Thu, Nov 14, 2024
[Archive]
Volume 5, Issue 2 (May 2020)
JNFS 2020, 5(2): 141-147 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Marzban A, Karimi-Nazari E, Farrokhian A, Farrokhian A, Barzegaran M. Demographics Factors Associated with Housewives' Attitude towards Transgenic Food Products in Yazd. JNFS 2020; 5 (2) :141-147
URL: http://jnfs.ssu.ac.ir/article-1-219-en.html
URL: http://jnfs.ssu.ac.ir/article-1-219-en.html
Noncommunicable Diseases Research Center, Fasa University of Medical Sciences, Fasa, Iran
Abstract: (2641 Views)
Background: In the last two decades, genetic engineering has led to the production of genetically modified or transgenic products in the world using the modern biotechnology. However, accepting such products by consumers is still in doubt with respect to their negative effects on the environment and human health. Thus, the present study aimed to evaluate the attitude of housewives in Yazd towards transgenic food products. Methods: This cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted on 500 housewives in Yazd in 2018 by cluster-random sampling method. In order to collect the study data, a two-part questionnaire (demographic and attitude) was applied. The data were analyzed by SPSS software version 18 using descriptive statistics and ANOVA test. Results: The mean and standard deviation of the participants' attitude toward transgenic food products was 19.24 ± 4.92. The participants' attitude scores were significantly different considering the participants' reading the food label and education level (P < 0.05). Half of the studied women reported that they have received their information on transgenic food products through television and radio. Conclusion: Regarding the misconceptions in people with lower levels of education and those who do not read the food labels, culture promotion is necessary. Moreover, provision of scientifically proven trainings on the advantages and disadvantages of transgenic products seems to be essential in order to develop a proper attitude in housewives in Yazd.
Type of article: orginal article |
Subject:
public specific
Received: 2018/11/21 | Published: 2020/05/1 | ePublished: 2020/05/1
Received: 2018/11/21 | Published: 2020/05/1 | ePublished: 2020/05/1
References
1. Amal Bakr S & Lukman Ayinde O 2013. Awareness of GM food proliferation in Saudi Arabia: A case study of Makkah city. Journal of the association of Arab Universities for basic and applied sciences. 13 (1): 8-13.
2. Bornhorst GM 2017. Gastric mixing during food digestion: mechanisms and applications. Annual review of food science and technology. 8 (28): 523-542.
3. Burns M, Shanahan D, Valdivia H & Harris N 2003. Quantitative event-specific multiplex PCR detection of Roundup Ready soya using LabChip technology. European food research and technology. 216 (5): 428-433.
4. Cui K & Shoemaker SP 2018. Public perception of genetically-modified (GM) food: A Nationwide Chinese Consumer Study. npj science of food. 2 (1): 10-19.
5. Eslami H, Marzban A, AkramiMohajeri F, Rezaei Z & Rafati Fard M 2015. Students' knowledge and attitude of hygiene and food safety at Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences in Yazd, Iran. Journal of community health research. 4 (3): 159-167.
6. Ganian M, Mehrabgochani O & Darani M 2016. A review of experts' views on the necessity of Iranian transgenic rice to enter the country's agricultural and food cycle. Quarterly journal of agricultural extension and education. 36 (4): 1-12.
7. Ghasemi S, Karami E & Azadi H 2013. Knowledge, attitudes and behavioral intentions of agricultural professionals toward genetically modified (GM) foods: A case study in Southwest Iran. Science and engineering ethics. 19 (3): 1201-1227.
8. Giasvand F, Mirokzade AA & Shiri N 2015. Factors Affecting Consumer Attitudes to Transgenic Food Products (Case study: Qazvin city). Iranian agricultural economics and development research. 46 (3): 427-438 (Persian).
9. Hall C 2008. Identifying farmer attitudes towards genetically modified (GM) crops in Scotland: are they pro-or anti-GM? Geoforum. 39 (1): 204-212.
10. Huang J, Peng B & Wang X 2017a. Scientists’ attitudes toward agricultural GM technology development and GM food in China. China agricultural economic review. 9 (3): 369-384.
11. Huang J, Wang X & Dang H 2017b. Impacts of and attitudes toward GM technology in China: Challenges, policy and research implications. China agricultural economic review. 9 (3): 334-339.
12. Kaya IH, Poyrazoglu ES, Artik N & Konar N 2013. Academicans’ Perceptions and Attitudes toward GM-Organisms and–Foods. International journal of biological, ecological and environmental sciences. 2 (2): 20-24.
13. Kline KL, et al. 2017. Reconciling food security and bioenergy: priorities for action. Gcb Bioenergy. 9 (3): 557-576.
14. López Montesinos OA, Pérez EF, Fuentes EES, Luna-Espinoza I & Cuevas FA 2016. Perceptions and attitudes of the Mexican urban population towards genetically modified organisms. British food journal. 118 (12): 2873-2892.
15. Marzban A, Barzegaran M, Delavari S, Marzban H & Rahmanian V 2018. Attitudes and Behaviors of People in Bandar-Abbas City About Herbal Medicine Consumption in Diabetes. Iranian journal of diabetes and metabolism. 17 (6): 300-306.
16. Marzban A, Rezaei Z, Karkhane M, Marzban H & Eslami H 2017. Surveying the knowledge, attitude and performance of lactating women of Yazd city about heavy metals transmitted from breast milk. HOZAN; a scientific journal of environmental sciences. 2 (2): 1-10.
17. Mataia A, et al. 2003. Public knowledge, attitude and perception on rice biotechnology research in the Philippines. Unpublished. 1 (21): 845-856.
18. Neri-Numa IA, Pessoa MG, Paulino BN & Pastore GM 2017. Genipin: A natural blue pigment for food and health purposes. Trends in food science & technology. 1 (67): 271-279.
19. Nourizadeh M, Kalantari E & Habiba S 2018. Modeling Of Tehran Residents Attitude To GMFs Using Structural Equations. Science and technology policy. 9 (4): 71-82.
20. Rezaee H, et al. 2018. The impact of education on knowledge, attitude and practice about Food Poisoning in students of Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd. Iran. Tolooebehdasht. 17 (3): 39-51 (Persian).
21. Rodriguez L & Kulpavaropas S 2018. Factors Influencing US Consumers' Preference for Positively Versus Negatively Framed GM Food Symbols. Journal of agricultural & food information. 19 (1): 75-96.
22. Tas M, Balci M, Yüksel A & Sahin Yesilçubuk N 2015. Consumer awareness, perception and attitudes towards genetically modified foods in Turkey. British food journal. 117 (5): 1426-1439.
23. Valente M & Chaves C 2018. Perceptions and valuation of GM food: A study on the impact and importance of information provision. Journal of cleaner production. 20 (172): 4110-4118.
24. Wunderlich S & Gatto KA 2015. Consumer Perception of Genetically Modified Organisms and Sources of Information–. Advances in nutrition. 6 (6): 842-851.
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
