I'm not sure I follow your line of thinking here (y2k, etc.), but
the whole irradiation issue comes down to consumer perceptions. USDA and
the major processors will be trying to get us to perceive irradiated food as
a good thing (it worked for milk pasteurization). Others of us will be
trying to steer the other direction. As long as the perception of
irradiated food is that it is somehow less wholesome (which it is),
alternative marketers will benefit. Folks who truly have no alternative
than to shop at the mega-food store will not have access to the most
nutritious food. But that has been the case throughout history, not just
since December 14th, 1999. Never has there ever been anything resembling
food equity and equality on anything larger than a commune level. Most of
us have the ability to change our food sources, we just don't want to go to
too much effort to do it. It is a matter of personal priorities.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Toni Hawryluk [SMTP:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 1999 2:03 PM
> To: email@example.com; PasturePoultry@onelist.com;
> Cc: Leigh Hauter
> Subject: Fw: USDA Approves Nuked Meat!
> >> Subject: USDA Approves Nuked Meat!
> >> Consumers Beware: USDA Approves Nuked Meat!
> Supermarket fare is feeding the majority of Americans, and FDA and USDA
> joined hands with :
> NAFTA, WTO, and the likes of Monsanto, et al.
> This is backlash coming on the heels of the activities in Seattle against
> the WTO .....
> y2k is not only about computers, people .....
> Toni Hawryluk
To Unsubscribe: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
To Subscribe to Digest: Email email@example.com with the command
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 06 2000 - 12:00:17 EST