Skip to main content
×
Home

Consumer perception versus scientific evidence about health benefits and safety risks from fish consumption

  • Wim Verbeke (a1), Isabelle Sioen (a2) (a3), Zuzanna Pieniak (a1), John Van Camp (a2) and Stefaan De Henauw (a3)...
Abstract
AbstractObjective

To investigate the gap between consumer perception and scientific evidence related to health benefits and safety risks from fish consumption.

Design

Consumer perceptions from a cross-sectional survey in March 2003 in Belgium were compared with scientific evidence based on a literature review.

Method

A quota sampling procedure was used with age as quota control variable. Subjects completed a self-administered questionnaire including health benefit beliefs from fish, fish content and effect beliefs for nutrients and harmful substances.

Subjects

Adults (n=429), who were the main person responsible for food purchasing in the household (284 women; 145 men), aged 18–83 years, from different regional, education, family size and income groups.

Results

Fish is predominantly perceived as a healthy food that reduces risk for coronary heart disease, which corroborates scientific evidence. This perception is stronger among women than among men. In contrast with scientific evidence, 46% of the consumers believe that fish contains dietary fibre, whereas less than one-third is aware that fish contains omega-3 fatty acids and that this nutrient has a positive impact on human health. The gap between perception and evidence is larger among consumers with lower education. In general, consumers are better aware of the content and effect of harmful substances than of nutrients in fish.

Conclusions

Despite conclusive evidence about the content and positive effect of omega-3 fatty acids in fish, related consumer awareness and beliefs are poor and often wrong. This study exemplifies the need for nutrition education and more effective communication about the health benefits of fish consumption.

