In class we had a debate (2 people arguing for each opinion) about whether or not irradiated food was a good or bad thing. Tristan and I were were arguing for how it was good (pros), and Blaise and Julia were arguing to get rid of it (cons). In the end Cons won and our final conclusion was that:
The students of 7B from the International School of Belgrade propose that the labeling on irradiated products should also have a detailed description of the effects of radiation and the potential harm that could come across from it. Also, education awareness of the subject should be spread throughout the world of the dangers and possible long term effects of irradiated foods. We believe that there should be a choice for the customer whether they would like to experience this new discovery of the irradiated food.
The problem with food irradiation is that irradiating food uses radioactive technology which could be harmful, and along with getting rid of germs, it gets rid of some of the vitamins.
Pros and Cons of food irradiation:
Pros:
Food irradiation has stopped almost 76 million illnesses yearly. Before food irradiation was invented 25% of the food that was produced was spoiled or had food related illnesses on shelves or on their way to shelves. Without 25% of the food being spoiled, there is more food at cheaper prices.
Cons:
Irradiated food has 10% less nutrients then fresh food, and while irradiated food does have less food borne illnesses, it gains other ones that aren't necessarily and better. Also, even though it is FDA (Food and Drug Administration) approved, it still hasn't been tested on the long run.
If you gave me a choice from irradiated and fresh food, I would probably pick the fresh ones because they usually have more taste, and so my parents don't blame me for eating unhealthy.
My thinking didn't really change through the debate because I still don't really care if the food is irradiated or not. I think the debate was a good idea because it let me see other peoples point of view.
