back to Organic Consumers Assn. Stop Irradiation page Letters to the Editor July 2001 General Guidelines Use the sample letters below or use them to write your own. If you use a sample letter feel free to personalize it to reflect your views. Letters must have 250 words or fewer. Use short paragraphs and short sentences. Make every word count! You can submit copies of one letter to more than one newspaper. You can send several different letters to the same newspaper. Sign the letter and include your name, address and daytime phone number. If you have any special expertise about the topic, mention it. If you are speaking for an organization (or even a group of people like your family), mention it. Most papers will phone you before publishing the letter. Some ask for permission, some just leave a message to notify you. If they call and say they are "considering" publishing your letter, that means that they almost certainly will publish it. However, they may shorten it a bit. They usually don't tell you which day the letter will appear. Follow the instructions on the editorial page of your local newspaper when submitting your letter. You can submit the letter by e-mail (it will be read), but remember to include your name, address and daytime phone number. (Obviously, you can't sign it). Large-circulation papers usually only print letters that refer to current news stories (within a week or so), but small/local papers often print letters on topics of general interest. The second letter is about a current news story.  SAMPLE WAL-MART Letter (230 words) To the Editor: I am writing to express my outrage that Wal-Mart is planning to sell irradiated meat. Irradiating meat serves to mask poor meat processing practices that leave meat contaminated with feces, urine and pus. Irradiation also destroys vitamins, making food less nutritious. While irradiation advocates state that irradiation will make food safer, no one really knows the health impacts of eating irradiated food. There have been no long-term human studies. Furthermore, FDA approval of irradiation was based on assumptions that we would eat only small amounts of irradiated foods. However, foods that make up 90% of our diet are either approved or under consideration for irradiation right now! In addition, new chemicals called unique radiolytic products are created in the irradiation process. No testing has been done to identify these chemicals, much less determine if they are safe. The Wal-Mart website states, "Sam Walton believed that each Wal-Mart store should reflect the values of its customers and support the vision they hold for their community." American consumers do not value meat products treated by the equivalent of several hundred million x-rays. As a matter of fact, market research shows that consumers are overwhelmingly opposed to eating irradiated food. A 1997 CBS News poll found that 73 percent of the public opposed irradiation and 77 percent would not eat irradiated food. Wal-Mart should listen to its customers and reject irradiated food permanently. Sincerely, Name, Address, Daytime Phone Number SAMPLE ABOUT LABELING REQUIREMENTS (207 WORDS) To the Editor: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is currently considering weakening or eliminating the labels for irradiated foods, with a decision due by early 2002. And right now Congress is considering requiring the use of "alternative" terms for "irradiation" should the FDA decide to keep the labels. I support prominent and permanent labeling using the term "irradiation" for all irradiated foods. Food irradiation is a process where food is exposed to radiation from nuclear sources, x-rays or electron beams in order to kill bacteria and extend shelf life. Irradiated fruits and vegetables receive 200 times the lethal dose of radiation for a human. Poultry and meat receive 800-1400 times that dose. Food products undergo chemical changes after exposure to radiation. Vitamins and enzymes are lost, and new chemicals are created that have never been in the diet before. A 1997 CBS News poll found that 73 percent of the public opposed irradiation and 77 percent would not eat irradiated food. Most consumers, including myself, want irradiated food clearly labeled because we don’t want to buy or eat it. Instead of weakening or eliminating labeling requirements, the FDA should strengthen them. In addition, Congress should reject alternative terms for irradiation and keep the current language required by the FDA. Sincerely, Name, Address, Daytime Phone Number