Nano-based packaging more acceptable to consumers
The survey by the UK Food Standards Agency (FSA) also warned that manufacturers risk consumer rejection of nano-based products in a similar way to genetically-modified foods, unless they start engaging over their perceptions of the hazards involved.
The study was conducted by research agency TNS-BMRB and was commissioned following publication of the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee report into nanotechnology last year, chaired by Sir John Krebs.
Positive packaging reaction
While subjects raised general concerns over the application of nanotechnology directly on foods, there was greater acceptance of nano-based packaging.
Food packaging that extended shelf life, better preserved foods or detected when products were spoiled were “generally viewed as useful a useful applications”, said the report. The finding came despite previous fears expressed that not enough was known about the effects of so-called ‘hard’ nanomaterials used in packaging.
This favourable perception was based on using nanotechnology to reduce food waste, preserve taste and save money through eliminating the need to re-purchase products.
Such assumed benefits were based on further research demonstrating that nanomaterials did not migrate from packaging into food.
Initial consumer scepticism regarding nano-sensors to detect food spoilage was overcome by a recognition that not only would this help cut waste but also boost food safety by flagging up contamination, particularly in large-scale applications.
Consumer fears
Central to public fears is uncertainty over the rationale behind developing the technology and the suspicion that industry players rather than consumers stand to benefit more from its increasing use.
A spokesman for TNS-BMRB said consumer concerns are not allayed by the lack of a clear definition of what constitutes a nanoparticle: including particle size, engineered versus naturally occurring particles, and 'soft' (soluble or digestible) or 'hard' (insoluble) particles.
"Consumer lack of knowledge generates scepticism – this goes all the way back to pasteurisation,” said the FSA’s chief scientist Dr Andrew Wadge. “They need to perceive the benefits, similar to microwaves, where the advantages outweighed the potential risks."
Dr Sandy Lawrie, secretary of the Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes, which advises the FSA, added: "There is a suspicion by consumers that the industry has lots going on behind closed doors, when in actuality little is."
The report found underlying concerns about nanotechnology revolved around long-term health and environment impacts, product cost increases and a lack of transparency of information from the industry.
“I believe it's for regulators and the industry to be transparent and to work together to explain to people what nanotechnology is and how it can be used in food,” added Wadge.
