Article

To eat or not to eat red meat. A closer look at the relationship between restrained eating and vegetarianism in college females

Psychology Department, The College of William & Mary, P.O. Box 8795, Williamsburg, VA 23185-8795, USA.
Appetite (Impact Factor: 2.69). 11/2011; 58(1):319-25. DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2011.10.015
Source: PubMed

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.

0 Followers
 · 
76 Views
  • Source
    • "Diets excluding animal products increase the risk of deficiencies of many valuable nutrients. Consumption of red meat, especially beef, can be a good way to respond to the macro-and micromineral requirements (Forestell, Spaeth, & Kane, 2012; McNeill & Van Elswyk, 2012; Williams, 2007; Williamson, Foster, Stanner, & Buttriss, 2005). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The impact of meat cuts (nine muscles and liver) and thermal processing on selected mineral (potassium, sodium, phosphorus, magnesium, zinc, iron, including heme form) concentration in beef from Holstein–Friesian bulls was evaluated in the present study. The mineral's content widely varied depending on the tissue type (skeletal muscles/liver, except zinc) and between the different bovine muscles. The greatest diversity between the muscles demonstrated was zinc (3.5–6.9 mg 100 g−1 f/w) and iron (1.7–2.3 mg 100 g−1 f/w), however, there were no significant differences in heme iron to total iron ratio (average 74%). Thermal processes conducted on longissimus dorsi muscles also significantly affected mineral concentration. Grilled, roasted and fried bovine meat was characterised by a higher content (by 6–26%) of most studied minerals (except sodium) as compared to raw meat. Sodium levels in processed meat were 16–33% lower than in raw samples.
    Meat Science 07/2015; 105:75-80. · 2.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Diets excluding animal products increase the risk of deficiencies of many valuable nutrients. Consumption of red meat, especially beef, can be a good way to respond to the macro-and micromineral requirements (Forestell, Spaeth, & Kane, 2012; McNeill & Van Elswyk, 2012; Williams, 2007; Williamson, Foster, Stanner, & Buttriss, 2005). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The impact of meat cuts (nine muscles and liver) and thermal processing on selected mineral (potassium, sodium, phosphorus, magnesium, zinc, iron, including heme form) concentration in beef from Holstein-Friesian bulls was evaluated in the present study. The mineral's content widely varied depending on the tissue type (skeletal muscles/liver, except zinc) and between the different bovine muscles. The greatest diversity between the muscles demonstrated was zinc (3.5-6.9mg100g(-1)f/w) and iron (1.7-2.3mg100g(-1)f/w), however, there were no significant differences in heme iron to total iron ratio (average 74%). Thermal processes conducted on longissimus dorsi muscles also significantly affected mineral concentration. Grilled, roasted and fried bovine meat was characterised by a higher content (by 6-26%) of most studied minerals (except sodium) as compared to raw meat. Sodium levels in processed meat were 16-33% lower than in raw samples. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
    Meat Science 03/2015; 105:75-80. DOI:10.1016/j.meatsci.2015.03.011 · 2.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Also, compared to non-vegetarians, vegetarians are more likely to seek out information about healthy diets and lifestyles (Lea and Worsley 2004). Along with the general aim of achieving a healthy lifestyle, this focus on health includes the desire to lose weight by reducing meat intake (Forestell et al. 2012; Gilbody, Kirk, and Hill 1999). Weight-loss motives are especially prevalent in women and younger people (Gilbody et al. 1999; Smith, Burke, and Wing 2000). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study explores vegetarians’ and semi-vegetarians’ motives for reducing their meat intake. Participants are categorized as either vegetarians, who remove all meat from their diet, semi-vegetarians, who significantly reduce their meat intake (at least three days a week), or light semi-vegetarians, who mildly reduce their meat intake (once or twice a week). The results show that most differences appear between vegetarians and both groups of semi-vegetarians. Animal rights and ecological concerns, together with taste preferences, predict a vegetarian diet, while an increase in health motives increases the odds of being semi-vegetarian. Yet, the choice between a semi-vegetarian and a light semi-vegetarian diet can also be predicted based on animal rights concerns and taste preferences. To conclude, even within each diet group, subgroups with different motives appear, and it is recommended that future researchers pay more attention to these differences.
    Ecology of Food and Nutrition 11/2014; 53(6):639-657. DOI:10.1080/03670244.2014.896797 · 0.78 Impact Factor
Show more