Abstract
In Korea, food-risk shock announcements are made one or more times annually; such as last September, 2010 when Seoul City revealed a very high concentration of cadmium in small octopus intestines sold in Korea. As a result, consumers avoided eating domestic as well as imported small octopus. Fishermen protested against Seoul city; however, the Korean Food and Drug Administration (KFDA) announced that small octopus intestines pose no safety risk. The conflict between KFDA and Seoul City on the safety of small octopus intestines amplified the confusion of consumers. The small octopus cadmium shock resembled previous food-risk shocks in many respects. Effective risk communication is important in resolving food risk shocks as risk affects people case-by-case; for example people who do not eat small octopus intestines should not be at any risk, but those who do enjoy small octopus intestines, especially one more times per week, could be at risk. Therefore, it is necessary to communicate different risk messages to people or groups with different eating habits. From this point of view, the risk message conveyed by the KFDA on small octopus intestines was not appropriate.