Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 151 Document Number: D06776
Notes:
Online via Pew Research Center. 8 pages., "Scientists and the American public are often far apart when it comes to views about science-related issues."
Online from publication. 2 pages., Identification of produce items cited as problematic and acceptable by the Environmental Working Group. Article indicates that more than 99 percent of produce samples tested for these reports have residue levels that are compliant with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards (which EWG considers insufficient).
Online from publisher. 3 pages., In this commentary, the Executive Director of the Alliance for Food and Farming argues that the "dirty dozen" list published annually by the Environmental Working Group is "scientifically unsupportable, negatively impacts consumers and it is insulting to farmers and farm workers working hard every day to provide produce to consumers." She says, "If we have learned anything from the pandemic, it is that science (not rhetoric or false claims) needs to guide our health and safety choices."
Qu, Shuyang (author), Lamm, Alexa (author), and Rumble, Joy (author)
Format:
Conference paper
Publication Date:
2017-02
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 163 Document Number: D08157
Notes:
Research paper presented in the Agricultural Communications Section, Southern Association of Agricultural Scientists (SAAS) conference in Mobile, Alabama, February 4-7, 2017. 31 pages.
7 pages., via online journal., Pesticide use and pesticide residues in foods have been the subject of controversial public discussions and media coverage in Germany. Against this background, a better understanding of public risk perceptions is needed to promote efficient public health communication. To this end, this study captures the German public's perception of pesticide residues in foods. A representative sample of the population aged 14 years and older (n = 1,004) was surveyed via computer-assisted telephone interviewing on their attitudes and knowledge with regard to pesticide residues. Based on questions regarding their typical consumer behavior, respondents were classified into conventional and organic consumers to identify differences as well as similarities between these two consumer types. As assessed with an open-ended question, both organic and conventional consumers viewed pesticides, chemicals, and toxins as the greatest threats to food quality and safety. Evaluating the risks and benefits of pesticide use, more than two-thirds of organic consumers (70%) rated the risks as greater than the benefits, compared with just over one-half of conventional consumers (53%). Concern about the detection of pesticide residues in the food chain and bodily fluids was significantly higher among organic compared with conventional consumers. Only a minority of respondents was aware that legal limits for pesticide residues (referred to as maximum residue levels) exist, with 69% of organic and 61% of conventional consumers believing that the presence of pesticide residues in foods is generally not permitted. A lack of awareness of maximum residue levels was associated with heightened levels of concern about pesticide residues. Finally, general exposure to media reporting on pesticide residues was associated with more frequent knowledge of legal limits for pesticide residues, whereas actively seeking information on pesticide residues was not. The possible mechanisms underlying these findings are discussed.