The safe handling of food calls for the application of hygienic rules for the person, clothing, equipment, premises and practices. People who do not meet an appropriate level of cleaning, have certain infections, ranked at poor personal hygiene or behave improperly can contaminate food and transmit diseases to others (Lake et al., 2009; page 52). This CCP for food safety in the home influenced consumer behaviour concerning food safety in Brazil, even for those ranked at low risk (Re = 29%), as well as those in New Zealand where consumers had a moderate risk (Re = 34%) (Table 29).
In Brazil the personal hygiene and health status of consumers were linked to an at-risk person living in the home (F(3, 2708) = 125.39; p < 0.01), formal education (F(4, 2715) = 9.56; p < 0.01), the influence of hygiene habits (F(5, 2724) = 36.55; p < 0.01), first-aid in response to some symptoms indicative of food poisoning (F(3, 2739) = 783.71; p < 0.01) and factors that influenced cooking practices and recipes (F(4, 2717) = 4.22; p < 0.01) (Table 31; Appendix IV).
In New Zealand, this CCP was of some concern, with the age (F(5, 632) = 36.61; p < 0.01), marital status (F(3, 631) = 6.28; p < 0.01), an at-risk person living in the home (F(4, 630) = 15.86; p < 0.01), occupational status (F(6, 629) = 14.73; p < 0.01), total income of everyone in a household (F(5, 583) = 5.92; p < 0.01) ethnicity (F(7, 623) = 3.09; p < 0.01), the region of living (F(7, 648) = 2.68; p < 0.01), influence of hygiene habits (F(6, 645) = 16.33; p < 0.01), first-aid in response for some symptoms indicative of food poisoning (F(3, 620) = 168.02; p < 0.01) and factors that influence cooking practices and recipes (F(4, 422) = 4.30; p < 0.01) (Table 31; Appendix IV) significantly influenced the personal hygiene and health care of consumers.
120
In a household with at least an at-risk person living in the home, similar food safety risks linked to poor personal hygiene and health status were identified in both countries. In Brazil, families with children under 5 (1) had a moderate risk (Re = 36.0%) while other groups were ranked at low risk (Appendix III) (p < 0.01; difference 1 vs. 2 = 35.77; difference 1 vs. 3 = 32.77; difference 1 vs. 4 = 30.73) (Appendix V). In New Zealand, families of most concern were those with an elderly person above 60 (2) (Re = 39.1%) or a pregnant woman (3) (n = 12) (Re = 39.8%), both ranked at a moderate risk, while other groups were ranked at the low risk range (Appendix III) (p < 0.01; difference 2 vs. 1 = 23.09; difference 2 vs. 5 = 29.25) (Appendix V).
Although survey respondents in Brazil had a low risk estimate linked to the influence of their hygiene habits (Appendix III), those who follow their own beliefs (1) had a significant difference in the risk estimate (Re = 30.9%) when compared with people that follow GP counselling or health clinic (4) advice (Re = 19.2%) (p < 0.01; difference 1 vs. 4 = 36.38) (Appendix III; Appendix V). Similar to Brazil, but of greater concern, in New Zealand the group that follows their own personal hygiene beliefs and legacy practices (1) had a moderate risk (Re = 37.9%), significantly different in the risk estimate when compared with the other groups ranked at low risk (Appendix III) (p < 0.01; difference 1 vs. 2 = 32.42; difference 1 vs. 3 = 47.28; difference 1 vs. 5 = 29.20; difference 1 vs. 6 = 49.05) (Appendix V).
Similarly as in the food preparation and cooking, consumers in Brazil and in New Zealand shared a great concern resulting from their first-aid attitude for health status indicative of food poisoning. In Brazil people that do nothing (4) were ranked at high risk (Re = 56.2%) and those who self–medicate (1) had a moderate risk (Re = 38.1%), while people that visit a GP/health clinic (2) or took oral rehydration first (3) then visit a GP were ranked at low risk (Re = 21.1% and Re = 28.8%, respectively) (Appendix III). There was a significant difference in the risk estimate between consumers that feel stronger and do nothing in response for a health status indicative of food poisoning and those who visit a GP/health clinic or take at least an oral rehydration first then visit a GP (p < 0.01; difference 4 vs. 2 = 113.16; difference 4 vs. 3 = 85.65) (Appendix V).
