IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i11p3946-d366422.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perceptions and Attitudes of Gynecologic and Pediatric Professionals Regarding Dietary Exposure to Chemical Pollutants

Author

Listed:
  • Juan Pedro Arrebola

    (Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain
    Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria de Granada (ibs.GRANADA), 18012 Granada, Spain
    CIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), 28029 Madrid, Spain)

  • Araceli Muñoz

    (School of Social Work, University of Barcelona, 08035 Barcelona, Spain
    Food Observatory, Department of Social Anthropology, University of Barcelona, 08001 Barcelona, Spain)

  • Silvia Ferrero

    (Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sant Joan de Déu University Hospital, 08950 Barcelona, Spain)

  • Cristina Larrea-Killinger

    (CIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), 28029 Madrid, Spain
    Food Observatory, Department of Social Anthropology, University of Barcelona, 08001 Barcelona, Spain)

Abstract

There is increasing concern regarding the potential implications of continuous dietary exposure to low doses of artificial chemical pollutants, particularly in critical life stages such as pregnancy and lactation. Within a wider social research, we analyzed the risk perception, discourses, and attitudes of health professionals regarding dietary exposure to artificial chemical contaminants. Data was collected by personal interviews on 35 health professionals from two Spanish regions. Although the participants’ discourses were strongly dominated by the nutritional composition and microbiological contamination, 34 expressed some concern regarding metals, and 23 regarding pesticides. Although only one participant mentioned a plasticizer (i.e., bisphenol A), we noted an underlying concern, since six professionals admitted to recommending pregnant women to somewhat avoid plastic food containers, and were aware of mother-to-child transmission and accumulation of artificial chemicals. The ubiquity of the exposure, the inability to locate the threat, and contradictory messages can all create a sense of helplessness and subsequent cognitive adjustments. Our participants also reported a lack of information, particularly on emerging pollutants. In conclusion, we found a range of valuable discourses that can aid in orienting public health strategies aimed at health professionals who have a substantial influence on their patients.

