On 4/30/2016 4:51 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> On 4/30/2016 12:43 PM, Cloudbuster wrote:
>> On 4/30/2016 3:56 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>>> On 4/30/2016 11:36 AM, Cloudbuster wrote:
>>>> On 4/30/2016 2:57 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>>>>> On 4/30/2016 8:17 AM, notbob wrote:
>>>>>> On 2016-04-30, Janet B > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Apparently this problem has been present over a number of years.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/zuwn9mn
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I love this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "If you have ongoing, persistent contamination, that can indicate
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> you have a sanitation problem,"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, duh!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's why food vendors keep trying to initiate irradiated food
>>>>>> programs. Easier to nuke the salad greens yer gonna eat than
>>>>>> actually
>>>>>> eliminate the source of contamination. :|
>>>>>>
>>>>>> nb
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This would seem to be the best rational for irradiating foods - food
>>>>> safety.
>>>>
>>>> I do prefer more basic cleanliness as it insures clean prep, utensils
>>>> and plating.
>>>
>>> Basically, people ain't that clean. I don't trust 'em myself.
>>
>> I used to resemble that observation, but I grew up and became more
>> germ-averse.
>
> That's a very good thing!
>
>
It makes me and mine happy and safe and enjoyable, and we all like that!

Who wouldn't?

I know - there are legions of grubbies and small children who'll put up
a fight.

:=(