Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why isn't radiation used to sterilize raw foods (like sashimi, eggs)?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 56 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't radiation used to sterilize raw foods (like sashimi, eggs)?

#41

Post by jareklupinski »

I agree and I think we should be moving towards using this in the future.

As for why it's not happening today, with all the news about that one little vial of cesium that's gone missing lately... I can't imagine a nuclear regulatory agency being comfortable with letting every single farm receive shipments of radioactive material.

Not until we have some sort of GPS+Satcom method of tracking these vials point-to-point.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_irradiation - "As for transportation of the radiation source, cobalt-60 is transported in special trucks that prevent release of radiation and meet standards mentioned in the Regulations for Safe Transport of Radioactive Materials of the International Atomic Energy Act."

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't radiation used to sterilize raw foods (like sashimi, eggs)?

#42

Post by giantg2 »

spicymaki wrote: post #16

Many people think GMOs, Bluetooth and 5G causes cancer no matter how much evidence you provide that it doesn't. It is unlikely they will accept irradiation even if it means a less healthy food supply.

I mean, that's a pretty shallow statement and may even be misrepresenting their position.

GMOs themselves my not be linked to cancer. Higher levels of glycophosphate could have some risk.

There could be some unknown risks of cellphone/wifi/etc. It's not a bad idea to limit exposure where it makes sense (like scheduling your wifi to turn off during sleeping hours). What we do know about wireless radiation around these bands is that cellular glucose metabolism increases. What that means exactly is unknown. However, glucose metabolism and its larger system has links to everything from cholesterol production to influence on metastatic cancer spread.

You also imply that irradiated food would be healthier. That claim needs extensive research to back it up, which I haven't seen posted here.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't radiation used to sterilize raw foods (like sashimi, eggs)?

#43

Post by pornel »

classichasclass wrote: post #15
retrac wrote: post #8

It is used, particularly with spices and fresh fruit, but sporadically for all kinds of food. As for why it's not universal: There are some concerns about radiochemical effects, mostly regarding nutritional degradation, with extremely high doses such as might be used to sterilize raw meat for storage at room temperature. While I can't source this now that I'm looking for it, I vaguely recall reading a survey about fo…

As a heavy milk drinker (I'll put away about three gallons of nonfat a week), my issue with UHT is the odd caramel taste it picks up from the heat treatment. On the other hand, my wife, who consumes way less dairy and hardly drinks milk as a beverage at all, has no problem with UHT milk pretty much anywhere I'd prefer fresh. It's been awhile since I looked at the state of irradiated milk, though I had an irradiated c…

It's funny how subjective this is. I've been raised on UHT milk and to me the "raw" one is worse — less creamy and more sour.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't radiation used to sterilize raw foods (like sashimi, eggs)?

#44

Post by fbdab103 »

jsnell wrote: post #33
fbdab103 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am so intrigued by this. You are putting down ~1.5 liters of milk daily? Straight or as lubrication for some other dish (eg cereal)? Do you slam it all in the morning or spread throughout the day? Edit: Do you think you have a strong stomach vs others? I had a milk-loving friend who developed kidney stones at ~25.

1.5 liters per day doesn't sound like an absurd amount. The average milk consumption per person in Finland is 1.2 liters per day.

I am finding different (though remarkably high to this American) stats on Finnish milk consumption on the order of 100-130 liters/year = 0.3 liters/day, which is still incredible. That's higher than Finnish beer consumption at 72 liters/year.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't radiation used to sterilize raw foods (like sashimi, eggs)?

#45

Post by crdotson »

srcreigh wrote: post #30
fbdab103 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of the bacteria and other pathogens which were inside the food. If they are killed, they are not magically transported away. Depending upon the structural stability, there could be a lingering antigen which elicits an immune response.

Can you provide an example?

https://www.foodsafety.ca/blog/what-are-bacterial-toxins gives several good examples.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't radiation used to sterilize raw foods (like sashimi, eggs)?

