Public perceptions of antibiotic use on dairy farms in the United States.

There has been a global push for improved antimicrobial stewardship, including in animal agriculture, due to growing concerns about antimicrobial resistance. However, little is known about the general public's perceptions of antimicrobial use in animal agriculture. The aim of this study was to explore the US public's perceptions of antibiotic use in dairy farming and how these perceptions influence purchasing decisions. Data from the 2017 Cornell National Social Survey developed in collaboration with the Cornell Survey Research Institute were used to assess the public's perceptions. The Survey Research Institute of Cornell University (Ithaca, NY) administered the survey by telephone to a random sample of 1,000 adults in the continental United States. The survey collected information about perceptions of threat to human health posed by antibiotic use in cows on dairy farms and willingness to pay more for milk from cows raised without antibiotics, as well as several presumed explanatory variables, including respondents' knowledge of antibiotics, beliefs regarding cattle treatment in dairy farming, and 18 sociodemographic characteristics. Data were analyzed using logistic regression. Among respondents, 90.7% (n = 892/983) reported that antibiotic use on dairy farms posed some level of threat to human health and 71.5% (n = 580/811) indicated they would be willing to pay more for milk produced from cows raised without antibiotics. Respondents who believed that antibiotic use in dairy farming posed a moderate to high threat to human health were more likely to be female and report willingness to pay more for milk or not purchase milk. Additionally, consumers' willingness to pay more for milk from cattle raised without antibiotics was associated with the belief that antibiotic use posed some threat to human health, the belief that cows are treated better on organic dairy farms, an annual household income of $50,000 or greater, being born outside the United States, having a liberal social ideology, and being currently or formerly married. These results suggest that the general public's decisions as consumers of dairy products are associated with demographic factors in addition to perceptions of antibiotic use and cattle treatment in dairy farming. The rationale behind such perceptions should be further explored to facilitate consumers' informed decision making about antibiotic use in agriculture, links to cattle treatment, and associated willingness-to-pay attitudes.

Using graphic warning labels to counter effects of social cues and brand imagery in cigarette advertising.

Exposure to cigarette advertising can increase the likelihood of youth smoking initiation and may encourage people who already smoke to continue. Requiring prominent, graphic warning labels could reduce these effects. We test whether graphic versus text-only warning labels in cigarette advertisements influence cognitive and emotional factors associated with youth susceptibility to smoking and adult intentions to quit. We conducted two randomized, between-subjects experiments with middle-school youth (n = 474) and adult smokers (n = 451). Both studies employed a two (graphic or text-only warnings) by two (advertisements with social cues or brand imagery) factorial design with a fifth, offset control group (social cue advertisements with the current US Surgeon General's Warning). Graphic warnings outperformed text-only warnings in reducing visual attention to the advertisement, generating visual attention to the warning and arousing more negative affect. Graphic warnings also reduced the appeal of cigarette brands among youth relative to social cue advertisements with the Surgeon General's warnings. None of the warnings (graphic or textual) influenced health risk beliefs. Graphic warning labels on cigarette advertisements appear to have effects similar to those observed on cigarette packs in previous work, with an added benefit of reducing cigarette brand appeal among youth.