot bar oooaldara'
a dclar bctHcn h
D»»»J for Baoaflto
Irrwilatlon'a uw on food* partially donnd
on tb. rutor. of uji i out
altoraatm
traatMflta. t* aoro dioideala abaro
th* rata of atbnaao dl-
bna
o4a (EBS), irradlatloo'.
For
UHB HhO
re rolofHtatlon
.a not laportant. a
iHh aa la
atlarrlai a
OWf
.ntln. -
nulrwnt prior
on aaT ba
toothor
potential b«i.fl
t or irradiation la
to laaaan
■tod irtth pork, el;
<*an. and
beef hoberts
(■t
nted in
Mt prod
^tlvlti for
Mnoai to>oplia»
IB, salBO
elloslB, caaipirlo-
baotarloal*
■— totals ToughlT o
dcllars .(inually
Trio
na<e relatl>elr lo> eatlaate*
oo«p«-o<l U.
(alM«ll«l> and
caaojFlobaeterioala
eatlB.l alseaaea)
i:o>«.nlt
rdatlon
Ir r.tu»a) Ml*
n potential benefit
fro« Irr
aiw
poll •'■e
tlHtid treatiwnt e
I at! OB appears
to h
■T. . r.
>or.ble Iwnefit t
1 coat ratio of i o
her palhofen
oont
rol optl
ona honever Mr
hav* hlihar ii*i bt
eflta tB«
irradiattoo.
ll.<llitl
on-steriJlt«l Mati In atrtlcht oan*
or plaatl
pouehaaar.
like
IX to »■
at in the Wi ted St
K ot established
re-enoea for trad
Itlonal (Veih and ^ociaiM naats and htgn
oats. TrrKllaClo
to be High
auppl«wntar]r tre
11 ty and pro-
iv. pack
■8l<i« requl'ed.
be denandcd
for
3pecl.ll
y uaea— aubaarlne
., space shuttle:..
aaplni tr
> laportant sonildaratlona .
U.S. oonaiaara'
pub Us raiulators are
eoBooma, klaa, an 1<
!tati for hlifalx perishable
,ln| ohaln. So that ad-
ir round prodootlOB— «
o puretaaaa irradiated fooda la an
Conauaiari uant to b* oonfldaat that
ildreailne aafaty and obolaaaBanaoa
d'a prioa auat b« eoapatltl** with Iti
,y Google
r*fuH Irrtdlatad food.
InfsraM ind b* abla t
r Mfety, l*ot(^ ■villablllty ,
■•r iron iloHlT for • Ttrlatjr of r«**oiw tnS will
mm Htwra Mrktt ooadltloei, sudi •■ Industry itrunti
ti, and nlM of th* produot, ar* oonduolo t« th*
'■ ao*t oiBfwtlttnno* with altn-iutln traatHntB
factor afftcMni ccuHsrclal d«*al(i(iiHnC. Iti* last
r th* iBportant pollor qiHitloai aooavanrlDS thli
r rirthar aafitir taatlnf, ooaliaar aduoat
and othar iMuaa.
„GoogIe
Robtrt Harm
Dfriaa of iBTloultir*
tt*aej for Intn-natlonal Omraltv
thahlmton B.C.
■M Oiu
Frank Fraaar
■rina Mlaon
ktoale Eocriii of Ci
OttauB, Canada
Food Safaty and L
Sarvloa, USN
1Miriln|ton, D.C.
Robert Tama
Kannatn Halla
Atlanta, Oaorgla
Oirlaty SolBldt
Hashlniton.
lobart BaldHln
Ubwt G«BbT
Cant O'SulUian
Intu-natlonal lutronlaa, mo.
Palo Uta, Calirornla
Thoaia Hniawa
Stm labia
Jaaan Htlaun
&iar(j> Salaiwaa.
Dtntar, Color ado
Gcorie Daltt
Gtori* GtddlBia
laoMdli, Ine.
laboratory
tntal ProtMClon AcancT
„GoogIe
HlllliB HoLai^hlin
neh«*l Slido
Cantar far Rcdlatlon Miairsti
Hatlonal Buraau of Standard!
t «»r *ollli«aiDndhtU •
□fflet or Taehnoloci' ^aa
U.S. Congreii
Haahlngton, D.C.
t Kanau Mdloal Cantar
adlatlon Dynaalea, Ins.
Radiation steFllli
Dai Id ttoiMl
Tha UilTariltr of utratfit
Utraoht, na iatbarlandi
•conoBlc cipartlM
k thalr collaaiuai: Clark BurMa,
oonomlc iMaareh Sarvle*. USDJL
la Mdgatta, Oionta Urlsht, Floranca
aarsn Sarvloa, USDA for aMlatanoa
n. and Todd HorrlsoB for prwtdlnc
„GoogIe
. mmoDUCTioi
Ivlng rinnitd ittcntlwi by lotntlatB, poilar
3, public )i»lth offlclalB, ■nd soMUNrs.
1 bnivflta and llattatleng his b««i ptquM bf
ty or chraical funigants and pre3ervatl»«i and
dercc of foodborne tiatttna. Tndlvlduali
d to ellnlratc >ilgh ipollat* loi*** In Chow
nd retailers are alnyi Isottlna far l*sa ooatlr
orlng nan taohnlquaa to aohlava daalrabla qualltlas
3, sclentlats at the Hassaohuaetts gtltute of Taehnalacy dwonatraCad
ce that tlire aiparliwnta on radiatlon'a effects on food Hid aafatjr taata
e been conducted around the icarld. Irradiation Is being used eoBMrolally
lan flahary (iraduet attend the aheir life of n-ulta and vegatablaa,
TodST. in the United Statta,
aettntlea in food Irradiation and major Federal rasearsti and deHlopwnt
actliltlas.
Tbe original analyses in tnia report are eatlaatloni of public health
benefits and IrradlHtlon treatiwnt coats. In ohaptar IV, aoDerts develops
■onetary estlnates of benef ta in tema of nedlcal costs, uagaa loat and
value of Uvea potentially aaved fron using irradiation to reduce Salaonella
■nd Caapylobacter contaail nation in fresh chicken. Trlehlnella and Toioplaaaa
Horrlaon presents eatlaatea of Irradiation trealnent coats for flv rood
applications. Iha focua of this research la the j-elationshlp betxeen treala
luportant public policy issues raised by this taehnoloiy.
„GoogIe
a af Irr»Jtitton
• axpoacd to lontitnc
Binsu rayi, )
eMlu»-l3T.
kr.tfs ( to 10 kOy) r«li
HlBh absorbed dosi-a of rHdlatitin rron 2,300 to b,
kCy} sCcrilliF a food and khen canblncd wl
HCBtlng kills foodborne viruses and Inm^tlv.
the rid ulth the Gray (Gy). Cne kCy equala 1
■ (eod rtdloMtlt
„GoogIe
raduet Chts* eh*ngcs.
Feaalbmty CrlttrH
Mill have (n iBporOnt role In the coaxrclilliMlon of
Ively strong off-
.or chonge In (Tglts
i rtrtllltf
ietlon reqi
the first »tep In iiet*n
Mlblllty or Irradlttlon t
d eoqutlbllltir HlUi the
■e or these teehnloal eon-
r life. publl« httlth p
ti pfoc^ssari and etsll<
ea. Chapters II an
isIlMe benefits. C
lotlon benefits froei
e nry concerned with how
(aeturers uy b* uniillling
risk the good Hill
,y Google
1M6
Itk* X-ray
Before lrr»dl»tlon can 6
approvM by FDt, and, In the c
Fooit Safety and Inapection Se
to 100 krada {1 kCy) and would ralH
would alio eatabliah additional raqu!
and change the eilatlng labeling reqi
Chapter HII dlscusaei the rsgulatory environiwnt for food Irradiation,
Including FDA's proposed rule. The roles of Che Nuclear Regulatory Coanlaalon,
the Departnent of TranaporCatlon, and the OccupatlonHl Safety and Health
Adnlnlatratlon are alao eiplalned. In chapter IX, U.S. regulations are
12. I9es, KHS Secretary Margaret Hackler algn*
H by the Office of H
,y Google
public h*(lth prot
Chapter VII hlghlltfits
the Prodgetlon, Froo»Bilng, and HMdllng «r Fiwd." C198
tdnlnlstntlon Propoa«<J tlule, Ttitrtl Itglsttr 119 (no.
981), pp. 5Tia-5T22.
li S. (1983) "An Historlcsl Rfrtwi of Food IrrMl«iOB."
i Sifrty. Vol, 5, Ko, «, pp. 161-190,
(19B5) Comwots it th» F*0/I»E* Intern»tlgn«l Sy^malui
•tlon Procetsing. Mashlngton. D.C., Mirch 4-8.
„GoogIe
II. TECHNICM. COHSIWUTIONS IM IRRADIATINC FOODS
1 yeira, nientlsta hiva kroM that loniilns e
, or .iKtrWally- ^•
e product significantly, thereby leaving lh» ro«l alosar to
fecti ^r rsdlatlon depend on tha oiouiiC aD»rtied. U1U*11|I
ropleal frult= and inhibit iproutlng in root
,000 krus t;> 0 kGy) raduce tha niaber of spollaee am
rganisms that <^an contwiinate foods. Varj high doaca of i
ange of 1 300 to ?,T0O Icrflds (23 to 57 kOy) In oooDlnatl.
terlltie a food ao t can be storad In aeaLed containers ,
ill foodhorne viruses and to tnaetlvata aniyM* Uiich xoiild ciuM tht food
1 deccaipoae an-lng Mornge.
One major problen nth trr*dt*tin« agrloultiral coinoaities Is that
iwiiltry, unde
he slgnlflcwitly r.
o h« BslntalnKl to
1,000 krad (10 kCy) 1
„GoogIe
ProblHS ■!» iriH Hhsn irradiation i> »»<! out of the hl|hly o
condition* of th* laboratorir (nd Into field oondltlon*. Ridlitlon tan
diMBe, not Innroiie, tnc quality of llvlnt sella. If the cwa^li) la
Irradlatad U 1«*» than prlM eondition, rMlation n
or oauM other undesirable oRange*. Evan for tha sane
ciaot affects of Irradiation depend «n variety riinfal
received, Htvlty at herveit, post harvest handling, i
tha nlcriAlal load is too larj*.
jrtlj t
lugmir
d product still require
of 1
Irradiation kills Insect and alcreblal p**t> only liiila thi
■poeed to the radiation. There are no 'residues* to Mrd Mai
estation and raeontBilnatlon. Unlei* pretaetlva BOHwaa are
9 adequate paokaglne. Irradiated food can be relnfaated.
The folloolna leetlEini dlacusi
iwd dasea of 5 to 15 k
. Hwllatlon'a ablllt
If cell division and wl
maiian to control sproutlnc of
Ic. Irradiation Innihlts aproutint
a (O.O; to O.i; kSyl with little
a irevent aproutlBf li aiaoelatad
avoid Intarferlng with the healing pro^
* tlM delay betwan harvaat and
BroMiln
g of ir
•dlsted potatc
es durlm
laclas and
gronln« CO
nd
t K
i-ethod
prevent c
pre
pealing
K>*Mng *
d eooklnc
thes
Tl
nal step
racagnlE
Ir
adla
ted onl
na
display a
arkenlng
f
prcti
las for
tattnc val
e (Katsuyau
k*nl
ng aay
be acoepta
yd
J=t
(50C
{3T..O
IIOF) haa
IB9)
Spr«l-lnhlb
ana
. P. 183).
„GoogIe
In ttw United Stat*i, chatoal* auoh ■■ iialclc hrdmlda Md ohlorol»pr«pfl
carbMat* irs us*d to Inhibit a^routlng of potitoes ind onlonm (Kadar at. al. ,
198», p. ?),
Dialnf at Stwad Craln
;^f^
iS'ii tl«
ad'
mit^n'^nd
Burdi
of 100 to
. 1983, p.
!00
rT.
irlJliad°
ng *nd
grain.
ts faad a
radined
d,
P. zaj).
c*
ennlnlne
h<
■pproprlata
da*a
r radlatio
to
apply
o tha ir
that ■»
(althar
aterlll
* fvrtnar
plleatad
by ttie f
ty of nn.
ba affaetad by a
aotora iiK
tgr of
evelopw
(agg, 1
h., food ho
at radl
"cia«"
^d
Tacnnalogr
. 1903
p. 218).
liid
*
9 that
ar-e Inf
atea with
■B
y dlfferant
Inaed
a. a 50 kr
d (
0.5 KCy
Ooae xl
laop, Tjil, p. 3),
posilbla UM a
(Ibid).
meat f laU.
,y Google
M»lnf«»t Fr«»h frut
rrttli fruits ind vcgEtablE9 Invelns ipplylnc radiation ts a lliilii( praduat.
Th* amint ot radlatloti needed CD klU an adiilt inacct nay. In Mny Inatanoaa,
■ avaraly <lanage the fruit or vegetable tioit. II, however, tha objaotlva 11
ehaniad to concrolllni nseoc pests br atopplnc racroduetlon. a doi* of 5 to
75 lo-ads (o.o; to <i.1^ kCy] vnuld be siifflelant. It thia Uval, aoM daHlop-
■•ntal stage at Insects nay sirv ve and daaaia th* prodiMt mk) avan avolifo
■otha, tnalr offspring Mil b« starll* [Kadar at. al., 19a«. p. Z>.
In addition to avoiding loaa ft-« tnsaet fasdlng, dtslnfastatlon la alas
an Inportant step n Beating quarritlna rastrietlons dasignwl to avoU Ui*
•eeldantal Introduction or scraadlng of plant pasts friiB the aiportlpg to
Burdttt statoa that 'n-uit nies of tha f«lly Taphrittdsa ara aMng
(Burditt. 19fl2. p. ^1). Irradiating Praah produce at an absorbed dole of 25
krada (0.25 kCf) has bean si«gest«j as an effective quarantine treaciaent
against fruit fliea (Kader at. al.. 196*, P. Z). ma J^-Mrad dose uouU
eaerie trim Irradiated pupee oould be aterlle (Tilton and Surdltt, S83
P. 223). This issurine* or sterility rather than coiiplete kill vould require
a ohsng* tn aurrant U.3. quarantine regulations utileh require that a traataast
raault ip at laaat 99.99681 aortal ty or lass than survivor out of }1,2S0
(Burditt, 19B2, P. 51). Coi points out another oonslderstlon.
h as dlfTerentlatton between th* staril* and noraal fllas Is
■possible* (Coi, 19T1, p. 2«).
inrt to Congress, USD* suggested thst th* Inability of radlatlMt-
Is to fly would b* an aooaptabl* srlt*rlan to distinguish batwap
untreated Insects (Secratsry of kgricultire, 1985, P. ID. niB
says thst raaaaroh Is sufficient to presoriba a papafs Irradiation
reetaient of a alniaw of 15 krada (0.15 kCy) absorbed by th*
Bight be Lrrad ated In oritas or pallata. A recent CAST publication pointa
out the pitfalls of MDrklni mth pallet and bulk bin loads. "Estlaates indl
hat a doae of about D.5 kGy (50 krad) la needed on the outside of such unit
to achieve h doM sf 0.3 kGy (30 kradl In the center. Since a dose error of
2Dt auat be coiisld*r*d, sob* outalda fruits aay be aiposed to 0 6 kCy (60
krad)* (Kadar at. al., I9e«, P. 3>. Nor* r*saaron la needed to design \h»
proper protocols. Bettar BovaBent- oonriguratlon or uorklng tdth aaallar
„GoogIe
»nother propaatd g« of lonliing rsdlation is to eitend
or frcili fruits and vegttaQlcs. Shslf lif* ean tw entemlcd i
drlay of ripening, ddiy of aenasatnce (aging) aM eantrol o
(Hiilc aiKt SniUBr. 1i)6S. p. J9). Irradl.ted fruit oflon McoHa soft end
bunanas and tPMtoes rewarcherj found thai Irradiation algnlficartly InsruH
the sensitivity of the rt-ult to low tmperaturis (Hiile. at *1., 1971, p. 99).
5r*«ii»BSW, Bt ■!.. 19T1. p. 75). lrr«)J«tlnn tass also been found to
Inhibit rlpenii« of papayas and nangoes. tn conpgriaon. LOQ to JDO-krad (1
to i kGy) doacs delay i
t and Hoy. 1983, p. 150).
out that •Alia ITS Krads 11.75 ki
Inhibition of poatharteal fungi
da (?.25 MGy) is near the luilaun
(tlianlne and Hoy. 19S3.
„GoogIe
p. 150). QiMitlons r*B*tn about u
In their ravlM of 21 fruit* (Including fru
n fruits; but ror the sane type c
t. uturlty at harvest. Initial <i
:kt effects of r
C higher
doses of 600 Kreds 16 KGy]
control of paparai whan irradiation was
UBS caiblnad >ach a hot water dip treati
to 75 krada (0.7! KSy) (lUinlne and Hoy
the salabl* life of papayas treated iiltl
tuB three days loncar
other frulta eouLd banaflt fron i
1983. P- 1*21' ika an added bomi
;hls hot dlp/lrradlatlon traataa
p/fkBlgated papayaa. Perhaps
„GoogIe
al countries tre hlgMy e
chmlea] funlgant most camnarly used ethylene slide, 1
■posed to tM gaa. Th* Occupational SaTetr and Haalth
tabllshad a usrkcr eipoaur* Unit of 1 part atRylMie
chmlatry la leas affeclirf b, irradiation tti
lt!i. Meqiate i:ontr^l of coritmtnanta c>Ti
krids {10 to 20 kGj) (Urbaio t97B, p. 831,
differences were found, eieept In one sample of Spanish paprika (ibid, p, 3661.
leuaoironaa. Is generally quite sensitive to irradiation, although sona
idlation resistant strains ha.e been found (Gre^i et .1., 1983. p. 18B1, A
poaa-e of »er» freah flah to lOO to !50 Wads 11 to Z.5 "Gy) wuJd double
e 6 ta 12 day refriserated shelr life of most fish (table II-J), However,
doaea above 100 M-ada there Is a potential for Clofltrldlii botullnia
,y Google
inlMl food
ThTMhoU doi*
LsbiUr
Sbrlv
RMblt
Op«iua
HlppopOtlB
Urtwln, I^TB. P. leo.
TOT-fl). m rruh ri(h, apolHii
HOMirtr, In riih IrrodKtM »t :
*petl«(c Flora, pradoalnantly p.
«t Ills thin jOQ Tie'F
■oin fr.qutTitly be hcl
bt ■ health htaril (tbltf, p. IDB).
t ^(fiC (50»r).' tM» eou
krad* (1 kGy) or b
a pcralat on ««« iMfoad
t botullM (aiuid,
out that theM multi
ovulation prior to li
und BO toiln prsdimed on chloken Irradiated ■
MfiC lilfi?) (I9B2, p. 869). Uao, indir m*
,y Google
Table U-Z. Optiul
«■ 33oF 0,6gC lifr)
Shrlap
Saokwl el
s of 50OC or IZJOP enough of t
or 200 sna 300 waat U la 3 kGyl , respectively INlemand, i
79'). « recent study of haaiburgef trm ecBiterolal outlets
orgenlsns JEnterobacterlfloeae y ) Nhen trested Wlti ?50 kri
3/ tt 500 krad (5 HCy),
Include E. coll. StilgelU.
,y Google
■ tMir itNor T
t Unltad Statw li»
TIfi to lE^C or 1^S9 to 1T«°F) to Inactlole enime that wulO ipall lh( Tooi
■ nd proptT piskiglng (r* alsa needed UoacphBon 19i3 P 332) To BlnlalM
to the neoeaiary nigh doaaa, tha fooda ara vacuia asdad and ln>adlat«d at
.»(fi to -ao"C (JIOO to -«OF) (Ibid).
Food* er anlaal origin are related to two tMri
polsonii« outbreriis tb« United Stat** (table II-J)
generally takes the Tort, of flu-like syBptong am
ne pathoiena by Bonttorlns for
d refrlcaratlon ta^MTMiiraa ;
■a hafor* tiny (poll; apd ualng
I. C««HHebaetar.
which ciuar rood polwnlng).;/ Ba«t*rta vary In thalr i«n*Ul«tty to trradlattaa
both by apecles (table II-*) and by tha *t*c* of thatr lira oyel* (tt-aoi,
at.Bl, I9B3, pp. 169-170). Qanerally, (rowina oallB *r* 10 tlaaa aoi^ aanaltlaa
to r*dlatlan than dormant apora*. 0-ou]n( calls ara probably aor* aaallr
daaasad by radiation bacauia tlMlr hl|h water content and aetln aataboIlM
^/ HlBor baetartal culprit* Inaluda; ailiella. Yer»tnU. Hbrto. E»oherlohta
cell. Clo»trldlua p*rfrln«an*. taraaena* hydrephlla. Edwaralalla tarda, aad
flebalalla (ttea**!. DM. pp. 91-2).
,y Google
si
i
1
1
1
1
£ 5
!f J
• Sir 11- ill
1 -1 ill
!-' ill
„GoogIe
r Sob* MieroorM"'-*
f»l»nelli app.
fungus jporea (P»Blellllui«, *»P«rglllUJ.
.12-.35
.2—5
Kroirtag e*lls aay McoH ■'
n targets, Biking y«*ati
I nlatlvcly mi
I* ta Irradiation,
Duld aUMitlilly alia
ce- Haiey. 19B3, p.
th faod apoilaga and
'strains balonging to tha
'Ibid, p. 181).
„GoogIe
Sensitivity to P«)l»tlDn vi-iM g-Mtly »>n« parasites. lytahltm
■Hong the most sensitive, and Anlaafcls (a fish psraliti) are anm the i>
raalstant. 6/ * do=e of i .odd kradj MO kGy) ta lethal to all roodbcrna
parasltas. The ofr-flavo-a produced by a dose needed to kill all parasl
arasltes In roods.
ra-entarlns the huaan (bod chain.
Vlniaea are highly f
llaasaas aueh aa hapatltla
that potentially h
»ni.fu
population- (1983
P. 20
In summary i
any To
radUtlon apd the
r nun
apore-
Coninn parasites
ary g-
a of radiation.
h aenaltldty to radiation
„GoogIe
r. (1981) "1
i«. Vol. 36.
. B. (1982) "Slgnl
II. REFEREMCES
. Hoy. (1983) *D«1b;
I. nhado (<966)
Problns
s." FomI Twhiwlogy 1
n Fislwry products
of Plant Producti. Coniwnts fToB
(1983) 'Action of Radlitlon an Protoio*
glflU T«h. (198«)
VPI-SC-SI^IR.
,y Google
Bulbs
Fhyst
In Pr
psi-r
at Ion ^.
9831
"Sprout
"""°
)1, I
LsLJ.
I. PP-
of" 5a
Constl
159-2t3.
M
C. a
Phy
"Sign!
F. Son
loloilc
me-. (1968
"C
s- 1
Ene
L!i:
.^■
Ms
gy »aenoy
(1971)
1 Approa
•ChtBi
r:
.r=r-
«
(19811 "in
.Tr
"
™1^
>;;S,
.;;
«r
•vz\
™bl
U. ». Hoi
upfcl.
T9!-T9fc
19B3
Badu-
.timn."
f
Trill
y of Agrlc
iJra-,a
lio.'<19fiS) 2:
Ener-iv «B»'i':y~
Syntheais; •
5-55?.
-t. J-. (19B3
r Food by mm
1) -my.
VUnris
983) "Ef
Review
lind Had
olog
J d'
(tavlor
".■
TTionms, ana S.D
n on Scove T'oples
000 al Ente-otoili
'lS5.
5
n siap
Eood
"llf
ct Cont
-ol. Comit
980 irra
fron CAST
STl, *prl
. 19B1-
b.r S
^Grain
bain.
WBlte-
1978> "
s Hex
I9S3) -
TMrLnolog
fork pp.
Vol.
U-
[;-;.';
clea Spl
Ethyl
Joum
.-,.-
"
clerce
na flo-
■ 38. p
P. 893-895
-.tlv. tf
fir
58-005 0-86-33
,y Google
III. CONSUHER «CCEETXNCE,
eotamtert miaX tj willing
adKted food.
it whether lrrw)l*t*d taaC
is ssfe snd w
isuwr, confident
Tut publl rrgulatjfs (r
safety conoerna
try Interest 5
»lao. the prl
« «sl be <=oip*titl«
with ntm-lrrallilM food
offered by irr«llatlon syfflclanl
be able to oho
IrridliMd ToM.
Consu«r »c
eptsnoe
Con»i»er •coeptinc*
nd wi iinghess
dlated food* are
Wide fluctustlon.
In ■■!•■ or c Dill J w I- boyc
radiation costs
sipilfleantly If
pFoductlon lines are aper
ted St less th
n ful capacity
(see chapter »1.
on Che benefit
of adiation t
eataent balnc pasowl
■ge reduction
ting cheaper h
ndllng BBthods
r transportotlon
■Hides Bide possible by tlH
longer ahelf
lfe>.
iMriain oonsoKrs ■
e not ganerall
opposed to new
food teohnoloilaa.
They h»e been quick to k
icept mieroHave
he eons ider able
•ipcnie of pirchsslng ■ speslal men end
the adJuitHnts
to ohaniei In taat*.
teitire, or color of som
foods, y
Before oonswers Nil
■aka ■ daotsl
the benefits offarod
bjr liredlrtlon .rs .pp»I
Tig they Bust
IrradUtad foods
■re ur« to oat. ITie naj
dM* It Mka food
r*diaMtl«*7 {2 a«.s it
lonil fluallty
of the foodT and (3)
Is th* rood sar* to eat.
re there sny t
rtaln. 19S>. p. T).
these isaura i
Chapter XI Includes oddlt
onal safety CO
oarns.
RadloaetlTltT
to baccae radioactive sbov* norasl b
photoDB froH cobalt and ceslua sourc
iatlon Hill cause their food
radiation [«9 FR STI6]. Tba
haie sufficient enariy to
t half the hoaes In th* United Stitos ha«« a aiernia**
„GoogIe
ing Bt less thsn 10
*s operating »t 5 H
197s, p. 299). ■
et. Hi.. 1980, p.
100-l.rM (1 kCy) <ij3e fbX Is qo<
destruction would b; even :
between irrtdiation doae ai
lty.£/ Electrons Oob aoce
9 pond differently t
F&A Is glvlTiB p.rl
IIl-l. trni
Bjl. but Iea= niaaT. and Bfi »
lughly linear r
e Ill-l
son, 1979, P
15
°
97 0.63
68 0. lU
°
21 0
26
Blboflayin (Bj) 0
80 2.63
B3 2
60
15
69 2.60
6 18.1
U6
8 ■«
8
15
57
Z 5«.9
50
5
Vlta»in Be 0
50 2.13
3
93 S
15
0
97 0.57
35 0
«2
U lrr.dl.ted .C 'l.TDO
to 7.100 la-aJa (17 to 7
kOy).
Source: Josephson, et.
al., 197B. P. 307.
ation fsr iillUon elect
ron volt.. One M.V equals
1.6 I 10'^ erg (Coreali
ne. 19T0, p.TK
t^ »-r»ys ,r en X-r», Mchlne
operated at lO MeV Is s
•t 5 HeV table Vl-J)
; econoBle Incentive to oper
■bov* th« proposed regu
«/ The loai of tltanl
gniflcwi
,y Google
r«qu««t«il furlh»r
vltHln loasea. Pr*lli>ln*ry r»ultB
krxl leiel ("ThMlne.' 1985. p. 35).
whethar IrrMlatlon ualng cobalt and
aaln ^atruetlon
The public depends
carefully scr
»da. mthough the Cod
> mi-entar
nt irradiation ot food u
p to t.OOO
tirads (10 kCy
plications, the FIM ha
taken a co
11 kC»> lev
vela (chapUrs Vlll an
XII. Publ
to confidence
peot consuMFB to e>al
y hundreds of
ed foods an
6 uke proper
ond It Ion ally approved
Thla variability h
la •tuUl-facft.ei) a
' be selectively us*
nstltutanU vlthln a food va
n. the Boount ot ralnrall, a
entlsts to rapUc.te *»p«i-ia
tie beeaus? th» ac entlfle t
aequently scientific data ea
to support their respective
In 1982. an FO.
Foods eiaalned all
studies, the Task o.
5/ Tha (Tlvate saclar
and pres lirleflnej M f
■eabera. trie Coalition's nlssl
letlslatlv* and regulatory ded
where useful dialogue about foo
Stop Food Irradiation m 1985 wl
hearings, and encourages the fo
National Coalition t
a newsletter. tesClflas at
si grsssroots groups around
„GoogIe
dcquttE aiperln*nt*l d*sign. Tn*i* t
asfet) of irrcdlaMd TaoilB. t/ Soat a
■nKnals. If ■ potent tcic nsterl.l i
iavel of toiooologUil algnifioance. s
noultf or should hav* [i*«i ninireat In
lack of douHle 6:inD p
Icologlcal Jlgns
Stwlles or surficlcntly high i
rding tn#sr types
itustlon. First.
High I'vsU of Ir
to unique radlolyll
19B2, p. 2-3).
,y Google
. Slitlf Llf« Eitwitlof
TJblc III-2. Estlna
9.0* - 16.61
CMlrr FTodiHts
.63 - 3.50
.382
.98 - 2.85
Bik«ry Goods
1.05 - 12.M
/ Trinsportatlon,
/ Ihaic riiuraa ii
b «3.?3» billion
ec of losBci Bhaccd with ochar teadi .
noffectlvi uruiBaiunt (Hlllormi, 1981
,y Google
illftoh e*n <laubl<
AlM»t all «00 repa
in irtertat In food proa
1983 (1. 233). Over 50
. flaH/SMfooa, sml
shelf lira froa
rnrJlng shelf llf»
(tbld, p. 236).
poultry, and fish
ruodborn* outbraaUi and thua ■
ally daatroyad by our
„GoogIe
t of these hcdch atmccrna
Hore iaportantly,
botullniu- type E
If lrr.)l,l.d n
h are not kep
re
ri,erat«
X study cont
acted by the Dep
rtiHnt of Ene
HV '
stinated
11O.O0O trlchlnel
a infected awlne
■re slaughter
statM rwultlne
0 300.000 hn.
