4 ms·

It seems you might be aware of this already, but irradiation of pork to kill parasites is an established practice in the food industry. Food irradiation in gen

It seems you might be aware of this already, but irradiation of pork to kill parasites is an established practice in the food industry. Food irradiation in general is safe and effective, but weirds a lot of the general public out (particularly those with low scientific literacy. Irradiated food doesn't become radioactive!) There may be something to be said about the hazards of handling a gamma source like Cs-137 safetly and making sure nobody drops it in the city dump or steals a truck carrying it, but X-ray and electron beam irradiation don't have these drawbacks. Many people today eat irradiated food without ever realizing it, though if they did realize it they might balk.

kjs3 6y ago
I was under the impression that Cobalt-60 was more common for food irradiation (it's not soluble in water and has a shorter half-life, so less potential eco-impact). But, yeah, food irradiation is a really common process with few downsides once you get past the whole "made in a reactor" part.
- bigbubba 6y ago
  AFAIK both Cobalt-60 and Cesium-137 are used as gamma sources for food irradiation, though Cobalt is more common.
- ashtonkem 6y ago
  I find that reading about nuclear accidents actually helps here. Assuming you’re not standing next to something unbelievably “hot” (don’t do that!), the main issue is the dust that tends to settle onto everything and keep irradiating you. So radiated food is fine, but food that’s been coated in radioactive dust is emphatically not fine.
everdrive 6y ago
Dumb question, doesn't cooking also kill parasites just as effectively?
- chmod600 6y ago
  A lot of cooking styles do not throughly and consistently heat all food to the required temperature for the required time to be 100% safe. And if you try to cook for extra time just to be safe, you end up drying out the meat a lot.
  - SAI_Peregrinus 6y ago
    That's where souc vide helps. You don't dry out the food (due to the containment in the bag) and you can keep the food in the required temperature range for plenty of time (because the immersion circulator keeps the water bath at a constant temperature range).
- outworlder 6y ago
  If properly cooked it should kill parasites and pathogens. Food irradiation is relevant for other types of food too, including the ones we don't normally cook, such as fruits.
- throw0101a 6y ago
  > Dumb question, doesn't cooking also kill parasites just as effectively? Technically yes, but how many households typically have a (meat) thermometer? A lot of people go by the "not pink" or "clear juices" rules of thumb, which work well enough for typical grocery store 'industrial' packaged meat, but may not be good enough for more 'uncontrolled' meat. A 6.5- to 7.0-log_10 reduction in pathogens (salmonella) is generally hit at 158F/70C (with beef) where there is 'instantaneous' destruction of the pathogen(s), but lower temperatures can also be reached as long as they are held for longer periods of time, e.g., 140F/60C for 12 minutes. Poultry has slightly different numbers, also dependent on the fat content, but a similar principal of a time/temperature 'curve'. Ditto for fish†, pork, etc. If you mess up the temperature you can have a really bad day. † And the type of fish can mean different temperatures. The fat content of wild versus farmed salmon means few degrees' difference could result in a dry versus juicy result: * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WSGjYMHF60 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WSGjYMHF60
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
outworlder 6y ago
> Food irradiation in general is safe and effective, but weirds a lot of the general public out (particularly those with low scientific literacy. Irradiated food doesn't become radioactive!) Frankly, if labeling was available I would actively seek out irradiated food (specifically bread and fruits). This would be great to reduce food waste due to spoilage and pathogen risks (either from spoilage or otherwise present in the food). I suspect most(if not all) of the "unprocessed" food I eat has not been irradiated.
- bigbubba 6y ago
  This logo is meant to be such labelling: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_irradiation#/media/File%3ARadura_international.svg https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_irradiation#/media/File... I'm not sure how widespread use of it is though.

kjs3 6y ago

I was under the impression that Cobalt-60 was more common for food irradiation (it's not soluble in water and has a shorter half-life, so less potential eco-impact). But, yeah, food irradiation is a really common process with few downsides once you get past the whole "made in a reactor" part.

bigbubba 6y ago
AFAIK both Cobalt-60 and Cesium-137 are used as gamma sources for food irradiation, though Cobalt is more common.
ashtonkem 6y ago
I find that reading about nuclear accidents actually helps here. Assuming you’re not standing next to something unbelievably “hot” (don’t do that!), the main issue is the dust that tends to settle onto everything and keep irradiating you. So radiated food is fine, but food that’s been coated in radioactive dust is emphatically not fine.

everdrive 6y ago

Dumb question, doesn't cooking also kill parasites just as effectively?

chmod600 6y ago
A lot of cooking styles do not throughly and consistently heat all food to the required temperature for the required time to be 100% safe. And if you try to cook for extra time just to be safe, you end up drying out the meat a lot.
- SAI_Peregrinus 6y ago
  That's where souc vide helps. You don't dry out the food (due to the containment in the bag) and you can keep the food in the required temperature range for plenty of time (because the immersion circulator keeps the water bath at a constant temperature range).
outworlder 6y ago
If properly cooked it should kill parasites and pathogens. Food irradiation is relevant for other types of food too, including the ones we don't normally cook, such as fruits.
throw0101a 6y ago
> Dumb question, doesn't cooking also kill parasites just as effectively? Technically yes, but how many households typically have a (meat) thermometer? A lot of people go by the "not pink" or "clear juices" rules of thumb, which work well enough for typical grocery store 'industrial' packaged meat, but may not be good enough for more 'uncontrolled' meat. A 6.5- to 7.0-log_10 reduction in pathogens (salmonella) is generally hit at 158F/70C (with beef) where there is 'instantaneous' destruction of the pathogen(s), but lower temperatures can also be reached as long as they are held for longer periods of time, e.g., 140F/60C for 12 minutes. Poultry has slightly different numbers, also dependent on the fat content, but a similar principal of a time/temperature 'curve'. Ditto for fish†, pork, etc. If you mess up the temperature you can have a really bad day. † And the type of fish can mean different temperatures. The fat content of wild versus farmed salmon means few degrees' difference could result in a dry versus juicy result: * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WSGjYMHF60 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WSGjYMHF60
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

outworlder 6y ago

> Food irradiation in general is safe and effective, but weirds a lot of the general public out (particularly those with low scientific literacy. Irradiated food doesn't become radioactive!) Frankly, if labeling was available I would actively seek out irradiated food (specifically bread and fruits). This would be great to reduce food waste due to spoilage and pathogen risks (either from spoilage or otherwise present in the food). I suspect most(if not all) of the "unprocessed" food I eat has not been irradiated.

bigbubba 6y ago
This logo is meant to be such labelling: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_irradiation#/media/File%3ARadura_international.svg https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_irradiation#/media/File... I'm not sure how widespread use of it is though.