#46

Post by maxerickson »

jsnell wrote: post #33
fbdab103 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am so intrigued by this. You are putting down ~1.5 liters of milk daily? Straight or as lubrication for some other dish (eg cereal)? Do you slam it all in the morning or spread throughout the day? Edit: Do you think you have a strong stomach vs others? I had a milk-loving friend who developed kidney stones at ~25.

1.5 liters per day doesn't sound like an absurd amount. The average milk consumption per person in Finland is 1.2 liters per day.

Is that milk products?

I like cheese and yogurt and so on and drink 0 milk.

Locating the source for a reddit post with high numbers, it does include milk products, other than butter.

https://jakubmarian.com/milk-consumption-in-europe-in-liters...

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't radiation used to sterilize raw foods (like sashimi, eggs)?

#47

Post by classichasclass »

fbdab103 wrote: post #28
classichasclass wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a heavy milk drinker (I'll put away about three gallons of nonfat a week), my issue with UHT is the odd caramel taste it picks up from the heat treatment. On the other hand, my wife, who consumes way less dairy and hardly drinks milk as a beverage at all, has no problem with UHT milk pretty much anywhere I'd prefer fresh. It's been awhile since I looked at the state of irradiated milk, though I had an irradiated c…

I am so intrigued by this. You are putting down ~1.5 liters of milk daily? Straight or as lubrication for some other dish (eg cereal)? Do you slam it all in the morning or spread throughout the day? Edit: Do you think you have a strong stomach vs others? I had a milk-loving friend who developed kidney stones at ~25.

I just drink it as a beverage. Never stopped since childhood. 8-) I'll eat some challenging things in my wife's opinion, but I don't consider my stomach particularly cast-iron or anything.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't radiation used to sterilize raw foods (like sashimi, eggs)?

#48

Post by classichasclass »

pornel wrote: post #43
classichasclass wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a heavy milk drinker (I'll put away about three gallons of nonfat a week), my issue with UHT is the odd caramel taste it picks up from the heat treatment. On the other hand, my wife, who consumes way less dairy and hardly drinks milk as a beverage at all, has no problem with UHT milk pretty much anywhere I'd prefer fresh. It's been awhile since I looked at the state of irradiated milk, though I had an irradiated c…

It's funny how subjective this is. I've been raised on UHT milk and to me the "raw" one is worse — less creamy and more sour.

Yeah, I think she's more accustomed to it as well, whereas I never developed a "taste" for it. I'll drink it, but I'm not fond of it.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't radiation used to sterilize raw foods (like sashimi, eggs)?

#49

Post by BerislavLopac »

> processors washing chicken in bleach, washing eggs and massive doses of antibiotics

That's very much a US-only thing; in many (most?) other countries there are regulations about raising livestock that make this unnecessary and even (like the antibiotics) illegal.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't radiation used to sterilize raw foods (like sashimi, eggs)?

#50

Post by ceceron »

catherd wrote: post #32
retrac wrote: post #8

It is used, particularly with spices and fresh fruit, but sporadically for all kinds of food. As for why it's not universal: There are some concerns about radiochemical effects, mostly regarding nutritional degradation, with extremely high doses such as might be used to sterilize raw meat for storage at room temperature. While I can't source this now that I'm looking for it, I vaguely recall reading a survey about fo…

UHT milk hasn't caught on because it tastes only slightly better than reconstituted powdered milk. It is, however, cheap, and hasn't had trouble at all catching on in poor countries.

In Europe, UHT has caught on even in "wealthy" countries. In most shops you can buy both kinds, the UHT cheaper and the unprocessed as the more luxurious version. I think you're overstating the taste difference — as a child, I was often drinking really fresh milk (my grandma had cows). Later, most of my teenage life I was drinking UHT, and now I'm drinking the unprocessed refrigerated milk. I agree with you that the unprocessed one is better, but the difference isn't mind-blowing. I even know people that prefer the UHT taste.
Post reply on HN