English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Opinion | Volume 4 | Number 2| 26 Copyright 2019 by Chakraborty S. This is an open-access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which allows to copy, redistribute, remix, transform, and reproduce in any medium or format, even commercially, provided the original work is properly cited. cc I overreactions to the food we eat are commonplace these days, despite food scientists’ and regulators’ best efforts at communicating actual risk associated with consuming foods to be significantly low. This is because we can detect toxins in foods to the parts per billion, which has advanced significantly since we were only able to detect to contaminants to the parts per million. Despite the infinitesimally small risk still associated with food production and consumption, consumers still fear adulteration of the foods they eat.

Despite 50 Years of Knowledge of Actual Versus Perceived Risk, Public Fear Persists of Contaminated Foods