Tag Archives: Observation

Eat My Brain

Posted on by
1

In May 2008, thousands of South Koreans took to the streets to protest the impending importation of U.S. beef. In a classic example of the social amplification of risk theory, citizens were apparently convinced that substandard beef was headed for South Korea and they would all develop mad cow disease.

Now, some citizens are fighting back.

JoonAng Daily reports that more than 1,000 Korean-Americans filed a group lawsuit against a Korean broadcaster yesterday, claiming its coverage of the supposed health risks of U.S. beef humiliated them and subjected them to mockery in the United States.

In April last year, Seoul-based MBC broadcast a report on U.S. beef warning that consumption of the meat may lead to the human form of mad cow disease. Following the airing of the “PD Diary” episode, tens of thousands of South Koreans took to the streets to protest a Seoul-Washington agreement that reopened the Korean beef market to U.S. products.

The protests continued for months, rattling the new Lee Myung-bak administration. …

“We demand that MBC and the chief producer of PD Diary pay for the psychological damage and broadcast a correction report and an apology,” said Lee Heon, legal representative of the group. …

Lee said the plaintiffs were insulted by PD Diary as its report insinuated that anyone who eats U.S. beef will contract the human form of mad cow disease. He also argued that because of the report, people living in Korea came to look down on overseas Koreans who have eaten U.S. beef for years.

And every time I hear of some frivolous story about mad cow disease – not the serious stories where innocent people die – I think of this 1995 song by Vancouver band, The Odds.
 

Mad cow Korea: Social amplification of risk, Internet style

Posted on by
2

One of the most influential papers I ever read was in a 1988 issue of the journal, Risk Analysis, entitled, The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework, by Roger E. Kasperson, Ortwin Renn, Paul Slovic, Halina S. Brown, Jacque Emel, Robert Goble, Jeanne X. Kasperson and Samuel Ratick. Today the paper seems particularly prescient for the events going on today, 20 years later,  in South Korea, where riot police were bracing for what could be the largest anti-government protest during weeks of rallies against an agreement to resume imports of U.S. beef.

Some 2,500 people gathered at a protest site in central Seoul, with thousands more expected to join them after a separate rally. Police estimated the total turnout would be about 20,000, the biggest in weeks of anti-U.S. beef protests.

Other reports said up to 100,000 protesters were present.

About a dozen farmers in traditional funeral clothes marched Saturday on a downtown street on the way to the main protest site, carrying signs with anti-government slogans. They also carried the severed head of a cow (right).

South Korea agreed last month to reopen what was formerly the third-largest overseas market for U.S. beef. It had been shut for most of the past 4 1/2 years following the first U.S. case of mad cow disease in a Canadian-born cow in Washington state in 2003.

That deal, coupled with some sensational media reports, sparked fears of mad cow disease and triggered weeks of near-daily street protests calling for scrapping and renegotiating the agreement (left, protesters carry a sign symbolizing U.S. beef infected by mad cow disease, from Reuters).

The abstract from the Kasperson, et al., paper, is below.

One of the most perplexing problems in risk analysis is why some relatively minor risks or risk events, as assessed by technical experts, often elicit strong public concerns and result in substantial impacts upon society and economy. This article sets forth a conceptual framework that seeks to link systematically the technical assessment of risk with psychological, sociological, and cultural perspectives of risk perception and risk-related behavior. The main thesis is that hazards interact with psychological, social, institutional, and cultural processes in ways that may amplify or attenuate public responses to the risk or risk event. A structural description of the social amplification of risk is now possible. Amplification occurs at two stages: in the transfer of information about the risk, and in the response mechanisms of society. Signals about risk are processed by individual and social amplification stations, including the scientist who communicates the risk assessment, the news media, cultural groups, interpersonal networks, and others. Key steps of amplifications can be identified at each stage. The amplified risk leads to behavioral responses, which, in turn, result in secondary impacts. Models are presented that portray the elements and linkages in the proposed conceptual framework.

Show me, don’t tell me

Posted on by
Reply

Show me, don’t tell me: That’s what I thought as I glanced through the latest survey from the International Food Information Council (IFIC) Foundation on May 14, 2008.

The survey of 1,000 American adults, conducted in February and March of 2008, found that,

"while more than three-quarters of Americans (82%) say they are confident in their ability to safely prepare food, many do not take steps to reduce the spread of bacteria in their kitchen. For instance, less than half (48%) report using separate cutting boards for raw meat or poultry and produce, and just 29% say they use a meat thermometer. … Most (92%) report washing their hands with soap and water when preparing food, and nearly as many (79%) say they store leftovers within two hours of serving. But just 15% report checking the wattage on their microwaves, and even fewer (7%) say they use a meat thermometer when using their microwave."

Danielle Schor, Senior Vice President of Food Safety for the IFIC Foundation and registered dietitian, said,

“Consumers are a lot more confident about their ability to safely prepare food than they ought to be, based on what we learned. We still have a long way to go to educate the public about the basics such as avoiding cross contamination and cooking to proper temperature."

We’ve been doing a bunch of observational research over the past year and results will start trickling out in the next few months. Until then, as Brae Surgeoner wrote in the June 2007 issue of Food Protection Trends

"The study of consumer food-handling practices has relied almost exclusively on data obtained in self-report surveys. … The problem is that people often lie.

