Consumer Faith in Food Safety Drops

Consumer confidence in the safety of the nation’s food supply experienced a “dramatic” decline in the past year, according to a recent public opinion survey. The poll also found that faith in the government’s ability to ensure food’s safety is at a record low.

The results, released earlier this month by a supermarket industry trade group, are surprising because the negative trend occurred in the absence of any major contamination problem.

The Food Marketing Institute (FMI), a grocers’ association based in Washington, has surveyed consumer attitudes on a variety of issues for the past 21 years. The most recent study, conducted for FMI by Opinion Research Corp., found that only 12% of those polled reported being “completely confident” that the food in supermarkets is safe, a decline from 17% of the respondents who answered similarly in 1991. Another 60% said they were “mostly confident” while 24% were “somewhat doubtful” about food’s overall safety. Three percent reported being “very doubtful” regarding the safety issue, and 1% had no opinion.

In interpreting the data, FMI combines the two figures for those answering in a positive fashion that they are “completely” or “mostly” confident in the food supply. The combined number creates a positive index that, for 1992, is 72%, down from an 82% positive index last year. The only time the figure was lower was in 1989, when consumers were faced with the twin controversies of Alar in apples and cyanide in imported grapes.

The figures represent a “dramatic turnaround” from 1991, according to the study’s authors, who also stated that “confidence has dropped among all demographic segments.”

Tim Hammonds, FMI senior vice president, said the findings are “difficult to understand, because there were no widespread food safety incidents this (past) year.”

“However, while our questionnaire was in the field, a major news article on fish (contamination) attracted media attention,” he said.

A leading consumer advocacy group was not as hesitant to explain the decline in consumer confidence.

“I’d like to think the decline is due to increasing public education and awareness,” said Jodie Silverman, communications director of Public Voice for Food & Health Policy in Washington. “In the past two years, there has been an unraveling of the mystery behind how the food system and the food supply works. As a result, consumers have gotten a glance at what goes on with meat and poultry inspection. They’ve also gotten a glance at what goes on in the seafood world. And they see how the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration are inadequately set up and can’t meet their food safety mandates.”

In fact, the public’s perception of government’s ability to ensure food safety is at an all-time low, according to the FMI polling data. Only 21% of the respondents said they rely on federal and state government agencies to “be sure that the products you buy are safe.” The 1992 level is down considerably from its high point of 37% in 1985. The largest percentage of those queried, or 40%, said they now rely on themselves to ensure product integrity. About 20% depend on manufacturers, 9% rely on food stores and 5% depend on consumer organizations.

Public Voice’s Silverman said that the polling data are revealing. “If consumers think that government can’t ensure a safe food supply, then maybe that’s because we don’t have a real safe food supply.”

Two other recent surveys, conducted by produce industry interests, also found significant levels of concern about food safety.

A surprising 82% of those surveyed for “Fresh Trends” (an annual report published by The Packer, a trade magazine) said that they either “strongly agree” or “agree somewhat” with the statement: “Based on what I’ve seen, read or heard, growers of fresh produce can greatly reduce their use of chemicals in production without diminishing quality.”

Only 6% disagreed strongly with the statement and 12% disagreed somewhat.

The finding is a setback for produce industry groups. Most recently, farm interests have opposed efforts by consumer advocates to reduce federal appearance standards for fruit and vegetables, especially in cases where more chemicals must be used in order to grow blemish-free or perfect produce.

In the second survey, the Center for Produce Quality, the public relations arm of two major produce trade groups, found that, in 1992, 61% of those surveyed said that they were “very concerned” about pesticide residues, up from 55% in March, 1989, or at the height of the Alar controversy.

“By ‘concern,’ consumers may simply be telling us that they care deeply about this issue and that they’re paying greater attention to it,” said Robert Carey, president of the Produce Marketing Assn. in Wilmington, Del.

Another ominous sign for the produce industry was that 75% of those polled agreed with this statement: “Current regulations for pesticides do not sufficiently take into account the risk that pesticides may pose to children.” (In retrospect, the Alar crisis was ignited when the Natural Resources Defense Council claimed that federal pesticide regulations failed to account for the health risk posed by chemical residues in food to young children.)

Agriculture interests are also acutely concerned about a forthcoming National Academy of Sciences study into the issue of pesticides, which has been postponed several times and is now expected in early 1993.