Expert vs. public perception of population health risks in Canada

In the field of risk analysis, there is ongoing tension between expert risk assessment and public risk perception. This paper presents the results of a health risk perception survey administered to Canadian health experts as a follow-up to a previous survey. A total of 125 experts (75 physicians and 50 toxicologists) recruited through professional organizations completed a self-administered questionnaire in 2004. Experts were asked to provide ratings of perceived risk of 30 health hazards as well as detailed ratings of five health hazards (motor vehicles, climate change, recreational physical activity, cellular phones, and terrorism) and five health outcomes (cancer, long-term disabilities, asthma, heart disease, and depression) in terms of perceived health risk, personal control, knowledge, uncertainty, worry, and acceptability. Sources of information on health risks, confidence in those information sources, as well as health risk beliefs were also examined. Experts perceived behavioral health hazards, such as cigarette smoking, obesity, and physical inactivity, posed the greatest health risk, and medical technologies, including vaccines, medical X-rays, and laser eye surgery, posed the least risk. Experts reported receiving 'a lot' of information from university scientists/scientific journals and medical doctors and reported having 'a lot' of confidence in those sources. High levels of environmental and social concern were observed, as well as a high degree of personal agency over health risks. Health risk perceptions varied by professional affiliation but not gender. Results are compared to a recent public risk perception survey in Canada. Differences between public and expert risk perceptions may hold instructive pointers for risk management and risk communication strategies designed to improve population health.