Suggested Citation

  • Juan Pedro Arrebola & Araceli Muñoz & Silvia Ferrero & Cristina Larrea-Killinger, 2020. "Perceptions and Attitudes of Gynecologic and Pediatric Professionals Regarding Dietary Exposure to Chemical Pollutants," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-14, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:11:p:3946-:d:366422
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/11/3946/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/11/3946/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roger E. Kasperson & Ortwin Renn & Paul Slovic & Halina S. Brown & Jacque Emel & Robert Goble & Jeanne X. Kasperson & Samuel Ratick, 1988. "The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), pages 177-187, June.
    2. Hien Ho & Tsunemi Watanabe, 2018. "The Roles of Three Types of Knowledge and Perceived Uncertainty in Explaining Risk Perception, Acceptability, and Self-Protective Response—A Case Study on Endocrine Disrupting Surfactants," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-23, February.
    3. Katie Abrams & Courtney Meyers & Tracy Irani, 2010. "Naturally confused: consumers’ perceptions of all-natural and organic pork products," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 27(3), pages 365-374, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andres Fontalba-Navas & Eva Zafra Aparici & Maria Clara de Moraes Prata-Gaspar & Esther Herrera-Espejo & Miguel Company-Morales & Cristina Larrea-Killinger, 2020. "Motivating Pregnant and Breastfeeding Women in Spain to Avoid Persistent Toxic Substances in Their Diet," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-13, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Loredana Antronico & Roberto Coscarelli & Francesco De Pascale & Giovanni Gull?, 2018. "La comunicazione del rischio e la percezione pubblica dei disastri: il caso studio della frana di Maierato (Calabria, Italia)," PRISMA Economia - Societ? - Lavoro, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2018(3), pages 9-29.
    2. Hung‐Chih Hung & Tzu‐Wen Wang, 2011. "Determinants and Mapping of Collective Perceptions of Technological Risk: The Case of the Second Nuclear Power Plant in Taiwan," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(4), pages 668-683, April.
    3. Jayson Lusk, 2011. "The market for animal welfare," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 28(4), pages 561-575, December.
    4. Emmanuel Songsore & Michael Buzzelli, 2016. "Ontario’s Experience of Wind Energy Development as Seen through the Lens of Human Health and Environmental Justice," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, July.
    5. Sara E. Kuhar & Kate Nierenberg & Barbara Kirkpatrick & Graham A. Tobin, 2009. "Public Perceptions of Florida Red Tide Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(7), pages 963-969, July.
    6. Ruth E Alcock & Jerry Busby, 2006. "Risk Migration and Scientific Advance: The Case of Flame‐Retardant Compounds," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 369-381, April.
    7. Vivianne H. M. Visschers & Ree M. Meertens & Wim F. Passchier & Nanne K. DeVries, 2007. "How Does the General Public Evaluate Risk Information? The Impact of Associations with Other Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 715-727, June.
    8. Rob Goble, 2021. "Through a Glass Darkly: How Natural Science and Technical Communities Looked at Social Science Advances in Understanding Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 414-428, March.
    9. Evangelia Karasmanaki & Evangelos Grigoroudis & Spyridon Galatsidas & Georgios Tsantopoulos, 2023. "Satisfaction with Media Information about Renewable Energy Investments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-15, July.
    10. Yang, Ya Ling, 2020. "Comparison of public perception and risk management decisions of aircraft noise near Taoyuan and Kaohsiung International Airports," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    11. Paul Slovic & James Flynn & Robin Gregory, 1994. "Stigma Happens: Social Problems in the Siting of Nuclear Waste Facilities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(5), pages 773-777, October.
    12. Susan Mello & Robert C. Hornik, 2016. "Media Coverage of Pediatric Environmental Health Risks and its Effects on Mothers’ Protective Behaviors," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(3), pages 605-622, March.
    13. J. A. Giesecke & W. J. Burns & A. Barrett & E. Bayrak & A. Rose & P. Slovic & M. Suher, 2012. "Assessment of the Regional Economic Impacts of Catastrophic Events: CGE Analysis of Resource Loss and Behavioral Effects of an RDD Attack Scenario," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 583-600, April.
    14. Yu‐Ru Lin & Drew Margolin & Xidao Wen, 2017. "Tracking and Analyzing Individual Distress Following Terrorist Attacks Using Social Media Streams," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(8), pages 1580-1605, August.
    15. Asim Zia & Katherine Lacasse & Nina H. Fefferman & Louis J. Gross & Brian Beckage, 2024. "Machine Learning a Probabilistic Structural Equation Model to Explain the Impact of Climate Risk Perceptions on Policy Support," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-25, November.
    16. Jinshu Cui & Heather Rosoff & Richard S. John, 2018. "Public Response to a Near‐Miss Nuclear Accident Scenario Varying in Causal Attributions and Outcome Uncertainty," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 947-961, May.
    17. Chang Liu & Lorraine Eden & Dan Li, 2024. "Violent conflict and multinational enterprises: identifying key frontiers in international business policy research," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(3), pages 260-275, September.
    18. Mathew P. White & J. Richard Eiser & Peter R. Harris & Sabine Pahl, 2007. "Who Reaps the Benefits, Who Bears the Risks? Comparative Optimism, Comparative Utility, and Regulatory Preferences for Mobile Phone Technology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 741-753, June.
    19. Alicia L. Rihn & Chengyan Yue, 2016. "Visual Attention's Influence on Consumers’ Willingness‐to‐Pay for Processed Food Products," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(3), pages 314-328, July.
    20. Samuel A. Markolf & Kelly Klima & Terrence L. Wong, 2015. "Adaptation frameworks used by US decision-makers: a literature review," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 427-436, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:11:p:3946-:d:366422. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.