Bean_sprouts3 Organic = Good, Right? OOOPS!

            Organic = Good, and Mass-produced = Bad. Right? The latest example that that assumption is naïve, and wrong, and potentially dangerous, is the recent discovery that the worst food-borne disease outbreak in Europe in decades may have been carried by organic bean sprouts. But don’t pick on the sprouts, and don’t even pick on Organic. The danger here is the way you and I perceive and respond to risk, a subconscious decision-making process that often works well, but which sometimes can create risks all by itself.

            Setting aside the issue of whether organic food is intrinsically any healthier than non-organic food, or safer because pesticides have not been used, organic farming offers no advantages over non-organic agriculture when it comes to by far the greatest risk our food poses, the risk that what we eat might carry germs. The suspected sprouts in Germany are only the most recent example of organically produced food believed to have made people sick. Organic eggs and spinach and lettuce have caused big outbreaks in the U.S. in the past few years. The way those foods are produced and processed and shipped is part of the risk, but we make it worse because of the positive/healthy/better-for-you reputation organic food enjoys. That encourages the assumption that organic food poses less danger of carrying disease. That leads to less of the caution that should be applied in handling all foods; washing, cooking, temperature control.  So our benign assumptions about organic food can raise our risk.

            But this is just one small example of a larger and more profound phenomenon, something which in “How Risky Is It, Really? Why Our Fears Don’t Match the Facts” I call The Perception Gap, when our feelings about a risk don’t match the facts and the gap between our emotions and the evidence creates risks of its own. Here are a few others similar to organic food;

      - We are less afraid of herbal and natural medicines than of the human-produced kind -  pharmaceuticals. That can be dangerously dumb. Ephedra and St. John’s Wort  are just a couple high profile cases of natural drugs that caused harm. A 2004 study of Ayurvedic herbal medicines found that one sample in five purchased from local stores in Boston contained up to 10,000 times more lead, mercury, or arsenic than U.S. safety standards deemed safe.

     - Most of us are less afraid of radiation from the sun, which causes 1.3 million cases of skin cancer a year in the U.S. and approximately 8,000 deaths from melanoma, than radiation from cell phones and nuclear power plants.

      - We are less afraid of mixing the genes of plants indiscriminately by “natural” hybridization than by the much more precise and controlled process of changing just one gene in a lab.

 

     What’s the common thread in what seems like so much irrationality? The perception of risk is not just a matter of the facts, but also depends on how those facts feel. One of the subconscious psychological filters we apply when assessing how scary something feels is whether it’s natural or human-made. Natural risks feel less scary. Human-made risks feel scarier. The sun is far more likely to give you cancer than radiation from a nuclear power plant or a cell phone or from power lines, but the sun is natural and the others are human-made, so even though they are all radiation risks, they don’t feel the same.

            The problem is, this can lead to problems. Not worrying enough about natural risks and worrying more than we need to about human-made ones may not always lead to the healthiest choices.

     - People who worry more about human-made vaccines than the natural diseases those vaccines keep in check are making a dangerous mistake, for themselves and for the community in which otherwise-controllable diseases can then spread.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Share This Story

About Risk: Reason and Reality

66 Posts since 2011

Fear is good. It helps protect us. But getting risk wrong — worrying more than the evidence says we need to, or not as much as the evidence says we should — produces stress and leads to unhealthy choices for ourselves and for society. We do have to fear fear itself: too much, or too little. Understanding why the gap exists between our fears and the facts is the first step toward managing the potential risk of risk misperception, and making healthy choices for ourselves, our families, and our communities. David Ropeik is an instructor at Harvard, a consultant in risk perception, risk communication, and risk management, author of How Risky Is It, Really? Why Our Fears Don’t Always Match the Factsprincipal co-author of RISK: A Practical Guide for Deciding What’s Really Safe and What’s Really Dangerous in the World Around You, and was a broadcast journalist in Boston for 22 years.

Recent Posts