Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: D08802
Notes:
Pages 29-40 in Debra A. Reid, Interpreting agriculture at museums and historic sites. United States: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., Lanham, Maryland. 265 pages.
James F. Evans Collection, cited reference, The results of a study that examined consumer willingness to buy irradiated food products are presented. Benefits and risks of food irradiation, economics feasibility, and consumer attitudes are described.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 8 Document Number: D10313
Notes:
2 pages., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign., Researchers report consumer research indicating that the "future of U. S. citrus may hinge on consumer acceptance of genetically modified food."
search through journal, In this paper, dimensions of the debate surrounding the application of gene technology to food production are discussed and a study assessing perceptions of the technology among a sample of the UK public (n=1499) is reported. The general picture that emerges from the study is one of people expressing low familiarity with the technology, with more people associating it with high risks than with low risks, and more people expecting it to provide low benefits than high benefits. Attitudes towards different applications vary significantly, as does trust in different potential sources of information about the technology. It is also shown that attitudes can be predicted not only by estimates of risks and benefits but also by perceptions of the involvement of ethical issues, but the perceived need for the technology, and by the perceived likelihood of improvements it is likely to bring to the quality of life in the UK. The results are discussed in the context of the need for greater public information about the technology and the realization that communication of risks takes place within a complex network of societal relationships. (original)
5 pages., Author concludes that "genetic information is easy to portray as a new and scary technology, but fearmongering is largely based on misinformation, a misunderstanding of evolution and our place in the natural world, and vague fears of contamination. In reality, GMO safety testing is extensive and has not uncovered any safety concerns for current GMOs. There are other issues with GMOs that are worth discussing, but fears of adverse health effects are not legitimate." Cites a review of research ty the European Commission in 2010: "The main conclusion to be drawn from the efforts of more than 130 research projects, covering a period of more than 25 years of research and involving more than 500 independent research groups, is that biotechnology, and in particular GMOs, are not per se more risky than e.g. conventional plant breeding technologies."
