The only problem that one could reasonably suggest here is that the
natural antioxidants are consumed in the process.  This can be tested,
for example there is the O.R.A.C. test (and other similar ones).
There is more than enough evidence now to "point one in the right
direction," and the technology is available to do the testing.  The
problem is that the money is being spent on nonsense "studies" that
often contradict each other and provide statistical information that
is useless to people who need to make actual decisions about their
diets and lifestyles.

http://www.almondboard.com/Programs/content.cfm?ItemNumber=890&snItemNumber=450
says:
"No.  Almonds are a safe, nutritious food that can be widely enjoyed.
This Action Plan is a voluntary initiative by the industry to further
ensure the safety and quality of almonds; it has not been mandated by
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the United States Department
of Agriculture (USDA) or any other governmental agency."

--
  Ron

I perused that article (at http://www.naturalnews.com/021776.html ), and
consider it very biased.  The headline, "Food Scam: Almond Board of
California to falsely label pasteurized almonds as 'raw,'" tells what
they're upset about: contesting their definition of "raw."

The "raw foods community" goes too far, in my opinion, by considering
108 degrees Fahrenheit the upper limit for all "raw" foods.  I have
almonds in my back yard that get hotter than that sometimes; it doesn't
affect them as far as I know.

They say, "Pasteurization...exposes foods to temperatures of *up to* 158
degrees for durations *up to* 30 minutes."  (Emphasis mine.)  I've been
in saunas at 230 degrees; 158 degrees for half an hour is no problem.  I
always thought pasteurization was a *lot* hotter than 158.

They go on to say, "NaturalNews *does not know* the precise temperature
that will be used for pasteurizing almonds."  So clearly, it's the fact
that 108 degrees will be exceeded ("without question") that has them
upset.  They group almonds with limes and avocados, apparently convinced
that 108 degrees affects all food alike.  The Almond Board of
California, they say, threatens to deprive them of "our basic rights of
life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

(I won't go on, but NaturalNews does.  For them, this is war!)

As the article stands now, it doesn't mention propylene oxide (PPO), but
it's a tiny, three-carbon molecule (C3H6O).  The passage above says "the
FDA considers it safe for human consumption."  That's absurd!  /The
Merck Index/ says, "Potential symptoms of overexposure are irritation of
the eyes, skin and respiratory system; blistering and burns."  "This
substance is reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen."  NIOSH
lists it as hazardous.  After all, it /is/ a fumigant!

But its boiling point, at 34 deg C, is lower than ordinary body
temperature (37 deg C).  If you *could* drink a glass of it (Shiver me
timbers!), it would evaporate halfway down your throat.  That must be
why it was added to race car fuel: to make it more volatile.  I suspect
the reason it was proposed for fumigating almonds (assuming it was) is
that it evaporates away quickly and thoroughly with minimal
aftereffects.  (NaturalNews says it would prefer using ozone, but
ozone's oxidizing; PPO isn't.)

I doubt Mehmet Oz said what NaturalNews suggests he said; I don't think
108 degrees (warm for a bath; tepid for hand-washing) would freak him
out.  What we usually eat is sweet almonds, but under "bitter almonds"
in the /Merck Index,/ I find "Caution: Cyanide poisoning from ingestion
of burnt bitter almonds has been reported" -- and sweet almonds are
closely related, from different varieties of the same species.

Perhaps what he had in mind was that roasting almonds carelessly in a
dry pan could burn them, causing risky chemical changes.  My bottle of
sweet almond oil (imported from Italy) says, "Excellent in salad
dressings, this rich, subtle oil [both!] goes very well with baked fish.
 It also enhances the flavor of cakes, cookies, and stir fries."  It
must have a low smoke point.