To eat or not to eat red meat. A closer look at the relationship between restrained eating and vegetarianism in college females
ABSTRACT Previous research has suggested that vegetarianism may serve as a mask for restrained eating. The purpose of this study was to compare the dietary habits and lifestyle behaviors of vegetarians (n=55), pesco-vegetarians (n=28), semi-vegetarians (n=29), and flexitarians (n=37), to omnivores (n=91), who do not restrict animal products from their diets. A convenience sample of college-age females completed questionnaires about their eating habits, food choice motivations, and personality characteristics. Results indicated that while vegetarians and pesco-vegetarians were more open to new experiences and less food neophobic, they were not more restrained than omnivores. Rather semi-vegetarians; those who restricted only red meat from their diet, and flexitarians; those who occasionally eat red meat, were significantly more restrained than omnivores. Whereas food choices of semi-vegetarians and flexitarians were motivated by weight control, vegetarians and pesco-vegetarians' food choices were motivated by ethical concerns. By focusing specifically on semi-vegetarian and flexitarian subgroups, more effective approaches can be developed to ensure that their concerns about weight loss do not lead to unhealthful or disordered eating patterns.
- SourceAvailable from: Anna Arnoldi[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The seeds of the plants of the Fabaceae, commonly known as “grain legumes” or “pulses,” are major foodstuffs in most countries. In addition, these seeds may also provide some health benefits, in particular in the area of hypercholesterolemia and hypertension prevention. Whereas the hypocholesterolemic activity of soy protein has been well known for decades and was finally supported by the health claim by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 1999, similar information on non-soy legumes is scarce. This paper reviews all such available data from animal models and human trials as well as information on the mechanism of action provided by in vitro studies, mainly on cell cultures or assays on specific enzymes. This body of data indicates that a regular consumption of grain legumes may be useful both for the prevention of hypercholesterolemia and hypertension. More investigations are needed, however, for elucidating the mechanism of action and the actual effective components in legumes.Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 06/2015; 34. DOI:10.1080/07352689.2014.897908 · 5.29 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: For agriculture, there are three major options for mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions: 1) productivity improvements, particularly in the livestock sector; 2) dedicated technical mitigation measures; and 3) human dietary changes. The aim of the paper is to estimate long-term agricultural GHG emissions, under different mitigation scenarios, and to relate them to the emissions space compatible with the 2 °C temperature target. Our estimates include emissions up to 2070 from agricultural soils, manure management, enteric fermentation and paddy rice fields, and are based on IPCC Tier 2 methodology. We find that baseline agricultural CO2-equivalent emissions (using Global Warming Potentials with a 100 year time horizon) will be approximately 13 Gton CO2eq/year in 2070, compared to 7.1 Gton CO2eq/year 2000. However, if faster growth in livestock productivity is combined with dedicated technical mitigation measures, emissions may be kept to 7.7 Gton CO2eq/year in 2070. If structural changes in human diets are included, emissions may be reduced further, to 3–5 Gton CO2eq/year in 2070. The total annual emissions for meeting the 2 °C target with a chance above 50 % is in the order of 13 Gton CO2eq/year or less in 2070, for all sectors combined. We conclude that reduced ruminant meat and dairy consumption will be indispensable for reaching the 2 °C target with a high probability, unless unprecedented advances in technology take place.Climatic Change 05/2014; 124(1-2):79-91. DOI:10.1007/s10584-014-1104-5 · 4.62 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In a random sample (N = 951) from the general population, direct and indirect effects of the Big Five personality traits on eating styles and food choices were examined. Path models revealed that high openness to experience were associated with higher fruit, vegetable and salad and lower meat and soft drink consumption. High agreeableness was associated with low meat consumption. Neuroticism, conscientiousness and extraversion significantly and directly influenced eating styles and significantly indirectly influenced food choices. Conscientiousness mainly promoted fruit consumption by promoting restrained eating and prevented meat consumption by reducing external eating. Conscientiousness prevented consumption of sweet and savory foods, and of sugar-sweetened soft drinks by promoting restrained eating and reducing external eating, and consumption of sweet and savory foods also by reducing emotional eating. Neuroticism promoted consumption of sweet and savory foods by promoting emotional and external eating. Extraversion promoted sweet and savory, meat and soft drink consumption via promoting external eating. Results suggest that neurotic and emotionally unstable individuals seem to adopt counter-regulatory external or emotional eating and eat high-energy dense sweet and savory foods. Highly conscientious individuals adopt regulatory dietary restraint and practice counter-regulatory emotional or external eating less, resulting in more consumption of recommended and less consumption of not recommended food. The higher sociability of extraverted people, which is basically a health beneficial psychological resource, seems to have health-averse effects. Personality traits are stable; however, the resulting more proximal, counter-regulatory eating styles such as emotional or external eating might be more successfully addressed in interventions to prevent overeating and overweight.Appetite 10/2014; 84. DOI:10.1016/j.appet.2014.10.003 · 2.52 Impact Factor