www.checkbiotech.org ; www.raupp.info ; www.czu.cz

Unless the food industry accepts that emotional connections drive consumer
decisions about what is and what is not acceptable, full public confidence
will be hard to restore, December 2005 by Anthony Fletcher.

This was the conclusion of Professor Lynn Frewer of the University of
Wageningen in the Netherlands, a keynote speaker at the Food Safety Seminar
at Paris' FiE show.

The argument was also highly topical, given Nestlé's recent experience of
withdrawing infant formula in Italy because of packaging ink migrating into
the product.

?People still eat unhealthily because they don't fear sugar or soluble
fats,? said Frewer.

?But an involuntary risk over which people have no control is perceived as
being much more threatening.?

Indeed, public reaction in Europe to Genetically Modified (GM) foods shows
exactly how consumers think about food ingredients. The issue also
demonstrates how important good communication is in allaying fears.

Frewer used the example of a GM tomato paste product that was launched by
Sainsbury's in 1996. It was clearly labelled as GM, was fully traceable and
received very little media interest.?

Then, around 1998 to 1999, the issue suddenly received a huge amount of
coverage, much of it negative. Saturation reporting led to a cemented
consumer perception of the lack of any benefit from GM technology.

The integrity of nature had not formed any part of the food industry's
communication. Effective traceability had not fully been put in place. The
negative reaction to GM, according to Frewer, was not so much about risk as
about consumer choice and the provision of relevant information.

There was, as a result, a decline in trust about what the food industry was
saying. Some major corporations had presented the technology as the solution
to world hunger, and such statements added to growing widespread cynicism.

?Emotional connections drive consumer decision making,? she said. ?We need
to move towards a risk benefit analysis.?

This sentiment was complemented by Olivier Mignot from Nestlé's research
centre in Switzerland.

?Consumers do not like surprises - like finding ink in their baby milk
formula,? he said at the Food Safety Seminar. ?We therefore need to build
safety into the design of the food and anticipate new risks.?

Mignot used the example of semi-carbazide in baby food jars to demonstrate
how the industry can tackle a safety issue before it forms a negative public
impression.

?Semi-carbazide was identified as coming from the polymer seals in baby food
jars. A quick preliminary toxicological risk assessment confirmed this, the
EFSA was informed via the CIAA and this resulted in the efficient ban and
replacement of the chemical.?

If only all food safety issues were tackled as effectively. A few years ago
in Japan, 15,000 people were poisoned by a product developed by Snow Brand.
The company's market share collapsed as a result, factories were closed and
the president and seven executives resigned.

?When it goes wrong, it can have disastrous consequences,?commented
Unilever's Tineke Mosert.

[www.foodnavigator.com]

------------------------------------------
Posted to Phorum via PhorumMail