"In 1999, a team of Australian researchers, in their article, “A Video Study of Australian Domestic Food-Handling Practices,” impressed upon readers of the Journal of Food Protection the discrepancy that exists between what consumers say they do, and what they actually do. Comparing responses to a food-safety questionnaire administered prior to video surveillance of participants in their home kitchens, the researchers found significant deviations between stated and actual behavior.  For example, there was a highly significant difference between self-reported and observed hand-washing practices. … Without observing actual behavior, food safety educators may be developing interventions that are successful in changing what individuals report they do, but may do little in changing what they actually do."

Oh, and anyone who says that avoiding cross-contamination is simple should be videotaped preparing a meal — preferably with a few kids running around or some other distractions similar to actual scenarios — and the video analyzed by trained coders looking for food safety, including cross-contamination, mistakes. My videos are at http://www.youtube.com/SafeFoodCafe, and I make mistakes — or at least what may be defined as a mistake. That’s because food safety — including avoiding cross-contamination — is not simple.

Superbug found in Canadian pork products

Posted on by
Reply

Helen Branswell of the Canadian Press reports that Canadian researchers have found antibiotic-resistant Staph in pork products in available at Canadian retail stores:

[The discovery] raises questions about how the contamination occurred, how frequently it happens and whether it has implications for human health.

Just under 10 per cent of sampled pork chops and ground pork recently purchased in four provinces tested positive for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus or MRSA, lead researcher Dr. Scott Weese reported Wednesday in a presentation to the International Conference on Emerging Infectious Diseases in Atlanta.

To date Weese’s team has tested 212 meat samples bought in four different provinces. Most were pork chops but the group also tested a few pork shoulder roasts and some ground pork.

None of the pork roasts carried the bacteria but an equal percentage of pork chops and ground pork did. The rates of positive MRSA tests ranged from zero per cent in one province to 33 per cent in another. Weese didn’t want to name the provinces.

What is most interesting to me are Weese’s comments about what food handlers actually do:

"If they do what they’re supposed to do in terms of meat handling, then it should be perfectly safe. But do people do that is the question?"

What food handlers do (whether in the restaurant, packing house, slaughter house or home) is an area of uncertainty, and there isn’t a whole lot of data around it.  We’ve been conducting some research of food handler practices using observation,  (T6-12, An Exploratory Study of Food-handling Practices at Church Dinners in Canada was presented at IAFP in 2007) and will be presenting some of our newest findings this summer at IAFP in Columbus, OH.

If it’s not Scottish, it’s craaaaapp

Posted on by
1

After 19 years, the Scottish government is bent on asking the United States to overturn its ban on Scotland’s traditional and national dish called ‘haggis.’

The U.S. implemented a ban on haggis from Scotland in 1989 amidst the bovine spongiform encephalopathy [mad cow] scare because the dish contains offal ingredients such as sheep lungs. Sheep can suffer from scrapie, which is in the same family of diseases as BSE.

A Scottish government spokesperson told BBC News,

"The market is massive because there are so many expat Scots there and once Americans try a good quality haggis, they can’t get enough of it."

A spokesman for the U.S. Department of Agriculture said,

"We do not allow importation because of the U.K.’s BSE status. Sheep are susceptible to TSE’s and thus the U.S. takes precautions on importing those ruminants from BSE-affected countries."

A spokesman for Britain’s Food Standards Agency said,

"We see no reason at all why people cannot eat haggis safely, so long as manufacturers follow hygiene legislation."

The story says that haggis is traditionally served with tatties and neeps (potatoes and turnips). It usually contains a sheep’s lungs, liver and heart minced with onion, oatmeal, suet, spices and salt mixed with stock. It is then boiled in the animal’s stomach for approximately three hours.

Safest meat in the world — especially in pot pies

Posted on by
Reply

While introducing a Senate motion to block the movement of older Canadian cattle into the U.S., U.S. Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) couldn’t help himself and played the "safest meat in the world" card.

"American beef is the safest in the world, but increased importation of higher risk Canadian beef and cattle would undermine the confidence of our trading partners and cause further damage to our domestic beef industry."

Observers said it was doubtful the motion would pass.

Handwashing: This is why observational research is important

Posted on by
Reply

Ninety-one percent of American adults say they always wash their hands after using public restrooms. But just 83 percent actually did so, according to a separate observational study.

These results were among those released by the American Society for Microbiology (ASM) and The Soap and Detergent Association (SDA), during a press conference highlighting National Clean Hands Week. Both groups have used surveys over the years to help highlight a vital public health message from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC):
The single most important thing we can do to keep from getting sick and spreading illness to others is to clean our hands.

An August 2005 study conducted for ASM and SDA by Harris Interactive® observed 6,336 individuals wash their hands – or not – at six public attractions in four major cities: Atlanta (Turner Field), Chicago (Museum of Science and Industry, Shedd Aquarium), New York City (Grand Central Station, Penn Station), and San Francisco (Ferry Terminal Farmers Market).

Ninety percent of the women observed washed their hands, compared to 75 percent of men. By contrast, in an August 2005 telephone survey of 1,013 American adults also conducted by Harris Interactive®, 97 percent of women and 96 percent of men say they always or usually wash their hands after using a public restroom.

USA Today reported the dirty details as:

* Atlanta’s Turner Field baseball stadium again was the worst. Only 57% of guys there washed up, compared to 95% of women.

* New York was Second City to Chicago in cleanliness. In restrooms at the Windy City’s Shedd Aquarium and Museum of Science and Industry, 81% of men and women combined washed their hands, compared to 79% at the Big Apple’s Penn and Grand Central train stations.

• At San Francisco’s Ferry Terminal Farmers Market, 62.5% of men lathered up. Women did better, with 84%.

Don’t eat — or serve — poop.