(CH2M Hill. 1983.
p. 3-5). The V.
e>pe>lng pork to
OK doaea of radl
the tri
low Cch»pter IV)
ToiaplHaTra gondii
^alth csncarn.
■l3k rroB cnntrm
Kf at 30c 13T°F)
IrradlBticn of beef o
iBuplc a nedlLiB levels
loatrldliin perfrlnj.nJ vh
irrMKtlon can be uae'
apoilag* HKt health rroblev
a SalBonella and
'neflta. For
nta"in»tlon tree
s (Eiaa, 198", p. 362). Ir
to 20 kGir) provides adequat<
2.5 to 5 kOy)
troyad by thor
Ligh oooklrtj
cuaied In chapt
■w spices that
r IV.
are highly
tlon ean cauae
eflta by substituting for petafltlally
s and preaervatlvea. Irradiation
a etnylene dibroalda (EDB) once
,y Google
el. al.. 1981).
HOount if niti-l
litprove triE quality a
haaoc. Inc. 193«].
a tbey nai „ major
It is unllkley that FSIS h.
Msauae negatlvt l*bcllfig
S Sets." 1985. P. 3).
,y Google
dlatlon. ind tentutlon (:
tmta»% nitttr at aajor i
laiwrtMt tanilnolotr li :
paratnt of th* eantiMira i
28). TlM Ura 'Irrsdittlon' alleltM tM
■ponsu. Tilts riiMllni iaphialiai how
r •eotptow*. 1 llttl* liH than 25
had ti**rd of th* prooau irlor to thi
apondanti war* ajkad t« volunMer opinions about poaalbla advantacas
), but othor raipondanti Hntlonad laaa etaanoa of aloknaaa froB food
oantl, allBlnatlon or raduetlon of diaalgaU (tO paroant). and loa|ar
ira ib paroant) (Ibid, p. )i|). Ttaua, tharo Is opportmttr to li ~
to Irradiation's poUnttal banoflta.
9 Hith Irradiation Using Thraa
iuwtai' of Baapondanta
■rractlve, sheir Ufa
0 mtlplo roplios
Souroc Hoist lasavch Assoc.
Roipondtnts Hara also asind what eonoarns tbay niiht hava idth this
proooas. Tha nliaitaored ooflotmi mrltd depandinc so ahloh daaortptlM
tara Has used In tha tarliar qusBtlon on initial oonoarn (tSblt III-J).
Conoarn ovar radiation laTt fn tha food BhBHad tha Boat nrtabilltr, THta
,y Google
■ Mlth IrradUtlon Inoludfd ita pasa
Insufflalant tHtlnf, tta errsot on tn« roo
th« procMS Ibid, p. 3t InUrMtlngly
1..Y.1 of concern
n «p*ol*l ai«t«),
Figure III-2 ihom Uia p
Otherwlst- prodgc
onltlnt radiation— do not
nsuDcr aeoaptana*
DellnK li not
g. or pastcurl-
„GoogIe
Most Persuasive of Eight Attributes
In Favor of the Process
_Fed to Immunity
patients - 16%
FDA approval - 12%
Used to treat
medical products - 9%
Used abroad - 6%
Eaten by astronauts - 6%
Uite ultraviolet light - 3S
Don't know - 8H
,y Google
labal*d « irr*dlat«d MoauM of tlw imteanU^ frnmr that It la rad
Dthara think that lab«lli« «an tw turMd into a poaitin atory Ilr
1985). Conauaar advooataa fntrally fail Uiat aoiuiaar* >■•«• th*
knoH if a rood haa Man Irradiated.
i(ht b
«g»ln«t Lata linn
latlon Is a pbralcal prooaaa
and Cona oT latall Laballnc at Irratflatad Foodi.
Far Laballm
aaauBatlon ot laok of Integrity
a vchlcla Tor
nasty.
e on th* labal pra-
Uilr it th« product la labalad can
consuBKrs MintiriF and prafar tha
(ultant Baatliv, I
19S2. pp. 20-21.
latest KhS prapoaal iMiloh haa yet to
.and Buaset (DMB) 19 to uae -Plcomve
[•HHS*, 1985, p. A«S>. 8/ Earliar a
* Codai CMBlttaa an Food Laballlns T/,
a by rSIS Indiaatad thai
odai C«Mtt*> on Vaoa Libell
ns la a ooB«ttee of the Codei llti
Dliaion, an Intarnatlonal gro
£reup dlHuialon ot operator
of Step and 3hop SgperurKets Ind
oe Tor 'atraight for-ard tera
Bolo«y »M eiplanatlan of the proc
e point of *al>. IViey fait that au
Mtion troB the publlo. Hooe
e helihtened sensitivity to •eclden
power plants and problaiaa wl
h dlapoial of radloactHe [rodoeta
and Durbln, 1983. p. 221).
„GoogIe
(■FSIS Sets,- 19BS, t>. 3>.
iMug th*C la vet to tw MdrcHd. Thtr
libtllng m th* Unltwl SUU>; rcstivrin
■n (uppoieil to st*M thti an thtlr Mnu
r eanitdar*tian.
r*t*ll libeling m
d pwltry produots thui trMM4
•doptw), th*
ehalst (lid
■lahroMis. During the inl lil stage Irrtdla
anly by the coitiuliory irndlatiofi symbol and
irrilieted ouahronma " UntrMted ■u«hrooB» ■
repelled by th* clear neasage that the MiahrsoBa
Japan's praTilbltt
•da. 1983, p. 28). ConaeQuently. dos
da — potato ehtpa, franeh (Vies, eiid s
Icatlng thty are mde Troa Irradiated
to Inhibit .
1 19T3. Irradlat
.el only. %l
lie of Irradlatad
'anttated
lotorlly.
I atraubarrlaa
„GoogIe
ngt buy tha lrr«dl*t*d foods unlui tt ma
h«d ■ longar an*ir llf* (vin Otr Llnd*,
.UD b«nerit9 can only be opCurcd by lrr«dl«tlni
uld after the test narketing are not
1 Irradiated.
aV of salBonel loaia caused by one of t
life, a cleaner prod
r roolbos tei
, led t
Re nan
ufBctur
ra n Sout
CO advertlal
een Light, Mh
B canps
z«
paign usea
wjor sup pile
es of roolbos
a- say
reach
a Toby
tea (tn
ti. 1985. P
portent, poten
ntage to Irra
dieted
char act
t:
and S
veral.1
auoh as
s'lonier s
III. hefedences
lotions, Deccirt>ar. p. 3.
. no. 3, pp, JD5-J
,y Google
BrynjDlf»«n, trl C1979) -Food Irr
Mutrltlonlat. Vol. 11, Ho. ». Oo
../Dec
or tb*
" Ip". T-lo"^
n.- Th. Frofaaalonal
ng. D. H. 19S3) ■Eviliatlon
AnlMl Faadatuffi* In
X
ent «<lvan.!M In Faofl Irrafllat
_ot;. e
. by P.S. Ell
s and A. J. Cohen,
El
enier Blsmlicil Presi.
cHa
Hil Central In . (1983) "Tr
FT
ceasing — x Feaalbllltr Study.
Dapt. of Ene-
iy Confect No.
CE
•CQiJ-SBALigsii. tajguat.
M. I. C198») -IrrBtLtlon Of
tr.lla. Vol. 36. No. 8. luKua
Spice
3*2-366.
ood Technology In
EliT
. P. S. .«l «. J. Cohen. «9.
evlc^ Bloaedicil Preaa.
1983)
s m Food Irradiation.
El
Joet 961) 'N. J. Store St
eadllr
Building New
resh Seafood Saetlon.*
1^
-™.rU,t News. Vol. 3*. No. »
2, Oot
ber 5 p. 3S
r«)/
tEt <k>nsultBf>t. Heatli« on Har
ner Scoeptance of
Ir
adlsted Fooda (1983) IAEA Has
dquart
S*pt - 1 Oat 1982.
K-TECDOC-29Q. International A
Fiergy Agency.
Vienna. Austria.
Fenasbene J
hn G. Phillips and Eugan
i-bUkl (1981) -InveatlgatUns
rosauinea in
rradtation-Sterliied
Bb
on.- Journal of Agricultural
oO Chenlatrv.
Vol. 29. pp. 551-654.
KarHeting Institute HSSS) Tr
""i°-
onsujer (tlit
ket 1985 Update. The Researe
h Dtvl
ion. Food Kar
etlng institute.
Hi
nington, D.C.
'FSlS Seta Mhclesal: Mtlll Libell
ng Opt
ated Pork- (1985) Food
..^
"'"' ««'■ "ol- "• "o- 39.
ran, JsHn M . Thoiaas R. Piers
[>«:e>>b
r 2, pp. 3-40
(1931) •Loasaa in the
. Food Distribution Syalem:
- and Su.»ary
Miohigan State Univ.
H
e fl -
, Eaat Lanaln
, Hlchigan.
Hiyi
hi, Toru (1985) lisdiatla Te<:
hnolo^y Lsb. , Nation
1 Food Rasearch Instltut
J.
an. Ijitte- to Tanys Jljbirts
Heln
, H. G, (1982! Food Irradlat
on: Dutch Eip«rienc*s with Practical
ip
llcatlona, and Present Status
enre and Technology Proceedln
Si'- "
Hetharlanda.
19851 'vashlng
Institute of Food
Sc
J*., pp. so-sf:-
-HH3'
Approves Rule for Food I"«l
•dlBCW] Food Labeling 'Seens *
•uat
ertain.' Muss
an says- (19851 Food
8.
g. and Handll
idlatlon in the Prodootlon. Fr
g of Food- 11984)
eral Begl.ter, Vol. »9. No. 3
U. K.
Calhoun (1978
•Mutritional Aspect*
ion Vol. 2, pp. 299-313.
»■
Flah'
Edwa
d S. Joaaphso
i-a 11 983
and Msrtin S. Peter«,n
Nin
nd Johflfinea G. La*t tl» den
Brljv
r, Claalna J.
Pretorlus. Cadrlo W,
lapfel and Hendfik lan da
, (1983) 'A Study of the MutH«lleltir
Irrad <ted Suga Solutiona:
topllc
of
SubtroDleal Fruits.- Journal
of *ir
31
pp. I016-1(HO.
Inlcal froble
Fa
tars and Mvalopmnt of Rests
. 1W, Oct 25. pp. 2010-2011.
anee-
Internal Hedlclnt.
Vo
„GoogIe
ubllo Voic
or imdlsled Food.: «n innotatsd Bl
rothr Dsvls (19^6j "WboUsonrness
UoRraphy " Federatlo" Procteaiims
October, 1966.
or the nenetlc To.lcology of Irrsdl
Its) Fjoaaturfs Using Short-term Test
SYStens. in In Vivo Tests In
Raster." Food CHemlstr* To.lcoloKV
Vol. ZO. pp. B6T-76.
Connlttee on the Whalesoneness
of TrrwtUted Food-. (1977) Horld He«
th OrRanliatlon Technical flcDorl
Series. H77, No. 609; PW FooO .nd K
tritiSn series. 1977. Ko. 6.
Bacterial" In Coimunlcable ana
le and Franklin H. Top ^3r. C.
V, Mosby Co.: St. Louis).
■tSayer. Donald W. (1980! "Food Irradiat
on.- Cereal Foods WorW. Vol. 29.
■o. 6. fp 353-6.
The Hex Uave In Hlcrowe Ovens' 1198^
6>H-n9, 700.
11985! Food Chemical N.«, Vol. 27. N
1983) "Hill Consuwrs Accept trrad
Foods?." Journei or F<»d S.r«,, Vol
S. pp. 219-28.
Itoeds, IteUl (19831 "Co-neroi.! E.perlc
o. 3. pp. 19-32.
Urbsin. Wslter X. (19761 "Food IrrMlst
on" In Advances In l^ood Research Vo
2«. ed. by C. 0. Chichester, E. H. Hr
k and G. F. Stewart (Aoadenilc Press
Ken York!.
Urbsin. Halter H. (1984) "IrrxtisCM Fo
da: * Giant step Beyond ^pert.-
Nutrition Today. Vol. 19. "o. «, Jul*
Augusl, pp. 6-11.
Iss. F LIB. V. Dunkel and C. Sheu
1982) Final Report of the Task Croup
for the B.VUW or To.loolojy Data o
Irrvllated Fjjdi" Food AddltKei Evsl
Bllon Branch, PuMlc HraltH Servlc
U.S. Dep.rtn»nt of Health i Hunun Ser
ices. April 9.
van der Llnde, H. J. 1983 "Eoonaiic c
nslderatlon. for the Irradiation
. Food Irradiation Newsletter. Vol
7, No. 3, pp. 32-"".
van der Llndt, H. J. and H. T. Brodrlck
ntroducing Hsdu-lsed foods la tue So
th AfVloan Market • apeecb at tha
nference, UashlngCon. b.C March
eness of irradiated Food 19?T) "Si«ineriBa of Data Considered by
nt PhQ/IaEA/WHO Eipart Comnittee on the WholESOBrnesa of Irradiatad
ereva. 31 August-7 Septeinber 19T6, MHO/FOOD MD./7T.«5.
earch AssocLstes. Inc. (I98«> 'ConsiBer Raaotlon ta the Irradiation
" D*pt. of Energy Contract No. K-SCOk-atACSMGD, Haroh.
,y Google
pot«ntlml publli
■nd t>**r to rwiue*
■alnonallosls,
b«neri
ta or To
quill'
r. .ll«
■alth p
rot«tlo
pylobac
TZi
[™°'i
or'rSdue
■ dlMu
ssvl In
■rant In* traatiMr
A bdlparH >stla«t* or roodborn* nines
S10 blllton loss (nnually In nMlcal >
, 19B0, p. 159). Savaral foodbornc 111
(Kaapliaachar , 198*: Sato,
<laublnl In ttia paat 16 y*>
(figur* IV-1] (CDC. 1981).
frlnjan*. Toioplnaa gandl
tn* Dnltad States la
i tin* loat Trim work
uch ai ailBonalloals,
Dthar davtlopad eountrl
, and Caapylobacter ]tjunl.
baan Incraaslng.
n SaHwnalleaH laoKtlona, Untt«d Stat*>. 1965-83
. 1985, p. 25.
,y Google
rpetuat* aiaeue cysle. Conoei
irger plants IncreaMa the SOMlI'll'.'
rcasses (SctiBabe. 1985. pp. 552-3 "
* -or. able to survive (Archer, 1981
hunan drug th«r«pl«s (Halatwrt, at.
ripting ta nodirn food prociaatng and
Alio thay ar* davalo^lnc raalstanc*
al., 1984).
1 (flgir* IV-Z) (Bryan), Cjomng f
third ar the outbreaks. InadgqmCe
i-firih or the outbreaks, ir the
-3, I9fl5) were asaoclitea mth i&
la reported In 19B1 (CDC, 19831.
:onsuDcd at home caused only 32
Data (Von Bt
,y Google
The »
onoile
as of fo
t. fro
rity ol
1 depends
ipon the
■ nd
r tha indl
YHHJ.1'8
fleu^» rv-3). The Jnoi
faMbjr-r.B <1l9i>ase costa can be claallfled iDto 3 aataBorlas: Individual,
Industr and pub l<^ (labia IV-1 T)ia Individual's aosts aaaoolatad idtll
during aicVneas reduction jf lelswe tlm chaicea dirlng the lllneaB and
recwery, and pain ard rfe Ing. The oostj to tha Industry or fir" found
reaponaible for th* outbreak aay IncluiJe the vslu* of produot raeallad,
redaction in future denand for ttie iroduct due td reputation daaaga, plant
cleanup, and liability ausrda. 1/ Public C09CS Include tn«astl(*tlon, tur-
oolal Costa of Foo
Hedloal coat.
l^oduot r«:.ll
Inoo» or productimty 1
us Plant closings and Cleanup
Pain and auTrerlng
Product liability ooats
Reduced prodoot deund
Averting behavior eoata
Publie Haalth SurvelUanea Coata
Travel costa
Costa or wlntalnlng dlaaaia aurvallla
Child eara coats
Costa of investigating outbrciii
Costa of cleanup
Traditionally, only t
e easily ■onetizable, direct casta have btan
aitlnted, naHly the nadl
al coats and ngea [or productivity lost during
an il rttas. Ho««er, av.r
ing behs.ijp coats (behavior designed to avoid o
dwaup the trad tlonil iwdl
al and productivity coats, t, recent Hesouroea r>.
the Future study of the CO
aniFiBtion of a uatar supply found the public xt
s to avoid lllnasi~«olllng uatvr, travelling to
another oop«>lty to obUl
natar, and purchasing bottled -atar (Hirrlngton
et. .1.. 1985).
ust be taken to asaura that product liability
ooata to nras are not air
ady counted in tha cstla«ted pain and surfartng
„GoogIe
risire IV-3. Direct ■
I Indtracl Foodborn* lllaaai Costa
A market purchase of
raw or prepared food
Exposure to possible
foodborne illness
Incidence and
severity of illness
Direct costs imposed on
the ill person and the firm
in the market transaction
Nonmonetizable
Indirect costs imposed
on others outside the
market transaction
Nonmonetizable
,y Google
Averting behivlor by th« public a«n rejuK In dl«t ind e«"»'-*^^*'
ipendltur* ehangts that affect salea and revenues of th* Involi*** *«''■/•
n opinion survey by tf7« Hatlonal Pork producers Council found tti*^ Wrcant
- mrl that they had redooed tnel canauiPDon or
acoul Hit and IT percEnC lalmed <J*<'-eaa«,
opinion
provid> enplrlca
t typically aicluded fron
° Eat luted
ortad . Foodborne
he reporting b, p
Houerer, fatalities
and Blaser, 19BS). Coats
lev(ls_«lld, ■
ot routinely tested Archer 9ft«, p. 3! ).
the case. Tor eisnpl? epidealoloflsts have
eported casea, estlBataa or the total U.S.
range of Illnesses caused by the dtseaoas
I iSentially unnollceatle to re-threaterrtog, Imont
IviduBl's Imune syaten 1ti fighting ofr the diseases,
oour In relatively nomal Tiianan adult hosts ^Ith
estiaated for three dlsessa severity
ary data sourses (updated to 1985 pricai)
Often these coats are derived froH aurveya
k of foodborne dlsaaae. Cenarally, they era
ly, deaths have been evaluated by the hunan sapital Mthod
he individual's contribution to productive output. Hm
at would have been produced by the individual la eoltspaad
slue for that production at today's prices.
„GoogIe
T > rniilnlns llfctlH
Ht > value or noiwarkac tlac sp«nt on ho
■n^'
T > r«Mlnlng lintlM
t • • particular year
Bt ■ Benentj of living = Lt • MLt . NKt • Pf ■**'» k. ■ '•^w iBOOiM.
N[^ s nonlaDor incone, NKt > noiwarket lotlvltlea and lataura,
a ' rlau averalon factor
.arically. the range of value of Ufa of aatlaaMa reiultlni frea the
Ingneas to pay oelbod has been lergn (Landefnld and Saakln, 19S2). The
ronaental Protection Agancy haa eoaoludad tHat mh Hllllnianaa to pay
lea ahou ■ valut of Ufa of tl ■llllon to *T.5 allllon (Beneflta Branoh,
o i>ay/huBan cap
U^]-
„GoogIe
Lnlng UrellM
Typically, SalBon.ll—
food. S*li»n*llo9l9 nay cs
■ Salmonrlla. lilie loni
or 2 tn 6 d«ys, but In atcaciclanal
g? (0.1 ptrccnc) of th* p«opl* uho
tallty Is (Maraiiy iisitid ta the
r the eldsrly.
E IV-K.
trasltla tofMtlons, o«n
nvUoBla.
raptllu.
■ngaroia, 19TB, p. 15W).
roducts. aapmlally poultry
„GoogIe
19G6 (Hilder ind HHCraedy, I9tfi. p. 1153). In
Ouillty Service (FSQS) of USDik rtporCad * 37 pc
In 600 ready-to-nrkct ehlckena sinplad In 1^ p
the bulV af tne juttrertJ {Cahen and Blakr. 1977, p. 7991. "ooantl^ rare
(Salnonalloali SuroelllBice. I9e3). Given the estimate of 2 nllllon cases
annually of aalnonellosis by the Carter Center tar CDC/Enory University
(Holmbars, 1985). beef and ehlcker. can he aicUoted tj he tne direct cause of
Colorado ogthreak (Cohen, et, al., 1978). The average survey respoi
reported coati of »1,?90 (In March 19B5 »)~«dlsal oosts of J938, ■
productivity losses of *289 and Blacellaneoui coats of (fi2 (cable I
c,., c.t„.„..
: 1976
^l«a
Updated IJ Mar 85
Ml. 88
936 5/
: 35
03
: 16
: 9
BS
56
: 376
21
TAtt'
; 33
Total
\ M15.83
«1.Z90 £i
/ Updated MslnE the nedicil eoat ooBpoaent of the ConiuHr Price Indei (CPI)
iir FebrL,8ry 1985 va, 1976,
/ Updated using the averse -eekly earnlnga for March 1985 vs. 19T6,
H Jobs, Ih* 1985 V
slug the all itens CPI
,y Google
Th* r«|H>rt*d esMS In tMs ai
■nnually (Hdlmbarg, 198^1.
or SBliKinclla
e dT 1361,500.
ortcd caH9. or 1.960,000 oia<
ciMS. but the bulk are prjbably ■
aprtng of 1985 xlll provide data t
Table IV-3. Pres
Xae
Hale
fU^le
tlathod
FVasen
1( erase
Death a
Value ! Value
Value
V*lu. }/
nuirt>er
number
tnouaa
IK) dollars
doll.^.
Huxan
o_»
3
S8 26*
,
TT
307
capital
159 0
139
IS-JH
300 600
21.1
2S-1I1I
«5-6il
10
371 0
1B9 1,B90
5
238
951
867
65*
f?
" rS
s
"
J^yfi
B5.SO0
MJuatad
0-4
3
1208 3.621
^
836
3,102
wllltnaiHsa
5-1 «
1K08 0
2
961
1.922
to pay/hwan
1655 3.309
aapltal 2/
25-* 1
10
1132 0
I
8«
3.162
2, •59
65t
1?
"' -^
^
90
1'IfiH
351,500
1/ Data Trom Dolan
1980; Vital. 198
: updatad to Ma
ch 19i5 doll,P..—
2/ Data (Ton
(Id and
Saskln. 1982; vita
. 1981;
Updatad
9BS dollars
„GoogIe
Table IV->. U.S CMta fsr SalBiwlloala, I
Coat Cat*(orla3
• Coat* par oaa*
Caaaa
Total
dollars
nu«.r
dollar!
"ii.'i'.ir
0
1,960.000
0
Hodarata oaoea
and deaths
938
•o.ooo
37.5
Loat ProdHeilTlty
250^
1.960.000
»».e
Moderate «...
2892/
38.000
11.0
Huun capital
eipltal/wll li
wthad
B5.SO0
351.500
2,000
m.6
or
703.0
Hl.«llane™. co.
.!/
62
■10,000
2.5
T«.l
»6T3 to *
.205 ■inion
a/ Misaell.neous
oat. In
.tlOB,
hild Mr., Jth.
Ubor.tory
(atlnate beeaoM It laavei out the talua of hoBeaaklng.
coata of t230 aplaoe (:
The nedlc.l cmts and Ist
nnuslly for th» mid cases, nod
hicken Is responsible for 9.5 p
1125 figure raportad In th< orlflnal artiala li updated udng tn* ahanga
„GoogIe
) feod polMolac
CM»rloMot«rlo«l»
SurnillaM* data for CtmelliibaBtmr J«Jual (
is apotty. tout all raomt itudla* Indlaat* It li
aa a caun af iataatlnal nu-lika dtai
Coaa. Dli, Ccntrol, I9S*, p. ITS: Manital, I9S*, p. 23; Ooflt, 19SI, p. «t«:
TofainaoD, l9Bi. •>. 33&.T). Th* Cartar Caatar of CDC/EBarir Ual*araitT
aatlaataa thara ara 2.1 aUlloa oaaaa aanuallT In tba Unltad Stataa.
Tha Saittla-Clni County i^rvatllanaa itudr of eiapjFlabaatarloali fisund
that tha tatal lantth of illnaaa wi fraitor for C. .lajunl patlanta than
aalaanalloala patlanta. Tha avaraga lanftta of llLnata for aa^jlobaotarlaala
waa ^3.5^ daya * 1il.12 dayi (aaan * atd. dar.) Hiilla tha a*ara|a lanfth of
illaaaa for aaliaanallaala w> 10. 2? daya • 5.S2 daya (Saattla, p. fiS).
Hoapltallutlon ns about tuloa aa pravalant for o^ylobaetarloata aa ■«!•
■onalloals aaaaa (t.Tl irarsus 3.S11 (Ibid, pp. 6;-6fi). Tha a|* apaalflo
InoldaiMa ahouad a alallar pattarn for tha two dlaaaaa* aioapt Tor an alaratad
looldanoa of o^pylobaotarloala In tha 20 to >0 yair i^a froup (flfura IT-4).
Can^ylabaatarloats la (anarally aalf-llsltlni. althoufh Ilka aalmwlloala
■ara atrtous eaapllaatlona, auoh aa calltia, arthrltla, aaalntltla aan ooour
(taeia IIi.ll. Clvan that tha duration of lllnaaa ami llkollhosd of hoapltal-
iiatlon mra aoaantiat graatar for eaapylobaetaploala la tha Saattla atudy, ■
aonsariratlva aaaava of tha ooata of oiBpylobaetarloala Illaaaa WNild ha th*
aalBsnalloals eoata rapoftad tn tabla n-l for illnaaaaa and daatha.
Flgira IV-a. lea Dlatrlbutlon of Caroylohaotar and SalMoalla bifaotloaa
,y Google
Tabla IV-5. U.S. Colt* for Ca»]>li)baetarlMls. 1985
Hodarata Caoas and Daath* 93B ST, 310 53.8 15T.G
<6S,02S
Hlld Cases 230 £/ Z,042,6fi0 «69.e >».«
1.931,9T5
HDdariU Caa*a 269 £/ . S5,310 16.0 K8.0
166,025
Daaths:
or ar 2,100 1S0.2 T3S.2
UJusMd huun oapital/
<illllngn*sa to pay 351,500
HlaeellaBeoua ■/ 62 57,3*0 3.6 10. «
168,025
ransportatlon, child «ar«, othtr laboratory
tc for Hlld ouaa alas Inaludei aona
e It Itmea out th* valua of hUMaaklng.
„GoogIe
I huMn Infaotlra doM oan I
(Gllbtrt. )9S3. -p. 5»). 1h* Ub
IMMI pcrfHtad In tha laat (l«ail<
iBsl. 3urT(]ri In T>envcr and Seattle
tracolatlnc to tha Unttad Stataa, the
cases «nnuall:r natlonwlda and tha Saa'
and B laser.
BtudT
Tfaa Bild cases are the
oaivrlabactarlaals and tha
Like salaunallOBU, the aaa
2,100 fatalities a year.
ara astlnsted' at batiisan IT
tha produotivltir e<Mts dMi
•ttir coiti asaaelatad itlUi aaaprlabaoterlaala
te and are iaportant for both lllnesMa and
baeterloBl the Seattle study <19S«.
cta^flvbtetn-iatU 9Lir>elIlanoa atudr.
>350 to ITOO iillllan annually.
Son* ho| produears
trlchioMls and tn* FDA
for this purpose (50 F
are lupportari of 1
has Juat approvad 1
29658-59). The de
HutDpsy dsta Indicates
itlon for aradloatlon of
. Df 3D to 100 krada
He ported es
1975-81 (Sohanti
responsible for
d 152 huaan eaaes annually trot
beef eontealnated vlth poTH Here
reported cases, or 131 eases tlleharda.
„GoogIe
19(1
•r. 3.3 "-■
«StllHtM
nd Wern
131 r.(,
er, 1976).
If
563 aiws
prlc*9 th« p*r pal
Iflfonaclon rvon in b
■1 InvcBtlgiUon (Sing
i»t«! 56J eaHS raiults tn »1.« ■llUon cost per yew for jBrk-ralst
>1 csrc up<l>t«4 CO FeArutry 1983 1 usln( tha ixdloil ceat
t or tha ConjuBer ?rle* Indai. Iht i»|*a lost updiCed to Hiroh
sing th* ivarig* HMklii •arnlnt* raportad by th* Buraau of LMor
klao. about on* daath a yaar la rapart*d for trlahlnual). For tha hl^h
lute I aaaiaad that daatha ar* undarraportad 4uat like illnaiaaa and that
k lould cauM Foufhlr thraa daaths a i^tr, h Coablntni tha aetiial a|a and
distribution af daatha reportad ror halatnthlaaai (trlohlnaa and ralatad
„GoogIe
Daaths : Valut
hs : v,lu« : Su«
nunhm- 1,000
Capital
5-1"
0 87
0 158
I
D 76 0
0 138 0
35.<*»
1 369
l.«T6
2 237 171
15-611
6 188
*2,T08
1535
tuo.ooe
Adjusted
5-11
0 1,202
0 I.UOI
•
0 621 0
955 0
oapltil/
0 1.6'>6
nMi'to"
25-»»
» 1.»25
5, TOO
65.
a 32
256
90 360
d feulc by total
, 19SD). Dubay
oil oontaliu
ttn U,S. Htiar
) or toioptasBoila, but piAllo
„GoogIe
f the lynpti sysien p
oioplasiKsis which
wals »r« mild and fought ctt by cur limune a)
Imtf* S.3 minion <:hSss oqi^uri- annuBlly. The benefit of
e adiat eiMa la llkel/ Co be substanUtl, but Upaislble
y porV la eatlnted at t21S
personal oonraunlaatlona. 1985).
bought to be a major aoi
- o
pork InfecCed irt
thi
"t'h
a.
old
'"'
f
o^Sari^doM "
S8-O0S 0-86-34
,y Google
Tabl* IV-B. Lir*tlM Coat for Spaciil Scrilcaa To
genlMl ToiepliaKUia Born in tha Unl
3,JO0 ailldran «ith Coo-
ed States Eacrti lear, 19SS
Sarvlea Raqulrad
«,>,..,i„
Cost at Santa*
SpKial aeboolliK Tor vUuallr
hindtcippcd
Special KFiAillnc for iKidarBtal)
ratar<l«l
foatar emr* for acnraly retard*
78.0
7.1
d 15.1
J01
Catlnc a li«« laf-vae ihat has not
live In the Intestine until the d
their intensity and sjne persons ne
mi*T aust pejple eiparlanoa sy«vptjn
Itie Carter Canter of CDC/Cwr]f Unlversltv <:
aawa oeeia- annuUlr In th« U.S. Typically the :
and drug traatMiit (lobarts, 1913. p. 3*). Thes<
mm for Uw vialta to ttie doctor ara eattnated i
The aanMl eoat dua to the baaf tapaiom. Taenia
W.) ■lllloti (Table Iv-9).
ir. slid. lh
ind tlae-oft
(table IV-9).
