FDA proposes relaxing irradiation labeling rules
FDA proposes relaxing irradiation labeling rules
WASHINGTON -- Irradiated foods may not have to carry the "irradiation" label or "radura" logo under a proposed rule that represents a shift in policy for the Food & Drug Administration.
The April 4 proposal would require irradiation labeling only for foods in which the irradiation treatment causes "a material change" in the food, such as changes in taste, smell, nutrition or functional properties. FDA cited irradiated bananas as an example of a material change because bananas may be irradiated to delay ripening and extend shelf life.
Under the proposal, food companies could petition FDA to use an alternate term to "irradiation" and would be allowed to use the term "pasteurized" if the agency was notified and the treatment process met the current pasteurization requirements.
"It's long overdue," said Ron Eustice, executive director of the Minnesota Beef Council and a long-time advocate of food irradiation.
"Why should we require labeling of a process that doesn't change the nutrition, taste and consistency of foods and is determined to be totally safe by the FDA?" he asked.
Fresh fruits and vegetables are approved by FDA to be irradiated for disinfection purposes, though only about 1.5 million pounds of fruits and vegetables - a very small percentage - are irradiated each year, said FDA. Mr. Eustice and some produce industry leaders are pushing for FDA to approve irradiation for leafy greens and other produce as an additional tool to kill harmful bacteria.
"We're looking at another summer, and every summer there's been an outbreak," said Mr. Eustice. "Obviously, someone at FDA realizes the importance of this technology."
The need for labeling would vary based on case-by-case testing of the irradiated food under specific conditions. FDA said research shows that irradiation may not work for all fruits and vegetables. Roma tomatoes and cut Romaine lettuce irradiated at low doses of irradiation were not as firm after the treatment, said FDA, while fresh-cut Iceberg lettuce and shredded carrots experienced no loss of firmness at higher doses.
The United Fresh Produce Association said that it would want consumers to know that fresh fruits and vegetables were treated by irradiation, since a big reason companies would use the technology is to re-establish consumer confidence.
"If irradiation is eventually considered seriously for produce, we would want consumers to know that the process had been used as a safety enhancement, not something to hide," said Amy Philpott, vice president marketing and industry relations for United.
This proposed rule comes as shipments of irradiated exotic fruits from Thailand and India are expected to be coming into the United States soon. In March, the U.S. Department of Agriculture gave final approval for the leading supplier of the world's mangos, India, to begin shipping irradiated mangos to the United States.
While food irradiation advocates praised FDA's proposal, at least one consumer group protested FDA's shift in policy.
"This proposal is a clear gift to the irradiation industry, which has been struggling for years," said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch, an anti-food irradiation consumer group. "This move by FDA would deny consumers clear information about whether they are buying food that has been exposed to high doses of ionizing radiation."
Comments to FDA are due by July 3.
The April 4 proposal would require irradiation labeling only for foods in which the irradiation treatment causes "a material change" in the food, such as changes in taste, smell, nutrition or functional properties. FDA cited irradiated bananas as an example of a material change because bananas may be irradiated to delay ripening and extend shelf life.
Under the proposal, food companies could petition FDA to use an alternate term to "irradiation" and would be allowed to use the term "pasteurized" if the agency was notified and the treatment process met the current pasteurization requirements.
"It's long overdue," said Ron Eustice, executive director of the Minnesota Beef Council and a long-time advocate of food irradiation.
"Why should we require labeling of a process that doesn't change the nutrition, taste and consistency of foods and is determined to be totally safe by the FDA?" he asked.
Fresh fruits and vegetables are approved by FDA to be irradiated for disinfection purposes, though only about 1.5 million pounds of fruits and vegetables - a very small percentage - are irradiated each year, said FDA. Mr. Eustice and some produce industry leaders are pushing for FDA to approve irradiation for leafy greens and other produce as an additional tool to kill harmful bacteria.
"We're looking at another summer, and every summer there's been an outbreak," said Mr. Eustice. "Obviously, someone at FDA realizes the importance of this technology."
The need for labeling would vary based on case-by-case testing of the irradiated food under specific conditions. FDA said research shows that irradiation may not work for all fruits and vegetables. Roma tomatoes and cut Romaine lettuce irradiated at low doses of irradiation were not as firm after the treatment, said FDA, while fresh-cut Iceberg lettuce and shredded carrots experienced no loss of firmness at higher doses.
The United Fresh Produce Association said that it would want consumers to know that fresh fruits and vegetables were treated by irradiation, since a big reason companies would use the technology is to re-establish consumer confidence.
"If irradiation is eventually considered seriously for produce, we would want consumers to know that the process had been used as a safety enhancement, not something to hide," said Amy Philpott, vice president marketing and industry relations for United.
This proposed rule comes as shipments of irradiated exotic fruits from Thailand and India are expected to be coming into the United States soon. In March, the U.S. Department of Agriculture gave final approval for the leading supplier of the world's mangos, India, to begin shipping irradiated mangos to the United States.
While food irradiation advocates praised FDA's proposal, at least one consumer group protested FDA's shift in policy.
"This proposal is a clear gift to the irradiation industry, which has been struggling for years," said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch, an anti-food irradiation consumer group. "This move by FDA would deny consumers clear information about whether they are buying food that has been exposed to high doses of ionizing radiation."
Comments to FDA are due by July 3.
