Text 16497, 48 rader
Skriven 2008-05-31 08:22:11 av Björn Forsström (2:203/614.61)
  Kommentar till text 16455 av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
Ärende: Misinformation(was: Pedophile)
======================================
BF>> I read in todays paper that it's allowed to wash chicken-meat in chlorine
BF>> in USA and that is not allowed here in the EU.

 RB> Lots of misinformation in that report, which we also got here.

 RB> First of all, it's a sodium hypochlorite solution, not "chlorine". Sodium
 RB> hypochlorite is used to disinfect small swimming pools in Germany and
 RB> presumably elsewhere, and the water in large ones is actually chlorinated
 RB> with compressed chlorine gas in flasks. Ever ger a mouthful of water in a
 RB> swimming pool? Most people do from time to time, and "surprisingly" don't
 RB> die of it.

Why is it then not allowed to clean chicken with it here?
And why did they evacuated the local public bath when one of those flasks
started to leak?

 RB> Secondly, the meat is washed with plain water after disinfection to remove
 RB> "nice" things like salmonella. So the residue, if any, is negligible.
 RB> Would you rather stick your tongue in the chlorinated water of a swimming
 RB> pool or eat chicken contaminated with salmonella? I think there's only one
 RB> honest answer to that.

Since we don't use chloorine there must be other ways of disinfect it from
salmonella.

 RB> Thirdly, many laypersons - in particular politicians - get all hot and
 RB> bothered when they hear the word "chlorine" because in their technical
 RB> ignorance they don't realize every swimming pool is disinfected with
 RB> chlorine or a chlorine-containing chemical. Only rarely are swimming pools
 RB> disinfected with ozone, and that has it's own set of disadvantages.

Too much of either isn't good.

 RB> So what's all the hype about? Why don't the same politicians and "gurus"
 RB> who get excited about people disinfecting meat with a dilute hypochlorite
 RB> solution and then washing it off also close all swimming pools?

 RB> That's an easy one: Such hype sells newspapers and magazines, and in the
 RB> case of politicians talking to uneducated voters can gain said politicians
 RB> votes for "protecting" the public against a danger that doesn't
 RB> objectively exist.

So:
http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/chlorine/basics/facts.asp
is not true at all?

---
 * Origin: . (2:203/614.61)