Inappropriate use of antibiotics in humans and animals contributes to decreased antimicrobial susceptibility in bacteria of medical importance. Resistant bacteria being transferred from animals to humans are causing public health concern. In-person interviews were conducted with 20 dairy farmers in rural counties of South Carolina to determine farmers' knowledge and attitudes about prudent antibiotic use among livestock. Four focus groups (n = 22) were also conducted to ascertain farmers' specific information needs about proper antibiotic use. Survey results showed that participants (100%) typically determined a need for antibiotic treatment using symptom assessment and reported following some form of operating procedures regarding administration of antibiotics. Few farmers (32%) had actual written antibiotic protocols. Preferred information sources about antibiotics were veterinarians (100%) and other dairy farmers (50%). Most farmers (86%) were not concerned that overuse of antibiotics in animals could result in antibiotic resistance among farm workers. Qualitative analysis of focus groups revealed significant barriers to following proper antibiotic procedures including limited finances and lack of time. The need for bilingual educational resources for Hispanic/Latino dairy workers was expressed. Desired formats for educational materials were posters, flowcharts, videos, and seminars. Education of South Carolina dairy farmers by veterinarians and public health professionals on the appropriate use of antibiotics in dairy cattle is needed to ensure antibiotic effectiveness in both animals and humans.

Consumer understanding of nutrition and health claims is a key aspect of current regulations in the European Union (EU). In view of this, qualitative and quantitative research techniques were used to investigate consumer awareness and understanding of product claims in the UK, focusing particularly on nutrition claims relating to sugars. Both research methods identified a good awareness of product claims. No added sugars claims were generally preferred to reduced sugars claims, and there was a general assumption that sweeteners and other ingredients would be added in place of sugars. However, there was little awareness of the level of sugar reduction and the associated calorie reduction in products when reduced sugars claims were made on pack. In focus groups, participants felt deceived if sugar reduction claims were being made without a significant reduction in calories. This was reinforced in the quantitative research which showed that respondents expected a similar and meaningful level of calorie reduction to the level of sugar reduction. The research also identified consumer confusion around the calorie content of different nutrients, including over-estimation of the calorie content of sugars. This is crucial to consumers' expectations as they clearly link sugar to calories and therefore expect a reduction in sugar content to deliver a reduction in calorie content.

In the age of preparedness, public health agencies are concerned with intentional acts of food contamination in restaurants, in addition to food safety. Food safety consists of applying standard norms of practice and infrastructure, which, if violated, cause food-borne illness. In contrast, food defense requires an institutionalized mindset of informed alertness to unusual variations from the norms, combined with preemptive practices best suited to each restaurant. Therefore, while food safety lends itself to regulation to ensure standard practices, food defense is best served by advisory guidelines for autonomous application, preserving the restaurant industry's core values of hospitality and customer service. To address this challenge, public health agencies need survey tools that can yield action-relevant data on the knowledge and practice gaps in food defense preparedness and on educational messages and support services to be developed for maximum impact potential. This article presents a mail survey instrument, developed using qualitative research to ensure content and face validity. Instrument development involved drafting the survey on the basis of expert consultations, validating its content by using focus groups (representing all restaurant categories and geographic regions), and ensuring face validity through cognitive interviews. The resulting survey remains sensitive to the hospitality industry while encompassing all vulnerable points.