NR AEYT
AU Gunasekera,K.D.; Hapgood,A.I.; Harvey,E.L.; Benjamin,T.R.; Jachuck,M.S.; Jackson,A.L.; Kronfeld,N.P.; Manikon,M.I.; Mearns,C.J.; Mushtaq,N.; Adshead,F.
TI Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and bovine spongiform encephalopathy... but members of the public make up their own minds about risks.
QU British Medical Journal 1996 Apr 20; 312(7037): 1038
KI BMJ. 1996 Jul 20;313(7050):171. PMID: 8688796
PT letter
VT
EDITOR - The government's recent statement on bovine spongiform encephalopathy has focused media interest on its potential impact on consumer behaviour.[i] The general public's response to media reports on "mad cow disease" and how this might have affected their behaviour already have not been well documented. In a survey among nurses 5% reported avoiding beef and a further 58% said that they would do so if cross species transmission was confirmed.[ii]
Before the government's most recent statement we interviewed 155 members of the general public in three south London boroughs to assess their knowledge of bovine spongiform encephalopathy and how this related to changes in beef consumption. Twenty one general practitioners also completed the questionnaire.
Overall knowledge of bovine spongiform encephalopathy was good, with 147 of the members of the general public being aware of the disease. Their assessment of the risk of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease was accurate, with 129 saying that it was either rare or extremely rare and 120 correctly estimating the number of deaths in Britain each year as 50 or fewer.[iii] Altogether 134 reported that the media were their source of information, with only five having consulted their general practitioner.
Eighty one (55%) members of the public thought that humans could get the disease by eating cow products, compared with 12 (57%) general practitioners. Sixty (41%) members of the public and 14 (67%) general practitioners had reduced their beef consumption. The public tended to avoid all beef products, whereas general practitioners were more likely to refrain selectively from eating offal products (39 of the public avoided all beef and 21 were selective, compared with four and 10 general practitioners respectively; (chi-squared=6.2, df= I, P=0.01).
Generally the public were true to their beliefs and changed their behaviour accordingly. Forty (49%) of those who believed that transmission was possible had reduced their beef consumption, compared with 14 (29%) who were unsure about transmission and none who thought that transmission was impossible (chi-squared= 17.2, df=23 P=0.002).
We also identified a subgroup of 59 people who had consistently changed their diet in response to previous media reports, such as the scares over salmonella and listeria in food, Of these, 34 (58%) had decreased their beef intake, compared with only 25 (28%) who had not previously changed their behaviour (chi-squared= 12.6, df= 1, P=0.0004).
Thus, before the recent statements, the general public seemed to have picked up on the uncertainty about the scientific evidence portrayed in the media, made up their own minds, and acted accordingly. The public are more sophisticated than we give them credit for; public health messages should take this into account. If people are given absolute answers to questions for which the evidence is uncertain they seem not to believe the message.
References
i. Brown 0. Farmers fear backlash from consumers. Daily Telegraph 1996 Mar 21:l.
ii. Little K, Palmer D, Swiers D. Something to beef about? Nursing Standard 1995;9:19-21,
iii. Delasnerie-Laupretre N, Poser S, Pocchiari M, Wientjens DPWM, Will R, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in Europe. Lancet 1995;346:898-9.
ZR 3
MH Attitude to Health; Creutzfeldt-Jakob Syndrome/*transmission; Decision Making; Encephalopathy, Bovine Spongiform/*transmission; Human; *Public Opinion; Risk Factors
SP englisch
PO England
OR Prion-Krankheiten G