Organic Food vs. Conventional Food : Irradiated Food Pro's & Con's

[dimensionalyspeaking]

when man plays super god , he surely gonna lose. :( what most people dont understand , is that after picking the fruit it stays alive all the way through the decomp process, during each step breaking down into simpler or more complex products. each process has an impact to other things that eat those items in its diet.... killing the fruit through irradiation kills those products our dna will miss, hence more illness ,and more money to get better...agenda 21

[gunfuego]

what if irradiating food is disrupting the atomic quarks in it's structure? would that be considered mutation?

[kmarinas86]

Irradiation is like laser treatment. If you use the right frequencies, no damage done. Laser can heal tissue and restore sight. However, if you use the wrong frequencies, you can cause damage to vitamins, proteins, among other things. Yes, "radiation" (which is the politicized way of saying "electromagnetic waves") can cause molecular damage, but if you know the right frequencies, radiation can provide health benefits.

[mihalspinvinyl]

bottom line, I trust the earth to grow food, not something some bloke ( however big his brain !) has invented in the last hundred years .

we should leave well alone .

[DrBuzz0]

except for the fact that "natural" living includes frequent death due to infectious disease. Ever thought of that one? Yeah, back when we didn't have "some bloke" invent things, people were lucky to live to age 40.

[Gary1111001]

AzureDrag)n1 has spoken!!, and knows all. No need for tests. There's No downsides. No downsides. No downsides. No downsides.

[AzureDrag0n1]

Terrible presentation. Irradiated food has virtually no downsides what-so-ever. There is virtually no loss of nutrients due to radiation. High power radiation is also not necessary to sterilize food. The range of power can very greatly on what is needed.

[DrBuzz0]

You're right, of course, but nobody is going to trust that because it's fashionable to pretend that the "natural" way is superior and bask in their own ignorance while accusing others of being part of the big conspiracy.

[AzureDrag0n1]

@DrBuzz0 Yes by that logic cooking food is also unnatural. As cooking food destroys even more nutrients than irradiation does.

Natural does in no way shape or form mean that it is better for you. Natural just sounds good to people like Tradition does. Even though tradition can be just as boneheaded.

[peacelovelightjoy]

It kills the phytochemicals in the food, which is the lifeforce of what we eat! If you eat this kind of food, you might as well eat cardboard, you will get the same nutrients.....nil

[roargathor]

The reason there isn't allot of research to prove the fact that radiation destroys nutrients in food is because the FDA, or any other organization with have a brain wont fund it. It's because they know it's bad, but kills the stuff that makes people sick right now. Who cares if you die of cancer or some other deficiency later in life?

[micheals1992]

im gonna buy an apple from asda that is irradiated and used my geiger counter and see if anything shows up

[nilesriver2]

don't touch my food. I would rather take my chances with nature than some loser trying to make more money for a corp. ITS NOT NEEDED....YOU COULD GET HIT BY A CAR SO......I GUESS JUST LIVE INSIDE OR MAKE DRIVING ILEGAL....GREAT IDEA...

[DrBuzz0]

The same could be said of pasteurization. Food irradiation is a means of sanitizing it. No level of cleanliness in food preparation will ever assure that it is 100% safe because only a tiny amount of bacteria can contaminate it.

Irradiation is not 100% either. It does not always sterilize the food and stuff can be contaminated after. It still helps.

Cleanliness, washing it, cooking it well and irradiation together improve safety even if no one is ever 100% effective 100% of times

[DGr8Strategist]

someone plz tell her shes helping psychos of this world make the most outrageous step against world health this is a part of codex alimentarius of the U.N which basically say too much people on earth not enough food space and best way to help is killing people actually they say keep 500millions people the rest are "undesirables" the best way to do that is killing the nutrients of food to starve to death everyone. without nutrient in food u can eat all u want ull die of starvation anyway

[WTF1920]

I would never eat irradiated foods. Sure, today it's "safe". But isn't that what we said about saccharin?

[DrBuzz0]

All food is irridiated by cosmic rays, the sun, natural radioisotopes. (don't tell me that's okay because it's natural it's the same god damned kind of radiation).

Irradiation of food with a controlled source does not make the food radioactive or alter the nuclear or chemical properties. It does kill bacteria however.

You ever seen those UV "Germicidal" lamps? Those use the same principle except this uses more penetrating radiation. It destroys bacteria.

[roargathor]

It also kills vital nutrients and enzymes that our bodies need. Only an idiot would think otherwise. The Sun and cosmic radiation are not to be compared to the concentrated beams used to irradiate food.

[Rubiksfanatic1]

Eh he he he, Eh he he he, he...

Actually that's a myth. Which is untrue. An untrue myth.

And how do you "kill" nutrients? Nutrients, although some are CALLED organic compounds, are really not alive at all. Organic compounds, in reality, are nothing but chemical compounds. And so there is no way that radiation could kill them.

[Gary1111001]

I quess he should've said "Destroys".

[jreily88]

@roargathor

No, it doesn't. The radiation used is not powerful enough to do that, and it is the wrong type of radiation as well. It's the same as if you were to get an xray at the doctor. The food never comes into contact with any radioactive substances.

[frostedsnowflakes]

It could also destroy the lives of people who live near the plant.