From: EXECSEC Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 5:00 PM To: EXECSEC Subject: FW: Irradiation Labeling, Docket No 98N-1038 -----Original Message----- From: blbarnes3@hotmail.com [mailto:blbarnes3@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 3:26 PM To: bschwetz@oc.fda.gov Subject: Irradiation Labeling, Docket No 98N-1038 Bernard A. Schwetz Food and Drug Administration 5600 Fishers Lane Rockville, MD 20857 Dear Bernard A. Schwetz,
> >I want irradiated foods to be clearly and conspicuously >labeled. "Irradiation" is a commonly understood term >that FDA should not discard for a deceptive substitute. >I'm not the only one who feels this way. An independent >opinion poll in 1999, commissioned by the American >Association of Retired Persons and the Center for Science >in the Public Interest, showed overwhelming support >for the term "Treated by Irradiation," instead of "Electronically >Pasteurized" or "Cold Pasteurized." Just as consumers >want label information about "dolphin-safe tuna" or >"low fat" foods, they also want clear information on >irradiated food. > >Please don't change the current sensible label. Informed >choice is part of a free-market economy. Some shoppers >want to buy irradiated foods because they want foods >with lower pathogen risks. Other shoppers may avoid >irradiated foods because of changes in taste, smell, >texture, or nutrition, or for other reasons. FDA should >not stand in the way of consumers making those choices >by putting confusing new labels on irradiated food. > >Thank you for your attention to this matter. > > Sincerely, Bonnie Barnes West Virginia 25411