>atlMt«d at
Table Iv-9. Coats to Treat a
nata (Tapewm)
dollara
T7
„GoogIe
■ H*tc *ni1 Pogltry
-nllllon dollars
roduotlvitr losse* for flie food
, porM and b««f total around one
c*apyIob*«t«rlosls and eoDBcnit
dreda of ullllons of dollars eac
BonellosU t9 iriatcr th*n aadleal
d ECurtin. 13841.I/ Finally, othar
3 the actual coats for Mlaonello
„GoogIe
Irridlttion h*l bean propaselt *
bttter to kill pathogens, ar
UtBWitarlus CcuHlsslon sugj
niiA«r of pathogenic alcroor
9). USM Is gonsLderlng pet
oontrol (■U3D1 Mir*, 19B5 3.
M 100 tci »0 krids ( to 2 kG;
■Dd oth*r pathotenle organlww
Ifigur. IV-5 and chspl
the nedtl used (Mulder 19fl?.
for ftiultry Hesearoh concertr
<2.f kCyl doM level <tn salin:
through Dorul retell o»ianrel
Into the chicken to Increase
greet irarlanoe In the Tiunbers
partially depending ui»h Mher
. 1962. p. «).
Haicr concluded that ■ U
eliBtnata- c^ipylob.ctar
a four log reduction In '
[t9S«. p. 1>. Irrwtlatli
•llalnate CMipylabaetar.
Is? and Dthei
The Klentt;
.anlnitad with 100 efu p*r gren
Ellnl nation of
Icroflors In chinke
rter IrrtdlMlon
ally oaDtaaAnatM
Its (cful of
s (2 kCy] Hould ■••Mnttally
Tarkomlil at. al. reported
beef at 100 krad* (t kOy)
50 krads (2.5 kGy) iiould
carcasaes had spoilage patterns coaperabla
H public health haiards occur [Mulder, 1982.
, 1983). gt higher doses Hhloh kill the
„GoogIe
r lugptnslan In th«
ry, '983. p. 119.
,y Google
«u«
■><
ctntag* of
ssii::.'
Po.ltlv. «„O.M.
th* traitnn
■ft«r
5
1*
5
10
25
50
i
5,3»0
2.670
'53»
10
5
J
2,660
1.3«0
5JS
1 <
■ splr.Us
Kond
In
r pork cin
Dial
tr
ch
""''
nd tjnopl*
Irr«
lit
em
™ t^i
at 250 kra
bft
tip
«
■ <Jos
idlation at 50 krada kills To«opla«»»
Oubcy. Brake, Hurrell, and Tifr, 1985).
-, 50 krida wuld be aurflclant tg pravant
luclated xlth porW [table IV-121.
1983, p. 251).
y [chapter VII>.
,y Google
T»hle IV-'J. Costs F>»r Case of Foodborn* Illntas and Irr,
iuo.ooo-iiTi.ooo Vital ; Land«f>ld (0.31
( Scsklnj DDlan,
Hodgson i Wun
130.303 Wllaon ( ncalngton SO
230 Cohtn, at. al.
t,290 Cotien, at. il.
5,e(M)-351,500 Vital; Landafald
k Saskln; Dolan,
„GoogIe
«heirn, Hary C. M9B«). 'Kn Uilyais of Contingent Valuttlon Uppllcd to Ur
QiHllty and Public Safety FroH CrliK' Ph.O. dissertation <Ore(«i State Uni-
versity: Corirallls, O-egon).
lr(!h*r, Douglas L. (I^BD) *Chranlc Aspects or Diarrheal Disease*. Report at
Co-BlulOTI In UasMngt^n, bX anobrr 1-5. 19S<.'
Archer. Doi^las L. 19KB) -DlarrMal Episodes and DiarrMal DlMue: Aout*
DIkjis^ with Chrj-ilc ■plUHllons.- JaurriBl ol FjoJ Prjttcllor^. Vol. »T,
Ho. « (April) pp. 32 -H.
Benaflts Branch tcorxwic tnalysii Dtvlsion. Ofrioe ^r PjHi^y PlanBli« and
Evaluation. C^tei 'Valuing Chsngss n Kortallty Risk— An Update.* Brurins
Prepared for »«iUon RuikII. Env -aimr tsl Protection J««neT, (Julr).
Berkow, loiwrt, ed. (19S2) The HercH Hanual. 1«th M. (Htrek and Co., Inc.:
BahHay. IJl.
Blascr. Martin J. an) Lee S. Rewan <19BZ) *• JtevieH or Hwan SalBonellosla:
I. Infeotlve Dose.' fttvit..a of InCfctlouj DiamMi. Vol. •. »o, &(lloi-naa).
pp. 109B-I tM.
Blaser. Martin J.. J.G. Halls. R. A. Feldnan. et. *1. (1983)
enteritis In the United States: A Kultlcenter Study*. Ann
Medicln*. Vol. 98. pp. 360-365.
Blaaer, Ngrti , Daiid N. Taylor and Roger A. Felikun (t9B3b
at C™pyi8b.ct«r J.Juni infections*. EpideM clonic Bevlaw.
15T-1T6.
Blaser Hsrtln David R. Taylor, and Roger A. FaldHn. (t9B'
of CMpylQb.ct.-r Infections- In CaBpylobaeter Itifecllons In 1
<Td by Jean-Piul ButtUf CIC ?reas. Ii
sing th* Gap,' Hes
d States Ixsoclatcd Hltll
KO-SO.
Policy Task
Oierubln, CharlFs E Tl or Fodor. Larry I. Denaark, Carol
T. Fuerst, and Joacph H. Winter {1969) ■Syivtoas, Septice
Sal«anallo«l»." Aaarlcan Journal of Epldealoloiy. Vol. 9
lltlM Us«d for the TraatMiit
ingaroaa (1978) ■Rontyphotd 3alaanallaala.*
', Ro. 12. pp. 15*0-15«5,
Cohcn. Mitchell L. and Paul A. Blake (19TT) Trends in Foodborne Salaonalloala
Outbreaks: 1963-1975*. Journal of Food Protection. Vol. *0, Ro. 11, pp.
T98-80D.
Cohen. Ultchell L. , Robert E. Fountalne, Pobcrt A. Pollard, Stephen 0, Von
Ulaan, ThoMS M. Vernon, and Eugene J. Gangarosa, (I9TS) -An Aasessaent
of Patient- Re la ted Econoalc Costs in sn Outbrert Df Salaonalloala.* Th*
Raw England Journal of HeJlelne. Vol. N9. pp. «9-60.
Cooper, Barbara S. , and Dorothy P. Hloe (19T6) 'The Eoonoaio Coat of Illnaaa
Ravlalted." Social Security Bulletin, Feb., pp. 21-36.
„GoogIe
e Brody 11975) "Llfet
ty Age. Se., R3<:
and Education La. el," Res. Statist. Not*. DHEW Publ. Ho
ISSA) 75-11701, Sept, 30, 1975.
Dolan, Thorns J., T. ». Hodsaon and L. K. ¥un (19B0! "Present Vilue of E.-
pected Liretine Esmings and HouseVeepIng Services. 1977," Dlvlaian af
Doyle. M. I>. (19^1) -CampyloDacter fetus Subsp. jejuni: >n Old Pethsgen of
Nei. Concern". Journal of Food Protection. Vol. Uu, Mo. 6, pp, 180-86.
Oubey, J. P. (1980
Livers and Publl
"Peralstanae cf Encysted TaiaplBBna gondii In Caprine
e«Mnary'Sedlcar*»socia"on'''C?'N7? ^""i" pFT^^
DuUey, J. P., n. J. Brake. K. D. Murrell and n. Faycr (igSsl "Effect of
m.
Dubey, J. P., K, D, Hurrell and Bonal Payer (196" 'Persistence of Encysted
Toioplasme RonOi
Veterlnur, R.sea
Dube,. J. P., S. E
ry Medical Association, Vol. 171, Ho. 6, pp. 6n"-9.
Payer. H. and J . P
Dubey (19351 -Methods for Controlling Trans^ilssion or
es frail Meet to Man." Food Teohnolofty, Vol. 39, No. 3,
Safety 'segulatlo
ith. fXir-ood's. Rowla, and G. Edgar Shattock, (1983) '
Plrstenberg-Eder,
"Conpelltive Cro
type E after an
Gilbert, fl. ]'. M9
rradlatlon Dose of 0.3 Krad". Journsl of Food Proteotlon.
p. 12-15.
T b7r"%ob
the Futjre" In Food Microbiology: Advances and Prospects
cm, C. 0. and Lynda w, Harris 11981) "Hamburgers and Broiler Chloliens as
te"loi?\^"''"
ko. 2. pp. 96-99.
Greci. Nlctiolas. Durwood B. (towley, anO Aklra Hatsuyama (1983) "The Action
Badlatlon, Vol.
acterla and Viruses" In Preaervation of Fooa by Ionizing
Raton. Florltfa: CRC Presa, Ine., pp. 167-218.
CoTitmlnatlon," ELI/EPA Seminar, Uashingt^n, D.C. , IB July.
by T. It. Robert, and F. ;. Skinner (Aoadeailc Press:
Lonoon).
Holmberg, Scott D. [1985) EnlerU Diseases Brsncn, Blv. of Bacttrlal Disease
Josephaon, E. S. (19ai> "Badapperllzatlon of Meat. Poultry, Flnflah, Shelflsh
and Special Diet
III. ed. Edward
" in Preaervatlon of FooOs by Ionizing Radiation. Vol.
„GoogIe
Ktnin. «. S. ind Honker, J, J. 0978) •Um-Dom ImdlatlDn of n-Mh. *>»-
rroMn Chlckon ami Oth«r PrMtnitUon K*t)uaa for sn<ir Lift Eitanilon and
for iHproTlnt Its Public Hcilch QiMUtr.' Food Pr«wni»*loii bj riT«dlrtlon
Vol. II <I1U: Vlonna).
Kaaplnachcr. E. H. (19M) •B«n«rit* of Hidlttlon Pr«i*»lnf ta PiAlte Kaaltif
■p««eh at mu Conr. San Dlago, Fill.
Kli«, Batty L. and Eitwird ^. Josf
d Hal Id nth •■
Edwai-d 9
J«<pFi»n .ml Martin i
FUrlda: CRC Praaa
Ine.. pp
ZW-BfiT.
J. Staian and Eugana T.
(19K) -1
a Ee,>n,
»i<! Value ar Ufa:
heory tj h-.ctloa." ItiK
Health. Vol. 7a.
■0. t. pp. 55»-56£.
L.y. F. S.
11983) -Hw iBtarwt in
> of Irradiation
n the Fsod Induatr
ie«t«. ad.
T. *.
Mart* and F. *.
ii3-'?9-
P. 1
leal Aapaets of
ctar Infaelloni of Htaa
na" in
. ftiM) •aiinlfleanea
of laaldua Organ
aas In
food* After Syb-
Vol. 5,
p. 203-211.
Maad, C. c
nd Shair LIf* of Procai
.ad Pc
*. fcilwrta and F
Praaa: U>ndo«}.
J. (19T6) Coat-B«ntfit
s. rnlaK
ad. «•
Hoaaal. 0.
«. «. 1198«1 ■intrry.m
the Rat lor
of Mloroblal Ettoloiv Tranul
tad tqr Fo(
a," Joi
<, pp. 89-104.
Koaaal, D. *. 1. and H. Stetaun (1985) -Irradiation: Jin Effi
ProctBilnt Food for Safety. ■ fcporl at tha UM/TW/mo "Ini
en Food Irradiation Prooeaslng.- Uashington, D.c n-B Marc)
Hulder. 8. U. ». M. (19*2) Salauinelli FladiclOatlon of Poultry
Ph.D. Oiaaartatlon, (grleultiral Unloersity. Usgentnen, The
Eitaniian of Mlnoad Baaf ttiraigh Cabined Treatnenta n>,miti« Daduriiatlon".
Rloharda, F. O. . Peter H. Schanti. and Enlly 3. Chlahola 982) Trlohlnoala
Surmlllano*,- CDC SurveUlanet 3u«arlea. Vol. )J. Ho. aS. pt>. 233S-2«aS
tobart*. Tanya (1983) ■Benefit! Analysli df Selected Slaughtarhouae Naat
Inapactlon practises * Voriiiiig Paper-T1. Studies of the Drganlntlan and
Control of tha U S, Food jyatn, Univeralt, of Wlaaonaln,
lOH*. lobart D. and
Loa taialca: k Bi
Malyal* Sarlcs.
„GoogIe
duolng
37 'p
!9;116l-6.
u.ry 25.
(1965) MncldenO'.
> .t 37t
e Intern
SslwiiiellB In Food
Vo
u.r. 7*).
K. ( 983) -TrlehlBWiU In W.
p. B3-6.
Ivin w (19B51 V««rlr..ry K.
98f Food technolojtr
ii»T. l^e.U^. 3M M.
S<at
Skir
llklns: BalttBort.
County Dtpt. of Pu
8. (1977) -Ci^jlob
t «o. 22;
B1-T0»1
Synthes
1983
le DlH>» Control
¥- dlHise.- British
on St.phylooooo.l Er
Snlth
S^
R, E., C. ». cinige
rgl3 end
(1980) -n-el iBinery
G. (19851 (Hi), f
^^5i.
inner. *s»o. of «
, (iSaai -Beoovery
liTi Petho
•tl Square, nt.
slBugmer
Ho. 5. pp. 372-1.
t (1985) 'Deiperitely
Vol. 226. 17 Hn, pp. 8*9-30.
Weahington, DC nay 9-1
3f Rw Heal. I. Beet
lly Contmln.ted 3«.
13-2 3.
:il»>H Outbraaka
Delated Recalls Bec.u*
uly. pp. 621-33.
1 -C-i^ylobacter Ent
No.M. DctoMr 1982.
No. 15. pp. 215-6^
USD* Nay Petition FM ■
(1985) Food Chentcal »
«a.Xl/27. ito."!*
itlon of cnUkan for Mter
pp. 2-n.
lal Control."
,y Google
'979:
ol— II - ltorUUt>. ftrt tk
I. Nblis Haalth Scr*le«~
•■tlonil CHtcr tor Hialtti Statlatioi (HT*ttiTllle. NirirUni)}.
■■■■•rHn. Rsbwt H. (I98!l N«at ml rauttry Ina;*etlan: Ih* lelntlFle >■■
of tlM latlaB'i rrova {latlsBal «o«i]a^ Pna*: Maahlncton, Kt
Vtldar. k. «. and t. (. (taoCrudT (1966) -laolatlen ot SalMitallaa IVm
rooltrr* ■«■ Eii»liid Journal of Willclna. ¥al. 2T«, PP. IWJ-ISIK.
T Baotarlal mi r»tmXt:
Co^lloatlon Cwmt
B«otTl«l lnftotlBB«i
SalBontfloala
ShlBcIloala
Cav |rlabaet«Fl a(l >
oliolaeratttla, eoUUi, andoaardlUi, BmlBstUa,
thrroidltla, ■yocardltls rtwiaatold aiFBdFoaBa.
laiWr'a dlMai*. iplinle ibMMMa, Mptleaaala,
panoraatltla, oatcoBTellUa. •o-tltl*
■rthrltli, •rjrlhsa nodoikn. apondrlltl*.
Mptloa^a, lliar aad aidanlo abtoaaaaa,
Bholanfltli pnaiBOf
acptloaaala
•ndooardltls
Paraaltle Infetlana:
eiardlaala
Tim lull
Toioplaawst*
TTlahlnoal*
djatrophy, IjrBpholdal hyparplaata, Joint
arthritis
pancarditis, eantral nanoui lyat^ dlaaaw
naurologlaal aaqualaa, oardlao dTafunation
»I, 198*. p. 93.
,y Google
IRIIU>IATI{M COST ESTIMATES AND ECONOMIES Of SCALE
flost. Irrsdlitton «
sve cffiet (t ■ low
lOHtr coats ror proc
feaalMlity. The
facility or the po
II b« ua*d. pro«p«etl(e uMrs auat b«ll*n thai
1, or prererably less than, th<
,st .alue the tuneflta .nough '
jopete tflth ■Itarnet''
lloatlons for Ktoptlon
Itural rir»a from using t
to laenllfy the Hey coat conponrntJ In buiiaing and
ize pobBlt-50 irradiator (ltd to Illustrate hoit unit o
t of application or dose level, the alie of operation
„GoogIe
Cetaslt-<a ■■■ MiMtM ■> til* radlnloa aowrc* for —nrM r^ao^. OBs
of Um ■■■i^itla— Im HttlBi iw the Bd*I IrraMatan -as tUt ftar aT tk*
fin foaaa ar* rrratfiatva In their pMk*«c4 Ton 1b ifelMl^ barmt «r eratca.
r«Mtr>ttat 4wta rkr* -mttcd frw rk«olHtap*i. like eebalL-iO aM r»»l^ tTT.
or X-rrjt frsii a aetliliie uur«« Biit 'be used ta Irradlat* boietf pmdDcts.V
teIt-£0 tiM been uMd for itcrlltu loo or aedlul uppU« U ^ Daltvd
Stetei ilnee the aid 19«a's. Cebaiueo la u*M In icenl ftelUtlea trrt~
dlMlni reo* in Eure^ and South Africa (■•• ehtpter M tiit*r«atiosal
aituatian).
data Kara aatlMtad for slasle purpM* Irradlatw* to llluMrat* tka
Iswar eoaU piMaihle with an In-haia* faeilltii iladleat*4 to trratliv dm pev-
tfuot for a B^Dlflc purpoaa, InMher approa^ i«ul4 be -to Irradiate fooAa
In a wUlfiurpoBe Tradlator alaltar to lOM of Un coverelal coatract
dliorM rroduot* r«c«l>tna Different dole* aacrlflcaa rfflcUnci am) Increases
east* (DUti, 19S3. p. T). The Puthor dMtdM to eMatnt coaU for alnfla
Pirpoaa food Irradiators.
The daslffi ana co^nnenta of Irradiators ar* dlseiased Iti datsU IB
several atudtaa (Cbu. 197« BradDurne. 19T2; BrrnoJolfaMn, 19T2). The
follovlni paracrapha dlscusa the aajor coal eoaponents Included IB this
anilyil* (see rifuros V-1 *nd v-2).
net lAllliatif
Net utlllutK
that ts absorbed li
M dose required to achieve the desired effect and the
Icleney of the oabalt-60 (Brrnjolfason, 1$7^ p. 191.3/
olencjF la the percent of ene gy ndtted by the s«a-cc
the product.*/ The foraula for tJecemlnlnE the approilH
V Klsh energy electrons froi a aachlne source, with ■ aiailaua penetration
depth of 3 Inches, are not poHarful enough to treat boied products. Dathar
they are likely to be used for aurface treataanta of fooda or penetration
defined in footnote 1 of a
being Irradiated. *adiatl<
oonveyora: aoae radiation '
passes through the product
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
1068
„GoogIe
itant and Incrcisln
Is needed. Cobalt
wriofllcally replen
a half lire of 5,3 years,
n product throufhput. On
la iMt (Bradburna, 1972,
Shielding 13 n
general public tron
jipoaure to
les the Ton
roralng the Irradla
leading Into and ou
e needed to
produci'd. Biologic a
''shielding*
soarera or reHlatlo
. but no at
wchlne Is turned of
r for aorvlc
design of the conveyor s)rsten has i .llrect effect on
rfflclency of the source. Hany systHrg have »en trl
eilst today (Bradburne. 197?: Chu. 1976: Cuda, 198U:
„GoogIe
Saliricd •■ployees muld i*"*
safety offleer/ijuallty control
370F or 3°C to
or /plant operator and
•vcral days 1200 krads or 2 KGy).
Throughput capacltlci
proprlatc fteoeraptilc loc
rt or the California re;
oductlon. These miliiuii
slKd U.S. *laugl
extending shelf life by
n (250 krads or 2.S
krads (1 kCy)
h the 100 krad
,y Google
Htlng pspayas, Tlsh
Hajor .HL.Bptlon,
k of a Ingle purpoai
The Rsjor uaiaptlon
a or ■ ^a-hour prwi<ssii«
r ajrskuv irtth lower B0b»lt-6D •rriolenosr ind wore eliborat*
with htgher sfflDienDT. HsC utilltitUn efruimclai r(part«il
,y Google
or (iobalt-60 li
njor cfut coBponcnts — biologic*! ihldding, lrrwll*tor
llf eiptna*. Operator* of lrr»-
o purchiia enough cabalt-60 to
ler th«n Incur th* high tr»in-
tiereforg, cgats miy bt slightly
rdoalng Is not ■
rel.tl«ly high 1
coats In th* Unlt«d States. Oepalletl
Ipptndli V-C). FVoduct handling is a
costs at capacity Ilncla.
In addition to labor raCas. land
/ The author asauned t
lator are dlvlM'l into fliad
anged as output la altarad.
„GoogIe
■an*y sptnc to buy the met. oVer tta usi
Cojt (1 • D" - I
ij lUes for Iht cupllnl
< planfs long-run
□ (pprotlut* th* long -run
eiplioltljr Bonaldi
th* colt of dlBpoBine of
lal ohar|a or M Inoludx) In th«
„GoogIe
11,000 ti,oU
1/
s«"r*«»
MT"
on
'.nd'ln
St"rlo.i"l
itid'^li
Ip^'S?.""
sad on
a apteiric
£/
cob»lt-60.
lologlo*! ahteldl
g and
other buUdim
»p»ee, Irr
iw Chine
y .nd .u.l]
na. prodg
t handling «)ulp>*n
rrfrlgerat
ed u
■■'
Wuie sp
ce. design
nd *ng]
..ring, 1
nd. an
d Horklng
3/
Included t
h< >
nu
liHd c
stj for inv
itiwnt
cens and
nnual
coata for
cobilt-6[l
personnel.
repi
nl
h-.nl.
Led «lnt.
'""• '
suranc. a
d taie
a. and Mlarl
>g«i
P.r.l*>ra/p snt opt
product handl.ra.
supplln.
■rlible «1
t.n.nc.
5/
Free atana
e tent for
ry Irradiator
^'do'thl
oti;;
#M for
> HOBthS p«
s (s.e foot
y.»r.
5 daya
year round
y
lnt.gr.Ud
r«
11
y; »ee
e.t for Ooi
level.
Split port. ear.
aisaa ar.
„GoogIe
I?i
S 8 8 8. 8.
ft S t R S*
8 8 8 8
£ 8 S S
III
8 18
-IS ^ I '
ii?innnii? lag
I ihn 5 J 3 SI , ; s I . J dE
i i S I
„GoogIe
I u-
% I
^
sKI
; n
llll
=, 1 ! ^
n'-:
5 • 3 =
lisS
3r8«
Is- 1 =
-!•!
llll
S3
SI
it;
„GoogIe
ill iiiliil
! 1^ t ;
s :•! j; 2 ! = il : f s f , I di
„GoogIe
eSssIII i
B
iiii
U
Ilfl
g s
!'"
S °
y
?,
^fSi
8
»!5-
?ijS
= |5|
.-fj^
e s
>■ a,
„GoogIe
I III I I I i I i i i i i i
Sojo_ S S 8 o S S o S o_ S 8_
III
? s s « £ _ :
I 5l"3 I I = 's : f H S ^ I g|
,y Google
is
II
u
■oSsSs
I 8
t i
Ml
til*-
"•'.ml
-S§£2ESl
BE3-SSI
„GoogIe
I ^KS
I i^l
2 ill i I I I I ° ° i ° I I
■ lljllii l|°°i°l i
|£b* g 8 s t a 5 5 2
a ' *
g t 5 a r
g . L 1 1 ! Is li 1 1 =
I =:!: I I I 5l 5 I I I s
£ ^g^S S is 2 S £252^53
,y Google
I
J *5S
»S$S SSgg g
liS| i i
1^
«€5
g iggg
':'. !
0:\
a 2 "S- EC 2 K -i'-5
K S^5 ■3i"&;« Vt'>* S-J '-2""
e: lit! :!Si'5. It; Es . s 3 c: ^ar^
" -yaffil use's ~ S 1 m S'iZ •• i S S ¥ * -tZ'
K 1m.< 1. ~ □ e t: 5 ■ n g " S" =■ a-* I- fc -J "l
i
„GoogIe
ill
i s~si
III i I. I i
llji III i °
III I
i 8
?TE ii ^ ^
c 1 :! i s M? 5 I I i
I -'la ! 5 I 11 ( I s 5 ,
„GoogIe
H
.S • 3
h
Hi
?' I
"- 1
ill
m
llf!
mi
„GoogIe
r capiclty i:»p.cltj la d
the pUnt wsa deaign.d.
■city Is uMd and r«atln e
UB unit cDsi th
rr«dl»Cora op«r»tlng a
Certain *i..plo>ee3— pUnt manager quality control
■ nd olerie.l peraorinel and ahlfl supervisor a— are need
e (all alzca enployed laaa Uian ^Orpcople)
a of tn* anployeea do not ehanga auoh aa .
58-005 0-66-35
,y Google
■11 lions or ^
Fl»h fllUU
w.s
in Ippandl. ¥^.
2/ Papifi and it
prio* for 19B3!
j/ For iCrMbarr
oy Google
Buildings, shielding, and oachlncry coati are llMIy to folIoH th«
eral sonstruct ion mlationship where proAiotlirc capacity Incraisaa fast
r. cost, aUhatigh at e declining rate aa acale Increaaes 4NcGee, 197*. p
. Ihla rel tlonafilp alac contributes to the eilstenee of largar >e>l*
ct>balc-60 19 not ■ source of p
lied IhrouBh cobalt-60 suppli^.
g then design cepanltir during
n. This could occur
n»pt»r
lae or the flied nature of m
itlng small mlumes or produc
Igurc 3. illustrate th
tr 50 million pounds
50 nllllon pounda per
„GoogIe
N
** O —
3 3 3 3
O O O O
o.aaa
oo
lAOoO
z
o
1!
I-
w
„GoogIe
1089
Looting an IrradlsCor In acrlcultural produetlon. araaa with aaqutntlal
hari/aat tiMi for «ffareBt Irradlatlon-eoiipatlble eeaaDditlaa or Irradiating
non- agricultural Itau during off aaaaona iiould icaaan thl* undar utllliatlon
prablca.2^/ tinlul product* are subject to leaa aaasonal riuotuatlana, but
cyclical aHlngs over tin could adiwraely affect u» of Irradiator capacity.
imptions unde lying
ly Spreading I
2 cent per pou;
able V-8). As
Ttila would raduce poti
Table V-a. Unit Ceai
h large cobalt-fiO load
baaed on ■ apaolTlc aat of aaauaptlon
„GoogIe
a«n«lH»ttT to Cab»lt-60 Prte>»
Prospcctln aatra of (■■■■ radlitlon iri alto IntsraBttd In hm »«i«ltl**
th* ca*t of Um trtttmnt !■ to th* prlc* of th( rtdlolMtop*. Wl*t wwld
th« orrast b« ir tnc price of coBilt-60 doublad; Riliin| th« prtoc af oobalt
fro* the II t^f CUT-Ie le«-l used to eitlut* Cha unit eoata llatad In takl* V-T
In aobaIt-60 prteo ralHi unit eoats bj
The lnar*a>lng pareentace dirfarcnc* as voliwa doublaa oecura baeausa
absolute coat Increaae becoHas larfcr In relation to the unit ooat. tt
aipeeted. an Incr
aie In oobalt-60
voluw irradiator
•dMnliterlni h
Wrtlon of tol»l
<aU. Howver.
for oobalt-60 vll
alao increaae t
Free St.ndlnii Ver
k higher prlea
r intaraat ii tuH unit ooata differ bttiieen frae itandlnf
t products froa wny Individual produesrs versvs sn Irra-
tegrsted Into ■ slauthterlns or packlnB operation. An
r xould not Incur the labor coata of inloadlnc trucks
d torage apsce, loading docka. and oertaln auilllary
nera auMracted froa the free atandlng flah, papajrl, and
ra .a deterain* the effect on unit coata of awltchlnc to
or iihlch the fira hai no alternative une. The coats for
The trade off In snitching frca a free standing to sn Inteiratad irra-
diator is that a single packing house's voluae aay be too Ion to rssllie any
slgnlficsnt tconoatea of seal*. Although easts for soat Itsas mvld b*
saved, the ntegrated facility asy not be able to treat enough throu|hput to
reallte sconoalss of scsle. For eiaaple. sn Irradiator Intsgrstsd into a
2U Costs for shipping the eobalt-60 and loading It Into the souro* rsok
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
Tibl* V-IO. Unit CMti for Fr*t 5t»ndli« Varius IntnrMcd Irradiator* 1/
Coaaodlty and Annual
Thrsuihput In
Hllltona of Pounds
Fraa Standi nc Md
FHh flll>t»:
7/ Th. unit e«t» m tht. tabl
are b.
ed on a ^»olflc set of MM-ptlon. '
listed In Uppendli V-l.
y The costi of tn* following
offlM sp»e* <SM'"t froB th* oi
Mitrol r
oa and doaliHtry lab), ■alntenanoe
rooM, labor to unload IruekJ,
hulldln
and cooling refrlgeratrt itorag*
■pace, and land. Only <5 pare
nt of p
ant Bwager's tlM, 30 pareent of
50 pere
nl olerlcsl person's tlM was
•lloeatad to Intcgratad Irradl
tor. S
lary coats reflect this allocation.
fish fllletlnc plant with an a
nual vo
Due of « ■llllon pounda eould trut
the nilats for O.J sent laaa
than a free standing Irradiator of
ikely that a single fish filleting
plant »uld have an annual vol
r to e or t2 .nuon pounds. Unit
ooaU for thase two integrated
reBp«tl*elir, ooq«red with a
atisent cost of 1,6 cents per pound
for the largest free standing
dlator. This 1.6-c*nts trestHnt
rtstlon to ( free sUndIng Irradiator
Adding transportation charge i
0 the t
oaplete
„GoogIe
Wul Iplylrtg this cost tj t
output of 11.3 blUloti pogndsVesultj lo s total annual coat of iSO ml He
In Ijoth case! the medium snil Urge chicken and hog plants account for aftt
1101,10 he subststitlfllly higher. In addition, there ere label change costs.
