Friedman S M, Villamil K, Suriano R A, Egolf B P
Department of Journalism and Communication, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA 18015, USA.
Public Underst Sci. 1996 Jan;5(1):1-20. doi: 10.1088/0963-6625/5/1/001.
During 1989, a major environmental and health risk issue, the spraying of Alar on apples, created a furor among the American people. After hearing charges from the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) that eating Alar-laden apples significantly increased a child's risk of developing cancer, numbers of school districts dropped apples from their menus and parents poured apple juice down the drains. Apple sales plummeted. The NRDC's charges, which were disseminated by a well-planned and effective public relations campaign, brought counter-charges from the US environmental Protection Agency, which accused the NRDC of basing its study on poor data, among other things. The core of the dispute was in the risk figures and risk interpretations being used by each organization.
