The nature of benefits

• Published in: Nutrition reviews Vol. 38; no. 1
• Main Author: Darby, William J
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: 01.01.1980
• ISSN: 0029-6643; 1753-4887
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1753-4887.1980.tb05840.x

To guide decision-makers, risk predictors of food toxicology have been developed to protect public health. Despite the uncertainty of risk evaluation, outbreaks of food-borne disease in the U.S. are rare. Great gains in public health benefits contrast with the concern over risk. Thus, decision-makers must evaluate categories of both risk and benefit, in order that policy regulations reflect a balanced view of public health. Risks and benefits may be classified as vital or non-vital, public or private, voluntary or involuntary, individual or societal. Terms such as needs, wants, hazards, costs, and safety must be defined for risk/benefit analysis. Since an individual's social level determines his concepts of food, food safety and his fear of any threat to the food supply, and since cultural and historical traditions influence food habits and attitudes, facts and values should be distinguished. The nature of benefits in food safety may vary more than the recognition of risks. Therefore, issues in which the risks are not clearly vital should be subject to voluntary decisions, based on an individual's perception of benefit