Comparison of knnual Benents 13. C
' 186-280 BO
n 3/ 3«1-653 15^
2.3-3.5 106-20
2.2-1.2 186-19
B 86 percent at TI.3.
,y Google
UlltoB* Of pound*
25.9 and Un
26 to 51.9
5r to 77. 9 "
7S to 103.9
104 to 119 .9
1)0 M 155.9
15' to iai.9
Its to 207.9
fareont oT Total
Total pounda of idwla and cut up chicken packed
1/ Plant* packloc 52 ■lllloo pounds or aor* of O
MdlB or lar* plant* In till* atudf.
Sourea: Food Scfaty aod Inapaetten Sar?lec, KSD
n n 19n wa 12.7 MlilS
Tabla *-12. Sin
. Hoi SlauiMcrlBB Plaat*.
Sin of Plant
100,000 to 399.9
1,000,000 to 1.299.999
1,100,000 to 1,599,999
1,600.000 to l,B99.9»9
20* to 25t
256 to 30«
30«.ndOT
t a iiaiiina* nal^t of 160 pe»d».
ts ilaiWtTHl «00.000 k^ far jav (or 6« allllaa pi
■adla or larai pUMa la Ul* (tatr-
FM« amt»*f ai ~
,y Google
IrradlatUr Is ■ eipiCal Intensive tei:hnoloey
of scale with treatment cosia declining as the In
For the cOTiwdltlea Included In this analysla, pi.
pronounced ror Irradiators treating lees than 30 i
Irradiators of this slie or leas ulLI not be able
costs possible with higher throughputs.
Food and agriculture flr«» that do not have the volutiea to Justify i
cent TBI ly- located Irradiator to treat their combined products. SwlUr
■ fee for the IrraOlaLlon treatment These fees are e.pected to be hlghi
than costs for an n-houae rradlator heoause the rieilblUty needed to
handle a variety of products sacririces operational efriolency and r.lsej
coats. *lso the contract Irradiator iian;a to aohleve a profit from the
service. Tor seasonal products, however, the contractor's fee ny be 1*1
<at of shipping
int. they will h
■.a at getting the cohob
la In pUnt scale econoi
be strengthened If Cher
prefarably (reattr than,
„GoogIe
EnglB«rlne .n
Co4«I Allwntiri
Fm4s, CxC/Vol
Food, Rostan, MaiaaenuMtt
E Ftrjt IntcriMtloni
3*n Di*aa, caiirornli
Dlrti, G, «, (19B3) -Th)
Faetlltld,' ptpi
'Itnt CapMltr— T*ehntOBl (nd E
ith International Hasting on >■
Oot«b*r 21-2e.
«aU wm IL»llabll ty of Cantrg
lOBlD Cuna Id«ratt<na, ■
a *Mncr, Vlan
of Food by'lontzl
cy and EcDKinlrs ot Slit
rha Now Learning. «d. Goldictaitd, H. J. , Han
.tie. Brawn and Co.. Beaton, pp. 5^97.
1. J., et. al. (tSTB 'SgcoMiendatlDn of the Ftni
>n ot Flah and Fish Products." Food Irr.dl«tlon Ir
E prspsrsd For t
n of Food, Daoeab.
1983) 'Co-aerelal
ation Kewnletter.
Ki of Irr ■!»>--
,y Google
i
s
s t
ii it
1
jl
Ji
i
1
1
1
?■
1
1
1
:
i
i
8"
i
1
i
i'v-
3£
"5!l=? Ill :;
i 1
\\
n
ii
8 =
1 1
1
a
I
1
It
n
a
1
1
1
1
1
„GoogIe
11
If
li
m
' iiiiii
E iiiiii
= 1
it! ":=";: =
i!s SS8iii
si: -■"'
ill
f piiiii
■ • iiiiii
1 Siiiil
= iiiiil
1 ->>>:!-:
3:
1 1.
1 iiiiil III
iiiiii s'f
i III
iiiiii 5li
1 ^^^!! ^
It ill
e
B
iii,
lilllJ
iij
1
„GoogIe
m
m
i
s
^1
:
i
1
S i
1
i
1
Fiii Iji^l
•1=3 MS:;
1
ill
1
^1
s
t
s
■
1
1
B
I
1
i
ii
ill
i
ill H
s
i
1
1
i
1
a
5
a
1
Mil
Mil
li.i
1
1
1
1
5
„GoogIe
Sri ~-'
[Is;
?!1
111
1-1
t&
it. 15
ri
„GoogIe
I . s
1
i
t
--
t
i
ii
t!
iiiiii
li
i;
"1
MUM
sis
11
-•mi
i
i
:
1
1
.Si
ill
ill,
1
l1.
iilli
atfSJ
■3
•s
1:
i
ii
i
it
'si
25
Il i
in
Km
pi J?
1
i
j
i
1
f
„GoogIe
I -i n
IS Iz
ilU
51
H i
„GoogIe
]n
ill
1
i
il
V
1
s
■
k
1
lit
— Ill
nil 1 1
i ; a i i 1
" " " _■ ™ V
b«5 :=
»ll II
I;
i-i
jls'slil
„GoogIe
.1^
If i
I!
3:1
H
:hj
It is
IV :
- si
Oi^
:i
= «]i
!!
! : =
i.
fi!l
„GoogIe
iii
1
h
|i
i
"~ - ■ 1 H
1
1
l-
1
S S S
1 1 1 1 ! 1
i s 5 1 M.
Si' !.
;»l Is
5jI ;•
Ml tl
Iii Iii
- I .oj?
lilJiii
i..3?-3-l
=51 :
„GoogIe
i
ii
i ir
hii
S ill
i
ii
§11111
s a s s 5 s
S S £ S £ S
il
mi
I h
i 1?
1 r:
i to.
""I
IS
;^ ^ 2 f ^ ^
Is:
! B S
iiitii
L ' £ J ; « h * -
'i ii ^ >. s ; . s u £
c ^ Ji « a - J ^ - o
„GoogIe
Blooucir, et.
V.lue of CS-n; Cyeulw. tett.IU Peeifit
NsrthHHt 'Labor
■ »ry. Drift
Pinal Report, SeptHbir 19B4.
Deltch, JeroH
Jick U. OebuF
B. Jr. ■nt ttirrr W. bichw. Caet-knetlta
SterlUi«J MlUt.r, Sob.l.t.oc. Icoh.
■DC-? 88-09-7 1-0
rtKot of CoBserce. Bore»u of DoBedtc
D«lK. Con.lruct
Ion SriCiK Cq
t. 198* McCr«rtUH Co.t to(ot«tlon
^CH. Ptlnc.
too. N.J.. 1»S
3.
tbd-on, MtUlia
. Preofdent o
the loteroatlonal AaaocUcton of Reftlgerel*!
tloD vlth author on Deceaber 7. I9S*.
Jsrrctc, Itober
n. St. -Uot
pe (Gaana) Radiation Source.," Preeerv.tlon
of rood br loo
ret<r.on/ >oc.
ugoo; noVtd'
: CIC Pren, Inc.. 1983. pp. 137-163.
H»ni Sq«ce Fo
ot Coeti ISM.
(obert Si>o- ffeane Coapanr. Inc.. Mngetoo,
HA. 198*.
Hsngclll. Rober
t C. ffctfcetlni
HnKarch teporc
Service, rtbrui
m. 113'. u.s
ry 1984.
Dapart-nt oi ^Icultor.. I«clc.ai:ur.l kaae.
„GoogIe
. NICHINE SOUKCES OF IkDUTIOl
la addition
rroa .iHtrw «
tlM IppllcltlOD
■ rWlatton froa rsdlotaotopaB,
n antlabla ranilna froB Mall
ln>B raqulrlnf thlok aoiMr*t«
r tn ■ aaM raolllty.
ElMtron aosaltriMri ar* eurrantljp u:
m thi InBulitlon i
iirtng hllh alaiiii c-
plaatlQ fo
od wrap, and
UMd to tr
aat food! in
MOhtn* radiation at th
dtainfaat
Mshlna ao
ir«a of radi
untrlaa.
High
tnttty clertr
Mtarlal. Elaot
12 H*V (Billion
astlvlty (FBt-rcl
n altctroni aalttad rroa a fllM
tarnatlna aagnatlc flald Hliara 1
ipr*ii*d In klloxatta (kw), dataraln<
er 10 to 20 m for Induiti
iM of aeetlaraCora producing a
B«n«flt» of Waoh
On* of th« b*n«flelal c
rcaa Is thalr ability
•qulrad. Radlti-
d slilna off radl-
. th* anai-Dr lavali of ■•■
p. 8). On MaV •quail
,y Google
Muapiulatlon looatlon to tb*. Irradiator a> altk tht ■<
dlraatlOD oT tha alaetron baai oan ba ehamalad halptnf to iMpror* tha nat
utllliatlon afflaUnoT of tha aouroa to lanU of *0 to 60 paramt, ooiwad
to i; to 30 parsant for oMialt-M (Daltoh. at.
al.. 197!. pp. T2tT3).
Hashing Muroes of radiation ire capabta
of aatarlalg per unit of tlw bocauaa of thai
hUh doae ratea. Kadi
hava ODBC ratas of around 20,000 rods par nlm
:e, uhila Hchinaa are
or dooa ratas of 60 ■llllon rada par slnuta o
aora (Dutt. ISM, p. 2
oonTaror syats auat be daslinad to aova prod
It qulolily throuth the
kn intanaa, low-anarcy radiation aourca would
ivarproeaM tha airfae*
food itilla undarproooMlng ita Interior. Ihu
produot tMoknesa and oonveyor ipead to Haohl
Penetration Llltatton
"" "-"1"
of laall partlolai liM trilna ai
tron Baaau Through Hatar
fferent food products aultlply tha
m. 19T3. p. 191.
,y Google
Dm panatritlon lli
(•rtlnc th* ilMtron b*i
art produced i*er Tilgh "
tungBten *t 3 MeV ar i
lova. the penttntlDri of i-riys .
In th* forn of hmt J
MS WH. p. 7) Tnti
.r pl.t-
teohnlque orfera d»p*r pen«tr«tlon and tli«r«f(
bMn ttehnlcilly proven yet. and questions rem
e VI^. Convenlon Emciency for K-nys with Hmgaten i.
oniforflloB Efflcleney
Snill Btohln
£-11). niese scl
1.02 inoh throuBh
iuit»bllity for t
Cowirlion
With Cobilt-60 Fidllty
tly into III
elded uch
er>. H»nuf
ng rood pa
els of 150-300 keV ire ■
•ilstlflg pi'setailng llTit
nes are onl capable of
ticuliCea *n<) poxdari.
•Dturtrs or
kW ringe.
•lt-60. 2/
This kW po»er Is •qulYil
arger macMnes ana l-r»y
in.tl>r tQ thfl jUniU fad
needed (ae* figure TI-1)
„GoogIe
ij
IS
„GoogIe
tanwKi* oosts for
htghly B
cipcctcd to b* hi
n BdOlClon, th« ■
electricity to poiwr th
T>i* capital ooata of alMtron ■ooataratora vary Hlth anargy leval aid
Cost astlaatcs ifor alactron accelerator unita range between 4^00, OCo tor a
^ Hev / T; ^W naohlne and U.S alllten for * 4|.5 KeV / 150 kU linear ae-
lelerator (o'Dnnnell SS^)- Costs for shielding ether building Space, and
aaterlal handling -cqulpaent nust be added. Costa for the aelf-ahl aided, leutr
energy nachlnea are approiKutely $^00,000 for 100 UN imlta. Oparatlng
Doats tor both typaa of ■achliwa would tnolude labor, Htntananoe, auppllea,
niyalclata and englnaera In the United States. Canada. Franoe, Unltad
of tlila type of acce
le or very high avarag* pone
y of California at Da«« are
ternlne 1 this nex MChlTie
Ihaae vary high power Ifv
m processing, but may be Bdv
Brynjotfsaon, k. (19T3) 'Factors InflueTielng Econiw
e EKsluatton of
rradla
Irradiation, Panel Proceedlnga Scrlea, Vienna. 1;
9T2) Cost-Benefl
Ehergy Agancy, Vienna. Jlustri.. pp. 13-35.
^
Farrell. J. Paul, Jr. <198n -EiaiBlnatlan of Produo
Soianoa. Vol. MS-ZB, Pto. 2. iprll. pp. 1TB6-93.
naaotlon. on Nuo
nad
«r
„GoogIe
ST. Vlan
■Irradlitlan In tta* I^.>duatlon, ProMKlnf, tnd Hindllni of toot,' (198*)
Food tnd Drui Adalnlstrttlon PropoMd Hula, Fcdaril Railstar *) (No. 11,
F«hru»ry 1». 19B«1, pp. 5TK-S722.
LMun*»-3olir, IMnucl C. and Staphm M. HatUiwi {1}g«) •CoiparaU** Eeoooat
FMtsrs on tha Um or Ridloninlld* or Elaotrloal Sowoas for Food Prooaiil
with Tonltliv RadlBtlon.' Papar ireaantad at tha Stti Intarnatlonal Naaiing
on Radiation Taahnotofy, San Uaso, California, Ootobar 21-26.
HattlMHa. 3t«phan H. [19B5} lattar to Roaanna Hantier Horrlaan, Juna 24.
Nablo, 3. 1. ass*) 'TM Status of tha Induatrlal Uaa of Salfahlelded naotr
BoBbajr, India, )Uroti 1-3.
O'DoniMll, Halilfl H. , 19SS, lattar to Roaanna Hantiar Horrlaan, Jun* IT.
Rutt, Jaaa P. {19BO ■The Applloation of Hlita Enarfy Elaotron Baaa looalara
tors for tha Presanratlon of Food.' Papar praaantad at tha Igtta annual
Haatlns of Rataarch and Danlapaant liioolatai for Military Food and Faolm
SfstaBi. Inc., cnieago, Illinois, April 3-5.
„GoogIe
tLTEMtTIVCS TO inUDUTIOi
a Irradiation
Laohnoloclas. iTrad
its tKhnloal and as
aaiblllc
taohntquvs both In t
prooassora, retailer
, »nd e
mauners.
Thla chB
Mathods for E«Un<Hn|i Bhalf Llfa
Food teehnologlata oonti
or pariahable foods. Three aj
ui to develop wayi to Unithan tha Hialf
preaches are highlighted belw.
Contrallad Storage
Hafr Iteration Is a boho
or Hny fruits. Apples, pear
stored for lone periods {^yal
an atBoaphpre filgher In *arBi.
•Ir. This (nvlronof-nt slauB
■ethod used to lengChan tha Barfcatlnc s
. grapes le«ns, and tree nuta are coiH
and ftr,t2tT 19S2. p. ]6B). Controllad
United Slates to atora applea for ]>aar re
ere iioftg* r.)c«s conblne r«frit*ratton h
dlo.lde Mj und owr In oiigen than n
sloifad doMi and vngr funcl are suppressed <3
Fackaglng vterlals suoh «s polyethrlen
Hodined or OMV-
retall neats (nice 198^. p. 121). Under refrlgerBtlon the J-layer paakai*
oan protect ground beef for 10 day* and solid bear euti for 3 inaka. Ullaon
Foods Corporation has pattttnntd USDk for approval to usa a controlled ataa-
sphere packajln) aystaa to Increase the shelf life of fresh pork {Food Chaa.
NaH*, 19B5, p. 2i1.
Edlbla Coatlniis
tnothar shelf life ntenslM technique la to apply an adlbla eoatins to
fresh produaa. nuts, and naata. Savaral vvralons of thla ooatinf ealit.
On* Material, oallad Pro-long, Is a pawdarsd alitve of lipids and ■ polj-
„GoogIe
t». 19K, p. 531.
, 19K, p. 51).
alia rtduocs ausseptlbllity Co ohill
th* oppoait* «rrect1 ■nd increases resistance tg sane t
paira, ind pliaa.
Natural adibl* coatlncs hava also bean davalopwl li
days (ikndres. ^9Sab. p. 5B) THe cditlne Is a tastele
factured fr» vegetable oil ttiat is applied In conjun
IFllck. 1985).
rtah or Uy coaMnlng ttH
rish wastier wl
jTitroger) In the packag
valued iiy the Industry
Fliofc. 1985).
aignirioantly inoreasin
sheir life thr
the potential for C. bo
ullnuB type E o
flah spoila ir proper t
•perature cdntr
(Eklund, 19BZ, p. 111)
„Googlc
VI 1-3
FlMtgltlOB AlttmitlK
trol lni«ct ln(
'tatitlon In
Include using oiygenless elr coli
th* grain illo If (rop«i>lj waltd
four nnths idthout tnTaatatton (Bol
Pathogana In food dapcnd u
and, 198*.
d Stagaaan, 1985 Thus control proeaduraa can b«
allnlnatlng raw product con tanl nation, tapraving prooaaslDa
aloplng nore affaetlva po*t proeaaalng aathoda of patho^VD
BiBlth orflc
■used by Salnont
r (Snoyenboa, 19851. Ther
altli protaction
Other Baana na
terial pathogtna
sr acaauraa Includa
hr feM Bill throt^
Soaa of tha aoat
nd thoaa attll on
) produce anlaal feed Ingredlen
e cloaa to aalinon.U.-free by
final product,
using ■ 1.5 HaV
of paltetlied f
1. probably not
aantal contaaln
a another teehnlflue. Israel has built a daaon strati or, faoll
Hertron beam eccele-ato- to Irradiatlon-Bterlllie Ho tons
ad pe- hou- (Kllng r, et, al., 1985), .SalBorena-rraa faed
tlon throUKh the al . by rodents, and «v»n naeot Jmother
lla proUfer.tlQM in anlaala can be feed additi.ea ^loh
shedding in fee
21 Hatntal
production: us
e SalBonellfl persistence In animal Intestines and SalBOnalla
1 «tter (Sioyenbos, 1985. PP. 90 and 319).
good fara practices to prevent croas-oont Hi nation during
SalBonalla-f>-ee eggs, aanltlaa the ohloken house In batwaan
„GoogIe
) Altir th* proccdur*! at thi beginning of th* (liugnMr llD*>Hh«-*
and other pathogens In t
tank with lenperatura lo
■ til SalaonelH £'; adding luetic acid, a.
tnlnaClan In t)ie kitchen; and monilorlni tor Sat-
li line {uhlch Hill be nare practical as sore
5> Infom c^nnrclal food
natnCBlnlng vtl-y Ioh remger
ntll it la well d
a (bout tM iaportsne* of
duoatlan of thg f
aev«n Sallwnella control options. While Curlln's atudjr Is pa
uould be Interesting to conpsr* the reaulti against a study u
ting horlion and considering various clustara of optlona to d
'optlasl* package of control options.
trichinae and coala only T to ID cants p
option Is a blood rait that Idantin** ■
/ Sttn acaldlnc —f alao replaea dafaatharlDi Baetalnaa to *o>a aitant.
/ I procedure used in aona U.S. planta but not tboa* aiportlnf bo Europe
here several oountriei hav* outlamd ohiortnatloti of elilll uatar.
„GoogIe
Tabic Vll-t. B*ii*rit/Cost Cmp*rlion oC Elann SBlaonall* Control Options
for Poultry In Cinidi, 1982
Control Dptten B/C ratio ■/
Clesn-up «nd dl3lnf«cttoii of t
Sterlllie f»m) to prevent S»lii
r young ehlckt to S«l»one
based prlurily on aipert
rlyt
«nlg™ni opuon
."Liiiir
kill
oement of BarMge
ubstantlilly grea
•» tlasf. dU..t H
cooking re
to hogs. Tt
ter than sla
Tnio
plaoaa mndll Cont
rol Options
Stveral options fi
ne bean sj
th«
" * public heelt
to oook seat thor
;,;;:;%':
Hat
oats, and soil ■
nd before e
such
« *.g«tloi..l ™
Bpslgn.
•«.;
° 1 screening progra. for pr
drugs (Fiyer and Dubey. 19B
se it wuld eipose some urln
oortion of SDK hoilthy fetuse
■ Inspection tedinlquM suoh
=h their hands after cort»ct with
could 'toe cut by 50 paroant with
h uould dettet those ulth
or trestHnc with MiBoiAat
pproBoh haa lasjar draobaohs
he to lie dnigs or raault
Ington, 19801. Firtharwir*.
J/ M*at n««tj to be haatcd to 6<fiC I MO°F} for ^0 ■Inutes (Dubey, 1
for 20 Btnutai.
,y Google
to.opH
Control of toioplamosls In cats on rarma raising rood inlMls
tlnatlon oC cats strict <lletBry control for cats (no hunting rat
)ne or these three options Hill be 100 pcroent efrectlve In ellnl
isDoals. Nora rigorous study Is neadad to datamlne tha ralatlva
re relatively high net benefita to society.
either
a and
natlni
lenla siglnati la a pathogen Identified under USM'a Food S»Ttty
and
Both these options cost tine and money, aso. cooking ■.r fret
tha appasranca or ma iwat and restrlcca Its use: coolced mat cs
1 as fresh neat, and previously froian naat «>y "uaap" too auch (
■i^aaMi
color, and flavor than cannlTig Movavar, proeaaaora have continued to ref
tnernal processing to shorten the heating ttaa and thus reduce the stress <
prodiHt quality, Meptle procaaslng uaca the principle or rapid heating a
58-005 0-86-36
,y Google
. 196}, p. 99). Ur«t Tlmm hHting appllad to
■etal oan r«ult( In •itriBtl)! short prgo«MlBC
Unlvardty vT Caltfarnla, M(t* ar* taatlnt a am
iquld, ult nr sucar; paralt* paoliailBS low-aot
requirwent* by 20 pcreant (knon., I9H|, p. 1S)>
Rapid aurrao*
derdoped by Rl<
imfnoribla «nv
fr««ilii( tachniquaa.
(Von hmdllni duagg aid prwanta
*, p. 60-61). A fraailni pi-OMM
'yatal* and craatlni an
I detalopad bj Bcatrlo* atlOHB treaia-drlad *e(ctabl*a to ra-
' than air-driad vtgatablaa (ana of tha twncflti irradiation
, 19B*b, p. 35).
onution of loa
Jin iapoi-tant oonslder*
Ity or any nau procasa li Fi
If Irradiation Is balng con
0 aDandon ailatfns
olalon Is idlathar
d ppodiwt to raaoup
.hla atudy wa not to dawinatrata Irradiation
to other taohnoloflaa. Hotieier. to give tha raMar
nt costs, tabl* VIt-2 lists ^on istloatcs for
be TUilesdtng to oipare t>ie estlutcs in tabic
, tha varying tli» rranes uitd and Iffarant
uMd bi aaeh resvsrcher. Use. sua* traat«anta
y IniolTa auppleiHntary practlo** or handltng
3,Googlc
8£ «R„SSS-,,_
1 1
I *
s
-,£2S 2323 S 33 S^S"
S S S S S£ G:
t-flll lli^ ■ 1-2 I ■ I l! I
Hi's" e"l I a'°8 t I s si t.
,y Google
ni. REFEREItCES
tBdr*a, Cal (19B«I>} •Edlbl* <
Food rroMMlln. vol. W. WO. , Jlnuary, pp
taen. (19t2) 'Iw rroduota Hade Potslbl* Hlih I
Food*. (01. n%. lo. 6, Jun*. p. 108.
n^fwent. Vol. 107, Ho. ; Novt
Engl nter Inn. ^'^ ■ ■5*- "^ ^*
>llMt Holitur* md Gtmm
No. )3, DHMlwr, pp. «a-49.
Halntains OiHlltT Utrlkutas.'
58-59.
. 32. *>. 13, *«rlcultur.l
lfc«t InJuttrj. «trloultiirc Canadi, 19B3?
land, Frank M98*1 "Controlliil Atnasphsra Stori
t OC, Davla.* Food
J.S. Dapartaant of Icrl-
isanted at til*
Kia Mall
■■Fl*taHattier' Could Doubla
feat. July 16. p. 9.
Fllok, Gaoraa (1985) Talaph
to Certify farU
r n>oduot.' (I9S*) Tha M«»hln«ten
with Tanya lobarta, Hajr 1.
M.y So, B 2i.
d WlsstMTi (1977) Coata laaooiatati
Impact Ion Sarvtc* i
S. tepsrtHnt ot Krlcultura, Hay
ion or ralllatlon?-.
Uarlean Journal of C
itetrlos and GynccolDgy. Vol. 1*1
ardiiar. millp 0. et.
1 (1982) *s«siltiR lltfrn.tl.. H
age. Bulletin 1906. rinlY^r.ity o
'c.??f°rn["'
KUnaar, T., H. Lapldot and I. Rois (19851 *E*ad Dadloldatlon (In laraal) —
In Updat*.' Eitandad Synopats: Intamatlonal Syapaalia on Food Irradiation
Proosaslnc. UU-3M-2T1. Uaahtnston. D.C.. Kareh 1-6.
,y Google
■t»ble».' lH»t
d Statai MpirtHBt .
,y Google
S*<*ral U.S. Fedaral Bganclas have re(ulBtory roles In rood Irradtatlon.
Tha initial regulator thsc praetssor InMrtstad jn trradlatlni fsod or
■nlaal faed aust satisfy 3 th* Food and Dru| Idatnlatration (FM] of Ui*
U.3 Dcpartawnt, of Heajtn and Kusan Services. Proeeiior* puit ocHp^l' with
FW'a egulatlons prescrlM I safe use of radiation on roods or obtain approva
through tha petition proceaa for additional uses. If a pfootssar wlsNea to
also petition USbA for pcnlsalon. It faollity using radioisotopes 19 the
radiation flowoe nust ba licensed by the U.S. Huclear ReeuUtory i«rni3»lon
or an ^reenent State If the radiation la aadilne-ganerateii the nachlne
■ust coaply uith FD> perfonaanoe standards. The operator of the facility
■ust ooHply Kith State regulations f apptloable, and Hitn Occupational
Safety and Health UaL Istratlon Units f^r worker aiposure to radiation.
Casks vhloh radioisotopes are ahlppad Bust caaply utth tha Departaant of
Transportation's aafaty requlraiaents and design criteria and auat ba ravlmwd
by tha Nuelaar Ragulatory Coaalsslon.
CoMWrclal Irradiation la legal for onlr a few foods In (h* Unites] Statvs
today. Spices for tngrtdlent use are the only foods Irradiated, and tha
■oluMa are shII. A rule proposad by FDK in February 19B oould llou the
use of lOH doaes of radiation to delay ripening cf trrah fruits and vegEtsbleB
and to kll usects that Infest food. Irradiation of foods for lonmrclal
and dri« lau of the united State i' U.S.C. 301-3» {Takegudtl, 1983. p.
Z13J. V A I'JSfl aoendnenl tj his Aot specifically Includes 'any sourca of
of a food additive J U.S.C. 321). Ihr Food Additives AmendBenl of 1956
(P.L. SS-929 requires processors to conply oitn FDA regulations prescriblnt
aafe use of radiation to treat foods □ processova nay siAait a food addltte*
petition ulth data supporting an anndDcn to these regulations ISI U.S.C.
3«B). me Federal food brug. and CosnetU A<: states that food is sonsldarad
adulterated If It has been Intentionally irradiated, inleas there ta a ragulatl
of radiation at
ect Infestation 1
to .15 KGy) to 1
1/ Jo the Federal Food.
Drug and
. -foe
Irtioles used for food
and all Ingradlents In
cles (21 U.S.(
;. 321
States Code; F.L.— Fubl
le Law: C
;fr— Code of Fi
Fll— fodar^ Ragister.
„GoogIe
T*ar Ippravad
(.05 to .15)
Control alaroblal
croblal dlslnriotion
„GoogIe
uMd bMWM 0f Um mtlaMllty of !•■■ •ip«itn and aular ta ma Btaartoali
In t963, FU apprond a patltieo subalttKl ^y th> Dcpirtaatit of Uw *ragr tor
Irradiation of cann<!<1 baeon at doaea of U SO to 5,600 kradi («5 to S6 kOri
(ze FB Ii>fi5) HoHoer, In 19£B, FD« rcvolced the ippronal after iddltlaaal
<lata froa antnl feeding atudlaa
Ua on m 5116) At that tlB
Irradiatad hia baewa* It Ml baa
(33 n iims).
