Файл: Перевод статьи Облучение пищевых продуктов.docx

Hundreds of animal feeding studies of irradiated food, including multigenerational studies, have been performed since 1950.[38] Endpoints investigated have included subchronic and chronic changes in metabolism, histopathology, and function of most systems; reproductive effects; growth; teratogenicity; and mutagenicity. Because a large number of studies has been performed, some have demonstrated adverse effects of irradiation, but no consistent pattern has emerged.[38] Independent reviews of the scientific evidence by a series of expert committees, involving the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Consultative Group on Food Irradiation (ICGFI), as well as the FDA have concluded in general that irradiation of foods is safe.[39][40][41]Some consumer advocacy groups like Public Citizen or Food and Water Watch maintain that the safety of irradiated food is not proven and strongly oppose the use of the technology.[42][43]

Irradiation to cover up poor food quality

Concerns have sometimes been expressed by public interest groups and public health experts that irradiation, as a non-preventive measure, might disguise or otherwise divert attention away from poor working conditions, sanitation, and poor food-handling procedures that lead to contamination in the first place.[44] However, similar or even identical concerns had been expressed when the heat-pasteurization of milk had become compulsory; in the contrary to such fears, dairy operations and hygiene have been improved until today.Processors of irradiated food are subject to all existing regulations, inspections, and potential penalties regarding plant safety and sanitization; including fines, recalls, and criminal prosecutions. Furthermore, while food irradiation can in some cases maintain the quality of certain perishable food for a longer period of time, it can not undo spoilage effects that occur prior to irradiation. Irradiation can therefore not be successfully used to mask quality issues other than pathogens. Under a HACCP-concept (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point) radiation processing can serve and contribute as an ultimate CCP (Critical Control Point).

Worker safety and impact on the environment

Experience over more than 40 years in the field of radiation processing has shown that such technology is generally safely used.[45] The steady improvement in the design of such facilities and careful selection and training of operators have contributed to a very good safety record. Nevertheless, there have been instances, as in Italy in 1975, in Norway in 1982 and in El Salvador in 1989, when safety systems have been circumvented and serious radiological accidents involving workers at the facilities have ensued.[45]

The safety of irradiation facilities is regulated by the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency and monitored by the different national Nuclear Regulatory Commissions. The incidents that have occurred in the past are documented by the agency and thoroughly analyzed to determine root cause and improvement potential. Such improvements are then mandated to retrofit existing facilities and future design.National and international regulations on the levels and types of energy used to irradiate food generally set standards that prevent the possibility of inducing radioactivity in treated foods. Care must be taken not to expose the operators and the environment to radiation. Interlocks and safeguards are mandated to minimize this risk. Nevertheless there have been radiation related deaths and injury amongst workers of such facilities, many of them caused by the operators themselves overriding the interlocks.[45]An incident in Decatur, Georgia where water soluble caesium-137 leaked into the source storage pool requiring NRC intervention[46] has led to near elimination of this radioisotope; it has been replaced by the more costly, non-water soluble cobalt-60.

Alternatives

Other methods to reduce different pathogens in food include heat-pasteurization, Ultra-high temperature processing, UV radiation, Ozone or fumigation with ethylene oxide.Insect pests can also be eliminated by fumigation with methyl bromide or aluminum phosphine, vapour heat, forced hot air, hot water dipping, or cold treatment. However, the Mango weevil sitting in the stone of the fruit can only be reached by ionizing radiation.Other methods to extend shelf life of food items include modified atmosphere packaging, carbon monoxide, dehydration, vacuum packaging, freezing and flash freezing as well as chemical additives. However, such methods are not effective for products already deep-frozen where only ionizing radiation can penetrate the product (without re-thawing).Some people argue that the best alternative to food irradiation to reduce pathogens is in good agricultural practices. For example, farmers and processing plants should improve sanitation practices, water used for irrigation and processing should be regularly tested for E. coli, and production plants should be routinely inspected. Concentrated animal feeding operations near farmland where produce is grown should be regulated. However, such methods as also practised in organic farming can only reduce the extend of the load with microorganisms of all kind; a residual flora including pathogen germs will always persist; and processing by ionizing radiation could be the ultimate measure (as a CCP under a HACCP-concept) to practically eliminate such risks.

i Официальный журнал Европейского союза