FOOD IRRADIATION WATCH

Fresh Tomatoes.

We have been advised that on January 18 FSANZ will release the “Consulatation Paper” in response to Blewitt Recommendation 43 for the “review” of mandatory labelling of irradiated foods. We expect that the public will have until mid-March to respond to this paper.

We hope that in the spirit of the words “consultation” and “review”, the discussion paper will present more than the industry-driven case for removing mandatory labelling requirements and include: 1) Maintaining the status quo (labelling requirements which we feel could be improved) and 2) Improving labelling (to include such things prescribed wording for irradiation labelling).

Our call for comprehensive labelling should in no way be taken as support for food irradiation. It is driven by the understanding that labelling is the only means by which a member of the public can be informed about irradiation and therefore must be in place as long as irradiation is legal, to ensure that the public can make informed decisions about what they eat.

Recent approvals for the irradiation of apples, apricots, cherries, nectarines, peaches, plums, honeydews, rockmelons, strawberries, table grapes and zucchini/squash. have significantly increased the proportion of irradiated foods in the average Australian and New Zealand diet, increasing the need for strong labelling laws. FSANZ is currently processing an application for the irradiation of blueberries and raspberries.

Below are some key reasons to keep irradiated foods labelled:

1. Despite their appearance, irradiated fruits and vegetables are processed, not fresh.

2. Without Labelling, irradiated fruit and vegetables would be implicitly misrepresented as fresh -products of the irradiation process are undetectable to consumers without labelling and consumers naturally expect such products to be labelled

3. Consumers have strong opinions on irradiated produce as it is a new technology with a limited history of safe use in the human food supply

4. Food producers have raised their own queries about the removal of labelling, as it will disadvantage non-irradiating producers

5. The irradiation of fruits and vegetables typically involves their exposure to the energy equivalent of between 1.5 and 10 million x-rays. When used as a fruit fly larvae treatment, food irradiation also extends shelf life, sanitises, and alters the nutritional value of the treated foods. The substantial and significant changes made to fruits and vegetables as a result of processing with irradiation cannot be discerned with our ordinary senses. Thus, consumers could no longer rely on taste, smell, texture or appearance to exercise their preference for fresh produce, if irradiation labelling were removed.

We therefore assert that the removal of labelling from irradiated fruits and vegetables will create a situation where the public will be led to false, misleading and deceptive conclusions as to the nature of these foods, also impacting on their right to make well-informed food buying decisions that potentially impact on their diet and health.

We will share the consultation paper and our analysis of it as soon as possible. Please get ready to let your state and federal health minister know that if food is going to be irradiated, it must be labelled!

– the Food Irradiation Watch team.

RSPCA Australia has supported a ban on irradiation of cat pet food and is opposed to pet food irradiation generally:

RSPCA Australia’s position is that pet food should not be irradiated. Currently there is a ban on the irradiation of imported cat food and we commend the Minister for implementing this ban. This ban followed scientific evidence and the recent ‘Orijen cats’ cases that showed an association between ingestion of irradiated imported cat food and severe neurological impairment, which in some cases was fatal. There is also a requirement that irradiated imported dog food be labelled ‘Must not be fed to cats’.

For more information, check out RSPCA Australia:
What is RSPCA Australia’s position on the irradiation of imported pet food products?

What will we do with nuclear waste? Let’s put it in our food! Some unsuspecting fruit get a shocking surprise in this first attempt kitchen-table animation.

This short film was made ten years ago, but it’s a silly and relevant as ever.

Creative Commons License: Copyright 2012, Kim and Josh. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License

The consumer and environment advocacy group Friends of the Earth has commissioned independent research that confirms nanoparticles of titanium dioxide and Silica in a range of food products.  Foods known to be affected so far include M&Ms, Nestlé Coffee Mate Creamer, Old El Paso Taco Mix and Woolworths Homebrand White Sauce.

In light of statements by Food Safety Australia and New Zealand (FSANZ) given to Parliament that food products containing these ingredients will not be sold until they have been subject to safety testing and pre-market approval, there is concern that the problem is unquantified and many more foods may contain nanoparticles.

FOE Press Release available here: Independent testing finds illegal and potentially harmful nanoparticles in common food products.

Further evidence that the government have a head in the sand approach to nanoparticles in food can be found on the Department of Health (via National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment Scheme, NICNAS) website that claims “Reported uses of TiO2 nanoparticles in Australia are similar to the overseas uses — cosmetic and sunscreen products and surface coatings such as paint”. No mention of food. Without labelling requirements, and with the government denying the presence of nanoparticles, consumers are unable to decide to exercise caution in the consumption of foods containing nanoparticles.

Read the NICNAS Nanoparticle Report.

There are few safety studies available on the use of nanoparticles in food, but studies that have been done on nanoparticles point to potential carcinogenic affects, genotoxicity or immune system compromise. The report “Titanium dioxide nanoparticles: a review of current toxicological data” provides a review of current research.  Part of the finding raises concern about pulmonary inflammation and lung cancers:

“Pulmonary inflammatory responses and lung cancers are the most important adverse effect observed in experimental animals due to TiO2 NP exposures. When only using realistic doses are considered, as in the case of some inhalation studies, inflammatory responses are still a prominent effect seen. ”  http://www.particleandfibretoxicology.com/content/10/1/15

More research is needed before deciding on whether nanoparticles are safe for human consumption.

UPDATE: In response to the SMH article Nanotechnology Found in Popular Foods Despite Repeated Denials by Food Regulators, FSANZ has released this statement. The statement essentially amounts to “FSANZ and other international food regulatory agencies have not identified any health effect known to be associated with the use of nanoparticles of titanium dioxide and silica, following oral ingestion in foods”.  They have also announced that a leading toxicologist will be undertaking a review into nanoparticles in food, with the final report expected to be published in late 2015 to early 2016.

Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) is recommending the irradiation of apples, apricots, cherries, nectarines, peaches, plums, honeydew, rockmelon, strawberries, table grapes, zucchini and squash – the latest move to expand the use of irradiation on fresh produce in Australia. This means that a large part of our fresh food diet can potentially be irradiated, increasing the risks to human health.

NOW is the time to write a submission.

• Submissions need to be made in writing; be marked clearly with the word ‘Submission’ AND quote the project number and name: A1092: Irradiation of Specific Fruits & Vegetables
• Submissions can be made electronically through the FSANZ website via: http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/code/changes/submission/pages/Submission-Form.aspx
• You can also email your submission directly to: submissions@foodstandards.gov.au

DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSIONS: 6pm (Canberra time) 9 October 2014

Read more »