In JuIt 19S}, fDI approvad (aaaa radiation ts aontrel alerobtil aoofcaala*-
tlon In drlad sploaa and dehydrated letetabla aenanlTigs (enlen and larlle
iwnidrra) at doai-s up to 1,000 krada (10 kCy) (HB FR 3D613). In Jiaa 191*.
this appron m expanded to ooiar Inaeot Infestation as wll (49 Fl 2*9C8).
are traated prlaarlly >rtth athylana oilde. ka the rulee goyirnlng Mrker
eipOJift to ethylene oilda baooaa atriotar, jplce nanufactureri mt look
Two UMS Here approved In the auanr of 19SS. Dried aniyaa praparittoaa
oan be irradiated it doses up tr> 1,000 krada <1D kCy) for Inaeot and Bloroblal
control (50 TK 2*190). In July, FDl approved the treataant of pork cHrcaaaea
and freah =ut= of pork at doaea between 50 rd 100 Vrsda 10.3 to 1 kGy) bo
onntrol Trlchlnella spiralis (the orja Ism thst causes trichlnoala) (50 FR
2965B-9!. Irradiation's use on pork must slJD tie ■ppro.e.l by USDi (SH
Under ailatlnf FDk r*(UIatlona> retail packagaa of irradiatad (tkoda «■■%
be labeled -traatad with tannine radiation- or 'treated with (ana (or
alaotron) radiation.* Wholasala packagaa and invoteas or billa of IbiUdb
for bulk ahipaants auat add the ptaraae '-do not Irradiate again' <2I CRF
179. 22/2" ).
t packaging aatarlala oan ba Irradtaftad,
aia ? CFR 179.*;). For eiHpl*. ir ■
oould b* uaad.
Congress Included Irradiation In ttie food addttlK* daflnltlon to b«
siB-e that the procaaa uea aaf* by requi ing sdequete aafaty taata. For
addltina that nay become a large portion of the diet, wholeaOBanaaa faadtni
studies are perfonwd to dateraina that the additive la ■Icrsblologioally,
iiutrktlonally and toilcologlcally aafe (Takaiuohl, 19B3, p. 2151. In
t adltlonat snliut feedliiE studies, laboretory anlulB are fed aiaggeratad
aaounta of the test aubsCsnce to provide * safety fsotor uhan applying tha
rasults to huaan*. Feeding enlaala enough of a spaclfle irradiatad food
iteB to obtain a 100-fold safety factor Is cloa* to lq>oaalbl« baeauaa it
Hill sanraly affect the mitrltlonsl balance of their dleta (■i9 FR 5715).
„GoogIe
to ..tr.polite
■ qh.mIo.ny 3
coneentr»tion of unique radlolyti
to 5,[)00 Krada ($□ VQ^) beoausc of
to uM Irradiation on foods has been (ranted
Idual petitions subBltted to FDk. Honver,
Dlaalon tnraj(h t|*ney action.
„GoogIe
On rabnury 1*, 198<, FDl pubUahcd * propostd rul* Uiit would allow
tha uM of Irrvllrtlon to 4*la|P rip«nln( of fr*ih fruita ■!«] vcsctiblas una
to kill iBMOt* thit iBfMt food (49 Fl 5T1«-ST2i). Doscb oould not (leaad
100 tirsdt irGj), FDl 1* slao rroposlnf to r*I*« th* Hiinun doBsae far
drUd ipiocB nd *«Mt*bl* MaMUlnc* fro> 1.000 to 3.000 lends 10 to 30 kCy).
This jjropoiad rul< foIIOH* in advineod notio* of propuod nil* aaking and
publio ooMwnt partod laiuad In March 1981.
FU rrapofa aipandln( tba aouroai of lonlitn( radiation far troataant
of fooda to Inoliala a-rara ganaratad friM aaohtnaa oporatad at anarn 1«««1*
not to aioaad S ■tllloa alaatron (olts. Iha propoMd nil* Mould rals* Um
pcrattted ancrgy latal for alaatron accalarator aaiAinaa Trtm i ta 10 ■lllloa
alaotron volt a.
Thia a^a propoaal Bontaliu raiulatlona for flna Irradlatlnf rood. Flrw
tnuld ba required to Kava -a quallflnl p* son tiltli rtprn knowledge of radlatlo
prooaaainc davrlop i ich*<lul<d praCrat apectfrlni tha dose range needed to
aohUva the ntended effect Tn addition, FD* ha) reserved the right to In-
Bpaot th* prMeaur j records pertaining to th* Irradiated roads. These
records uill include tAs food treated, tha lot nuaber, the icheduled proccaa.
dlatrlbutlon of the Irrad ited food [.roduct and data of Irradiation. 1h*M
rocorda auat t« svalleDle for FDik Inspection for 1 year b*|POfld tha ahoir
llf* of th* Irradiated food.
On the oontro
verslal laaia
■ of labeling. FDl
rm
sraed ita earltar
poaltlaa
■tatlng:
eed for a Bpadal
1«>*1
on Irradla
ted foods
pTopossl voul-d ll
the cond tlom. of
of irradl.
to »» sefe" <*9 Ffl
57 8>.
ih* propos
el iiies o
B to isy ho>
«Yer. that FW irf
formation
be ling Issue
on this .res. FOA da-
elded to r
etsln the
labeling requlre«nt, -trested
w!
th lonlilng radlat
Ion— tfo
not IrradtaU sgaln
adlatad foods and
for
the Imolo
e or bill
'of ladlnf uaad In shipping bul
>tat*d that th* •«*
noy
d*t*raln* whether fo<
a above ICW krada
Wy) can to
lout additional to.
entsa studies oT r
■terlllied
the tray In 1976.
Theae studies subnl
tted
to FD* for
their re
1 1W oonalatad o
series of 20 inln
■ss the safety of
«htck«i
SVerage d
o»e of 5 900 KradB or
S9 kOy) in relatlo
o mtstlons. ti^n
*ff*atB,
toitolty, •■
>d other aal-ety con
cer
n. Thayer. 19S«. >
p". 355>.
Iterlnc {.he 90-dBy public oosiaint period, FM reealaad o*ar
FDl Kilt study th*** csaHnta to b* aur* that tha publto'a oonoa
the preposad aotlon are addraaaed in tha final rule. M tha tiaa of t
„GoogIe
fSiS ]tpprQ»»l for
> Food Saftty *ikI inspection
■nd CoiBctle let <?i U.S.C 153.
at IrrwllBtlon wtll FD* Has
HuptUn is an
te or foreign
Heclder (IgnM ■ regulation
3 3.000 krads (30 kGy)
M51. Under the reBulation. i
l«r9 auBt label Trash ft-ults and ngatables that have bee
els tiaiat Includa an Inlarnationsl logo (see figure 1 in c
ateaent 'PlCOMJkVED* or "PICOWAVEO TO DTEND SHELF LIFE" (
iCion do*s not bacon a final rule until It U publlshad li
■glJter folloHlnt rarla« by Ui« Offloa of NaiuwaMnt and Bi
,y Google
r 3tata letlons ■
t b* BBiwlBtant Hltli
vlalonB In tha Fadaral Food, Drui
praaaptlon qutatton la llkaly to
of rood othar thw Mat
narallr hava Jurladlctloa
c Fadaral praeBptlon pr<^
Inother araa iihara USDK vgulatea the use of
radiation on fooda la
throuth the quarantine protacnls at tn* Jlninal and
Flant )<e>lch Inspection
otlona to .volfl the accldMUl
Introduction or ipreadlni at anlnsl or plant pest
ana diseases between aerl-
cultural areas. Kith the U.S. Enrtron«*ntal Prote
ctlon Agency-s cancellation
or ethylene dlbrcvlde'a use as ■ funlgant for fre
h produoe, »PHIS has had to
develop and approve alternative dlalnfeatatlon »
hods that win aaiiay*
quarantine loala.
aclentlats since the 1950'b (Engel, IMS, P. 6). II
aaearoh on Irradiation of
Hawaiian papaya to control laelon fly stid "tdltfrr
nean and Oriental fruit
rilea ia aurflolent for kt-HlS to praaorttf > usra
ntine treatment level of
a Bilntaun or 13 krada t.Ab kGyl absorbed by the 1
sect larvae (Secretary of
Mrlculture. 1985). But FO* approval ^uat hi. gran
alternative can he used. Reaeardi on Irrgdiitlon
smtablllt, to control
Neilsan and Carlbbaan fruit files tn (rapcfrult la
tlon of I*otop*(
Ihe other three Federal aBenoles that have a
role In refulatlna food
Irrad atlon technology are the U.S. ICuelear Hegula
tory Connlaslon INHC) ,
the Occupatlotial Safety and Health *ilBlnlstratlon
(03Hk}, ind the U.S.
Bepartnentof Tran.port.tlon(OOT).
Facl ties using a radioisotope, auch as coba
lt-60 or eeslum-UT. -uat
b« lUenied V th* NRC or an agraemant state. Twe
flty-aevan states hava
■ ntarad Into agraaMnts irtth the NRC allowlni thaa
to lloenaa and Inapaat
and poultry products after
uTay hav* left s FSIS-lnapected plant to datemlne
whether they have baooM
•dulterated Clpolls 19851.
SCO Board of Suparvlaora
tabled • proposal an JIugus 1], 19S5 that would ha
*a required poattng of algn*
for Irradlatad food produats at the point of sale
In tha olty and oounty of
San Franelaeo (CFI, 1«5, p. 2).
„GoogIe
saf.t, d.^>lgn f^Btiirs
;/ 03HA dfwa not han any Jurlsdlntlan ovar itorliar iipaBur* to radiation In
racllltlas using reietor-produoMl radlol lotopaa la thalr radiation aovree.
However. oSlu's current worker aipoiura lanl* ara aaaantlally the aaaa aa
NRC'3 standard! Tor ■ailnim eaposure to radiation.
,y Google
Th* DapartHnt of Enargy [DOE) has no r*gul*terr role tn rood Irridla-
tlon. Continuing ■ resHrch Interest or Ita predeoeiior igenBy, the Atoalc
These rood-related progrsBS sre discussed In Chapter T. DOE also prodtic*B
satll auunts of aobslt_6D and has limited supplies of cesluv-ITT which war*
r»co»erad froa raproctsslnc of spent nuclear ruel beiun In 19T*. DOE Is
■■king part of tha oesluiit-137 supply available on a leased basis to print*
trredlatton ooapOTlea. This situation Is discussed In chapter XI.
VIII. REFERENCES
1-8, 19B5. I
Generei Ser^ic
ons for Etaluetlng the
repared for the Director.
tlon. Washington, D.C.,
985) conversstlon with
ichard E. Cunnlnghsa. Dlr«-
fety. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Ion. U.S. House of Repraaent*-
•anent of the Food Safety
nal SjBpoalun held In Wsahlngton. D.C. Karofi
ale Energy Agency, pp. 297-309.
or of PSIS (19K) Latter to Dr. Martin A.
technology. Inc., September 9.
n (196*) Code of Federal Regulations, title
the Production, Procewlng and Handling
Packaging. Michigan State University.
. Offloe or Stendtr
f Food.* Food
„GoogIe
!t. THE IKTERNATIOH*L SIIUHTIOir
Thi IrrBdlttsd food
In 1983 oontalns several
•979. The 1979 atandard
r 3. 19B0 to updal
,y Google
1 do5e applied dspAnda
I of t
should nnt t« rBg
b*«n *st*bllsh«d'
R«t»ll Labtllnn
In
1983 »
rlite for uny purpoau. Th*
ur« ipprovall of hlltwr doMB
d thit th* 1,000 krtd -valua
jpp«- Unit (bov* Hhlch Irradi
1 *c or twIOH Mtilch s*r«ty haa
CoBiilislon rgvtritd Ita
rstdl labcllm or irradl-
■gei of IrradKttd fooda
ell 1
ln|. TTh Food
be Idcntiriad.
t typ* of Idantiri-
1 U> ■* food uhien
1). The CoBidtt
to the n»™ of the food- (HoRay,
nded that rrsdlated Iniredtanta
r In Icited on the label. Thaaa
AllB*nt.rlu. Co«d»lon at Ita July
■rter two rears the laMlinf ra-
s — 300 k
h — 2Z0 ki
Souroe; Codei. 1980. |
„GoogIe
t the Cod«i Alls*
Ion for fe-lrr.cti
d IhF 19BD Eipr
roods should nornally b« IrndlateO only cnc
repeatW IrridUClon BUHt He justltHd. Un
19 BllDHd for die fDtloulng roods: 1dm nola
sted et dos
foods •t\crt the foil dose Is ippll*d In Inat
allM.ils fo
r a speelflc techn
loglcel purpose Codei, J^Bt, P. 31 The t^u"
t-bU Bveraje dose
rologlcsl propert
Here not slgnlfleintly Inpslred (Deport, 198
T. p. 12).
The Codei Hlnentirius Connlaalon has i
lon'^r^Id
Bllon F.pllltl«
InternttlOMl Opportunltlea for Training end Heap
national Facility for Food Irradiation Teemolog
tHbHshed Dy tn* F«D. the I»H, and the ttutah HI
and Fisheries In 19T8. Ita purpose is to serve
a aa part of feaaibUlty
Iclals frcn QS countries
<Farkas. 1985. p. 3. up
/ The 19 other aenbar eountrlea, as of Iprll 1995, are Irscntln*. luitralla,
angladesh, CwiK)*, Egypt, the Fedarat RapubllD of Garkany. Franca, Hungary,
ndlB, Iraq. Israel, Italy, Halayala, Htitoo, iha Matharlanda, the Phlllpplnaa
yria. Turkey, and lugoslnla (inon.. ISBS. p. S-T).
,y Google
ni*a* tuo Inttrnatlonal (roup) tuppltuvnt tha aetlvitlM of th* Joint
ria/lKl Division Isctopr and Raillition «pplloatlons of Uonlc InerBy for
Food and Hgrlculturil bevflopiKfil headquartered In Vienna, Austria lAloh
the quarterly Food Irradiation ■ ■ - *
■ othar ■eetlnea focusinf on food
-19S3 (Farkas, 198<,
i9S^. 27 countrlas n*d isauad uneondltl
LLy. ana tha quantltlet Involvea are vsr
ually ualng t
lilng dlspoaabla ncdical auppIK
n* Japaneae have op
erated
a coinerclal
an averace of 15,000 tons
tatoas par yaa
raeant yaars. Iha Shlhoro
o Irradiator h
oapaoltir of 10,000 tana f
19BJ. p. 3«>. Ihe Kilhor
0 ftata
1= Irradiator
and proceaalng oonpltl op
by the Shihor
ttokkaldo for an approilma
t r i.aBini
Japanaa* rood additive i.
United States to keep pot
atoej
froi sprouting
Tti* uln objaetiva o
f Ih.
Irradiation tr
, the irradiator
quality potaloaa,
hf year (Ibid. p.
y Thla 35.000 tons doaa not 1
,y Google
„GoogIe
TTi« Matnarlinda hil bam vary Botl** In tha fa
th« lait Mvaral yaars. B*alitaa providlni i pilot
irrzT, tlM Cutch hiv* a BulClpirpol* »«r*loe Irradl
Irradiataa about TO-a; tona of food a uaak. Tb* H
for aleroblal enntrDl piB-poa*s. Fresh agrlouUiral
traatad (Ltaoborat, 19M, p. 2). Paekag** of trrad
Hatharland* mat carry eh* »ywbol •tionn In ftgur* 1
on riald In
a tor for bb«
In Ed« that
#•%
Irradiated foods wre first 1
ntroduced to the South tfrloan aarkat
during 1978-79 Barkatlng trials of
trrsdlatsd potatoss, asngoal, papayas.
and strsMbarrlfs. Currently, tbere ere tbrae Irradiator! In South Amca
that treat food. The nexeat plant
upgrsded by HEnO, Inc. In 198), la
de»oted solely to trrKHaClng food
In l^ai. S.OOO tons (oonvartad to 100
krad [1 kCy] equivalent) of ftesb
fruits, soae vegetables, and aango aohar
radiation procaaslng coapany that
Dsas gaaaa radiation to aterllln dlapoasbl
nedlcsl produsts and crosslink pis
sties, Irrsdlated sbout 18,000 tona of dry
and dehydrated foods and spleas In
eonvertad Into a casnarelal plant
n 19B>. and Its output of food for tb*
iplcea, potatoes, onions, snd sapa
ragua— have been treated, but the doalnant
food product has been »tr»i**rrle»
Recent Iteas include herbal tea, sugar
cane yaast. ploklad aancd. and va|
table pastes (van der Linda and Brodrlok.
1985, p. 3). Ito labeling Is requl
•d for irrsdlatad foods sold in South
Afrlcs (de Het, 1985, p. 5>.
Sovlat Union
Saai-coaasrclol seal* dlslnfestatlon of grstn has been reporta
■ port elevstor In the Soviet Union ( Zaklsdnol et. •!., 1982,
rrsdletlon facility, uhloh constats of two 1.1 HsV mth 20 kx
elaotron seoelarstora. las plaoed in servlct in 1980 (Ibid, p
aooclerator Is capable of Irradiating 200 tons of grain per ho
gh January 1983. 250,000 tons of grain have been dtslnfestad b
is facllltr Ivan KoolJ, 1985).
T6-T7).
Irratflstlan
,y Google
In igQC, ibout 3.000 tons of dried v«g(t*bl« Ingradlcnta.
cFs food for liboratonr anliHti. ind tniyac* wtrc Ir-
d Buyle, t98><. p. 6).
vegitsble aeasoniOBS ire Irradiated In ICsrvay, France,
a (Farkas, 1965, P. 9). An Italian ngetabl* 1 ' '
neld In Vashlngt'
on. (1985) 'First Haetlng oT
n Food
i, August, pp. 29-39.
Oder llKwntarliJs CiwBlsslon
1980) Reconnendet) InCerngtlonal Cin^r
■dlitrd
Food a. CAC/Vol, KV-ffl. 1, Co
19616) Recognenaed'liiternstionil Code
arm of
In Scuth Africa' apeaoh pras
ndards frograaiM. FAO, Done.
(Vera (t98>) -Marketing of Irradiated
nted at the Hti Internatloral Meeting
ng. Ootobcr 22-26, San Dtago,
„GoogIe
EtKnnc. J.C
F.rk.s, J. 1
■nd R. BuyU (1981! "Eleolro-wohanlcal Englnwrlng Aapaota
Cor Daslgn.- Revue IRE Tljdachrirt, Vol. B, Ko. 1, pp. 2-9.
IFFIT II*po
9S5) 'Recent DevelopiKntB In Food IrrKllBClan In Europa and tha
Srapotlua
Entrgy A|«
cy, pp. 215-230.
(1981) -Status Report— Food Irradiation In Japan* In CoaAlnatlon
held in Co
Agency, pp
LfMhoPSt, J
0. (19811 Lattar to author datM Oetober B, 3 pga.
(1985) Lattar to author dated April 17.
W. F. (19BO -Pilot Plant Operatlona for the Food Irradiation
UB*d,. K,1JI
WHO loch. Rep. Ser. 659, G.na.a.
11963' "Ct-mrcial Eiparlence with the Shlhoro Potato Irradiator.
atlon Ke-.letter. Vol. T. No. 3. PP. 19-32.
Introducln
, H. J. end H. I. Brodrlck (1985) -CoB-ercial E.perlanc* In
Radurlsed Fooda to th. South African Karkef In Food Irradlafcloo
van KoolJ. J
»n KoolJ, J
«-S, 1985. International Atoaic Energy Agency, pp. 13T-14S.
a. CHeu) Letter to author dated Hay 1».
a. (1985) Letter to author dated January U.
(19B5) "Tha South African Food Irradiation Prograwa: Rol* of
Intarnstlo
Atomic En*
IMladnol, a
CT,»r«pko.,
No. «, pp.
si Syaposlim held In Washington, D.C.,. March A-8. 1985, IntamatlOH
gy Agency, pp. 323-33'.
A.. A.I. Hen'shenln, E.3. Pertsovskll, R.A. Salt»o». V.G.
and V.S. Rrihaalnskl (1982) "Irduatrlal Applloatlon of Radiation
cation of Grain." Translated fre* Atomaya Energlya, Vol. 52,
5T-59, January. Original article aub.ltted N,y 5, 1981.
„GoogIe
R reDERM. BESEARQI AND DEVELOPHElfl ACTIVITIES
Kilvement In food lrr»ai»tloii r«»tBrch d»t«» rro" th« "
-«B *jt8Dll3hFd by ?rs3lacnt El=onhow»r In th» osrly 19
10. Che Army Ouarte
DIT.Kll3SlOn UEC)
econoBlc reulbtllty 3
ivta of Cre:sh co
( Bun 1965)
In 19B1 (G»0. 1976, p.
Canter In PMladelptili. 7)ie Matlck trradiitlon
and the Unlwnlty of Lotwll tn Hasiaotiuaatt*.
reieari^h. Including th«
■clllt) »■ subaequently
ladalphli raaaaroh ointar
,y Google
Il«PTtMnt of En»rg> [POt)
MC'a ourrMit IntcrMt tn food irradiation fill* und*r
Utlllutlon ^atr^ *st>bLl9hwl tn mT to find UMi for th* nuolotr uaita*
Trm M^mna produce Ion. TTiefocus of DOE'a rood rradlitlon Mtl«ltl» 1*
on low doH radiation traatnent af roods IevsIs b*lcM 1DD Icrada (1 kCj),
•apaolallT Insaot dl slnf »tatlon of rraah produce and tnaccivatlon at parB-
•Itaa In aaat (Gilbert. 198*. p. 3>. Tha radiation louroa for thaaa appll-
oatloni Is »*luB-t3T. • ridloaetlta aatarlal Mparatad fr* dafanat nuclaar
Mit* aatarlal.
in dad savaral
ntracta In conJuiKAloa
with tha U.S.
Dgpartaant of
»irlo
ultura (USM)
al laiinraltlea. Th*
a to detenln
a tha ran
ntandad aurpo
ea-odlty. kpulloatlona in
er atudy Include:
Ing Florida grapefruit
and Callfornl
■eanslng
ahal fish h.r
ested fren po
Bed along th
coast of the Unltml
States nd t
actuating tr
nd freah pork To
pork Irradlatlcn
cent a to
y contracted by OOt
lookad at tha
blllty or IrraiJlatl
ng port
trichina* par
a te CTW K
nlral. Inc..
9S3 1
another atudy rmdml
by DOE and th
Natlona Por
vera lntervlew»d ta learn thair r
taction to th(
Ion concept and ■
aerial of deai
ngs of Uila atudy
ara dijouaaad
tn the Aapte
on b.
neftta and conauHr ac
To >«-a
loaely aiaula
a oo»
■orolal conditlona. DO
la fading • tl
close to production
ar**a. Itia irredtator waa
by Foster Vnr*
ler and
the idllpplng c.ak.
Mhleh -ill eoi
tain 250,000
Packaging Co.
The Irradiator end
ahipplng cask
are jiwa
ing a.fel, rc^laws
Faolflc MorthHCat.
cobalt-60 Irradiator built and
This Irradiator contained HO. 000 curies of cob«lt-60 atid was use
of eiperlaanta on the possibilities of extending the ahel fe
fruits and vegetables. Tne results of these eiperloents were ra
two USDA pii>llcatlana (Sranlage and Llpton, 1965. and Braalaga ai
)965>. The Irradiator was returned to Canada end suhsaquantly d
DOE haa oontraotad with Rodtuell
.hat wll Teat betweer 1,000 and V.OOO
of produce per B-hour ahlfl for fruit fly contamination and ahalf
tension. The Irradiator will contain 3 nl IIatI cu lea of ocalua-137,
negotiating a oooparatlve agreeaent olth trie Kitlonal Food Proceaaors
tlon to looata the 13 iillllon facility at their nevly purchaaad raacarc
„GoogIe
valopwnt liborstory In Dublin. Callfornli^ BullcN
CHirch ind training f.cUlty for Inte
ry, and tht Inttrn.tlon,! na-wnltj.
DOE *lM h*l plan
r Agrloulturs, 19B5),
r fruit ri, control I
ogr In 1563. « pHot-so»li
a-1960'3 by AEC to (iplori
rrn Rrglonal RcstBrch
tudlH on hl«h dQse
SnfBty of Irradiflll.
tudylng sh«lf lir*.
elwetn 750 and 3.0
,y Google
loH and Btdlia 4om Imdlitlon
■ Itlon of trash <ihli**n ind bear
Liboratory KlantlHi art ilso *
thtlr ptreild* t
th* ERIIC InvolvtB lawer
•it*nd ihair 1
food poltonlng b(et*r
In (ddltlon t
■M oth«r cf facts
up to 1,000 kridi (10 M>}>) on th* dwo^w-
■uMl* during aitcndtd atoraic Food Safatjr
udylng Imdiatad polruninlurittd Itplds.
^loclcil ■ poll IB
nlng •ceoptabl*
ic through th* UM of low enargy, lurf
th« radiation aipoaur* with other troa
atoraga and us* of ehaaleal fungleldaa
On tw> oeeaalon
agrlou
Ita-al
3*r«le* and othar US
a ting aalected produ.
«. 195
■ungoca. East Coast
jhrlap
alng ca
th tha Eoonoolc Reaaarota
sale faaalblllty of Irradl-
9T2>. Tha 19T2 eoat-hanaflt
R the lata 19&0'a
dlr« a Hat of flra
(Food Irradlat
ehlllad eounterpi
Con Id
1 Hadlstlon Preservation o
1980. Thla CoMlttee a
eurrent food irradiation aetlr
19S1>. [*Hls la also th* chali
Irradiation. Th* taak fore*, i
In thta araa. Mat* qu*rt*rl}
aottvltlaa and Intaraats.
1983. Philip Lex
ce on food
ulatora wrklng
oy Google
Witlonil MTtng FlahtrleB Srylcg
The Nitlanul Kirlne Fisheries Service imTS) . ■
1985>. The fsolllty wis deilgiKd to IrradU
■ t ■ dose or 200 krK)i <E kCyl. The Gli
■ ny KldlCloiiBl oabilt-6D. lo the so<rei
the suthora visited the fsolUt,. the ■
tlorrsl BursBU of Stsn
stBna.rcls to U.S. Ir
1. N6S has supplied eipertlie m
aughlln et. a\., 1983). Doilnetr
„GoogIe
BrSIi^.. H. J. .nd H. n.'c
ouey (1965
Ca
xa Radlat
on or Frul
ta to Eltend
BraHtCC. U. J. *nd H. J. U
Ipton <19£
.una ne»
) r,
ion of Ves
atatles to
E>t.rd M»rk« LIf,. Mirk
C«rv«r. J.H. «i. .1. ()96B
dies, ftjr
Dept. Itgr.,
e>L> of C«aM^
elil Fisheries, T*chnDLag
U.S. It«.lc Energy Conmi
CosptrolUr G.n»r.l of th»
1978) The
DepartBent
or the truv's
D.ltch. J., J, W, Osburn Jr
ichim (19
Dl»ti Gtorge 19fi5 -Fa
Radiation ProervaCion of
«""« a"
ppo
Was
of Don.s
[ion 13TJ
national
.C. pp. 3
., Harch.
Acade-W of
sllM-P«t
D3-313.
GUHrt. f. ChBrlM (19841
atnt or Enargy.- Haarlnsa
3ubc«Mltt« on Eiwrsy Ke
July 26,
Joi«phs>n. Edxird S. (1983
Kaylar. ,t. al. (1985) "Th.
tlis Jnllea Stat. 1-1 Fo<.
-TeatlBony of B
saaroh and Pro.
"»n Hiatorieal
Co«i.rciarF«
tieviM o
. 161-90.
sibi tj
Set Me* *n
S. HOUM 0
rood lrr«
f Irradiat
■1-8, 1985
« in U.S.
I, U.S. Dapart-
r RepraMfltatlvaa
iatlon.-
m Seifood in
ga of ■•> Intar-
nsllonal Syiipostii.- fi.ld
Lewis. Philip". (19Mi Irr
n Mashlngt
029-^35
F^
d>: (^han
Inter national
ember.
i!?'
.K. (1983
•Iladiatio
NcLaughl r, H.L Killer, A
Duality Control of Food ?
DoalHtry for
and ChaidBtry. Vol. 22. 1
n 111 terra t
,.«"'""i"»'":;.;::j:."k'«;
bruary 15
he EasUrn
2, Septwub
Component a, "
and H.>,-PeterMn. Boca B
ainlo. h.G. DliO.roglu, «.
and Degraf
nponent of
Re
(19B3) ■
1. 223*.
1-73.
Phyalcs and Ctie-latry. V,
Ihayer. 0. W. (19B4I "Food
Regional tl»..rcli
er, pp. "9-60,
U.S. Depart-ent of Comarc.
Suppllera, and Hesearcn.
Suaineaa a
„GoogIe
OUTLOOK FOR FOOD IMIDIATION UD n
». The Hcond
nill>« triataan
nhlbltlor. delay of ripening,
ne requlrewnta. ind iniotUi
I kC,) (»iion.. 19856). Tire regulation does not beooa.
■ nageaent and Budgat,
„GoogIe
Th* lam
voluBt of product ne
Caoaraphic
lly cent
llktlj to
b« uaad In 1
ndustrlai
■■rly
in th* urkctlna ehi
±rrM
1 t, 13 „o
« ST pcrce
Uon
noth.r d
product 1
^IS ^«t
Ht(t
and poultry alaushtar
duct
on cTClaa
DM"
d for Brn
fits
to aohlave Ion a**ra|a t
>r« thara 1« • canaolidatlng point
SHailan paptfti would aatlafy this
atle charBptiPlitlo 9 steady ^*r
t to Kit rrulM and *((BtabUa.
ft Bor* wooth and eontrollabl* pri^
lrradiatidn'3 use on Foods partially dapcnda on tin futura of aurrsit
alternat n trcatnenc • Ona aajor raaaon for tha rapid (rovth of radiation
atarllliatian of nedlcal auppllaa la the atrlotar atandarda lapoied by the
Occupational Safety and Health Main 1 a tr at Ion for wrkcr aipoaure to the
dlbroald KB , irradiation's futiira •• a dl ainf aaUtlon traatJ«nt brl^tcn*.
requlreaent prior to aiport, irradiation say b« appropriata.
foodbortw dlMaMi, iuoh a> aalaonalloala and triohlnaita. Thta ua* will
depend on aithar the drsirf of the food Industry to luprova EonsiMar BDaaplanaa
of'S prodiNt by lessening the potential for diseais or tha fetarnaant'a
dacialon to Inpoae stricter atandarda for alerobiolaclsal aafety.
