The Rural Voice, 1988-10, Page 27the public, and this has led to an
unspoken boycott of the process. She
is also skeptical of the expansion into
the Third World, and believes that the
technology may make hunger worse
by diverting more land into useless
cxport crops.
It is probably usefulness rather
than safety that will decide how
widespread food irradiation becomes.
We in the West have little need for the
technology, as we already have proven
methods of food preservation that do
not use nuclear energy. The public is
hesitant to accept controversial
technology that appears frivolous or
unnecessary.
Dr. John Webster, head of the
Deparunent of Animal Husbandry at
the University of Bristol in England,
touches on this point in an article
examining the uses of biotechnology
in animal breeding (New Scientist, 21
July, 1988). "Consumers may be
resistant to specific advances in bio-
technology, not because they are
biotechnology but because they ap-
pear pointless," he says.
He goes on to talk about engineer-
ing sheep genetically to produce a
human blood -clotting factor in their
milk, and says that public response has
generally been "what a wonderful
idea."
"This suggests that people will
accept biotechnology provided that
scientists can come up with applica-
tions worthy of its power."
Using radiation on food, then, will
only be acceptable to consumers if the
reasons for doing so are valid. Con-
venience and some added safety in the
handling of chicken, or fruits that do
not rot on the shelf, do not seem to be
strong enough as reasons.
Even the reasons for using the
technology in the Third World do not
seem strong enough. Technology
shipped to these regions to eliminate
starvation does not always accomplish
its goal. Some of the major causes of
starvation cannot be stopped by a
"technological fix." Land ownership,
poor transportation, reliance on pest-
icides or fertilizers, and non-food
crops grown for export are more
important reasons for starvation than
poor food preservation.
It must also be asked whether or
not Third World nations can run the
HOW GOOD IS YOUR HAY?
You can't tell just by looking!
Hay can vary from 6% to 25% protein (on a dry
matter basis). Calcium on hay can range from
0.40% to 1.7%. Other nutrients can also show
wide variation.
An accurate chemical analysis of your hay and
other feed products will give you the answer.
For more information, call or write and inquire about
our feed and forage testing services.
AGR/ SERV/CES
353 Bridge St. E. Kitchener Ont.
Box 1707, Stn. C. N2G 4R2 519-742-5811
ACRO -TREND
SNOWBLOWERS
14 models:
from 42 inches to 9 feet
Match any horsepower
Single or double auger
Rugged & reliable
AGRO -TREND CLEARS THE WAY
SEE YOUR DEALER OR CALL
AGRO-TREND CORP
CLIFFORD, ONT. 519-327-8005
OCTOBER 1988 25