So here’s a follow-up on “grading of Pew’s public attitudes toward science report”–& why I awarded it a “C-” in promoting informed public discussion, notwithstanding its earning an “A” in scholarly content (the data separated from the Center’s commentary, particularly the press materials it issued).
Pew asked members of their general public sample, “Do you think it is generally safe or unsafe to eat genetically modified foods?”
Thirty-seven percent answered “generally safe,” 57 percent “generally UNsafe” and 6 percent “don’t know/Refused.”
Eighty-eight percent of the “scientist” (AAAS member) sample, in contrast, answered “generally safe.”
Pew trumpeted this 51 percent difference, making it the major attention-grabber in their media promotional materials and Report Commentary.
This is simply pathetic.
Share this article
As an elite scholarly research operation, Pew knows that this survey item did not measure any sort of opinion that exists in the U.S. public. Pew researchers know that members of the public don’t know anything about GM foods. They know the behavior of members of the public in purchasing and consuming tons of food containing GM foods proves their is no meaningful level of concern about the risks of GM foods!
Indeed, Pew had to know that the responses to their own survey reflected simple confusion on the part of their survey respondents.
The media is filled with accounts of how anxious people are about GM foods. That’s just not so: people consume them like mad (70 percent to 80 percent of the food for sale in a U.S. supermarket contains GMOs).
Indeed, the misimpression that GM foods are a matter of general public concern exists mainly among people who inhabit these domains, & is fueled both by the vulnerability of those inside them to generalize inappropriately from their own limited experience and by the echo-chamber quality of these enclaves of thought.
Read full, original article: Pew’s disappointing use of invalid survey methods on GM food risk perceptions