Bsdistiiin-ateTll led Mats in alrtliht eana or plaatie pouehaa ara Ukalr
prsferences for traditional fresh and processed neata and high production
costs. Canned seata are not a talCh volwe Itia n U S. superaarkets. Irra-
di Ion costa IPC likely to ba hi|h because of the large dose suppLnaantary
Radlatlon-atcrll ud asats «*pa davaloped by the tray as possible refilacc^nt
for trad tlonal canned C-ratloBs and aay ba daaandad for spaelslty usa»— •»(»-
' aarinas. space buttles canplns trlpa, and other usaa ittar* apse* and tialght
*tt laportant c ona Iderst ions.
oountries has been alsad. Irradiated potitje^
'by consuaer group In South Ifrica, -wtiere r
•itensine educBtlonal -campalen Irradiated stnanberrie herbal leas and
of an ntl-irradlatlon ca^ialfn tarteted touard tbclr product. Co^aniea
do not want to risk the good will of their brand ines if Irradiated food*
Hill be rejected by consiaMrs. It tha ssaa tliw, there could ba baoaflta
fpoa batnE the first to aarket "aarar* food products aiBh as trlehln«a~aafa
pork OP sslBMSllaa-rraa eTilekan.
„GoogIe
19811. Tt\ty p
I proMems, 3/
au, p. 16).
Possible Innunc ayatem compiicsi
an ImdlstM Isb diet, ind by DM wt
Chineae hinateri fed irridtited flah I
and Sadaslnn, tSTS; Uvln* and Ivanov
Ganany {Srlkanl
J
„GoogIe
conpoundB arc irodiBi
«ralDla«
sequentlir nand
ridiolaalape mat aatlsft Ch« radiation ufatr r*QUlr*-
biF tb* 27 agrnenen Statas Uteri or ■aohlno-produacd
t attittf statt re(ulatlani (chapter VIII). Th* NIC
covorlng Imdlator design and oparatl-ng prooaduraa.
t both uarliBrs In the ficillty and tha (anaral piiille.
RC'b Division of Fuel Crcla uid
aoHnt Stataa ( Cun nlnahaa , 1SS», p.
ccirrad Khan mrlwra fallad to
bid. p. 3). KUC , Ttn^i tioiu wra
lyaCam dailffiad ta ensure that •
■hen ttM radidtotlve 3our«« is
iilit for MeMna-^raduead radtatlan
, Dlreatjr at »
•rcially available Mthod to datinlna ir * food haa twan
lixlnasDanna aatlud to
identify eon.
irredletad foods IBogl and Helda, 1983.
p. 2). Thay report th
t the teehnlq
ue win only wri. on dry fooda, aoch aa
t picas and nllk poHdar
<:he.itt«>so.nce Intenalty of dirf.rant
foods IrradHtM at eq
a ..y vary considerably (ibid). In 1960,
nitlal find If
g3 froei eiparlaents ualng ultraviolet
lipit to identify riah
doHS of 300 krad* (3 kGy) (KnabMa.
'981. p. 3971. Until
post-lrradli
tlon testing aethod is davelopad. rasu-
latlnB food Irradlatlo
oust be base
d on proceiilng reoords, not analrMa «f
the produot.
Should irradiated food
be lebelad a
leval?
The lie»e of labe
ing IrradlaU
d food Ingredients and produota haa
iBportant lapllsatloni
■ireaMnt that uholeia
e ItoBS shoul
A be labeled to alert purehaaara that
„GoogIe
too nuch eipoaure to radlitlon. Leaa agreement eilta about r
of Irradiated foods. Chapter 111 dlscusaes aom of the retail
the United States want Irradiated fooda labeled at the retail
that retail labeling wuld alao assist In a recall effort If o
Consumers who are unfaniilar with the technology aiay erponeoua
*t a 19B5 International aynposlua on food Irradiation, consum
58-005 0-86-37
vCiOogle
•1U60 hii ver
cobilt-60 ind CM1WI-13T— and n (Itetroo llnaar
llltr ws closed after responsibility for food Irradiation
ad to USD* In I9SO. the Nuttoniil Marine FlIlMrlca
n Glouceater, MaiMshusetts still aperatUe, but
tr for Food Irradiation Tachnolofy uacs tha
•qutpaent are ganarall;
■re also possible tralnln( altea if the facilities'
>lr plants aval abla. Ftrw that buy Irradiation
■t>l* t« r*e*l*< on-*lt* Crilnlns Troa tb* atllar.
attn absorb
s niutro
Ihst tr
nsforjiis it
the Hestern
H««l spher
e only th.
tha itoalc
Ins. Die
enon Na
jlsml snd Caneral
Pltaaanton,
Callfornl
Jarre t
, 1982, p
XEa, ■
Onadlsn
oro* corporallon.
wirld's cob*lt-60. 3/
In 198»
or cabalt-«
rriB Canala value
•t »11.5
199*). Baoa
uaa of th
producing CO
19S2. itEa ha* not
for the laat
fen year
ppUls 0
cobalt-6
food irrsdl
tion held
19B5. an s
«ECL planned
ei In ^gtl
. 35 all
■ 9**1. */
« Bost dealrahl* radiation aouro* for
!^int non-radioBct ve eobilt-59 In a
3 bsir y*(r«. In th« reactor, tteti oabalt-59
-; Into radioactive coball^D. m
'•* eivaerclal auppllara of sobalt-60:
.n Ottawa, Canada: Nevtron Froduota,
Electric Nuclaar Qiarg} Hvlalon In
idBlnliter and «iTiag« p\ti Ic aervicas. Ir
pri» ■») pitiUc accoun tall 111 ty are eahtr
«/ *n Irradiator designed to dlslnfait SO
ipaar with > ?6 vrad (.26 kGy) doaa wuld i
dlator applying higher doae of !50 kradi
of fihleke yould need about Z allllon ourl
an a Sl^ow ]>roci9slnf daf. five daya par
^oeaaalng rata. Both calculation* (lao 1
affleleney of eobalt-<0. kn Irradiator d<
■fftelaoey Mould raqulra lea* cobalt.
illllon poixid* of fra^ produoa a
led about 100,000 cirla*. An Irra-
(Z.5 kSy) to 100 Billion pounda
IS. Ihese oaloulatlcna arc baaad
wek and aaaiaa* ■ *t«*dy yaar-romd
laiae • 2S p«ro«nt net utlllxatlon
ilgnad to Increaaa tha net utlllxatloa
„GoogIe
1968 (Haddai, 1965). currently,
Ths price of
He cQDfllt-6C I
■L. al.. 1972. P
-137 rrcm nuole.
n Tt less wne
-137 a In the r
Sloan. 1983. p. 6>.
r
„GoogIe
.S. irradlitari {Ibid; HeHullln and Soan. 19S3.
-137 would Iniali* rcproecsilna otter d«f*n««
frcn eaaarelil pontr plints. Tba ■oaatary
desirability of the irmtUB and plutonlia
■RBlstanei and th* n**d for ■ddltlonil c
Would food IrraJlatlon add to tht tranap
adlolwtopea auat be replenished to ulntaln th* anoiBt or Fro^uct able to
be treated CobaIt-60 rradlatars iftth lar|* loadlnia may ricilva r«plenls>ncnC>
evarr yair or tm. >*ile IrraaiaCora crvatlni aaall qiantltlaa or adalnl Btarlnt
loMr doaaa ar« likely to puruhaae antra cobalt Inlttally. rathar than Inour
tha tr ana porta tlofl and loading coat* aaah yaar.
Gattlnc tha radlolaotopes trm the rcactora to th* araapaulatloD attaa
hlghiiiT>- Special iMpplnc oaaki for radioactive aiCarlal have baan taatad
and approved ty tha U.S. Departaient of Tranaportation (DOT). HoHcvar, momt
cCBinailtlea pr<Alblt transport of nuclear produota on ttialr roada.
iBOt
apes tm
radiation aft not ikaly 1
0 add Hgnifl
nntl.
rage vnl™ of lo- Inal
n «aoT eaaca
the decaynJ
ioureai can be raaotivatad
For a
mpU.
iEa offera to taka back
its apant cobalt pwulla.
the sail atw or tha
eobalt panelle mt»
na that
any eobalt-eo that la
not abla to ba reeyclad m
Hid be a Unu
e por
ion or
the aBproilaatel, j.fiB
■lllion cubic faat of lo«
epoaed in 196* Itaon. . 1985o). 6/
Also, eobalt-eo frcn radla
ion therapy
equiring Intena* doaaa can be
raoyclod to tha lowr lava
uaea needed
by a
food ir
radiator, nerafora. It
la poaaibla that low la*el
Ispoaat of c«balt-«0 eouid
daellna ulth uaa of rood l
radiation.
Like cobalt sourcoa,
he DOE caslH
-137
napaula
s are relativaly aaall
and net addition to loo la
dacar raU of caal«-l 3T ■eana a lonier
pario
en raloadtmi ocaparad to
eobalt. HDHvar. ca*liB-t3T In tha DOE
oapau
n a waur aolubla for.
Hhloh aaana a laahir« or n
ptu-ad eapau
a could eont
alnata an» watar in th*
„GoogIe
eulatlona for tr.nspDrllng rfldloiaatop#s on hiahxaya a
aHit»rl»l= that have brcn loal or Inproptrly dlapoaM (
Can U.S. flrma aupply Irradiator fl«algn »nil equlpaantT
t-60 la m non-watflr aolublt attal.
„GoogIe
lif* otttMa th* laagrvhle —rift for
provided the recipient country will acotpt IrredlstM) fMd. kt the ■■■•
Ik Irrsdlatlar tould Illcw other countries to opmd their experts to ua,
Deaeercbers at the Rational Marine Flsherlea Service point out that auDMsaful
pplleation of Irradiation would allm Canada. Iceland, and Norwaj to Inoreaac
th* Mount or fresh fish flllats they ihlp to tin Unltvl St*t«a (Kijlor, at.
al.. 198!. p. 6).
Another uar Irradiation could opand International trade la br dl*-
Infestlni prjducCi prohlbltwl fr« being laported booauM of quarntln*
rmtrtctliin . This usage alao dapanda on the laportlnf ccuntrir aooaptlns
tb* Ipradlitlon trestaant.
Will Irradiation .fffct the fconoBie atruclurt of the D.S food InduatryT
a nan product or adds special appeal to an eilstlng oif Fins that srr
quick to adopt such a technology «nJor an edge in prafitebillty for vilst-
To the eitsnt that Irradiation night replace eilstlnf teehnoloflaa to
preserve fooii It couU affect the structure or 3oii>e industries. It waa
raitiitlon with other technolagle*. Based an our analyala of traataant
floats It d«M not *|ifKar ihet irra<ii»tijin nil dramatlcallj altar food
preaemtlon pranttoes. However changes In consuoer preferences ir In
food safetjT regulations eould change the econoilcs of rradlation. For
aidwla, ir new regulatory seasureg proh bited uae of taportan chemical
prcaenatives or fuaiga ts, the coipettclve stance of Irradiation Increasea.
ethylene dlbra
latMnt for food.
of IrraHUtlon on future nduatry atru
coat* for five applications using varl
ivarage eosti per unit of output were
Irradiator and the atount of produot b __ _
ralatlonahlp beooaes less drsaatte at annual voliSHS Rreater than !0 allllon
oods aay
herlak
of a
1H..1
a polaonlnc
th
nfonutlon about
csight 1
ha pot
itlal •ff.ot
H) traataant
■adlatora.
a* the
treated
Inor
ased.
Howavar, thla
„GoogIe
'^^^■"99^^^^H|
115S ^^^^^^^^1
.._....„ -u:;--—-;,:-— 's"L-.£f::.. 1
uI'.'2t •••""'•• •' —'• '•' "•' '"•"•'"• — ■' ■"■«"
»n,l« S>.l... t».r. .r. ..., mil h„ .l.^hMrl., .»l r,..l,
cTsalng plants that account Tor only a sinll portion of total
(see tables V-11 and V-1?). Eighty tfl 85 p#ri:er,t of U.S. pradaatlon
edlun ana Urge plants which have sufrislent volkm to nallie the
cconomlea of scale tor gamns Irradiation.
lar eiaFiilnatlor of the Use distribution of paoklng plants In
ants «ay hsnOl. ».ller "^^•'""■^/^^'^f^^»^;;%;;;«^"8^^'^^„, ^
UMe'MKjH^««r!'pmduarBrore£ofte^^^^^^ ■
g area -here it could treat appropriate agneultural producta on ^H
ation Is likely to continge to 6e used initially in United States ^M
srllc poudera. These itens are Ingredients in processed rood, and ^H
s or a contract irradiator, a food company can teat teclinlcal
and consmer acceptance -ithout i>nderteklng the large Investment
11 depend on regulatjry apprjvil, procasaor and consumer interest
■hnology is costless or ulthout rlsli. Prospective (ilera and con-
other poatharvest techniquea Tor making the xorld'a food supply
hlne-produced radiation Has not eiaaln*!) by th* »
„GoogIe
II. 1IIFEIIEIKE3
lam, ft-w* (nil) 'Dietary Carolnocma and tntlaaraloofaaa,* SoImm. Vol.
SZI, Id. «61T, a*ptabw 23, pp. 12S6-<i3.
bion. (19Ka) ■Flo/liU mtarnatlonal Smpoilia on Food Irradiation ProoaaalB
Uiitalnfton, D. C. .- Mardi 118;: Sunary Raport of tha bpart Panal oa tba
t oT Htalth and Hwan 9*nlo*a rr>«
Senite Octot.r ?9.
f F*adli« Irr^latv)
Miaat to HtlBOurlihad Chlldran.- The fa»t-lc>n Jd
rn.l Df CUfii=-l nutnttoB,
»01. M. Frtruanr. pp. 130-135.
tb* U.S. mpartaint of Entrgr unaer contracl DE-J
HMortll Institute i T«cirie (torlhwest Libor.tory
P1L-53S0. UC-7C1. Iprll.
Curry, P«prlk«. und Mllchpulver all Hicnuels Eine
I3H-B«rlcht 32. Soveaber (Enginn ebatrsct).
n<.iiii>«i by U.S." CoMlttaa
on Sadlatlon ItppUeationl. Itoalc Industrial Fona
, Ino.. Bathaad«. Marrland.
Cwinlmhaa, llohan) E. (19Bt) 'Taa
Divlaion of Fuel Cycle and Iktar
Haarli^s berore the Connlttee on
Enaru
Raaaaroh aod
of Rcprele
J.. J. u. o,a
and H.
chwi (19T2)
CoiC-6enefltB Analyala:
t.B,. BDC-788-O9-71-O0?.
wpt. or c«iK
Frank (l9Bfi)
Ion vUft BoMn
FTawr,
r» Hertier
torrl»<.. January 17.
Gtlbart
of En
ttee on
Solano
CllMrt, U.S. tecartavnt
of Hepres.
.latly July 26.
Jarrett
Bober D. S
r 983
tin '""
. ed
, ll!^. pp
da: CR
tjT-ies.
K. 19« -
In Food Irra
dl.tlon.
Proceed
Mr 24-
Developsent In Ja
8, 1980, iBtarnat
onal Uo>lo Enariy
*«ane:
387-39
John D. , Jo».
; J. Uarw
1. <19K> ■!!>• Couar-
Ing 3*a
god li
aentai
■ on 1
ood Irradta
(■I- eh »-
Lailna.
I. I. and «.
;, Kane
. 119TB
lorpholoiy
.f the Kldnaya In Rata
trwalated TriM
.S. DepartHnt o
Enarg
original ¥
John (19S5) U
tlon with Roaanna HantHT
„GoogIe
oHull.n,
willlM H. and
Dwilal'p.
Sloa
(I9S3) ■C*ilu^137 •> I Kadlatlon
Sow at.
|up*r pr«Hnt«d at the
11 tar
•tlonal Conf
.nd Agi-U
icural ProducU.
lono
ulu, Hatial
■E:;;
Food ChOiM.
8«» (isaai
982) 'liTi 1
;;.;
.;;»
. Departne
n=er Preve
,.,
Cuid. t
»«at
n No. 85-37
gation of th
e'oe'
etlo Tojiic
W. et. .1. (
logy of
Using Shor
TMt System
IP s™i
pp. 867-878.
a Me
anogaat-er.'
■ood
CheWalrv"
S. C. (1978)
"S(». Erf
r Feeding Ir
ted Whent.
m.l Synpoal. o
n delation
tlon snd ?role
In Hetabol
logy
Nuclear Bbj
Uh orator
Agrloul
t"Ii?irn""-nS
Robert ml
Janu
Health Energ
tltote and
Envlro-wnt.l
nstitut*. resptctlvHj)
nil
ing, ma H.n
dUn
or Food f
*00». H.y it.
T ^tfi. Bloron
a (I98'i> U.
. H. (1983) -E
""■"ttl
of
rradlated Fo
oda.
cy, Vienna
interna tl
n.l
toDlc Energy
Hg.n
llson, B
ng. Monte E
nergy
af Canada
0 Olivers
tlon HLth Rasa
nna Hentu
Mor
laoB. Januar
y '3
„ Google
f IniHuti toot CO vUllBi buyari
t thar Bra bujiiif >
pEorUM
of onlr llilccd valui about <*rtlno)«iI
T Th> HhI or tptdnlolotlc jitiidr nqg
■dlilad [ood Hill tociuM (oc poultilT '
ln]inl<a aaooi tiusao. slivlj 1.M not ba.
bacauH 1[ muld ratalE*
»IH <r.«Tural) too.
■a do biov vlth cai
unldn titled ch«lF.
iradlatad fssda a
c trrWtatloa
alavlT a frni to MU t
U tmir TUht ta
. H^ ta all at
„GoogIe
Committee for Nuclear Reiponiibility, Inc.
Sui Fnnclm, CA 94101, USA
„C,ooglc
THE ASSEMBLY
STATE OF NEW YORK
ALBANY
Hovnbti ». l«aj
■ bill, xxiuoHd br
,dlp| MBi uc.pt«» el 1
.• ■pint of th. Mil. It
■cki(*i Df In
ickit* conirlcixnid;
I nk. no ]ii<)(...iit ,
»d lit loo to priiiivi
llmrly Mk that Hhin thll |
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
MSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS
Th«nk you for the opportunity to coownt on HR e9G, * bill to provide
Federal cDordlnitlon for the continued developnent and coBKrclalliitlon
of food Irradiation.
I *B Richard A. Greenberg. Director. Office of Scientific Public Affairs.
of the Institute of Food Technologists (IFT). IFT fs a non-profit iclcntlflc
society of nore than 25,000 Individuals. Our noAeri are concerned with food
science, which attanpts to understand the scientific basis underlying tb*
efficient provision of « nutritious, safe and acceptable diet. He alto aork
in food technology, which applies this basic knowledge to the practical
developnent of new and inproved food sources, products and proceiies. thatr
proper utilliatlon by Industry and the public, and their effective regulation
by government agencies. Host of the scientists who have ever worked on food
Irradiation in the United States have been {and st111 are) acaibcrs of IFT.
He thus believe that it is particularly appropriate for IFT to coiMint on HR 69
He attach, for the record, "Radiation Preservation of Foods', a Scientific
Status Sumary published In 1983 by IFT's Expert Panel on Food Safety and
Nutrition. Its surmary states. In part, 'If and when the govemoent grants
approval to produce and market irradiated foods. It will not assure cOMnerclal
success. Irradiation of foods wst be seen as useful enough by process on to
justify the costs of the eflulpnent needed and the process. The cost of
Irradiated foods to the consumer must also be competitive with the cost of foods
produced by alternate processing technologies, or they mist satisfy sane other
perceived consumer need at a reasonable cost, If they are to be accepted and
successful In the marketplace."
HH iK constitutes a giant step In fulfilling the needs of both processors
and consumers 1n realizing the succeuful application of this useful technology.
Richard A. Greenberg, Ph.D.
Director
Office of Scientific Public Affairs
Institute of Food Technologists
,y Google
Radiation
Preservation
of Foods
A Scirntific Stttut Summery t> Ihi
Inslilult bI Food TichnolBgiili' Ezprrl Panti
on Food Softly and Nulriliim-
D IN-DEPTH FOOD IRRADU-
TION STUDIES m Ihc Uniud
SulH b«Bii in Ui< itily l6bOL
ihe 1958 Food Adl^^^ Amend-
mcnl te the Food, Drug ind C«-
proviJ frDiD thF Fond uid Diui
Adminiitrilion (FDA) bcfort uy
pvLicuUr irndieled food couJd be
Sblicly told. EarUtr woik (1947-
W wtt unied oul by at Itul
ciiJiud ((encin of Ih* United
.„.,.v,.„,n,.l,,h./»d«r.,y
™i
luded th.i ;my food in.di.ud lo
n .vrr.gt "dos." of 1 Mr.d (>»
fulfill, a perMived mnamwr
\ciwy !:•! de fin i lien) oi leu is
need
irt should be ■ppravtd wllhout
TSt WHO Joinl Exptn Com-
FMd'p"reB"rvB''iion
UdDticni for food) rrradiiUd'il
ifhfr r.duitiMi IfvcU unUl daU
om on -going Kudiea >rc gyiibble
mi becauH thtn it only • ilutii
feature mako the ptw«b (Itnc-
DA"hu sulWd I'numlKr of
tive for heat-aemiliTC aapKla of
otiible ictiont which tould ulU-
S.rti!l,-a"£S
iiuly lead u approval for irredi-
.( irradiation leveli .ued ai> O.l
food. lucii u alter«I Hevor, od«.
(rad 11 IcCyl or leas The FDA hai
color, tenure, and Um of nutri-
lio luuHMd chingei tn the mt»-
tional quality a« loiniDilial- Th«
ndi that would be inadiatM) •!
'velt betwew 0,1 and 1-0 Mrad
quality characterifllica oTFreth rav
1-10 kGyl, whkh inctudea level)
cesMH it fleiibilitlnrradialion on
.'HO Joint Elpert Cominill«
ihipei— cialra of polaloea. (lout
in »- OI 100 pound ucki, entin
rou>[> of meet, ^hole turkeya,
■v.iionotfood.i.limely.Ho»ev-
umlwichn of .liced meat. liih. <a
„GoogIe
U arTifld by foodi. Radi
eHfctiva in pnMrviii( fnili ma
pouluy. ot Mher foodi thit q
b^at'il^i"™tm^. r^
[ion paUwHution at paulli..
poultry producti, and poultiy Sttd
sSm "* ^^
Uin aaafeodi. The Ind of »
lalmonriL (Froninf, 1978^ Kan-
hei, 1982; M»k] and Van
. 19831. Even in Ih« d
uunlrin, SalmBntlla
lion can bt Krioui er.
me hta](h autboritifa
ahouJd be required, to brini
urobleni under conlnS
producu timilu to the famiUar
producta thai bava bnn paatcur-
b*d by hut (eictpl that radia-
cooked); ■■ would Ik vipected.
nfiwntion i> aba (anirally
rtqulrcd for radiation paiteuriied
Baforr Iha actual radiatioii n-
cH^Ei|« the food typicmUy ■ fizit
beat traatad (bkanclMdl to inaeti'
vala any autolytH: anntHa
preamt, aaia den* tat ftaaan feedi.
Thk helpa aHun that tlMca •in ba
ng MHynutk tiMitata aftai radla-
tion traalBtnt Ih—tHmHB, imi.
Thii beat traatmant alas taadi-
(Larkin, IVT)), balpa to drii>a o«
Another poaiible applica
an el ol IMK
iktberoo^BwA
m reducing the number
foodi Such rooda.
the food, ipcrilan and di
[aniima are kill^ at radiauoa
of 1^ Mrad (lO-M kCM.
diaeaie bnf wlU be coaknl to a '
canned food, radiat
inadiatad to about 1-6 Had
ihip foodj like chiUcd, unfroun
laafood from the coattaJ placet of
catch to the ceotial pacta of the
taniia tUrtlwr tb*
j]'o!&^
[ Glossary .
EteetTOil RadiaHon. Ccpuirular radiallon. nn. tipoi«l lo ladialjon al loila hifh ano^h u> kUI aD ■
■iilimafMrtaniDfbianlxifdKlroKFacakraUd onioHmi of f«xi ipoilaie or pubbc baaltfa aipuB.
-ihon" X.iayi. GamiPa ran an cmillMl by iio.
tnpR of luch f lemenu u robdl md c«iuiii u thay
iSrouali in procmini. 1 Gny (Cyl «iuali 100 radt;
1000 Cj «]u.I> 1 K;Td(.., (iOy).
l.OOO.OOo'r^-l'Miad'-lOlG^" "*'
i'£S™r.steS'a.5tS
uortd undtr Ttlroraliar, ai in Ibt aaw at r«Udd-
„GoogIe
tl Kilb Ciid. u
tt Apolln-Si^ui tpttt flight ID
1S7S. Durinc the CoJumbia ipKt
nauU tit ndiition-tuHliicd
I, K>n Hided U (oodL
uniulian with
■poUjVV BPd dlHIHf
: un be packed diy. then ii do
n proceumf. Urfei
inar the F.D.A.
;e thrte ipecial food
odon Df ipicei.
The UK of iidiition al levela of
0,003-0.016 Mrad (30-160 Gy) or
onioniVanit thin ailaBd ■IDtui
Life hu been appcnved in the U J.,
Japan and other counlria. Thii n
npvciaUjr impQTtvil in oarthvrn
countraea which do not pamut
„GoogIe
ruUag and provide the popuu-
wilh wKdIf poUtQH Ihrou^h-
witl oatit. Thui. Ih* *ip«l*d
qucf tion "U^tl thii iMk« Ihr food
will be -'Uckgnnnd redMtion."
- - - nlly E,uj(
d ittftty on tba tsnpUcMid
h«ni«] uhI bioaudicil tMto
Ihe I
Ai mentioned ibove^ the itrtdi-
■tion prcicfu prwwed to vield
radielion-itenliied ftiod rombincB
the Die of ndiitirtn leveli luffi-
cient lo dettroy the ipora of C.
iKilulinum nilh pr*-heM treal-
mcnl (blenrhing}fnenzynein*c-
. Thin diu] tieilnMnt a
rt in drsiroy miciobwlofi-
tatlwFM>d.Dn^^
Cwnetic An. nich daw hM U be
tubuiUtd lo tb> FDA. Beliww
1959 uid ISai. apprainuuly M
imdialad fooai haw bMn tr-
E roved by haahh authoritHa la m
lUl on of 34 eountrila harui
lenilation on iiradiaUd focdi (•■■
Kooii. I9«2). Thia includea. in lb
U.S., radial' ■ " "
infeUation ,_ .
iprout inhibitien for potatoaa.
Recently, the FDA hm m-
(Hted thai indiation be tnan<
saiibed about tht rWdiatio
tfy of componenta of tifu
be laed Is evaluate tlit
other foodt of ■»
, n, Thb wou' ■
ly rrdun the need tot ii
of teoUt, but (bi
-'-- the hmlib ol
ini the amount of nitrite addcil
oiuy that amount required
develop the normal pink uloi ■
al. 197B1. Iiradiat._
companUe to presently ^^sed food
preiervatton procevet in ita
•ffoci* OB vilunins. ilthaLiih
nutritionat effecu vii)' «ith the
tlol. 19911. In
inu ?>Tmpr"i^"by"il» io"°
Dfoi>-^n from Iht packagt helps
(radiolytic prodiieia) lAiA
r.uiation may have tora "" -"
lodi. and on poiaibU ton
gniAeanM of aueh pradt
inaiderable body of ac
nowledge on radnlytie n
u been developed in
tl « =i 1978),'' U»"^
roductt that were idea "
n the food pioducu by
are the only iiotopic radialioii
•nireat permitted lot food pro-
enerciei will bl beloo the thmh-
old leva! that would oiherwiae
induce radioactivity in food. Simi-
larly, if the maiimuis eiKiiiei of
1975). Cor
foodi have been totted for ttability
and intefrity and will be approved
on the basil that they will provide
ever advari* findina i— n av
naJly reportMl in thi liUMn.
te-t«iini faiM to eooam Ik
orifinal edveraa ropotta. la t^l.h
leilNW of whol
inp nan n'ot tit* randt of lacMn
^eoncaUy rolatad to •^— ■ ■«■
IplJieatian. Thua. *
»GoogIe
..■vc1dp«1iI._.
»la1«l roodi. Thii ptix
called "chcmldHnncc.''
Thi Joint Eiptrt Comniitt
ivincd by WHO In ISBO npur
d Ihil
le Dial al) nil
r]iu« or toadt iiradiatRl ui
Kiiiaft dou of 1 Mrad 110 loyl
pou no toikoloiiical problami.
humina oithoul funhci leitiniTor
»hottiDn»H« IWHO. 19811- Th(
ncned wilh foni >tuidud>. the
^"a Nl'uttltiar^ quaJily u not
ampromiaad; and
• IrrtdialioD laveb uwd m ipr-
ciflc applicaliou ahould be conbis-
Unl wilb the objeirlive lileiihu
lion or paateuriialion) and Ihp
lhi> IntemalionaJ ^Tovp of eiperU
ihould ilKfld up world-wide Hp-
proval of irradiated roodt.
