2017
DOI: 10.1080/09581596.2017.1285008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Re-assessing vulnerability to foodborne illness: pathways and practices

Abstract: Foodborne illness is a major public health concern, often approached by focusing on socio-demographic groups who are considered most 'vulnerable' to foodborne disease such as elderly people or pregnant women. Based on a review of existing literature and original research with UK consumers, this paper proposes an alternative approach to analysing vulnerability to foodborne illness. Challenging conventional approaches that focus on the inherent vulnerability of particular socio-demographic groups, the paper emph… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
10
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
1
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, after feeling lost for varying periods of time, all participants described how they eventually found strategies to manage the situation, and the state of vulnerability ended . For the mothers in our study, vulnerability was situational (Jackson & Meah, 2018)a result of contextual factors surrounding their performance of weaning practice rather than their age or socioeconomic status. It was also diachronic; these mothers moved in and out of vulnerable positions as their everyday practices involved events where the babythe object at riskwere suddenly placed in relation to an risk object, for example processed food with non-Swedish origin as in the case of Klara, or inconsistent information as in the case of Ingrid.…”
Section: Weaning Practice and Risks In Parents' Accountsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…However, after feeling lost for varying periods of time, all participants described how they eventually found strategies to manage the situation, and the state of vulnerability ended . For the mothers in our study, vulnerability was situational (Jackson & Meah, 2018)a result of contextual factors surrounding their performance of weaning practice rather than their age or socioeconomic status. It was also diachronic; these mothers moved in and out of vulnerable positions as their everyday practices involved events where the babythe object at riskwere suddenly placed in relation to an risk object, for example processed food with non-Swedish origin as in the case of Klara, or inconsistent information as in the case of Ingrid.…”
Section: Weaning Practice and Risks In Parents' Accountsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Although foodborne infection can affect anyone, current advice about the risks of contracting a foodborne illness tend to focus on specific populations who are considered particularly vulnerable (26). In countries such as the United Kingdom and the United States, 20% of the population may be more susceptible to foodborne illness than the general population (34).…”
Section: Who Are the Vulnerable Groups At An Increased Risk Of Foodborne Infection?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In earlier work, we explored how the performance of practices within the domestic kitchen could either protect or propel an older person towards vulnerability in terms of food-borne illness (Dickinson et al , 2014). Jackson and Meah (2018) drew on this and other studies to explore vulnerability in relation to food-borne illness, concluding that vulnerability is situational, contextual and dynamic. They argue that vulnerability goes beyond the conceptualisation provided by Schröder-Butterfill and Marianti (2006), and call on ‘authorities to develop a more nuanced understanding of vulnerability’ (Jackson and Meah, 2018: 91) to develop and target public health interventions better.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Jackson and Meah (2018) drew on this and other studies to explore vulnerability in relation to food-borne illness, concluding that vulnerability is situational, contextual and dynamic. They argue that vulnerability goes beyond the conceptualisation provided by Schröder-Butterfill and Marianti (2006), and call on ‘authorities to develop a more nuanced understanding of vulnerability’ (Jackson and Meah, 2018: 91) to develop and target public health interventions better. However, they fell short of providing a practical model that could support policy makers and practitioners to achieve these ends better and the present study therefore seeks to address this gap.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%