Dataset Information

Why environmentalists eat meat.

ABSTRACT: Why do people who care about the environment adopt behaviours that are not consistent with their beliefs? Previous studies approach this as a case of cognitive dissonance, researchers looking into the strategies through which people reduce gaps between their attitudes and their behaviours. Here we start from the premise that there is no dissonance, and that people have consistent reasons of why they are doing what they are doing. The research task is then to shed light on these reasons. Using Q-methodology, a mixed quantitative-qualitative approach, we interviewed 42 environmentally-minded researchers asking them why they eat meat. Our interviewees were aware of and cared about the environmental and ethical impacts of meat eating, but reasoned that they eat meat because either technological, or political changes are more important than what they personally do, because of doubts about the impact of personal action in a complex world, or simply because they lack the determination to stop eating meat. Our analysis suggests that policies and messages that try to educate or guilt meat-eaters are unlikely to work with those well aware of the impacts of their actions.

SUBMITTER: Scott E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6622546 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Why environmentalists eat meat.

Scott Evon E Kallis Giorgos G Zografos Christos C

PloS one 20190711 7

Why do people who care about the environment adopt behaviours that are not consistent with their beliefs? Previous studies approach this as a case of cognitive dissonance, researchers looking into the strategies through which people reduce gaps between their attitudes and their behaviours. Here we start from the premise that there is no dissonance, and that people have consistent reasons of why they are doing what they are doing. The research task is then to shed light on these reasons. Using Q- ...[more]

PMID: 31295301

Similar Datasets

Project description:Methicillin-resistant and vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA and VRSA) are zoonotic life-threatening pathogens, and their presence in food raises a public health concern. Yet, scarce data are available regarding MRSA and VRSA in both ready-to-eat (RTE) meat and food handlers. This study was undertaken to determine the frequency, antimicrobial resistance, and biofilm-forming ability of MRSA and VRSA isolated from RTE meat (shawarma and burger) and humans (food handlers, and hospitalized patients) in Zagazig city, Sharkia Governorate, Egypt. We analyzed 176 samples (112 human samples: 72 from hospitalized patients and 40 from food handlers, 64 RTE meat samples: 38 from shawarma and 26 from burger). Using phenotypic, PCR-based identification of nuc gene and matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS), 60 coagulase-positive S. aureus (COPS) isolates were identified in the samples as follow: RTE meat (15/64, 23.4%), hospitalized patients (33/72, 45.8%) and food handlers (12/40, 30%). All the COPS isolates were mecA positive (and thus were classified as MRSA) and multidrug resistant with multiple antibiotic resistance indices ranging from 0.25 to 0.92. Overall, resistance to cefepime (96.7%), penicillin (88.3%), were common, followed by ampicillin-sulbactam (65%), ciprofloxacin (55%), nitrofurontoin (51.7%), and gentamicin (43.3%). VRSA was detected in 30.3% of COPS hospitalized patient's isolates, 26.7% of COPS RTE meat isolates and 25% of COPS food handler's isolates. VanA, vanB, or both genes were detected in 64.7, 5.9, and 29.4% of all VAN-resistant isolates, respectively. The majority of the COPS isolates (50/60, 83.3%) have biofilm formation ability and harbored icaA (76%), icaD (74%), icaC (50%), and icaB (46%) biofilm-forming genes. The bap gene was not detected in any of the isolates. The ability of MRSA and VRSA isolates to produce biofilms in addition to being resistant to antimicrobials highlight the danger posed by these potentially virulent microorganisms persisting in RTE meat, food handlers, and patients. Taken together, good hygiene practices and antimicrobial surveillance plans should be strictly implemented along the food chain to reduce the risk of colonization and dissemination of MRSA and VRSA biofilm-producing strains.

Dataset Information

Why environmentalists eat meat.

Publications

Why environmentalists eat meat.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets