First thing this is from the highly liberal Huffington post. D'oh. Gotta love those comments.
Second. Third arm? Dude. I suppose if you've been eating hamburgers then you would already have one. If it hurt you. Which it doesn't.
The only thing that I would care about is if it makes food cost more. Spinach already costs more than I think it should.
And to expect farmers to document where they get their fertilizer and how they irrigate? GRRRRR. That's really excessive. They are already regulated on how their farms are set up. Documenting water and fertilizer that would be time consuming (and sometimes difficult, especially if they're trying to grow organically) and what would it solve? It makes food cost most because farmers would have yet another step (a useless one) to take their time.
Well, I'm not intricately familiar with the huffington post, it was just the first (decentley written, and least biased seeming) article i ran across, and if that article isn't believable to you, then there's a CNN article as well (among others like ABC, etc), detailing it as well.
Also: the third arm thing was meant to be a joke. I know they all ready irradiate meats (see previous post), however, irradiated meats are required to be marked because of the (relatively to other foods, like wheats, flours, etc) use such a high amount of radiation to do so.
I didn't bring it up to call it bad, or to strike it down. And I didn't say I was for or against it, I was just bringing it up because I wanted to see what opinions were floating around about it. Health-wise, I have no problem with it, as my food isn't radioactive and hasn't been. Flavor/nutrient wise, I'm unsure, as I know irradiating food supposedly has some impact on it (and one of the main reasons organic food makes great cooking ingredients, but that's another issue all together), but I am unsure of what great degree, I was merely trying to spur discussion on the issue.
