食品中的微生物和化学风险：公众认知与风险排名

IF 8 1区农林科学 Q1 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

Food Research International Pub Date : 2025-09-22 DOI:10.1016/j.foodres.2025.117586

Kah Yen Claire Yeak , Rallou Thomopoulos , Philippe Palmont , Gilles Rivière , Heidy M.W. den Besten , Marcel H. Zwietering , Jeanne-Marie Membré

{"title":"食品中的微生物和化学风险：公众认知与风险排名","authors":"Kah Yen Claire Yeak , Rallou Thomopoulos , Philippe Palmont , Gilles Rivière , Heidy M.W. den Besten , Marcel H. Zwietering , Jeanne-Marie Membré","doi":"10.1016/j.foodres.2025.117586","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Food safety is a critical public health concern, particularly regarding microbiological hazards (MHs) and chemical hazards (CHs) in infant foods. This study examined the risk perceptions of MHs and CHs associated with fruit puree and infant formula within the general public (<em>n</em> = 3585) across the European Union with a focus on comparing general public views against outcomes of recently published risk ranking results based on scientific assessment.</div><div>In terms of public risk perception, <strong>1)</strong> The general public perceived bacteria causing severe sickness (e.g., <em>Listeria monocytogenes</em>) or mild sickness (e.g., <em>Bacillus cereus)</em> as the highest concern and viruses or unknown hazards as the lowest; <strong>2)</strong> The general public perceived the greatest and lowest concern for agricultural (e.g., pesticides) and fraudulent (e.g., melamine) contaminants, respectively; <strong>3)</strong> The public exhibited a higher concern for CHs than MHs, likely due to a general distrust of chemicals in foods.</div><div>In terms of comparison between public perception and risk ranking, <strong>1)</strong> public perception of hazard severity showed limited alignment with risk rankings (ρ = 0.67 for MHs and ρ = 0.15 for CHs); <strong>2)</strong> in terms of risk, public perception aligned well with risk rankings for MH risks, with (ρ = 0.70 for infant formula and ρ = 0.97 for fruit puree). In contrast for CH risks, there was a strong misalignment between public perception and risk rankings showing correlation coefficients of ρ = −0.70 for infant formula and ρ = −0.20 for fruit puree. The public tended to overestimate risks from agricultural and packaging-related chemicals while underestimating risks associated with environmental and natural contaminants.</div><div>These findings highlight the need for targeted communication strategies to bridge the gap between public perception and risk rankings based on scientific assessment, particularly for chemical risks. Clear communication of scientific evidence, addressing misconceptions, and tailoring messages to audience needs could enhance public awareness and trigger appropriate actions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":323,"journal":{"name":"Food Research International","volume":"221 ","pages":"Article 117586"},"PeriodicalIF":8.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Microbiological and chemical risks in foods: Public perception versus risk ranking\",\"authors\":\"Kah Yen Claire Yeak , Rallou Thomopoulos , Philippe Palmont , Gilles Rivière , Heidy M.W. den Besten , Marcel H. Zwietering , Jeanne-Marie Membré\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.foodres.2025.117586\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Food safety is a critical public health concern, particularly regarding microbiological hazards (MHs) and chemical hazards (CHs) in infant foods. This study examined the risk perceptions of MHs and CHs associated with fruit puree and infant formula within the general public (<em>n</em> = 3585) across the European Union with a focus on comparing general public views against outcomes of recently published risk ranking results based on scientific assessment.</div><div>In terms of public risk perception, <strong>1)</strong> The general public perceived bacteria causing severe sickness (e.g., <em>Listeria monocytogenes</em>) or mild sickness (e.g., <em>Bacillus cereus)</em> as the highest concern and viruses or unknown hazards as the lowest; <strong>2)</strong> The general public perceived the greatest and lowest concern for agricultural (e.g., pesticides) and fraudulent (e.g., melamine) contaminants, respectively; <strong>3)</strong> The public exhibited a higher concern for CHs than MHs, likely due to a general distrust of chemicals in foods.</div><div>In terms of comparison between public perception and risk ranking, <strong>1)</strong> public perception of hazard severity showed limited alignment with risk rankings (ρ = 0.67 for MHs and ρ = 0.15 for CHs); <strong>2)</strong> in terms of risk, public perception aligned well with risk rankings for MH risks, with (ρ = 0.70 for infant formula and ρ = 0.97 for fruit puree). In contrast for CH risks, there was a strong misalignment between public perception and risk rankings showing correlation coefficients of ρ = −0.70 for infant formula and ρ = −0.20 for fruit puree. The public tended to overestimate risks from agricultural and packaging-related chemicals while underestimating risks associated with environmental and natural contaminants.</div><div>These findings highlight the need for targeted communication strategies to bridge the gap between public perception and risk rankings based on scientific assessment, particularly for chemical risks. Clear communication of scientific evidence, addressing misconceptions, and tailoring messages to audience needs could enhance public awareness and trigger appropriate actions.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":323,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Food Research International\",\"volume\":\"221 \",\"pages\":\"Article 117586\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Food Research International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0963996925019246\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Research International","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0963996925019246","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

