Search

Background: Poor quality irrigation water is a major cause of disease transmission for urban inhabitants consuming fresh produce in many developing countries. Irradiation of food is an alternative approach to reducing health risks for consumers, but its implementation depends heavily on consumer acceptance., Results: In this pilot study, we show that most respondents consider the water quality of Mexico City to be poor and a health risk, and would be willing to pay for irradiated food as a means of pasteurizing fresh iceberg lettuce., Conclusion: Irradiated food could, potentially, be accepted in developing countries that have problems with water quality. Such acceptance would presumably be due to the perception that such a novel technology would (1) alleviate water impairment, and (2) lead to economic improvement. It is then possible that the public considers that water quality is a more pressing concern than any potential side effects of food irradiation., (Copyright © 2010 Society of Chemical Industry.)

The use of irradiation to improve the safety, protect the nutritional benefits, and preserve the quality of fresh and processed foods is a well established and proven technology. Over the past 35 years, the United States Government has invested in the science to confirm safety and in the technology to show application. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Food and Drug Administration have approved sources of ionizing radiation for the treatment of foods, and their application to most meats, fruits, vegetables, and spices. Despite the value of this technology to the food industry and to the health and welfare of the public, only minimal application of this technology occurs. This underscores the importance of increasing the public's understanding of radiation risks relative to other hazards. Accordingly, in 1995, the Committee on Interagency Radiation Research and Policy Coordination of the Executive Office of the President made recommendations for the creation of a centralized National Radiation Information Center that would work closely with Federal departments and agencies in responding to public queries about radiation issues and Federal programs. This article updates a commentary published in 1996 (Young 1996). In the past six years, some progress has been made, including the establishment of a government operated Food Irradiation Information Center, and the completion of final rule making by USDA, thus permitting the safe treatment of meats and poultry. Despite these actions, little progress has been made on the public acceptance of this technology. The need for an informed public and for a better understanding of risks, i.e., risk communication, is noted.

The continuing high profile food poisoning incidents are beginning to attract food processors using electron and gamma-ray sterilization technologies. The present method of choice uses radioactive isotopes but high-power electron particle accelerators are proving an increasingly attractive alternative. We are developing a family of compact industrial continuous wave linear accelerators which produce electrons with energies from 600 keV in increments of approximately 600 keV and with beam power of 30 kW increasing in increments of 30 kW. Here, we describe the performance of our 1st section that accelerates 15 keV gun electrons to relativistic energies and then we sketch the design of the less demanding subsequent sections that we are now constructing.

In this paper, the results of a pilot study of willingness to pay (WTP) to avoid poultry-borne illness are reported. Through this, the problems of devising an economic measure of the 'intangible' benefits of prevention of food-borne risk are explored. The study is the first to allow those against a prevention policy (irradiation of poultry-meat) to register their WTP not to have the policy implemented. The study demonstrates that it is feasible to obtain answers to WTP questions from a self-selected sample. Future studies should ensure greater representativeness of respondents, that better information about benefits is provided to respondents and that an appropriate method of aggregation of benefits is used.

The purpose of this article is to describe and contrast two relationships between radiation and food--on the one hand, beneficial preservation of food by controlled exposure to ionizing radiation; and, on the other, contamination of food by accidental incorporation of radioactive nuclides within the food itself. In food irradiation, electrons or electromagnetic radiation is used to destroy microorganisms and insects or prevent seed germination. The economic advantages and health benefits of sterilizing food in this manner are clear, and numerous studies have confirmed that under strictly controlled conditions no undersirable changes or induced radioactivity is produced in the irradiated food. An altogether different situation is presented by exposure of food animals and farming areas to radioactive materials, as occurred after the major Soviet nuclear reactor accident at Chenobyl. This article furnishes the basic information needed to understand the nature of food contamination associated with that event and describes the work of international organizations seeking to establish appropriate safe limits for levels of radioactivity in foods.

This article examines the cost competitiveness of the food irradiation process. An analysis of the principal factors--the product, physical plant, irradiation source, and financing--that impact on cost is made. Equations are developed and used to calculate the size of the source for planned product throughput, efficiency factors, power requirements, and operating costs of sources, radionuclides, and accelerators. Methods of financing and capital investment are discussed. A series of tables show cost breakdowns of sources, buildings, equipment, and essential support facilities for both a cobalt-60 and a 10-MeV electron accelerator facility. Additional tables present irradiation costs as functions of a number of parameters--power input, source size, dose, and hours of annual operation. The use of the numbers in the tables are explained by examples of calculations of the irradiation costs for disinfestation of grains and radicidation of feed.

Microwave cooking has gained considerable importance as an energy-saving, convenient, and time-saving cooking method. This article reviews the state of the art of microwave cooking and the existing publishing data on the effects of microwave cooking on nutritive values of moisture, protein, carbohydrate, lipid, minerals, and vitamins. Most reports indicated that microwave cooking resulted in higher moisture losses compared with conventional methods. Overall, the nutritional effects of microwaves on protein, lipid, and minerals appear minimal. There is no report on the effects of microwaves on carbohydrate fraction in foods. A large amount of data is available on the effects of microwaves on vitamins. It is concluded that there are only slight differences between microwave and conventional cooking on vitamin retention in foods. In conclusion, no significant nutritional differences exist between foods prepared by conventional and microwave methods. Any differences reported in the literature are minimal.

Poultry-borne salmonellosis is the most common foodborne infection in Scotland for which the vehicle can be identified. The cost of the disease to society in terms of health service use, absence from work, morbidity, and mortality is substantial. The study estimates the total cost of poultry-borne salmonellosis in Scotland and compares it with the cost of a single preventive measure: the irradiation of poultry meat. The results suggest that the public health benefits exceed irradiation costs. This conclusion is, however, sensitive to assumptions made in the analysis, particularly those related to the cost of unreported cases of salmonellosis.

Successful commercial radiation applications are analyzed, and an evaluation is made of those factors present in each which led to its success. Common "success elements" were identified. Several potential food irradiation applications were then examined from that viewpoint, and some applications could be identified which appeared to contain those favorable elements or characteristics which could lead to successful early commercialization. Reasonable FDA clearance requirements are assumed.