The opinion-page article ``US Should Allow Irradiation as Means of Preserving Meat,'' July 21, is an excellent article on food irradiation, that is until the last two paragraphs. In these paragraphs, the author ruins his otherwise effective article. He uses the label, ``anti-irradiation activists,'' and castigates those persons concerned with the bad effects from pesticides, power lines, and computers. Such generic castigation is unprofessional, is unkind, and casts a shadow over legitimate concerns with technology.
How does the author feel about Rachel Carson, author of ``Silent Spring''? Did she have technophobia? Ms. Carson no doubt had vastly superior technical knowledge and experience than the author's. Certainly her accomplishments are unquestionable. There are very responsible and legitimate concerns with problems from the bad effects of technology. Those working on good solutions to such problems are doing much more for the world than the author's unwise criticism and labeling.
I worked for many years on the formulation of cleaner automotive fuels, and was very concerned with the bad effects of smog. Am I an ``anti-dirty-fuel activist''? Do I have technophobia? I hope not! Charles Gahr, Vancouver Island, B.C.
Your letters are welcome. For publication they must be signed and include your address and telephone number. Only a selection can be published, and none acknowledged. Letters should be addressed to ``Readers Write,'' and can be sent by Internet E-mail (200 word maximum) to OPED@RACHEL.CSPS.COM, by fax to 617-450-2317, or by mail to One Norway St., Boston, MA 02115