Anticipating public reaction to the use of genetic engineering in infant nutrition

American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Volumn 63, Issue 4, 1996, Pages

  Hoban IV, Thomas J ^a  

^a NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

biotechnology; consumer acceptance; education; ethical issues; Genetic engineering; infant nutrition; marketing; policy; public perception

Indexed keywords

BIOTECHNOLOGY; CONFERENCE PAPER; GENETIC ENGINEERING; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH EDUCATION; INFANT NUTRITION; MARKETING; MEDICAL ETHICS;

EID: 0029920466     PISSN: 00029165     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/63.4.657     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (8)

1. Stenholm CW, Waggoner DB. Public policy in animal biotechnology in the 1990s: challenges and opportunities. In: MacDonald JP, ed. Animal biotechnology: opportunities and challenges. Ithaca, NY: National Agricultural Biotechnology Council, 1992:25-35.
2. Office of Technology Assessment. A new technological era for American agriculture (summary report). Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1992:339.
3. National Research Council. Improving risk communication. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1989.
4. Sandman PM. Explaining environmental risk: some notes on environmental risk communication. Washington, DC: US Environmental Protection Agency, 1986.
5. Heimer CA. Social structure, psychology, and the estimation of risk Annu Rev Sociol 1988;14:491-519.
6. Hoban TJ, Kendall P. Consumer attitudes about food biotechnology. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service, 1993
7. Hoban TJ. Consumer awareness and acceptance of bovine somatotropin (BST). Washington, DC: Grocery Manufacturers of America, 1994.
8. Gore A. Planning a new biotechnology policy. Harvard J Law Technol 1992;5(fall):19-30.