Weighing health benefit and health risk information when consuming sport-caught fish
Weighing health benefit and health risk information when consuming sport-caught fish
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.0272-4332.2003.00392.x
复制
发表时间：
2003-12-01
期刊：
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Patterson, J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Knuth, BA;Connelly, NA;Patterson, J
鱼类消费者可能因吃鱼而带来好处和风险。州、部落和其他实体发布的健康建议通常包括有关如何限制鱼类消费或改变其他行为（例如鱼类清洁或烹饪）以减少接触污染物造成的健康风险的建议。然而，吃鱼可能对健康有益。风险沟通者和鱼类消费者建议在健康咨询沟通中纳入风险比较信息以及健康风险效益比较的重要性。为了更好地了解在受健康建议影响的水域钓鱼的钓鱼者如何应对此类风险-风险或风险-收益信息，我们对安大略湖（美国纽约州）钓鱼者进行了调查。我们通过电话采访了 4,750 名钓鱼者，其中 2,593 人在过去 12 个月内曾在安大略湖钓鱼，并收到了详细的邮件调查问卷（1,245 人回复）。我们提出了不同程度的鱼类消费带来的健康风险和健康益处的问题，并改变了受这些风险和益处影响的人群（钓鱼者、儿童、育龄妇女和未出生的孩子）。受访者受到健康益处和健康风险信息的影响。当风险较高时，无论收益水平如何，大多数受访者都会减少吃鱼。当风险较低时，鱼类消费的变化幅度与收益水平相关。根据问题的措辞顺序，即“风险”是否先于“好处”，回答会有所不同。对于给定的风险收益水平，受访者会给育龄妇女和儿童不同的建议，向育龄妇女提供更保守的建议（少吃鱼）。受访者似乎更容易受到风险-风险比较（例如，其他食物的风险与鱼类的风险）的影响，而不是风险-效益比较（例如，鱼类的风险与鱼类的益处）的影响。风险分析师和风险沟通者应加大力度，将风险-风险和风险-收益比较纳入沟通工作中，并澄清鱼类消费可能给谁带来健康风险和收益。
Fish consumers may incur benefits and risks from eating fish. Health advisories issued by states, tribes, and other entities typically include advice about how to limit fish consumption or change other behaviors (e.g., fish cleaning or cooking) to reduce health risks from exposure to contaminants. Eating fish, however, may provide health benefits. Risk communicators and fish consumers have suggested the importance of including risk comparison information, as well as health risk-benefit comparisons in health advisory communications. To improve understanding about how anglers fishing in waters affected by health advisories may respond to such risk-risk or risk-benefit information, we surveyed Lake Ontario (NY, USA) anglers. We interviewed by telephone 4,750 anglers, 2,593 of which had fished Lake Ontario in the past 12 months and were sent a detailed mail questionnaire (1,245 responded). We posed questions varying the magnitude of health risks and health benefits to be gained by fish consumption, and varied the population affected by these risks and benefits (anglers, children, women of childbearing age, and unborn children). Respondents were influenced by health benefit and health risk information. When risks were high, most respondents would eat less fish regardless of the benefit level. When risks were low, the magnitude of change in fish consumption was related to level of benefit. Responses differed depending on the question wording order, that is, whether "risks" were posed before "benefits." For a given risk-benefit level, respondents would give different advice to women of childbearing age versus children, with more conservative advice (eat less fish) provided to women of childbearing age. Respondents appeared to be influenced more strongly by risk-risk comparisons (e.g., risks from other foods vs. risks from fish) than by risk-benefit comparisons (e.g., risks from fish vs. benefits from fish). Risk analysts and risk communicators should improve efforts to include risk-risk and risk-benefit comparisons in communication efforts, and to clarify to whom the health risks and benefits from fish consumption may accrue.