R«eulation or
lophiEiicaled l(iiicali«ie>l Ieitln|
□lethods and a firmer Kienlific
Spina, under the FDA propoul.
can probably be iiradiaUd at a
higher level than otlicr (ooiU,
auch imall amounU. The anounl
of any unidentified rujinlylli:
WHOJ^niB^nC™
lialed food prodocu
procened fold. Preservation pro-
aulhorltiei it at leaal nne of 2*
do^'i ™o'"hiv* U tTaWifieaJly
countri». For doei EreaUr than 1
from a maulve 6-year aludy on the
chicken are now belnf .n^Uj by
the i;.S.DA. lo determine whelhe,
Under Ihr cutrenl law, FDA
mux .t>o approve the food pack-
IC and wheo Ihe eovernmenl
market inadialad (ooda. il will not
Ucl Willi the food u well aa the
aiaure commercial fucceu. Imdi-
packice it«ll before either can be
tify the CMla of the «nuipmenl
Sf'irradiited fcJX^e co-^-
packiiini haa been taken' FDA
Kaa already approved ■ number ol
food.
the coil at fondi produced by
To pievenl Ihe pouihility that
lead to the developmenl of radia-
or they m'ual uii^y lomt o'tiier
•onible coat, if they are U, b.
euKniion has been nade Ihil
flccesled and lucceasfu) in Ihe
repealed inadiation of a food be
ptohibiled. FDA plant intpection^
K-muas
thii reinidiaUon be permitted.
where needed. II ieail ID a cumula-
tive doae ot 1 Mrad (10 kGyl
Suminary
"!:riV^'°££*£:^.teix
The FDA hai alio m«geil«d ipe
cilic teala for the icieoliBc evalua-
tion of any chemical amuMUnda
formed in food when hiiher Itvab
lO.l-l.O Mrad 11-10 kCy)) are
uiinf the WHO chemiaaanD
ener^l that ahould make it con-
patiuva with older food proceaaini
melhoda. Thia almild m
„GoogIe
Eiptil PuMl on Food SatilytKoK-
„GoogIe
Hr Cbairasn, Public volca aobalta thaaa coaanta bacauaa
we bava long baan concainad aboot uniaaolvad critical qaaatlcna
legaidlng tba naa of lonlalnq ladlation to tcaat faoda and tba
ciiticBl nacd tor adaquata labaltng toe any faoda that bava
baan litadlatad. Public volca for Pood and Haaltb Policy la
a non-profit organiiation concantiatlng on food aafaty, nntrltlon
and agricDltora policy.
It la our ballaf tbat tba avaaplng ^angaa and oonoloalona
of B.K.«S« aca praaatura and unjgatitlad at tbla tlaa. Tba
laglalatlon would aaand tba rood. Drag and Coaaatlc Kot to cadafina
'Pood Irradiation* aa a food procaaa rathar tban aa an addittva,
piovida national unforalty in tba ravulation of food irradiation
and aatabllab a coaaiaalon within tba Dapartaant of Agricultura
to proBOte tbc uac of food Irradiation. Until aora li Icno* about
tha long-tara affacta of food conamptlon of Irradiation producta,
only raatclctad uaa of low-laval Irradiation aa a food procaaalng
tccbnology Bbould ba paraittad on a prodnet by product baala.
Additionally, with tha uaa of Irradiation, tbara abould ba con-
coBBltant laballng with worda alartlng conauaara that tba food
Itaa na traatad with Irradiation.
,y Google
rood IrradlaCion pconiaaa B*ny d»ir*bl« ■dv>nt«g*« a*«r
current (iroceaalng alternatlvea : ataillliatton. allBlnatioa
oC bacaful bacteria, rcUcdatlon of sold qroath ud a«tur*tlflci
In (rultB, and prevention of aproutlng In vagatablaa. Bat food
Irradiation only eroalaeg tbase benaflta, and camipt auaryi^M
freedoa froa harsful conaequencea. Public Voice la partiealarly
concerned about the nnreaolTed laau* of tbt unlqna radlolyttc
pcoducta (tntP'a) DRF'a are produced during Iriadlatloo and roaain
In the food aa It tiavela through the food chain. Dvapita tb*
fact that aeveral lapoita (aaong tbe> tba IMO Bureau of Pooila
Irradiation Pood Coaalttee IBFIFC)) have concluded that l»*la
of DRF'a in food irradiated at doaaa of 100 krada or laao ar«
'wboleaoaa and aafe for huaan conauaption* without toiicoloqleal
taatlnq, ire believe aajot unanaverad quaatlona raaalDi
'■bat ace the Jong tera atfecta of DKP'a on the huaan ayakaa?
-have all poaalble DRP'a been detected and Identiflad?
'■hat ia the Incraaaed burden on the huaan popalatloo
Of DRP'B froa food Irradiation?
-to Hhat axtent are cuaulatlva concent rations of DKp'a
Innocuoua in caaaa of unauthoilied re- Ir cadi at ion?
Another concern about the ctf ectlveneaa of liradlat:lon
ia ita lack of a continuing preaervatlve effeoCi aftar a tiaa.
Irradiated foods ata vulnerable to telnfaatatlon by bactocla
and Inaacta. In addition, alnce aoat foods could be Ircadlatad
after packaging, safety queations aay coae Into play Hban asalliig
„GoogIe
product! Hhlcb bava undcigon* Irradiation traataant and to anaura
that tbay aia not alalead by tha abaenca of laballng InforBatlsn
to think that tha food baa undargona only traditional procaaalng.
of liiadlatad food in the event health problaaa aia dlacovarad.
In thla poaitlon, na Join our conauaar oiganliatloo eollaagaaa
In Europe, iibara tha use and study of Irradiation has baan aore
Mldaapcaad. In addition to tha pro-laballnq poaitlon takan
by tha Bureau European Dea Dnlona De ConaoMatanra (BRIC) . tha
coalition of conanMi qtoupa In tha Boiopaan loonoaic Co— unity.
Public Volca'a vlaaa on labeling alao coireapond to early aork
on the iaaue by tba EEC Coaalaalon aa wall aa latar atandarda
under developaant by the Codax UlHentailua.
Coneu«r» nead fall IntarMH™ *" — *■ >"~t rfu.t.».
Food labala provide a aechanieM for conauafca to datanlna
tha approprlatanaaa of certain product aalactiona In taraa of
further preparation required, health valua and aafety. rreah,
froaan and canned/ baa t-procaaaad fooda can laadlly t
-1-
,y Google
ai Bucbi but since litadlation !■ a new concept to aost conauB«ca>
queBtiona are likely to be lalaed about coniualng Itradlatad
fooda. Puctberaore, bacauaa tba aafaty of the procaaa haa not
rlearly establlahed and because the Inpact on nutrlaot
value for certain population groupi could well be BlqnlClcant.
infoiaatlon on irradiation treataent ahould be noted on product
labalB.
Only by eiccclBinq one'a eight of choice in tha aarketplac*
> conauaei ctaooaa the aaounts of procaiaad and unpcoc*BBad
he 0[ Bhc conauaea, and dctecalna the uount of Irradiated
ta he or ahe vlBhes to purchaa*. Public Voir:* ballcraa
eaaential to take action to enable conBUaeie to eaarclae
the right to choose the foods they desire with cleat infonaation
of the use of irradiation declared on the label at the ratall
level.
— oppoaa H.R.OSi
— believe aote raaearch la necessary on nRP'a. and
— call for aandatory labeling of all food ptoducts traatad
•Xe^,
■iCytX-O-Ti-^ •^u^L.-^yVLtf*^ ?• *
„GoogIe
1173
FORT Q)[= PAJ5GO
Food Irndliti
fKlllly to ulil
lomic Energy A gen
feetibility of food irradU
established.-
So far, 18 countirei. Inclu
ruit. About 1DD food Ir
worldwide.
ding Japan, Israel, France. Holland and
a dial ion plants currently are operating
Some usetui side benefits h.
e been found, including the following:
iiiEHS-rHSs
ve discovered that Irradiated grapes yield
bread with a greater loal volume,
percent nigbar yield during malitng.
„GoogIe
FOOD IRRADIATIOW PROGRAM eontlnuwt ~ p*g* 1
Vr* tupport the leglilalkm Intreducad by Htpratcniatlvi 5Id UarriBBo
*n<J Senator Slide Gorton (H.R. MC and S. IM) to pramolB Um
■ncreaied use of tnii proecit ind to eniure that il vill b* dona with
adequate safeguards- Th* U-S. FoikI and Drug Admlnlftratlon I*
regulatory changes would alloo levels op to IM.aoO rads, which la
only one-tenth the u(e lavel established by the Joint FAO/IAEA/WHO
Food irradiation technalogy has bean eitablishad around tha world for
mora than 10 years. In this procesi product) art axpoaad to
controlled amount! of gainma radiation fron sources such a* cobalt-iO
or ceslum-u;. two radioactive isolopes. The product being irradiatad
lioes not bacomt radleactiva. Radiation Is ineaiured in energy untla
can lie achieved in polaloes and onions, and fruits and vagatatalss can
achieve extension of sheK-lita, and in the range of one to five nitlton
rads commercial iteriliialion can be accomplished. With the low amounl
of thermal energy transmitted by this type of processing, it ia ofian
Food irradiation may open new channels lor fresh fruit nporls; for
example. Japan currently quarantines all apples grown in tha Pacific
Northwest. Camina rays have been shown to eflectivFly control tha
-.!- - •/,.A,Li^'V l!iu/ /^^...,/^
„GoogIe
Nov. 10, 1985
Con. pressman Leon Panetta
House of Representatives
¥ashln^ton, D.C. ?0515
Dear Congressman Panetta:
I am enclosing a copy of "Report to the Con-
sumer" (#325) dealing with the hazards of
IRRADIATION OF FOODS.
In September, 198^^, when I aired the contents
of the enclosed newsletter on my "Consumer
Awareness" show, the unanimous consensus was
that:
IRRADIATION OF FOODS MUST NOT BE UNDERTAKEN
UNTIL THE PUBLIC IS ADVISED OF ALL OF THE
TRUE HAZARDS, WHICH HAS NOT BEEN DONE EITHER
BY THE FDA, HHS, or USDAI
EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES ON HUMANS, TO DETER-
MIHE WHETHER LONG-TERM INGESTION OF IRRADIATED
FOODS WILL INCREASE CANCER AND/OR GENETIC DAMAGE
MUST BE DONE PRIOR TO ADOPTION OF IRRADIATION!
I urge you to vote a/^ainst HR-696, when it
is discussed on November l8th, and ask that
this letter, and the entire RTC #3?5 be
Included in the hearing transcripts.
Slnrtrely,
2901 Los F lores '-Bl.
Lynwood , CA 9026?
PS: My show Is on the air for 55 minutes-'
with no commercial interruptions.
Send me a copy of the transcripts
5 hearing. Many thanks.
0
„GoogIe
:~^s.'mr..\MS irradiatiGn
i
m
„GoogIe
fc-2- ■•.-■■ #385 ■
p^«^*M h J«M]I ay) iMtth «^^^ M-^— fc ^^mmmm ■!— BJJ. — i—J— ^*»
MM ■ ta ol fHi^K f tMHH, iMMtal. ■ IHlUjMl to % teMMMMkn^^iUH*
INI rill tiW — Mrf b.|rw- ln«taM*l*i«tltk^^HB- ■ iilwi ■■■ ■>■> — ^■T
tmw^»Ummmmtm-t,Mm,h t»^ i ■ ^ I H i.lii.i.! ^afc— *w«( ■ |r 'I I,
— . . - ■ . . ■nq.— aanuw. « at ^^^^S. _^.
iiirtTlT' I -I I Tki li'hifcAlMiwIwWta
I r lH»n>*ii pnnl ■■ kIh IMI I* J<# 1W
■d — hMt ■■■(■itti KM» b M- ■■ ipav MB Is pnll Bp-
r-i^Wi^i— h4^fadfc- imt.
,y Google
l>«T>dilB._
TJs:
■J^^2
iTSS
„GoogIe
rrr=rT^^ SSt'SS^sSsS^SI
i, Google
jienC of Oparation
„GoogIe
,"..^^^
inq CO advance th
e eoBHUmcr interest througli advocacy of coopetitton ^^^H
ha marketplace, c
educBd gevernment intscCecence In coonnsrce and tha ^^H
ision of accurate
inforaacion to assist coitsuDi^rs in making ceiBoned ^^H
omlc ]udgmoncs on
their own bohalt. Incorpotaied in Washington D.C. ^^^H
dn»B from its individual nember* who reside in all ^^
;■ states, an «ell
aa by voluntary contributions and subscriptions
" publ.catiQns.
COKSUKEB ALERT has no support from sources that
inancially from the promotion of food irradiation
He appreciate th
IS opportunity to cofamcnc on the overall advantjgos
ee to the process
of irradiation of food and on H.R. 696 in particular.
CONSUHEH ALERT i
s Hnthusiastic in its support tor this technology
h m cnsidci to
committee has no
ted, the advantages are well known and nuuerous.
itradiatinn prom
ises to add to the arsenal of food protection processes
g with salting, s
ffloking, arvlT.g, canning and freeiing. It can elininato
nood for preserva
tivea Mhich Is greeted with enthusiasm by many
UBiers. Likeuisa,
the irradiation process san eliminate the neod for
ganta on food pro
dueta, such a^ ethylene dibromlde EDB, and reduce
Zrra"'™ir '"'
curing certain meats,which is good news to ..any
nclnde sterilisation. paateuri«ation. disinfection
prqsorvation tci e
luninato the nlcroorganiams that dacay food and
carcinogenic. Trichinosis and other harmful
a can be eiimlna
ted from pork and other food products. Sprouting
^tjtoes and onion
s IS delayed. The variety of foods that can bene-
froiT, the irraai
ation process is broad, including meat, fish, fruit
S8-O0S 0-86-38
,y Google
but VI 1
1 do so enthus
last
ically whqn t
foods a
ire ]ust 39 nut
ritl
OU3 and that
rid ou.
■ food supply 0
.t un
healthy micrc
Moieovf
ir, foods treat
ed 1
n this iivannei
which 1
iB radically di
ffor
ene from trui
which 1
>as been aub;e>.
;ted
to the high t
C<
mamncrs Hill 1
OOK
favorably upc
I the aibility i
?y will have the advantage of ' f rash'
j. Ho doubt food processors will look
;s, as the process can tw carciad out
il oethods preiently in widespread ubb.
a used suqceasfully in the apace pro-
1 country now onjoye
4etherl*nds, f iod Frane<
1981 docunent stated:
B preserved, ve are not blind t
>ised by tho technology of ioni
led to pay particular attention
, nicEobloIogy. packagi
„GoogIe
foimei! in other (Dod p
fldvontage exists tovard incteaBed cffieteney and BanitatiDn. Test
1 still be needed co ensure that packages themselves aro not
ecsely affected causing hazards ta develop.
Appropriate labeling is iciparant to many consumers though ue
□gniie the fact thjt milllono of shoppers don't read labels. It i(
an, or Bteriliied by ioniiing energy
e» or funlctants-.
Ese pose no health risk vhatsocver
jalth ftspeets of Irradiated Beef,
,y Google
The Fedeiation of Ansrican Societiei for Expeiincntal Biology, conclu
CONSUMER ALERT suppoits the Stated goals of U.R. 696, thaE is
the coordinated development and coiomercialization of food irradiACion.
If a Joint Comnission is establiahed wo would urge that its mandat*
clearly be to facilitate the devolopmeBt ot this technology. Me «rs
concerned that many comnitteeB thus established by Congress oftan
work at cross purposes with their stated goals and become snaga which
wrap the competlture private sector in bureaucratic red tap*, pravenelng
it fcon moving forward at the pace prompted by consumer demand,
scientific findings and technological development. He would cathac
drop the word "Control" from the title of the Act.
Though we agree national uniformity of regulation has certain
of restricting innovation and variations in processing. Me would urge
We are confident that industry advertising is a good education
public understanding and confidence in the irradiation process* la
by resisting the political temptation to fall prey to the delay toctica
which will be attonptod by those are ant i- technology by ptofeaaion.
iiblic exposure to radioactive food stuffs", doubts about "cancer
sistanee from its source. It will he coming from a few vocal
• illty I
c oppositio
„GoogIe
the Dopartnent of Agriculture, from already existing sources within
In conclusion, ue restate our support for this important technology.
nvenient food supply. Extensive scientific testing has tnown that
oper use of food irradiation does not present a health hazard. All
radiated foods, but instead can looH forward to a greater variety
,y Google
OSpIRO
A BALANCE KM THE PUBUC INIBBT
M)-iMJH» w>«aMi7T sn-snMcn
,y Google
„GoogIe
.th« Ui>
ol <pl
.■lologic
cudy THiulnd 10 tl
.ll.ly 1I.C
•Imply
H not !»■
■loi" W«t 1*
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
Mr Tim Galvin
Committee on Agriculture
U.S. House of Fepresentatlvea
1301 LongHorth Building
Wasnington DC 20515
Dear Mr Galvin,
During tne hearings on Congrt
United Kingdom. Congressman
.i/t^
„GoogIe
i R U RADFORD
(A preEentation Co Che IAEA Task Force Meeting on Trad* Pronotion
of Irradiated Food, Vienna, Occobar 198S)
rhe United Kingdom was among the very first nation* to racognlaa
ihe potential oC irradiation as a means of food preservation.
ind £ considsrable amount of pioneering work was carried out
in Che 1950e and 19G0s at a number oC locations in Great Brit«ifit
I dedicated ~entra for such research was even set up by tha
United Kingdom Aco.-nic Energy Authority at Wantage near Harwall,
Once the practicability of the process had bean escablithed,
Che then Ministry of Health instituted a review of the madicBl
and scientific information about the effect of irradiation upon
food, including any changes in its nutritive value, and the
possible hazards to man that might thereby arise. Tba Working
Party appointed Co carry out this review was further aakad to
report on the need or ccherwise for official control, and if
control were recommendad to Indicate the principles which should
The report of l
ling Party was published in 1964 (1) ,
today (wit
Lgl and remarkably far-sighted
r food irradiation with which <
i exception of the labelling ii
and given due consideration. The Working Pari
hazards to health which could possibly arise
of irradiated food, but concluded that such hi
reduced to negligible proportions if food wai
controlled conditions. For this reason, ic i
.jnJ chat control should take the form of proh:
iw. Virtually
• familiar
lue) was identified
y listed certain
rom the consumption
larda could be
irrsdiaced under
I re commanded
food was desirable
lition from which
icifled conditioni
„GoogIe
However, the fir« conBtratnt in the list which follows stemE
directly from Imposition of the controlling legislation.
The constraint on introduction of irroJiatcrt food which was
particularly important at the time that the Working Party sub-
mitted its report, (and which remains under present United
to be provided in support of any application for exemption from
the regulations. A full range of tests was required including
and for the possible presence of toxic substances in general
a:id of carcinogens and radioactive substances in particular,
logical tests on the irradiated food before and after storage
unJ'T stated conditions.
i, Google
Eoch testing was clearly beyond the In-houao capability of all
but the largest companies, and the namber of firm» abl* to undar-
' take such work under contract was snail. Similarly, the faci-
lities capable of irradiating experimental batches of food Cor
testing were few in nur.ber and not always suited to th* Irradia-
tion of food under conditions approximating to a connarcial
plant. Certainly no potential uEsr was going'to Install a com-
mercial facility before an exemption could bo obtained.
was not peculiar to the United Kingdom of course
with any country where the use of irradiation
>d. It thus formed an Ideal opportunity tor cella-
'Ch to reduce costs and avoid duplication of aff-
>rt, and happily such collaboration was forthcoming In tha guita ~
it the International Project in the field of Food Irradiation
IFIP) hosted by Che institute of food research at KarlSEtiha
from 1970. The United Kingdom was associated with tha Project
\ inception, providing financial support and nambora
Management and Scientific Programme Committeea,
completion of IFIP's programme culminating In
I 19S0 Joint FAO/IACA/WHO Expert Committee On Food Irradiation
(JECFI) is too wall known to need repetition.
t recommendations of this JECFI(}] were to ba acceptad
:ted upon in the United Kingdom, it would remove tba onus
of proof of wholesomeneis from the prospective user and thua
significantly enhance the attractiveness of the procaas to tha
food industry. Additional impetus would be given to tha intro-
1 of irradiated food into the United Kingdom if at tha
same time other countries were seen to be moving towaird* accap-
tance of the 19S0 JECFI recommendations,' and internationaal
trade would be immeasurably facilitated if the CQdax General
Standard for Irradiated Foods and associated Code of Pcaettca
1 be generally adopted.
Logical Meed
: comprises a sat of circumstance*' mora apacl-
(ingdom. Tha UK ia a relatively small and
„GoogIe
■nsiva. The food production, p :ai
jEtcies are well developed and ttiera ara i
lome produced or Imported fresh food throi
re are no major public health problom* asst
These factors combine to lessen the r,eed for food preservation
compared with many less fortunate nations, and where preser-
vation of fresh food does prove necessary, the availability
of a range of generally accepted techniques lo.g. heat treatmsnt,
freeiing, canning and the use of chemicals) has tended to pre-
ei:ipt irradiation from serious consideraCian; nor has there
been, up to now at least, a pressing demand tor irradiated food
to be imported into the UK frc
naniely that the consumer is unlikely to purchase
food it it costs more (or even the ea/ne as) Che
equivalent of outwardly indistinguishable qualit
for example, the rise In world oil prices has reiultad In a
widespread increase in distribution costs, so that the economic
advantage of transporting larger batches of food less frequently
is becoming more (ignlficant. The effect on energy costs gener-
ally ia making heat treatment and refrigeration relatively more
expensive. Another trend is the desire to move way from the
use of chemical preservatives ( including fumigonts and sprout
inhibitors} which are known to be associated with potential
health risks either to the consumer or to the operators who
apply them. There is in the UK a grouing and largely unfulfilled
market for tropical and sub-tropical fruits and vegetables
which cannot at present bo Importad by aea because the maturation
time after harvest is too short. Delay In ripening induced
by irradiation or a combination treatment could overcome this
„GoogIe
rradioted food In t
Irsrae— 0
ship of
Co cagulat* 1
tandard on Irrculia
„GoogIe
comnittsa first mat In Hay 19&1 and originally plannad to
plate ita work and aubmit a report ta Hinistars doring 19B4,
a target proved impossibla to achieve, but the Cominlttee' s
ort ta now underatood to be virtually complete and ia expec-
ts ba aubnlttad within tha next few waaka . It ta then
acted that tha report will ba made public, probably akrly
1986.
ra has already baan much apeculatioo about tha contanta of
Coranittea'a report, and aavaral madia articla* h«v« pra-
ted that it will prove to ba generally favourable towarda
d irradiation. It this provea to be Che case the Qovernnient
then to decide whether or not to amend existing legislation
tha light of the raport and it* recomnienilatlonB. also taking
a account the views and oplnlona anpreased by interested
ties such as food producara. proceaaora and im^iorters con-
er groups, public health authorltiaa and so on Another
cor which may influence the Gavernment will ba the possibllit)
action to harmonlss attltudea to food irradiation within
European Cominunity.
:tion or ieradiatad food
□ the United Kingdom have been identified. Together thay
e resulted in the situation that no food for sale to tha
lie has yet been treated by irradiation at the time of pre-
ation of this paper. No one of the conaCraints ia however
Eidered to be ebsoLute, and there are hopeful signs that
magnitude oC many of them may be diminiahad in the toreaa-
e future. The next twelve months may therefore sea a marked
nge In the Irradiation scene within tha UK.
>ed in this paper are the author'a alone
: official UK policy.
,y Google
odiiOP
V.HERE PEOPLE f.£T TOGETSIZR
Hon. BecHley Baijall. Clrtlt-^
:oiiiinlii*a on Depactiaent Opiocloni. Raiaaich. (nd Fortlgn Agrleultuia
itlviE Btdall and O* 1
: Is tubBltled at
laabtt la. 1«SS.
■tivi ot B*I
iCLCi*
il*y. Inc.. tUa
om opposition was Did* foinal by J
Bi. adopting Cbt tollouing niolutloD
Soaid ot DUactet* et
t of inadlition ol
,y Google
itlv», B.d«ll »na De U Gjcn. ll/tz/»s
( dangiceut pLac
counciy.
ition Ls ihl«
^....^tLei-
„GoogIe
lualifled. appraitriaie Klcntiflc
f long Bine* pub1i«h*d Kithout
cattr Bcuptad]
"qu.lH, of
,y Google
e percllled br FOt. publln!
t being cauaBd hj m
56-005 O - 86 - 39
,y Google
■tccDcnlHil <■ Uti' !■ no lDn|*r t^'ioB *^*< ctmlorl w Is aafatj. Iki|
Tiid, rHiiiiilud. ssthoritMIn Kl<>iitiri[ todr In thl frM «» lUtk
• C<Hlt[« of Cl
chert ti M 4iM*tio« of aafati*
f toniilj COB leapt USUI. M< «
cane 14 ted bj lBCBapl*c«, i
TIhi* hih aDthoTs vhs |l?a loch nEgitlie leitlaiHiir *lK fn^^ntlr aaka rafBMCN
to "unlijiir'' iadici1|tlc prodncK. Ai Ihe FU and Mnr other lian vlreadr pajnu^ M
■eini [hit there tre produced cheiiret Bpecies not alnadT In our dtata iitiillw
food. It la l^HsalbTc to appl; ai
«n coaparad with all olhar food pTotaiiliig cachnlquaa. Palaini ilv t^apeimtan
oda to paateurltlDi l««cli 1« pultlni aorc than tvo hundrad tlaas aa bucIi mm
ilo Che food!, and baklni, hroUlna, etc.. at higher teaperaturaa la patct^ m
I
„GoogIe
Tadlaoctiy? nocciials Into Ol
Tinocteptable haiBrds. rini.ll, or II
light, subjecting foods to
the fooda], Biilog vith th.
for Food SXclT .nd Applied
,y Google
iHUtlgatlou tato cUtM fsi laoi tulltf d«|r*ditlaa nwltlBt tram PIc—bi"
procHalit of laoiM i»twmfi.lQBM h>» alMfi ■K«wr*(l la^srar kudU^ mI
VTOcaHlnt tacIialqaH. Frvi Um rHulta of ncnt wrt iiltk prs^r coatraU mi
mdn proptT coa<ltl«a, iwlna Iswi diia«, and acUailaB •mllaBt raa«It*. II
■ut fca eiBcladad that l^roH' en^illou i«a Iha eaua at tk* iasradactoa, mt
Of "PlcMBVa^rDcaaalnt. >h]i>r food fin aclaatlata wrtl^ with urn, Hd •■
wrklat M eat an, hava ptocaaaad anri altalflcaatlj, caaarcl«11r BttncUn
lasd which caald coKalnklT r»fl^ '"■ ■» a' l^^* ueh»lau. Il> Imiv alHja
bnn abla ta find a Btaclfic aat it csadltloia for aKcaaafnllr. »MaflclalI|
ftacaaalat foada alth flcvm^tm^xiKlmt datradatlea of fiallti.
M haia aitaaalvalr Innacltatad tha tapartlaia af f laiar chaota sr wottMrnitf,
nc, rayertad u raanlt fna thla Plcawir rracaaalai, aad in tboaa laataacai
■hn-a It Ha poaalbia to find thm [aoH of the wrk wa dosa aera tliaa ftftan
|Mr» atn), ■« ban aliKra nKontad atroiii tanlHinr ftaa parclclpsata Is tha mi*
that tia^tatar* central ar haadliai, ate, uaa (aaltj. lajarlaaa nr aim ailalaal
For aaaaatlallr all (raah fosda, tbara U narj raaMH to kalian ttet laod
procaaalBt tachal«Ba> oltl raaalt la nri attractli* Isoda.
Tha natattm taailflara haia ofiaa faetad er aaad aiKh 'aiparta* a« Dr. Joba GafaH
United Stataa. Jad|e Patrick F. tallai ef tha U.S. Diatrlct'ceart CKanau) la a 110
J ij ii vltaaaaH, 5MX) rM™ at
dad that [ aaooc ■wij alter
that Dr. Gefaan'a drastic caafltct Kith all af U*
a blaa la hla which daatrsja hia eradlhtUtf u m
saaa In radUtlea caaaa. Hla ebaaaaleu bllada hla
■ho baTa aabalttad taatlaoar a|alut "food Irradlatlaa'. Ena Thriagli tk«t mU*
eipUla tha ■atlnttoti. It deal aet auaaa or JVMtUj tba lactlca and iaaaa't
correct the da_|e dooi to tha aaTlroeMnt el hiMa life h> daBjlBg/ delanm *•
aao of thla techaelefrl
ie o^rortaaiir te aabalt tbl* laarlwj u jvat ■■aiiinai
" • ■ ' ' — ' -o T0«. n«n call i*M
,y Google
TtST[MOHT OF CONSUKRS WIITEO FOR FOOD SAFETY (CUFFs)
/ complex issue from g po1
in HR 696 and to raise
le acting 5oon on the I
vegetablos. and the di
Consumers
United
learch
orqan)
for food Safety Is a S
organiiatton norUng o
faming, food cooos.
lattle, Washington ba^ed not-f
r-orofi
•ducatlon and n
issues such
nd pesticides
s fooa irradiat
on. dir
farm marketing.
W. ha.e been e
pecial!
concerned about
the 1a
eltnq itsue xith food
rradlation. a
d are particula
ly diitu
about the Chang
s intie
ent in HR 6H relating
to labeling. TKe orovtlon of
has also teen w
fought .
ith misinfonutlon and
driven by po!
tlca1 not icien
ific and
safety conceruF,
This
s ejtrmely frustratin
for consuner
and scienlliti
Vou wy c
ntact
UF^Fs at: CUFFS
P.O. Bo
Seattle
22928
iugai22
Linda Capper J22-683t
Don Moman Mi-i;75
Goldie Caughim
Call 206) 3JMM1
„GoogIe
i hai presented I rewlutlonj, one calling far 1
li to bt Dtrfonntd prior to the acceoUnce i
■bcllnq, and i sacand hr
dlited ftods. Belw
git put Co the
■t of organiiatlons that have signed bath reialullani. CUFr» hts u
> over ISO grovpt. but we are a swll qruup, and hive not hi
iirces to rccontact then to find out If they
y found that mst groups talie a 1
, and they have little relation t
Bckbumer on board vpetlnq aqendaa. Those c
have acted on tb* rMolatft
I act on thi> bacMis* tl*
■ have conucced
about the further
h CooToratlve Seattle. M Both reioIutlDni aerc tMsiad at th* mmm\
aieetlng. and the libeling resolution wai passed at the rniiaii— iitil Mffiln
coaslttee. CMC Is an eitremly large HW In the sute of Mashlnqton.
