The Numbers

A Run at the Latest Data from ABC's Poobah of Polling, Gary Langer

Gary Langer is director of polling at ABC News, where he's covered the beat of public opinion for nearly 20 years - conducting and analyzing ABC News polls, evaluating data from other sources and setting the news division's standards for poll reporting. Langer is a two-time Emmy award winner, both for ABC's reporting of public opinion polls in Iraq.

FAVORITES

October 2008
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

« Previous | Main | Next »

Good Eating?

January 15, 2008 3:09 PM

I'll take a little break from the political fray and the fallout over the New Hampshire polls (though we're not done with that!) to dig into public attitudes on a completely different issue - food from cloned animals, which was certified as safe today by the FDA. A memo I just distributed in-house follows. At a minimum, it's a reminder of the useful intelligence we can glean from polls, far beyond the hothouse of election politics.

Re today's FDA action: Public acceptance of genetically modified or cloned foods is up in the air, at least in part because a lot of it has to do with that very choice of words. “Cloned food” sounds scary. “Genetically modified,” a little less so. “Biotechnology,” apparently less so still.

Those differences – plus the information people have – are reflected in their attitudes.

The last poll we see that asked about cloned food was done by the Mellman Group and Public Opinion Strategies (a pairing of partisan D and R firms), for a Pew Foundation group in September 2006. Sixty-four percent said they were “uncomfortable” with animal cloning, 46 percent strongly so. Just 22 percent called foods from cloned animals safe, 43 percent unsafe; many, 36 percent, had no opinion.

Other results show the extent of compunctions about cloning: In a Gallup poll last May, 59 percent called cloning animals "morally wrong." This question did not refer specifically to food.

Results are different when the question is about “genetically modified” food. In a General Social Survey poll in August 2006, 16 percent said they didn’t care about eating GM food, 52 percent said they were willing to eat it but would prefer not to if other food is available, and 30 percent said they would not eat it. (GM foods were defined as follows: “Genetically modified foods come from plants or animals whose characteristics have been changed by alteration, addition, or deletion of DNA in their genetic material using advanced laboratory techniques. Some say that genetically modified foods are unsafe and pose risks for human health. Others say that they are safe and necessary to reduce world hunger.”)

In another approach, Gallup in July 2005 asked if people support or oppose “the use of biotechnology in agriculture and food production.” They got an even split: 45 percent support, 45 percent opposed. (The previous question explained that biotechnology “includes tools such as genetic engineering and genetic modification of food.”)

In that same poll, 88 percent were confident in the safety of food sold at grocery stores, and 80 percent were confident in the federal government to ensure food safety.

The Mellman/POS poll asked about GM foods, as well as about cloning. One question asked if people favored or opposed “the introduction of genetically modified foods into the U.S. food supply.” It got 27 percent in favor, 46 percent opposed, with again a lot – 27 percent – undecided.

Mellman noted that opposition was down over the years, from 58 percent in 2001 to 46 percent in 2006; and that it was particularly down among women, from 66 percent in 2001 to 48 percent in ’06. (Opposition among men started lower.)

Just under four in 10 (38 percent) said they were likely to eat GM foods, 54 percent unlikely, a different formulation than the GSS question. Again there was a gender gap, with women much more apt than men to say they’re unlikely to eat these foods (61 percent to 46 percent).

Thirty-four percent called such foods basically safe, 29 percent basically unsafe, with a very big 37 percent unsure. But perceptions of safety increased (to 45 percent) after people were told that “more than half of processed products at the grocery store are produced using some form of biotechnology or genetic modification.”

This suggests that additional information – as well as the language used – may help shape attitudes as they evolve on this issue.

January 15, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (0)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/25153464

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Good Eating?:

User Comments

Post a comment