Journal of Nutraceuticals and Food Science

Editorial

Consumer acceptance of Genetic Engineering (GE) has been observed to vary not just between different types of GE applications, but even within the same category. Consumers have been found to have more favourable opinions about the use of genetically modified organisms for medicinal purposes than for food production. Medical applications are often thought to be more helpful, less dangerous, and ethically right than food uses. Medical applications are often thought to be more helpful, less dangerous, and ethically right than food uses. There's also proof that customer acceptability varies depending on the organism being modified. GE of microbes and plants was determined to be less risky than GE of animals or human genetic material, according to the researchers. Microorganisms and plants were deemed helpful, essential, and advantageous in a British research, but human DNA and animals were deemed immoral, destructive, and hazardous. These findings highlight the significance of examining opinions toward individual applications rather than generic attitudes regarding technology.

It has been discovered that attitudes about GE differ amongst countries. Consumers in the United States and Canada appear to be more enthusiastic about technology than those in Europe. Swedish consumers proved to be more hostile toward GE than many other European customers in the third Eurobarometer survey. According to the fourth Eurobarometer poll, they are still more pessimistic than consumers in several other European nations. Other demographic variations in consumer sentiments have also been discovered. According to studies, women are more sceptical about GE and have more unfavourable opinions regarding it than men. Age differences have been indicated as well, although the results have been mixed. Some studies have found that older people are more optimistic, while others have found the reverse, that younger people are more positive.

It has been stated that the limited acceptability of GM foods is related to the fact that most changes have benefited just the manufacturers thus far. As a result, it's fair to believe that GM foods that provide measurable advantages would enhance public acceptability. Consumer desire to purchase GM foods with real advantages, on the other hand, appears to be unclear. Consumer desire to purchase GM foods may be influenced by benefits such as "more nutritious," "better for the environment," and "cheaper pricing," according to some research. Nonetheless, a recent Nordic research found that the traditional product (cheese, sweets, and salmon) was the most desired product, despite the fact that most of the GM alternatives offered either health or environmental benefits or were less expensive. According to a Swedish poll, around one-fifth of customers would buy a GM tomato if it had a better flavour, nutritional quality, a longer shelf life, or a cheaper price. However, given the same percentage of consumers said that they would be interested in buying a GM tomato with no such benefits; it is likely that these physical benefits did not affect their desire to buy the tomato.

The general goal of this study was to learn more about Swedish consumers' attitudes on genetically modified foods. Consumer opinions about nine GE food applications, attitude towards GM foods in general, whether consumers are interested in buying GM foods with concrete advantages, and their understanding of biology and genetics were all investigated. Gender, age, and educational disparities were also looked into. We also sought to look at any links between customer interest in natural foods, light food items, and healthy eating, as well as views regarding genetically modified foods.