Ihiqet Consuaers CoeoeratWe Seattle, VA. A 4 store. 3S.OO0 ■aaber food coon.
Central COop- Seattle. ll»
The Food Co-op Portland, OR.
Puqet Sound Cooperative Federation Seattle, M
Wortlwest ^trltlonal Foods Association Seattle, WA
'Greenpeace, Horth»eit Seattle, M
Washington Public Interest Reiearrh Group Seittle.W
HIchlgan Federation of Food Cooni Ann Hrhor, II
Mheativllle Food Coop Austin. TX
People's Food Co-op Ann Arbor. HI
West Bank Coop Winneapolis. rtl
Heitarn Maililngton Tmilcs Coalition Seattle, WA
CUFFS has found that once groups understand iihat the Issue 1s about, which qenarilly
takes quite soae tlow read and digest, they support the labeling Issue.
„GoogIe
ents on Procedures of Regulatory AqencJi
Poltct Acl. He h
safety issues, pim
XahC of tlie safety qi
aised (y the Naclonil
j11y disacDOinted by the rOA.
objections to the Dork ruHnq (Docket '84
KER-Doa) M noted that tlw ruling
nrents would Nave necessitated
9 15 years to inpleneni NEPS:
IF-OZ30 ^^ cfr pi
■as released si
I 179), In our obJKtions
ral dayi before tKe NEPA
t statenent. You night n
t angry are the
0.000 tons of potati
ig a panplet entitled -10 Hythi about Fooil
■ptions by the publU alwut Irradiation.
It 'It's being done in ZS countries'
(from pra- Irradiation oeople) Is
in Japan; that Is less thai O.II of
le US. ClaliK that irradiation will cure hunger.
rood ohlle its gmwli
o t«, reduce pi
Ulthln the FOA. there are also Ini
>k management transition, as well i
tian. In hit SI
' infomatlon surrounding tl
ere tlie House Subconntttet
„GoogIe
RHwrch and Production. CoiBlttM on $cl«K° and Technology on July 26. 19B4,
Sanford niUer Hid, '..vlth kmnilcdta of the (-hF-^lcil change -Kuirrlng tn frradliM
foadi. wr can soKify safe coiMlltlons or uie by ■lUbUihlng tnr aiiilauia dosr% at
radiation peraltted ...*■ This statement hat -'rMdy been hrdnnt upon by the rerait
notice In the Federal ReqlsCer (Hiy 17,1W5, fa^e tOiH) that the FM Is ■IIOHlai tM
Increase of tplce Imdiitlon frm ) to I Nt^ersdi. Tin recent final nil* oa pork,
■1th doMi up to 100.000 Rads, nlll not qet rid of all the bacteria, and It *i ohrlon
that It will be petitioned to be Increased, nt urn teitlaony adalti that ihould tiB
percentage contiaptlon of Irradiated foods IncroiM to bo a ilgnlflcant portton Of W
diet, there Mold hfve to bi ■ re'evaluatlon of potential •ffKtt. Thll iiMW* tkat
there xlll be in avenge diet. Hare Isiuei rexitlng to the 1 neons I static In wtlt be
iddre
s i^estlons below
The basic Intent Of MR SW ii Co al
absoliing the FOK inm labeling requlrene
■label neutraf. CUFFs Insists that there
deiund that a clear label be dedscd fdr
er the definition of Irradiated food*, ttas
ts. Sid Morrison Insists that tie bill Is
Is no such thing as label neutral, ui4 w
ital1 lalai. THIS section ihould be Inwnal
Into the bill, Hith stipulations for packaged aaterlals, fast food, resuurant mmi,
stickers for fresh fruits and vegetables, and other fonn of retail talat. nils does
not have to be an offensive label , but a sinple universal One. If Imdlawd food H se
safe, let the wrlietplace be the Judge. The potential backlash could be Mars*, cailleg
eitroK paranoia. Specific coBvntS of the bill are as follOM;
Section Z<a)5: Irri
not Just Ilki lelcroMiIng etc.. Irradiation C*«Mi
procouno cnangei In the structures of the food. Tills Is SMClflcatIr
■hy It li defined as an additive, though It Is a pr«c*ss. Hhlle
It the proposed doses, the effects of those changes any be difflcelt
to detect, due to the Idm nuaber of UWs produced, thay arc preiast
in I praportlDnal amount to the dose received. If you hut ftods
Kith roOB toiperatura ilr, they xlH not get hot. If tha alcroMee
Isn't strong eoounh to route the bonds, the food will not gat hot.
Because Irradiation Is based upon rays of discrete anaiiui. aaeb
single ray hit the potential to create an IMP.
,y Google
Ski Ion
?la)
?lal
6r The niarketplace sHould <1o
tat1onn«ds to be included.
Sectio
13
This Nas been discussed ab
eiamlne Sections JClls) and
CosTOttc Act lZ\ use 321 (sj
o.e. CUFFS has not had the tin
409 of the Federal Food Druq a
tn supply thp actual wordinq.
:.'•
SKtio
S(bJ
ties- Itapefullj' her^ -111
itipyppil
e public
.££ji]nd^:::,^^.
deirlnghouse for infornatSon
•?.
stions nb
ut Fo
d Irradidtion
s to be covered by the Price *
for pub: ir. inwt'
„..,
at food Irradiation facil!tie
enul a to rv actions and (.haotf
.iderson
rosslinking. i^nat are the effects of tni; unuseable debris (URPs) in the body'
Do they cause allosteric cHioelltion during pro-tcin lynlhesis. thus altering the
Mhy are spices, which tidve the hi^ghest potential for producing ta>1c Vftf-, al10>«il
Has research -studied the types of surviving bacteria after Irradiating, and looked
the production cf toiins produced UDon the death of the bacteria?
Is there one location, or bibliography Chat siMnarlies 111 this InfonutlonT
can CUFFS obtain it?
Than* you for your attention to this
Donald Nonun. for CUFFs
„GoogIe
HRITTEH TESTIHONY OF
miON sPRiNSOCi:*
THE HOUSE AGRICULTUtE SUBCCmiTTEE
OM OEPAnMENT OPERATIOHS. RESEUCH
AND FOUEICM AGRICULTUIIE
BBCARDIMG
nX» IRRADIATIOH AND UMLD HUNCDt
NOVDtBER 16. 1985
Santa Cruz Coalition t(
Bca Sie3
Santa Crui. Ca. 9S063
«»-426-2734
Stop Food Itradiatlon
lea that the doHitic irradiation of food will •lUinat* vorld hiintir U
circulating In Congrtaa. Uaahlngton State Repteaantatlia, Sid Horriaon, InrU)
a Julir 26. 1964 Congreaaloal bearing on food irradiation atMtad that " (vltt
food irradiation] ve can take our current production of agriculturMl prodactl
•tch it Buch farther In reaching our helping hand artnind to ochtr pv**
world."' California lepreaentatlTe, Leon E. hoetta wrltaa la ■ latlti
to eonatltuenta, "anti-hunger aupportara bellnrc that thla [food irradlatioa)
will protect food for overacaa ahlpplng to tba buniry,"
nlEeli
Afrlci
rlan arguaenia like thcae calling for doaastlc food Irradiation fit
1th recent aaii aedla attention focuaed on Afrlca'a praaant food
, but food Irradiation •■ a tacbaological hunger aolutiea aiiwidi
le emly aa long aa we ignore political
irrent drought haa auralf Intanalficd tba
'oalltiM af baagtr.
bat povarcr la Ik*
,y Google
^oot cause of famine. It ia the chionlcall; iapoverlahed otio die
^nd Africa's inpoverishnient has be«n arveral hundred tears in the nakl
^Balanced farming and herding Sjislems thai for centuries had adapted to changing
environmental conditions gave way to European colonization. Fertile fan lands
iKiow grow sugar, cocoa, oil seeds, coffee, and cotton. These eipon crops have
countries nust compete with other nations.
Xlependence on mineral and agricultural exports in return for food and nanufac-
Tured goods is at the heart of Africa's hunger problem. Sudan. Ethiopia, Ghana,
This bitter irony is often created by large eiports of one or two sain food items.
76Z of Ghana's total export income is generated from sales of cocoa. Gaabia
raises 581 of its export income from oil seeds and nuts. While world market prices
for rau naterials and agricultural products have stagnated or declined over time,
prices of aanufactured goods and proceased foods have soared. By 1962 a full
year's worth of African exports bought Juat 27 dajs worth of that continent's
This deterioration in Africa's terms of trade means that Boat African nations
— ' Bust fill the gap bf borrowing. As these nations go deeper Into debt, conventional
( IMF ) wisdom encourages boosting export crops to service the debt. As cash
rolls in from sale of exports, much needed protein floods out to developed
countries. After servicing their debt, developing countrie* have little re-
Uorld food urkets allocate food according to monetary wealth, not nutritional
need. The six corporations that control 8SZ of world grain auppllea are con-
cerned with profit. While world grain reserves are at their highest level in
Food distibution by nonetary wealth !■ not th« only stumbling block to feeding
hungry people, food is alao used a* a political tool between nations. While Sub-
Saharsn populations go hungry, fully two thirds of of U.S. aid to Africa goes
to just one country, Egypt. When in 19S1 the governaent of Hozambique expelled
several U.S. officials for spying, the Reagan Administration cut off all
„GoogIe
Noxaabl^iw^aad aid vhlle thou»«nd* in that cotmtrr BtBTirad.
Ulth theae verir real ccondsic and political praaaurB* In Bind It la difficult
to envlaloD doawatic food irradiation relievlnt hiuBcr and mCfariai aroaad tk
globa. Food Irradiation la not an Incxpenalve treataant and will drlv* load
prlcaa up aa auch aa IM per pound depending on the food and dosB rau,^
Tbla raallti ovtllnea the follf bahlnd tiopca that Irradiated foods will flad
tbelr tiaj Into poor countrlaa. The fooda now bein| irradiatad la Earoyoaa
coontrlea are high priced, fanci^ fooda like ahrlap, froga laga. pcpMya, fiab>
etc. If food irradiation will feed anTooe it will be food baycra In dcewloftd
countrlea with high per capita Incoaea.
-Before n feed the world's hungr; we auat dispell the notion that pa^l* M4
becauae the^ are geographical!)' laolated. Thla idea la ahatterad Kith tbc raal-
liatlon that white South Afrlcana enjoj one of the hi^at atandarda of livlag
on the planet, rat theji are geographlcallii cloae to starving Batlona. Sautb
Afrlcana eat wall for the atae reaaoo that xe do, ther bold anoiish aonatarr
The idea that we need food irradiation aa a high-tech traataeot to aa«* food
that would otherwlae spoil is a nonaenac idea. Curreot food preaavatlon Cacb-
niquea, like aun-dr]rlng fruita and vegetables, are prolan, chaap, aad llcaaaad
for UBC, what we need now is the huaanltarian will to aaka real atrldaa for
food equltji. Hunger In the developing countries la a aarloua probloB iiortbj
of thla aubcoaalt tee's sttentlon. Trual; prograaalvo Idaaa, If iBplaaantad
can aake great atrldaa toward feeding hungry people, food trradlatloo la not
1. The Status of the Technical Infraatructnre to Support Doaaatlc Ftoed Irradi-
ation. Hearing before the House Science and Tachnologj Mbco^alttao oa
Energy Research and Production, July Z6, 19U
2. FAO World Trade Tearbook, 1977
3. Africa's Debt Crisis , Intarfalth Action For Econoalc Jasttca, Jalj, IWt
«. Id.
i. Food Irradlatloo Update. Pood Procesalng, June IMS. p.tS
„GoogIe
ST«TtKENT or
Hartln «. Halt, Ph.D.
Chatraan, Praaldaat aed CIO
ladlatlon T<ehaala|]r, Ino .
iDekawaf, Haw Jaraajr OTBee
to tha
rtBint Opantlona, laaaarehi and For*
or tha
CORMITTCt OH JIGIICULTUIE
U. S. HOUSE or lEFlESEHTlTIVES
Hovaabar U, DBS
,y Google
Kr. C
bal
■an
•n
■•■
•ra af
tha
su
sppor
o.l
• ta
ttBOnT
for
nal
an th
a anb
las
of
ladt*
tlo
Ta
nno
o|».
Ine..
found
d I
■•rol
• 111*
tlo
f
oi
rraala
Ion
la
fia«B
aap
art
aohn
lata
■ol*l
pan
Ibl
fo
e»t
Inlni
tb* o
If
food
;rrad
IBO
116
. Tab
a I
aaa
■«aa*
pit ah
■•n
B \W, 1MB pt*«**r*d tka i»
to* »Blt*4 Stataa. V
froB tha ■•«*raB«at( m
ru approvala for BBrBst
■■rtta* tha «B«a«t af Uli
TiaLt t
lECEiT rok imoikis ro» roon i
and larllo po^d.r
T/S/«S
•a n ]Hii
nd (oiatabla aaaa
nln|(
«/ia/«s
so ri tfiit
6/10/«5
so n »m
roiaaaa
T/2Z/a9
50 n twi
•loHid, du
paaaaia of
■prooatf
food addlt
oonoladad
kCf) Hltho
abaut tha
aoaaant, 1
iBlaaaklRi
raad (*« r
tb* fiaal
■paelflaa
rot raaul
«":
ap ta ti
an of irradla
■I Food and 9
tloB latroda
b|P Saaator S
lata alaaalfy
r rraailnt, ■
«6 ri
ood
n kdvaa
onltta
0>lao
ruarr
food.
of 2
lOB tlltti
• raa
ona for
OBld
a*a baaii
rradl
hax pa
tloB of
(Ulatarr «vpra*al af Ut
• aaaaarolatisattaa |r»
hi* teehnolagy ha*a tm
ad food Httkla tko IM
ui lot . «a Btaaolr am
•d br Coo cr •••■•! *"
lada OortoB fBZBO) ;
food Irrodiatloa
ihtob tt ta, r«tkBr '
laad Rotlaa of PrapOMt
t Hhlali ataarll
of too krad '
taatiBi or m»w aoi
irtar ISO Oara of pallK
l« ta laaua tha lattaa iT
'rooaaalat and Raadttaf iT
batoaaa thaa-* ro|al«tari
hlB tha food ladHatrT «<
-aaa to aoblltia thtlr
tha dalap 1b laaaaaat at
.»• rood and a FBI Irt
aabalttad rood addltlo
(rantad.
"Uj »
,y Google
proc**iln( fi
td Ststei wcr*
Thll CDHlttCI
Tht rin*l r
■heir stabit ■••I* of t
I* (■troniuli.
lalrBan. It la vital t)i
>re>lil( cot>*lt-»0 Bourc
tton fao<
product*
ISzn pouF
ent or En<
tlon li
lini er
SOBC
In Chlaaio on Oete»-
ra at Weit Kaaphla,
lltjr la aipaetad to
rlt In )9Se. and
lion project at th«
tnorlty. Baaad on
t dlslnroatatlon by
papaya or othtr
(y to lo ■
ult and
ra. Prlvit
Ln( U ludlorou.
ot hB<a that ■ 4 D tn-
on approvals lisuad to
ladlatlon TichnoloiiP,
I patltlon wa« paid for
ivaral otliar patltton tfforta
Llanta. ranflni fros flan and
> now provlda to tMa i«3k
„GoogIe
rBBtnt prodUBia
.pproprlatloB ili
■tlon plant! b* rtohanni
•chnoloi)> b* alloitad ta i
t 90« of th( mrll
•rtlo
•aratip 1
dlraat
•iparlan
odirir
hair poa
■■ttini
l«8* I sfealrad ■ ■•■■la< •
Irradlattd Toad aafatr at tha NlDtar Haatlat of tho AaartoM tMliv
SoolatiP la Haahiniten, D.C. it that oaatlaf aar paaal of olMrt* <l
laaad th* onlir artlola* found In tha aolantlfla lltaraturo wklab al|
iBplr aa advaraa food safatiP Issua raiultlni froa Irradtatloa. ttaa*
iKntlst Hlth dlraat aiparlano* In tba flald af faod Irradlatlaa a|rMl
naiatlva davpolnt, ■>• lavltod t
thar Houltf baaaflt froa tho opoi
a. UnfortunatalT, our sood latMttMi
aritura eltatloaa vhlak thay ba«« M '
food Irradlatlan. Ha aipa"* that tkar Ml
I Coaaitta* Hlth thla Inforaatlan KltHoat prBvltflag tko •
ta ifhieh la titry Initanoa hava rafutad tka a<t<
I a papar publlttaad br tha Jeuraal af Industrial lrra(l>-
iir. tltlad, ■tarrltrt to Htdaapraad Appraval i ~ ' '
3tl, diSS], I diseuaaod thoa* l**aaa la iobb datai:
atlon li ilvaa lo a papar b; Dr. Arl ■rpajatriiw,
I Bf Irradlitad Foodat 1 lavlair', Oopartaant of IpTlli'
il*ne*>, Masaaehuaatta laatltuta of Ttobaolesp, Caakrll|i<
02139.
.atlon praaar«atlofl of food offora an aaparalltM
or th* U.S. faraar to rafaln hla eoapatltt** •««• la awU
itop tha daallna of ovr atrlonltural atporka. Tlat li
>r u> In our roe* for aarkot akar* •* foralcn aattaas aMft
iahnolai)> aad dlaeoiar tbat tkolr fraak pork «r papapa r~
opportuBttr
trad* and to
,y Google
■SEHSONED PORK FOOD IlltDIlTIOi PtOGIESS II I»t5'
ladlatton T«ehBolo|]P. Ine.
loekawiy. I.J. 07*66
llsn or S*iaonlnt Hanufaeturar* Innual Haatlni
IWTIIODUCTIOM
fruat
tB »1
'od"r
]\T,
11'",
reial
I* on
" 111.
n*"n
Fadar
1 Coi
9(t5.
Tha F
>a ad
pro*l
■ loni
ni 1
nduttri
aad
blan<
1 and
■bla I
and t
ha pr
Anoth
duct
r fa
otor'in
tll^d
rirai
tlaa
and
,hat 1>
(FHII
or po
■K ir
ha c
adla
r trl
o»are
IV,.'
otn*
r aat o
taetinoloflaa. food Irn
Hon In eoaliif. C
t, (FFOCm,
TESETABLE 3E*aOMIIICS
' (kGy) or 1 aaiar
,y Google
>dluB ehlorld* •• a alir
can ba •••n by aatlH U
1. Tha D-10 *Bta* (Im
raduD* th« atatad
lYPIC*!. HE!
'
0.Z2
0.26
0.2«
0.2O
0.81
(2) 30 kCir [3.0 Hrad> ■ailaaa law
ihi triatad praduot ■• oaaHBaraUlU
taid for tha radtattan ■■nltliitln
> tha Blsroblal oount data ebtllwl
„GoogIe
SPC Callfor
Lleorli* loot a.TOO.OOD 3Z.DO0
130,000
ChiBOBll* 10.500.000 STO.OOO
1,500,000
P.[.[.or»lnt l.«50.00D 17.800
3>B,OD0
Or*nt* Potali 9.(60.000 1.120.000
z,jio,ooo
*Tn* aiarx* laluos of 10 rapllost*! with ■
laa* than 10 sou
t(K*n ■> 10 and iroattr thin 37.000.000 tik
*n ai 37,000,000
Ottiir icudlas (3) were conductad on a Dirb tra e
onatltuent (Flor
Bh*aoallloa) Inordor to r*4ucc aloroblal ooncaalnaMo
Inrjlcata th* prajonco of tncrBophll Ic bacteria up to
poat hartaat paltleltfa rcslduaa. The Irradiation pro
■n afraetlt* alt(rn>tl*a to chcaleal trcataant for In
aect dlilnfaatat
Th* chHlcal ooBpoaltlon or the chaaoallc oil xa* aon
■paetroioopy, thin lar*r and (ai chrooatoiraphr. Ko
h.raful effect o
radiation traataant icaa found on any of the aetlit co
■anltlxatlon.
Dr» or Pehydratad Eniy, ITeparat lona (Including i.ao
bllii.d)
diet a. en 1...
th. (Ball rr-actlon ooaprlaed by spied. Ihey act aa
■■hen alitd ulth the tar(at food product ana ara uaual
> catalyilni aien
doniuoptlon. *■ alth aplcei. eniraei do not aarve a
th. dlat and hence any lota of aniyaatU actiolty dur
m the Irradtat
aiant co-pleted Its talk. The relatively low t.naltl
radiation effecta Id of practical Intara^t In foodatu
|lly of etiiyaat
naceaaary to pre.ent eniyaatlc apollase a> -ell aa al
rroBlil'jp'lli,.'
pr.a.rolni food. The Inactlvatlon of aniy.e. by aola
, heat u.ually
Thla 11 not the oaae .Ith radiation preaer.atlon of f
ood». *i a (ene
tlaa* the doaa raqulrad for th* InaetKatlon of th* ■
croorianlaB («)
June 10, 1985 th* FD* approied the uae af Cobalt-fiO a
r CaaiUB-13T for
■anltliation and tniodt dlalnf aatat Ion Bf trf poiidtrr
ar taaobllliad
•njy.ei (SOFI2«190).
Dry poHdiry (ntyB* praparatlona. laoludlai prata
dapolyaeraaa, and peetln aathyleslaraaa aetliitKa h*
Cobalt-6D lamaa rayi. Th* reiulta reriaKd a Blnor 1
o» in eniy.atic
"S';i^V"*(^?°"E.p"*^.n;i°conS>.otild''iy^^i^.tli;
'THnncto^I/I^
praparatlona! rilquld''iua"*nalo"if "•BirB*"coapoa*
rlad antys*
d of lipase {.ala
eonitituant) and proteaa* (alnor DonBtltuavt) nere aj
ubatrataa. Tha
„GoogIe
TABLE 3
DRIED •TiriCAL* CNZTNE BIOBUI
iTEH com:
I FD« (SOFl;
■ triBtid Nith TirylBi
■or* thtn 991 of tb* di
at ( doi* of 3.0 kOf
oun In Tabl* 5. >■ tl
•I oipoetod but It tki
190). a hlih 4*|r«* ot
FEI OBAW
0.0 M M.t
51 low
[ POHDtil liXXNC
Tfc rti oim
SIS.OOO
3<S,000
91.500
,y Google
o.sts
0.965
0.950
o.e«o
; coMTiOL or fiti
On July 22, 19BS tl>* FDt tlvt nottc* tmt th* ndlitlBn pr*i
0FIZ96Sa) -nich a»pr«v*« th* lrr*<)l*tlen of ■ Bijor food ItcB—
rk, (t • <ro3« nol to no*..! 1.0 HCr ind no 1«» ttitn 0.3 kZ, U
Bduca ■ trlchlnaciin product. Thli ipprovil uk Cti* rourth r
dlatlon T^ehnoloiT, Ine. ■Inco th* iple* ippraval on Jul, S, 1?
pr*(*n(i the only rood Irradiation *ppro«il* (r*nt*(l b|r thi FDA
••*ot iprsutlni and Hhaat aad iih*at flour for pr*a*ntlon sf In*
th* dlaaii* by Inapictlsn sf th* Hat, hy rr«*iln(, eurlni or
rt of th* eonauair du> to th* ■■■It but flntt* nuahar of o^^^^
lehlnoil^ r^portod ■■ch year Th* C*nt(r for Slaaaa* Control a
oo|nl»* th* dU«(i( ii ( ■orloua puhllo haalth haiard. Thla a
„Googlc
Triehln.u/Ulrtu;!
(9) hxr* ino»n mat ■
«Dgr*tlni in thi Infic
to 10-;o Kri4, f*Bil«
produelni ••sond cent
In Inftctid Koali aft
Krada thi anciratad la
lni**Cion. laoant at
or Trlchlnttla larvai
radlattoa •■ a public
tha hoat ara not nae*
de*. bat-.n 20-3^ »r
Iniaatad praduot.
Ihara ara no ad«
trradiatad pork (anan
ohanoi (12). Horao
• nhanacd by al(nirua
cpnooattant Irradlatl
Eathatleally. a b*n*f
hatird of trlehlnoata
Irradiation itud
bara Ihoxn that at th
2300 pound pallat loa
packad, boitd and pro
■uaaarltaa tha data t
rafrliaratad oondttto
of lana radlit
t $ to ID Gt (0.
lad* br tba ihlppar to bo 2
(aouuB paektd irradlatod tri
laboratory In South Dakota
for irradiation and roturaoi
■ponalbla oriMla. ■
■ ra ktlla* or aNa ■
n <S>. lavaitliMM
-1.0 Krad} Hill
laraa* aa^akl* at
tka doaa Is laorMM
bacaaa laaapabli tf
amaa ^mvw t»n (mm
». kt a doa* ttH
aa) ara klllad hm
ia9aaa«ndad tkii
lavala tkat pradi
I «• kill tka lartttti
lurvlv* tn tba •
lultina rroB tba
I bactarla.
> aay aajar aatltl pal
Llaad to ai«l« tin
tlOB TaotaBoloirt !■•'
Irada dalivarad ta
a pork lala, vaaiN
Irada, tka akalf llh
tad abair Ufa af Ui
dara {13). Takli I
b »ork. Thaaa dit*
ftar tit* aaMlai <w*
whlia BBlatatalai >*•
,y Google
SMELF LIFE PROJECTIONS
IlliDIATED FXESH VilCUUH fkCKED rORK LaiM
Control
e.OTS On
riOJ£CT£t> SHELF LIFE <
■ Ssaploi t*>t*4 for Stai
ind of tk« akiir Ufa vhi
1,000.000.
I-
or tho O.JOO Hrod >oapl
ITO dog
00* r OBd ttatod for poa
tbolr •
oollant Botor and ao ado
pork on
oihtbltod no off odor*
THE FED
R«L HE*T IRSFECIIOIC *CT
h FD* ipproill to irradl
Inipaat
tFSIS)
f ttii USD*. FrsdalsDa
iBGsrpo
atad in tn> Dapartaanta
■tit. t
60. *■ aaandad). Tbaaa
HhOlOBO
• Naat let. approiad Dae
lif dailinatad tna orlil
JI, III
and IV to tti. *ot. Iha
FHI« th
FK1« r*
■tint ts food Irradlatio
Tltla I- SaotloB Ua
any eircaaa. part th
baaa lataatloBollf a
tltla I- SdotloH 1(a>('
labaltni la fall* or
Or th* Foo
Sara
aaat Inapa
ar 15 , l«fi
(81
prooiaiona
for ■
laaala Naat
lot c
at rood pro
::!"
Iha tor»
adult
tod to radl
■••Ut
" *" *" "
F.d<
Th« t«r>
aUbr
at fo
•adlaa ta •■
1 P»rt
rd Tltlti
>1 Food, 1
andad* akall
„GoogIe
■y Bay br rcgutBtlon praaarlM
, part* of aaroaasaa, ■•■*, M
In*, loat*. horaaa, Bulaii m
huaan food, ahall »• aterM v
flra, or oorporatlan aaiiiM li
fr«*iln|, atorlast 1b or far
letaa. xhanavar th* Saarvur?
■ lur* that auoh artlolaa Mill M
) dallnarad to tha ooaaaaw.
Hadth
itandlnf any othar pro*lalaa *t
' tn* Fadaral Food. Drug. aa4
th* provlaloaa of thla lat lUU
eanrarrad br tha Fadarat Faa«,
•naetaant of tba Hholoaala Nttt
■oeaaa Taehnology. Ibo.
Ka faollltlaa lnap«ata« far •
I* ha>a polntad out that a
loldi boiad fraah pork for It 4»
iduet aa trlehlnao aafo, or alifll
■ tlon proeaaa" doaa not raqalr* ■
( an inapactor prooant dartaf tM
■ an aada la aeeapt tho
, Fiiur* I, Bdoptod by tbo Varll
turil Orf anliatloti and a (raallf
C01CtU3I0«3
I forth rot ■
I bj ladl
raakthrouth roar «ltli r<(ar«
Thra* FDA rosulatloai MM
<ith tn< OSPt. It la paaalkli
■ 1 ■•■latar baforo tba aa* al
Irradiation or poaltrr (!•*
■oaalla oontrel ■«■ bolaf
tha USOk (14) It waa raaa<
ilf Iff* and produat quallti
16 to ba tha yaar la ■«!■*
obansa to ohooaa ^aalltr
„GoogIe
25
i-jl
ais-zas
•:
Tl
-STJ
• 1 Ren
I
"
of H.rl.'T.i'
or
wills*), ladtat
!70-3. 1975.
•I.Ctrl
Fo
cua
D»ltnc
III
H.,
Clbb..
H.C
. a
m. 1
6*
srk
Xr.ybl
top«».
,
>5^
tr»l. I
^^,
Urbiln
Flouih
•pttbll
ty
■ re
c.
OH
■toblr
trit Ea
ta,
t**
of Food Imdli
159-16T.
and B.J
1 Frotaaiaa b
, J. Foad Bio
lB-La|r*r 1
1-B5. 1«TS.
ibllihlfli
r Induitrlal
. (S-e*. 1)TB.
la II.
1 »r CKiHtll
■ah. 8», 1SS,
,y Google
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
„GoogIe
MTEOUE
STANFORD UNIVERSHY I
STANFORD, CALIFORNIA
„GoogIe
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11