|
Tell
FDA Not to Weaken Labeling for Irradiated
Foods!
Dear Thomas Baker,
![]()
What if the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) proposed a rule that would
intentionally hide information you rely on to
make decisions about what to feed yourself and
your family? Or if FDA proposed changing food
labeling information to something the agency
knows to be misleading to consumers?
Well, FDA has announced just such a rule to
weaken labeling of irradiated foods.
Currently, irradiated food must be labeled as
?Treated with irradiation? or ?Treated by
radiation? and have on them the irradiated
symbol. But now, in yet another attempt to
appease industry at the expense of the public,
the FDA has proposed a new rule that would allow
irradiated food to be marketed in some cases
without any labeling at all. In other
cases, the rule would allow the terms
?electronically pasteurized? or ?cold
pasteurized? to replace the use of ?irradiated?
on labels. These terms are not used by
scientists, but rather are designed to fool
consumers about what?s been done to their food.
Pasteurization involves heating liquids for
the purpose of destroying harmful bacteria and
other pathogens, and has been used safely for
decades. Irradiation is a completely different
process, using high-energy gamma rays, electron
beams, or X-rays on meat, grains, and other
foods.
Labeling irradiated foods as ?pasteurized?
is simply untruthful and misleading.
Allowing the marketing of irradiated food
without any labeling is equally misleading.
Consumers have demanded irradiation labeling
because they know that irradiation can create
potentially dangerous chemical byproducts and
reduce their foods' nutritional value.
In fact, FDA?s own research found that the
proposed change would confuse consumers, stating
"Research indicates that many consumers regard
substitute terms for irradiation to be
misleading."
What is the FDA hiding? A lot.
Consumers have a right to truthful
labeling in order to make informed choices for
themselves and their families. A
public comment period is open until July 3,
2007.
Protect Your Right to Know: Tell the
FDA Not to Weaken the Rules for Labeling
Irradiated Food!
*If the links in this email do not work for
any reason, take action online here: http://ga3.org/campaign/Irradiation
![]()
Send
a letter to the following decision
maker(s):
FDA
Docket No. #2005N-0272 c/o the Center for Food
Safety
Below
is the sample letter:
Subject: Oppose Docket #2005N-0272
Dear [decision maker name automatically
inserted here],
Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305)
Food and Drug Administration
5630 Fishers
Lane, Rm. 1061
Rockville, MD 20852
Re:
Docket #2005N-0272
I strongly oppose the
proposed rule to allow the use of the word
"pasteurized" or other alternate terms on
irradiated food, and the proposed waiver on any
labeling requirement for some types of
irradiated food. The current rules for
irradiation labeling should be preserved.
Irradiation and pasteurization are completely
different processes. Calling
irradiated
foods "pasteurized" is scientifically wrong and
can only serve
to manipulate consumers, not
inform them. Consumers deserve accurate labeling
that clearly indicates when food has been
irradiated by use of the term "irradiated" with
the radura symbol.
Consumer data has
repeatedly shown that consumers recognize and
prefer the current labeling requirements of
irradiated food. In 2001, your agency conducted
focus groups of consumers on this issue.
Consumers participating unanimously rejected
replacing the term irradiation with
pasteurization and reacted with phrases such as,
"sneaky," "deceptive," "misleading," and
"trying to fool us."
The proposed
rule would also severely limit labeling
requirements by requiring companies to label
irradiated food only when the radiation
treatment causes a 'material change' to the
product. The Center for Food Safety and Food and
Water Watch released a report last year, Food
Irradiation: A Gross Failure, exploring these
very changes in irradiated food, finding that
"published research on irradiated foods
repeatedly finds that they smell rotten,
metallic, bloody, burnt, grassy and generally
off. The taste was described as like sulfur,
singed hair, burnt feathers, burnt oil and
rancid fat."
Serious questions linger as
to whether irradiated food is safe. CFS's report
also cites several scientific studies that show
irradiating certain foods can form volatile
toxic chemicals, such as benzene and toulene;
causes stunted growth in lab animals fed
irradiated foods; and a startling 2001 study
that linked colon tumor promotion in lab rats to
new chemical compounds that are found only in
irradiated foods, known as 2-alkylcyclobutanones
(2-ACBs).
As someone who is concerned
about the food I eat, I believe that I have a
right to know if my food has been irradiated,
and I have the right to avoid purchasing it if I
choose to. As such, I believe the current
labeling rules for irradiated foods should be
maintained.
Sincerely,
Thomas Baker Nicaragua
Solidarity Fair Trade
Resource
![]() |