食品安全是一个重要的公共卫生问题，特别是婴儿食品中的微生物危害（MHs）和化学危害（CHs）。本研究调查了整个欧盟普通公众（n = 3585）对与水果泥和婴儿配方奶粉相关的mhhs和CHs的风险认知，重点是将普通公众的观点与最近公布的基于科学评估的风险排名结果进行比较。在公众风险认知方面，1)一般公众认为引起严重疾病的细菌（如单核增生李斯特菌）或引起轻度疾病的细菌（如蜡样芽孢杆菌）是最值得关注的，病毒或未知危害是最低的；2)公众对农业污染物（如农药）和欺诈性污染物（如三聚氰胺）的关注度分别为最高和最低；3)公众对CHs的关注程度高于mhhs，这可能是由于公众对食品中的化学物质普遍不信任。就公众认知与风险排名的比较而言，1)公众对危害严重程度的认知与风险排名的一致性有限（卫生保健的ρ = 0.67，卫生保健的ρ = 0.15）；2)在风险方面，公众对MH风险的看法与风险排名非常一致，婴儿配方奶粉的ρ = 0.70，水果泥的ρ = 0.97。相比之下，公众认知和风险排名之间存在强烈的不一致，婴儿配方奶粉和水果泥的相关系数分别为ρ = - 0.70和ρ = - 0.20。公众倾向于高估与农业和包装有关的化学品的风险，而低估与环境和自然污染物有关的风险。这些发现突出了有针对性的传播策略的必要性，以弥合公众认知和基于科学评估的风险排名之间的差距，特别是在化学品风险方面。清晰地传播科学证据、消除误解以及根据受众的需要定制信息，可以提高公众意识并引发适当的行动。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

Microbiological and chemical risks in foods: Public perception versus risk ranking

查看原文本刊更多论文

Microbiological and chemical risks in foods: Public perception versus risk ranking

Food safety is a critical public health concern, particularly regarding microbiological hazards (MHs) and chemical hazards (CHs) in infant foods. This study examined the risk perceptions of MHs and CHs associated with fruit puree and infant formula within the general public (n = 3585) across the European Union with a focus on comparing general public views against outcomes of recently published risk ranking results based on scientific assessment.

In terms of public risk perception, 1) The general public perceived bacteria causing severe sickness (e.g., Listeria monocytogenes) or mild sickness (e.g., Bacillus cereus) as the highest concern and viruses or unknown hazards as the lowest; 2) The general public perceived the greatest and lowest concern for agricultural (e.g., pesticides) and fraudulent (e.g., melamine) contaminants, respectively; 3) The public exhibited a higher concern for CHs than MHs, likely due to a general distrust of chemicals in foods.

In terms of comparison between public perception and risk ranking, 1) public perception of hazard severity showed limited alignment with risk rankings (ρ = 0.67 for MHs and ρ = 0.15 for CHs); 2) in terms of risk, public perception aligned well with risk rankings for MH risks, with (ρ = 0.70 for infant formula and ρ = 0.97 for fruit puree). In contrast for CH risks, there was a strong misalignment between public perception and risk rankings showing correlation coefficients of ρ = −0.70 for infant formula and ρ = −0.20 for fruit puree. The public tended to overestimate risks from agricultural and packaging-related chemicals while underestimating risks associated with environmental and natural contaminants.

These findings highlight the need for targeted communication strategies to bridge the gap between public perception and risk rankings based on scientific assessment, particularly for chemical risks. Clear communication of scientific evidence, addressing misconceptions, and tailoring messages to audience needs could enhance public awareness and trigger appropriate actions.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Food Research International 工程技术-食品科技

CiteScore

12.50

自引率

7.40%

发文量

1183

审稿时长

79 days

期刊介绍： Food Research International serves as a rapid dissemination platform for significant and impactful research in food science, technology, engineering, and nutrition. The journal focuses on publishing novel, high-quality, and high-impact review papers, original research papers, and letters to the editors across various disciplines in the science and technology of food. Additionally, it follows a policy of publishing special issues on topical and emergent subjects in food research or related areas. Selected, peer-reviewed papers from scientific meetings, workshops, and conferences on the science, technology, and engineering of foods are also featured in special issues.