Consumers who reject CRISPR fear that gene-edited crops cause allergies and only benefit food companies, survey shows

Credit: Inspo Fitness Journal
This article or excerpt is included in the GLP’s daily curated selection of ideologically diverse news, opinion and analysis of biotechnology innovation.

Recent gene editing technologies advances, such as CRISPR/Cas9, will continue to shape the future of agriculture and genetically engineered crops. Using a representative survey of a North American Midwestern state, we examine the relative weights of specific risks and benefits associated with GMO foods in impacting potential rejection of the technology.

Controlling for established predictors, we find perceptions of specific risks and benefits of the technology have a significant and substantial impact on GMO rejection, with risk aspects playing a relatively greater role. Two risks, viewing GMOs as benefiting food manufacturers and causing allergies and illness, are among the strongest predictors of GMO food rejection, suggesting social dimensions are important to consider and present in the public mind.

Supplementing this, people also consider aspects related to health and nature. We discuss implications for communication efforts about GE foods and crops, and for the future of gene editing in food production.

Together, our results emphasize the interconnectivity of media coverage of GMOs and public rejection, in this case through the coverage and subsequent salience of various aspects of GM foods. Although we find that the effects of media attention are limited with the addition of perceptions of risks and benefits associated with GM food into the model (suggesting a potential overlap in explanatory power), media attention remains a strong predictor of rejection. Further, previous research has suggested that another predictor, perceived familiarity, is likely connected to media attention, again underscoring the importance of the media in GM food rejection.

Related article:  CRISPR-edited chickens are coming: Can they stop a bird flu epidemic?

We suggest that some specific potential risks and benefits may be more salient for those who pay attention to news about GM foods based on the aspects of the technology that are frequently discussed. Our results also indicate that those who pay more attention to GMO-specific news rate the importance of GMO-free foods more highly. A brief consideration of the ongoing media coverage on GMO-related issues, such as mandatory labeling legislation or concerns with the ethics of biotechnology companies, supports this finding.

Additionally, although viewing GM foods as unnatural, an indication of moral concern with the technology, is associated with increased rejection, we find that other aspects of the technology are of greater weight in explaining rejection. This finding pushes against recent claims on the pervasive appeal of GMO opposition as an emotion-based response to the unnaturalness of GE foods. Rather, the perhaps less instinctually-based views of GM foods as only benefiting food manufacturers and causing allergies and illness elicited stronger responses.

Read the original post (Behind paywall)

Outbreak
Outbreak Daily Digest

podcasts GLP Podcasts More...
Biotech Facts & Fallacies
Talking Biotech
Genetics Unzipped

video Videos More...
stat hospitalai ink st x mod x

Meet STACI: STAT’s fascinating interactive guide to AI in healthcare

The Covid-19 pandemic underscores the importance of the technology in medicine: In the last few months, hospitals have used AI ...

bees and pollinators Bees & Pollinators More...
mag insects image superjumbo v

Disaster interrupted: Which farming system better preserves insect populations: Organic or conventional?

A three-year run of fragmentary Armageddon-like studies had primed the journalism pumps and settled the media framing about the future ...
dead bee desolate city

Are we facing an ‘Insect Apocalypse’ caused by ‘intensive, industrial’ farming and agricultural chemicals? The media say yes; Science says ‘no’

The media call it the “Insect Apocalypse”. In the past three years, the phrase has become an accepted truth of ...

infographics Infographics More...
breastfeeding bed x facebook x

Infographic: We know breastfeeding helps children. Now we know it helps mothers too

When a woman becomes pregnant, her risk of type 2 diabetes increases for the rest of her life, perhaps because ...

GMO FAQs GMO FAQs More...
biotechnology worker x

Can GMOs rescue threatened plants and crops?

Some scientists and ecologists argue that humans are in the midst of an "extinction crisis" — the sixth wave of ...
food globe x

Are GMOs necessary to feed the world?

Experts estimate that agricultural production needs to roughly double in the coming decades. How can that be achieved? ...
eating gmo corn on the cob x

Are GMOs safe?

In 2015, 15 scientists and activists issued a statement, "No Scientific consensus on GMO safety," in the journal Environmental Sciences ...
glp profiles GLP Profiles More...
Screen Shot at PM

Charles Benbrook: Agricultural economist and consultant for the organic industry and anti-biotechnology advocacy groups

Independent scientists rip Benbrook's co-authored commentary in New England Journal calling for reassessment of dangers of all GMO crops and herbicides ...
Screen Shot at PM

ETC Group: ‘Extreme’ biotechnology critic campaigns against synthetic biology and other forms of ‘extreme genetic engineering’

The ETC Group is an international environmental non-governmental organization (NGO) based in Canada whose stated purpose is to monitor "the impact of emerging technologies and ...
report this ad report this ad report this ad

Trending

News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.
Send this to a friend