Requiring food all to be irradiated | Permitting but not requiring | Banning food irradiation |
It can harm people’s health (con) | We have choice if we want irradiated food or not irradiated food (pro) | It is good because you don’t get harm ( pro) |
That it can stay fresh longer time(pro) | Long-term we can compare the effects of irradiated food and not irradiated food (pro) | The food is not fresh it can rot easily (con) |
We don’t have choice if we want irradiated or not we can only have irradiated(con) | It kills nutrients (con) | It doesn’t kill bad bacteria (con) |
If we irradiated there will be more control (pro) | consumers have not been educated to compensate for irradiation-induced losses elsewhere in their diets(con) | |
It kills bad cells (pro) | Irradiation can kill insects and pests infesting foods such as grains and flours without leaving chemical residues(pro) | |
it kills nutrients (con) | You may get affect it or not (pro and con) | |
People get affected by irradiated food (con) |
Thursday, April 21, 2011
For and against food irradiation
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Very interesting table. Good work! :)
ReplyDelete