This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Löfstedt, R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Löfstedt, R. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Family Issues Health Literacy Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Hormesis and risk communication: a comment to Ortwin Renn

King's Centre for Risk Management, School of Social Science and Public Policy, King's College London, Strand Building, London WC2R 2 LS, UK lofstedt{at}iiasa.ac.at

Professor Ortwin Renn should be congratulated for authoring the definitive piece on risk communication with regard to hormesis.¹ Most of his conclusions I agree with, specifically the importance of labelling hormesis as a possible natural effect, thereby reducing the stigmatization associated with a technical/chemical label. Rather than discussing all the points that Renn raises, in this comment I will focus on the issue of trust, a topic that Renn does examine but which I feel does not get adequate attention and which I do not completely agree with. In so doing, in my conclusions I am more optimistic than Renn is in preparing risk communication strategies regarding hormesis and other new paradigms to target audiences (defined in most instances as the general public and stakeholders).

Key Words: hormesis • risk communication • risk perception • trust

Human & Experimental Toxicology, Vol. 22, No. 1, 35-37 (2003)
DOI: 10.1191/0960327103ht317oa


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?