    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Consumer perception versus scientific evidence about health benefits and safety risks from fish consumption
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Consumer perception versus scientific evidence about health benefits and safety risks from fish consumption
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Consumer perception versus scientific evidence about health benefits and safety risks from fish consumption
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
*Corresponding author: Email wim.verbeke@UGent.be
References
Hide All
1Dias MG, Sanchez MV, Bartolot H, Oliviera L. Vitamin content of fish and fish product consumed in Portugal. Electronic Journal of Environmental, Agricultural and Food Chemistry 2003; 2(4).
2Bender DA, The vitamins. In: Gibney MJ, Vorster HH, Kok FJ, eds. Introduction to Human Nutrition. Oxford: Blackwell Science Ltd, 2002; 125–76.
3Sidhu KS, Health benefits and potential risks related to consumption of fish or fish oil. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 2003; 38: 336–44.
4Hoge Gezondheidsraad, Vis en gezondheid bij volwassenen [Fish and Health among Adults]. Report D/2004/7795/3. Brussels: FOD Volksgezondheid, 2004.
5Brunsø K. Consumer research on fish in Europe. In: Luten JB, Oehlenschlager J, Olafsdottir G, eds. Quality of Fish from Catch to Consumer: Labelling, Monitoring and Traceability. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers, 2003; 335–44.
6Gross T. Consumer attitudes towards health and food safety. In: Luten JB, Oehlenschlager J, Olafsdottir G. Quality of Fish from Catch to Consumer: Labelling, Monitoring and Traceability. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers, 2003; 401–11.
7Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition. Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food. Advice on Fish Consumption: Benefits and Risks. London: The Stationery Office, 2004.
8Welch AA, Zavitsanos X, Tumino R, Galasso R, Bueno-de-Mesquita HB, Ocké MC, et al. Variability of fish consumption within the 10 European countries participating in the European investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study. Public Health Nutrition 2002; 5: 1273–85.
9Leek S, Maddock S, Foxall G, Lund E, Amiano P, Dorronsoro M. Determinants of fish consumption. British Food Journal 2000; 102: 1839
10Trondsen T, Scholderer J, Lund E, Eggen AE, Perceived barriers to consumption of fish among Norwegian women Appetite 2003; 41(3): 301–14.
11Verbeke W, Vackier I, Individual determinants of fish consumption in Belgium: application of the theory of planned behaviour. Appetite 2005; 44(1): 6782.
12Kris-Etherton PM, Harris WS, Appel LJ. Fish consumption, fish oil, omega-3 fatty acids, and cardiovascular disease. Circulation 2002; 106: 2747–57.
13Kris-Etherton PM, Harris WS, Appel LJ. Omega-3 fatty acids and cardiovascular disease – new recommendations from the American Heart Association. Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology 2003; 23: 151–2.
14Vrijens B, De Henauw S, Dewettinck K, Talloen W, Goeyens L, De Backer G, et al. Probabilistic intake assessment and body burden estimation of dioxin-like substances in background conditions and during a short food contamination episode. Food Additives and Contaminants 2002; 19: 687700.
15Frewer LJ, Howard C, Hedderley D, Shepherd R. The elaboration likelihood model and communication about food risks. Risk Analysis 1997; 17: 759–70.
16Burger J, McDermott MH, Chess C, Bochenek E, Perez-Lugo M, Pflugh KK. Evaluating risk communication about fish consumption advisories: efficacy of a brochure versus a classroom lesson in Spanish and English. Risk Analysis 2003; 23: 791803.
17Alhakami A, Slovic P. A psychological study of the inverse relationship between perceived risk and perceived benefit. Risk Analysis 1994; 14: 1085–96.
18Siegrist M, Cvetkovich G. Better negative than positive? Evidence of a bias for negative information about possible health dangers. Risk Analysis 2001; 21: 199206.
19Carson C, Hassel C. Educating high risk Minnesotans about dietary fats, blood cholesterol and heart diseases. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 1994; 94: 659–60.
20Robenstein R, Thurman W. Health risk and the demand for red meat: evidence from futures markets. Review of Agricultural Economics 1996; 18: 629–41.
21Kinnucan H, Xiao H, Hsia CH, Jackson J. Effect of health information and generic advertising on US meat demand. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 1997; 79: 1323.
22Mizerski RW. An attribution explanation of the disproportionate influence of unfavorable information. Journal of Consumer Research 1982; 9: 301–10.
23Verbeke W, Ward RW. A fresh meat almost ideal demand system incorporating negative TV press and advertising impact. Agricultural Economics 2001; 25: 359–74.
24National Institute, of Statistics, (NIS). Population Census Data January 1, 2003. Brussels: NIS, 2002.
25Wetenschappelijk Instituut, voor Volksgezondheid, (WIV). Health Interview Survey. Brussels: WIV, 2001.
26Inra Marketing, Research. Fish Campaign Evaluation ‘Fish or fish’ Results after One Year of Campaigning. Brussels: Inra Marketing Research, 2003.
27de Deckere EAM, Korver O, Verschuren PM, Katan MB. Health aspects of fish and n–3 polyunsaturated fatty acids from plant and marine origin. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1998; 52: 749–53.
28Whelton SP, He J, Whelton PK, Munter P, Meta-analysis of observational studies on fish intake and coronary heart disease. American Journal of Cardiology 2004; 93: 1119–23.
29Terry PD, Rohan TE, Wolk L. Intakes of fish and marine fatty acids and the risks of cancers of the breast and prostate and of other hormone-related cancers: a review of the epidemiologic evidence. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2003; 77: 532–43.
30Larsson SC, Kumlin M, Ingelman-Sundberg M, Wolk A. Dietary long-chain n –3 fatty acids for the prevention of cancer: a review of potential mechanisms. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2004; 79: 935–45.
31Caygill CPJ, Charlett A, Hill MJ. Fat, fish, fish oil and cancer. British Journal of Cancer 1996; 74: 159–64.
32Sasaki S, Horacsek M, Kesteloot H. An ecological study of the relationship between dietary-fat intake and breast-cancer mortality. Preventive Medicine 1993; 22: 187202.
33Salem NJ, Pawlosky RJ. Docosahexaenoic acid is an essential nutrient in the nervous system. Journal of Nutritional Science and Vitaminology 1992; 38: 153–6.
34Tanaka Y, Funada T, Hirano J, Hashizume R. Triacylglycerol specificity of Candida cylindracea lipase: effect of docosahexaenoic acid on resistance of triacylglycerol to lipase. Journal of the American Oil Chemists' Society 1993; 70: 1031–4.
35Karl H, Ruoff U, Bluthgen A. Levels of dioxins in fish and fishery products on the German market. Chemosphere 2002; 49: 765–73.
36European Commission. Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Animal Nutrition on the Use of Canthaxanthin in Feedingstuffs for Salmon and Trout, Laying Hens, and Other Poultry. Brussels: European Commission, Health & Consumer Protection Directorate-General, 2002; 129.
37Alderman DJ, Hastings TS. Antibiotic use in aquaculture: development of antibiotic resistance – potential for consumers' health risks. International Journal of Food Science and Technology 1998; 33: 139–55.
38Leonards PE, Lohman M, de Wit MM, Booy G, Brandsma SH, de Boer J. Actuele situatie van gechloreerde dioxines, furanen en polychloorbifenylen in visserij-producten: Quick- en Full-Scan. Report C034/00. IJmuiden: RIVO, 2002.
39European Commission. Assessment of Dietary Intake of Dioxins and Related PCBs by the Population of EU Members States. Scoop Report. Brussels: European Commission, Directorate-General Health and Consumer Protection, 2000.
40Karl H, Kuhlmann H, Ruoff U, Transfer of PCDDs and PCDFs into the edible parts of farmed rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss (Walbaum), via feed. Aquaculture Research 2003; 34: 1009–14.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Public Health Nutrition
  • ISSN: 1368-9800
  • EISSN: 1475-2727
  • URL: /core/journals/public-health-nutrition
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 6
Total number of PDF views: 750 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 848 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 21st November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.