Exploring customers’ perceptions of food adulteration at bazaars and supermarkets in Dhaka, Bangladesh; a qualitative exploration

BACKGROUND: Food adulteration is an increasingly recognized global public health problem. In low- and middle-income countries like Bangladesh, adulteration is difficult to detect and respond to. We explored customers’ perceptions on food adulteration, perception of risk and connections between information, participant characteristics and patterns of adulterated food concerns that impact risk perception in urban Bangladesh. METHODS: A formative study was conducted in Dhaka, between June and August 2015 at a supermarket and a wet market. We explored community awareness and response to chemical contaminants (adulterants) among participants from a range of socio-economic backgrounds. The team conducted 38 in-depth interviews with 12 customers and 4 staff from a supermarket, and 12 customers and 10 vendors from a wet market. Participants were selected purposively. Audio recorded data were coded based on thematic content and analyzed manually. RESULTS: We asked participants how common foods were likely adulterated, and most gave figures of 70% or more. They reported that foods were adulterated with chemicals or artificial colors, especially fish, milk, and vegetables. The supermarket more commonly sold packaged foods with nutritional and expiry information on the label; and offered convenience in terms of building size, layout, and cleanliness. All customers from the wet market thought that foods were cheaper and fresher than from supermarkets. Supermarket customers expressed greater concern about adulterated foods than wet market customers. Most participants from both markets reported that food adulteration is invisible, adulterated foods cannot be avoided, and have long-term negative health impacts including cancer, diabetes, paralysis, heart attack, and others. Nearly half of customers from both markets were concerned about the poor nutritional value of adulterated food. Participants from both settings expressed the need for access to credible information about adulteration to help choose safe foods. The majority expressed the need for government action against those who are responsible for adulteration. CONCLUSIONS: Food adulteration was considered a major health threat. The government could act on food adulteration prevention if provided credible population-based data on disease burden, a model food sampling and testing protocol, a model for inspections, organizational strengthening and training, example social and behavioral change communications with estimated costs.