‘It is not entirely healthy.’ A qualitative study into public appraisals of uncertain risks of chemical substances in food

Abstract

For some chemical substances in food, scientific uncertainty prevents definitive statements about the presence of risk for human health. In this qualitative study, we explored the public’s understanding and risk appraisal of these substances. During semi-structured interviews, participants from the public were presented with inconclusive risk information about either a food additive or one of two food contaminants. Findings show that interviewees had no prior knowledge and constructed their risk appraisal on the spot. Results suggest that generic and case specific beliefs and inferences affect understanding and appraisal. Respondents’ interpretations of the risk messages used in this study were often not in line with what the message intended to convey. In addition, specific use of scientific jargon was associated with increased risk. In general, respondents were more apprehensive about the presence of the chemical in food than that they were worried about the chance of experiencing health effects.

On the Road to End Pig Pain: Knowledge and Attitudes of Brazilian Citizens Regarding Castration

“…Citizens and consumers often refer to hormones, antibiotics, pesticides, transgenic components, and feed additives collectively as “chemicals” and link them with lack of naturalness in production systems, and with lower animal welfare and product quality [ 35 , 51 , 52 ]. As shown in this study, Jansen et al [ 53 ] found that some people have negative attitudes towards chemicals in food and consider them unnatural and detrimental to health, and associate “chemical” with danger. Concern that immunocastration (and to a lesser extent, pain medications) would leave residues in the meat was also reported by participants, as shown by others [ 47 , 54 , 55 ].…”

“…For example, the name of a technology influences public attitudes [ 64 ], so the term immunocastration may have induced some people to think of controversies like vaccines or biotechnologies, adding to distrust. Additionally, it has been shown that interpreting risk messages is not straightforward, and lay understanding may not be in line with the intended scientific meaning [ 53 ]. Lastly, part of the participants said that they did not trust most of the sources of information on animal production, which may be why some participants implied having low confidence in the information presented.…”

Creating conditions for critical trust – How an uncertainty-based risk perspective relates to dimensions and types of trust

“…Also, stimulating careful evaluation of the information about risks can serve to amplify signals or aspects previously ignored or overlooked and affect how this information is perceived and reacted to. It may, for example, lead to cynicism or rejection of information, decrease the perception of safety of food products ( Frewer et al, 2003 , Jansen et al, 2019 ) and negatively affect levels of trust. This may spur responses resembling those seen in 2014–2016.…”

Decisiones y justificaciones entre natural versus no natural en el consumo de un producto alimentario por estudiantes de 14-15 años. Un estudio piloto

“…La segunda categoría se refiere al procesamiento de alimentos después de ser cosechados, y distingue entre los ingredientes utilizados y el proceso de producción en sí mismo. En cuanto a los ingredientes, los consumidores parecen dar importancia a la ausencia de ciertos componentes considerados negativos (principalmente aditivos, pero también conservantes, colorantes artificiales y sabores, hormonas, pesticidas y organismos genéticamente modificados) más que a la presencia de ciertos componentes positivos (ingredientes naturales) (España 2008;Jansen et al, 2020). Los productos deben ser tan mínimamente procesados como sea posible, incluso con parecido a los alimentos caseros.…”

“…a) Centrarse en la composición química de los alimentos más que en los procesos por los cuales se obtienen, que suelen ser más relevantes para los estudiantes y ciudadanos (Rozín et al 2004, Jansen et al 2020. Los estudiantes tienen que apreciar y reconocer que la composición química es lo realmente relevante y lo que puede o no, tener efecto sobre la salud.…”