121
Similar to the consumer behaviour in Brazil, in New Zealand there was a significant difference in food safety behaviour of consumers linked to personal hygiene habits between those who do nothing (4) ranked at high risk (Re = 55.7%) or self–medicate (1) ranked at moderate risk (Re = 36.9%), when compared with people that visit a GP/health clinic (2) (Re = 22.8%) or took oral rehydration first (3) (Re = 28.5%) ranked at the low risk range (Appendix III) (p < 0.01; difference 4 vs. 2 = 103.03; difference 4 vs. 3 = 84.89) and (p < 0.01; difference 1 vs. 2 = 44.30; difference 1 vs. 3 = 26.17) (Appendix V). Interestingly, people who do nothing for a health symptom (4) also had a significant difference in the risk estimate from those who self–medicate (1) (p < 0.01; difference 4 vs. 1 = 58.72) (Appendix V).
There was a trend in risk reduction with schooling with respect to personal hygiene habits and the health care of a person in Brazil (Appendix VI). All education groups were ranked at the low risk range (Appendix III). However, those with no formal schooling or primary incomplete (1) had the poorest personal hygiene and health care habits (Re = 32.0%) when compared with people that have achieved a completed university degree (4) (Re = 26.9%) (Appendix III) (p < 0.01; difference 1 vs. 4 = 15.90) (Appendix V).
In New Zealand, the age of a person influenced food safety risks linked to personal hygiene and health care habits. Households with a person 60 or older (6) had a moderate risk (Re = 42.1%), while other groups were ranked at the low risk range (Appendix III). There was a significant difference between personal hygiene habits of the elderly (6) and the younger age groups (1) (p < 0.01; difference 6 vs. 1 = 54.11) (Appendix V).
The widowed (4), usually elderly, had a moderate risk estimate at this CCP ranked at 41.5%, while other marital groups had a low risk estimate (Appendix III). There was a significant difference between the widowed (4) and the single (1), the married or partnership/de facto (2) and the separated/divorced (3) (p < 0.01; difference 4 vs. 1 = 32.65; difference 4 vs. 2 = 27.28; difference 4 vs. 3 = 29.67, respectively) (Appendix V).
122
Interestingly, the retired (4) had the same risk estimate (Re = 41.5%; Appendix III) compared with the widowed and a significant difference in personal hygiene habits when compared with the employed full–time (1), the employed part–time (2), those self–employed (3), the unemployed–beneficiary (5) and people on home–duties (6) (p < 0.01; difference 4 vs. 1 = 34.53; difference 4 vs. 2 = 41.70; difference 4 vs. 3 = 30.67; difference 4 vs. 5 = 41.42; difference 4 vs. 6 = 23.70, respectively) (Appendix V).
The survey outcomes indicated that in New Zealand family income influenced personal hygiene and health care habits of consumers. Low income families (2) had a moderate risk (Re = 38.2%), while other groups were ranked at low risk (Appendix III). There was a trend for decreasing risk with increasing income in New Zealand' households (Appendix VI) (p < 0.01; difference 2 vs. 3 = 19.79; difference 2 vs. 4 = 24.83; difference 2 vs. 5 = 28.77, respectively) (Appendix V). Although ethnicity and the region of living influenced personal hygiene (Table 31; Appendix IV), there was no significant difference between groups within these variables (Appendix V).
In Brazil, about 29% of households participating in the survey had at least an at-risk person living in the home, while in New Zealand this was 48%. About 89% of survey respondents in New Zealand were from an urban area, and in Brazil this was 100% (the survey was undertaken in capital cities only; 84% of the Brazilian population lives in urban areas; Censo Brazil, 2010) (Appendix II). Overall, the great majority of survey respondents considered their families have good or excellent health condition (Brazil = 77%; New Zealand = 88%). Generally, survey respondents follow their own beliefs in terms of personal hygiene habits (Brazil = 68%; New Zealand = 59%) (Appendix II).
In Brazil, over the last six months the most frequent health symptom indicative of food poisoning reported by survey respondents was diarrhoea (43%) followed by the lack of energy (42%), and in New Zealand it was the lack of energy (32%) followed by chills/muscle aches (27%). Interestingly, about 42% of survey respondents in New Zealand declared they self–medicate for symptoms indicative of food poisoning and in Brazil this was 25% of consumers (Appendix II).
123