Characterization of the opinion, knowledge and perception of the training needs of portuguese nutritionists in relation to genetically modified foods
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14306/renhyd.23.4.758Keywords:
Food, Genetically Modified, Nutritionists, Knowledge, Education.Abstract
Introduction: Genetically modified (GM) foods have been approved in the European Union. These foods have been questioned for their actual benefits and risks. This is especially relevant in the case of the nutritional dimension, where consumers are confronted with daily decisions about how to best feed their families. Within this complex framework, health professionals are called upon to intervene and respond to the questions on opinion, attitude and science their clients bring in. The objective of this study was to evaluate the knowledge and opinion of nutritionists on the subject of transgenic foods and their perception of training needs.
Material and methods: Quantitative research. A questionnaire was applied between March and July 2016, and 248 individuals participated. The variables studied were opinion, knowledge, and training. Descriptive calculations and multiple correspondence analysis were performed to obtain the respondents' profiles.
Results: With regard to opinion and knowledge results show that nutritionists are mostly unfavorable to genetically modified foods, even without knowing the technology in detail. They are aware of this illiteracy, which was confirmed by their answers to a number of objective questions about the national reality. Multiple correspondence analysis showed four different nutritionists’ profiles are sufficient to group all participants. These profile types differ in interest and confidence levels relatively to the GM technology. Portuguese nutritionists do not have a unanimous position on GM foods but mostly agree that specific training in this area should take place at the university level.
Conclusions: This article highlights the different profiles of opinion, knowledge, and training needs of health professionals, nutritionists, in relation to genetically modified foods. Lifelong learning and interdisciplinary training supported by specific research, associations of health professionals and interference in public policies may strengthen attitudes towards the thematic.
References
(1) ISAAA, Global status of commercialized biotech/GM Crops in 2017: Biotech crop adoption surges as economic benefits accumulate in 22 Years. Ithaca, NY. 2017;53.
(2) Europa.eu. EU Register of Authorised GMOs. 2017.
(3) Zhang C, Wohlhueter R, Zhang H. Genetically modified foods: A critical review of their promise and problems. Food Science and Humam Wellness. 2016; 5:116-123.
(4) Santis BS, Stock N, Wal JM, Weesendorp E, Lalles, JP, Dijk JV, Kok E, Giacomo M, Einspanier R, Onori R, Brera C, Bikker P, Meulen JVD, Kleter G. Case studies in genetically modified organism (GMOs): Potential risk scenarios and associated health indicators. Food and Chemical Toxicology. 2018; 36-65.
(5) Sanchez MA and Parrott WA. Characterization of scientific studies usually cited as evidence of adverse effects of GM food/feed. Plant Biotechnology Journal. 2017; 15(10): 1227-1234.
(6) Lucht JM. Public acceptance of plant biotechnology and GM Crops. Viruses. 2015; 7:4254-4281.
(7) Popek S, Halagarda M. Genetically modified foods – consumer awarenses, opinions and attitudes in selected EU coutries. Irregularly Journal of Consumer Studies. 2017; 41(3): 325-332.
(8) Edge MS, Kunkel E, Schmidt J. Evidence analysis library systematic review on advanced technology in food production. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. 2015;118(6):1106-1127.
(9) Boccia F, Sarnacchiaro, P. Genetically modified foods and consumer perspective. Recent Patents on Food, Nutrition & Agriculture. 2015; 7(1): 28-34.
(10) Almeida C, Massarani, L. Farmers prevailing perception profiles regarding GM crops: A classification proposal. Public Understanding of Science. 2018; 1-15.
(11) Lachowski S, Jurkiwicz A, Choina, P, Florek-Luszcki M, Buczaj A, Gozdziewska M. Readiness of adolescents to use genetically modifed organisms according to their knowledge and emotional attitude towards GMOs. Annals of Agricultural and Environmental Medicine, 2017; 24(2): 194-200.
(12) Aleksejeva, I. EU Experts`attitude towards use GMO in food and feed and other industries. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2014; 110:494-501.
(13) Gardner GE, Jones MG. Science instructors’ perceptions of the risks of biotechnology: Implications for science education. Research in Science Education. 2011; 41: 711-738.
(14) Aleksejeva I. EU experts’ attitude towards use of GMO in food and feed and other industries. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2014; 110: 494-501.
(15) Velickovicc V, Jovic M, Nalic E,Visnjic A, Radulovic O, Cedomir S, Ciric M. Knowledge, attitudes toward, and acceptability of genetic modification among Western Balkan University students of life sciences (AGREE Study). Journal of the American college of Nutrition. 2016; 35(2): 1-14.
(16) Carvalho H. Análise multivariada de dados qualitativos - utilização da ACM com o SPSS. Vol. 2. 2017, Lisboa: Edições Sílabo.
(17) Hill MM, Hill A, Investigação por questionário, ed. Sílabo. 2008: Lisboa.
(18) Vogliano CT, Knowledge base and perception registeres dietitians hold on the genetic modification of foods, in School of Health Sciences. 2012, Kent State University College. p. 70.
(19) Schmidt JL, Vickery CE, Cotugna NA, Snider OS. Health professionals hold positive attitudes toward biotechnology and genetically engineered foods. Journal of Environmental Health. 2005; 67(10): 44-49.
(20) Commission, E., Europeans and Biotechnology in 2010, ed. E. Commission. Vol. EUR 24537. 2010, Brussels.
(21) Brown JL, Consumer perception of risk associated with eating genetically engineered soybeans is less in the presence of a perceived consumer benefit. American Dietetic Association. 2003; 103(2): 208-214.
(22) Heffernan JW, Hillers VN. Attitudes of consumers living in washington regarding food biotecnology. Journal of the American Dietetic Association. 2002; 102(1): 85-87.
(23) Hilimire K, Gillon S, McLaughlin B, Dowd-Uribe B, Monsen KL. Food for thought: Developing curricula for sustainable food systems education programs. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems. 2014; 38(6): 722-743.
(24) Rayner G, Barling D, Lang T. Sustainable food systems in Europe: Policies, realities and futures. Journal of Hunger & Environmental. 2008; 3(2-3): 145-168.
(25) Quesada JCB, Lembo T. Percepção dos estudantes da área da saúde sobre biotecnologia e alimentos transgênicos. Journal of the Health Sciences Institute. 2014; 32(3): 229-234.
(26) Wunderlich S, Gatto KA. Consumer perception of genetically modified organisms and source of information. An Advances in Nutrition. 2015; 6:842-851.
(27) Roberts KS, Struble MB, Mccullum-Gomes C, Wilkins L. Use of a risk communication model to evaluate dietetics professionals viewpoints on genetically engineered foods and crops. American Dietetic Association. 2006; 106: 719-727.
(28) Wilkins JL, Kraak V, Pelletier D, McCullum C, Uusitalo U. Moving from debate to dialogue about genetically engineered foods and crops: Insights from a land grant University. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 2008. 18: p. 167 - 201.
This journal 