Less Animal-Based Food, Better Weight Status: Associations of the Restriction of Animal-Based Product Intake with Body-Mass-Index, Depressive Symptoms and Personality in the General Population.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Medawar E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7284911 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Protein plays a crucial role in the growth and development of adolescents. However, being a secondary energy source, protein's role in obesity has been sidelined. We examined whether intake of protein (total, animal, plant), branched-chain (BCAAs), and sulfur-containing (SCAAs) amino acids are associated with general body and central obesity and body composition in a cross-sectional study among healthy adolescents. Students aged 12-18 years old (n = 601) in schools near two major Adventist universities in California and Michigan provided dietary data via a validated web-based food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) and anthropometric data during school visits. Intakes of total, animal, and plant proteins, and BCAAs and SCAAs were derived from FFQ data. We defined general body obesity with body-mass-index-for-age (BMIz) z-scores and central obesity with waist-to-height ratios (WHtR). After full adjustment for covariates, multiple regression analyses showed significant positive associations between intakes of total protein (β = 0.101, 95% CI: 0.041, 0.161), animal protein (β = 0.118, 95% CI: 0.057, 0.178), BCAAs (β = 0.056, 95% CI: 0.025, 0.087), and SCAAs (β = 0.025, 95% CI: 0.012, 0.038) with general body adiposity. Animal protein (β = 0.017, 95% CI: 0.001, 0.033) and SCAAs (β = 0.004, 95% CI: 0.000, 0.008) were also associated with central obesity. Total and animal protein and BCAA and SCAA were also significantly associated with fat mass. Our findings suggest that high protein intake may pose a possible detriment to adolescent health. Longitudinal and safety evaluation studies are recommended.
| S-EPMC7019331 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Three separate and distinct literatures exist investigating general factors of psychopathology (p factor), personality (GFP), and personality disorder (g-PD). Surprisingly, there has been little-to-no investigation regarding the convergence of these three distinct general factors. In the present investigation, two studies were conducted examining the convergence of the p factor, GFP, and g-PD. In Study 1, a combined model extracting all three factors from self-report data simultaneously found high convergence. The findings for the g-PD and GFP were replicated in Study 2 using multi-method data, wherein the GFP and the g-PD were extracted from a community sample of 1,630 older adults and correlated with an index of maladaptivity. The present findings support the position that general factors of psychopathology, personality disorder, and personality are likely to entail a common individual differences continuum, which may impact on how these general factors are to be understood.
| S-EPMC6132273 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPlacing food further away from people decreases likelihood of consumption ("Proximity Effect"). However, it is unclear how proximity affects consumption when both healthier and less healthy foods are available and cognitive resource for self-control is limited.AimsTo test the hypothesis that when both healthier (raisins) and less healthy (chocolate M&Ms) foods are available, placing less healthy food far, rather than near, increases the likelihood that healthier food is consumed.MethodsGeneral population participants (N = 248) were all put under cognitive load and randomised to one of four groups: 1. Raisins near (20 cm), M&Ms far (70 cm); 2. Both foods near; 3. M&Ms near, raisins far; 4. Both far.Primary outcomeproportions of participants consuming raisins and M&Ms, respectively.ResultsThe results did not support the primary hypothesis: when healthier and less healthy foods were both available, placing M&Ms far, rather than near, did not increase likelihood of consuming raisins (OR = 1.54, p = .432). Regardless of the M&Ms proximity, likelihood of consuming raisins was unaffected by the raisins' proximity (62.9%(near) vs. 56.5%(far) OR = 0.61, p = .211). Likelihood of consuming M&Ms non-significantly decreased when they were far and raisins were near, and when both foods were far (OR = 2.83, p = .057). Likelihood of consuming M&Ms was affected by M&Ms proximity, being higher when near (68.3%) than far (55.6%), OR = 0.39, p = .015. Indices of cognitive load impact (higher vs lower) were unrelated to consumption of either food.ConclusionsLikelihood of consuming a healthier food was unaffected by its proximity and that of a less healthy food. By contrast, likelihood of consuming a less healthy food was influenced by its proximity and possibly by that of a healthier food. These effects need replication in studies designed to detect smaller effect sizes.Trial registrationThis study was registered online with ISRCTN (ISRCTN11740813).
| S-EPMC6335384 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: The approach to farm animal welfare evaluation has changed and animal-based measures (ABM), defined as the responses of an animal or effects on an animal, were introduced to assess animal welfare. Animal-based measures can be taken directly on the animal or indirectly and include the use of animal records. They can result from a specific event or be the cumulative outcome of many days, weeks, or months. The objective of the current study was to analyze the use of general ABM codified terms in the scientific literature, the presence of their definitions, and the gap mapping of their use across animal species, categories, years of publication, and geographical areas of the corresponding author's institution. The ultimate aim was to propose a common standard terminology to improve communication among stakeholders. In this study, data models were populated by collecting information coming from scientific papers extracted through a transparent and reproducible protocol using Web of ScienceTM and filtering for the general ABM codified terms (or synonyms/equivalents). A total of 199 papers were retained, and their full texts were assessed. The frequency of general codified ABM terms was analyzed according to the classification factors listed in the objectives. These papers were prevalently European (159 documents), and the most represented species was cattle. Fifty percent of the papers did not provide a definition of the general ABM terms, and 54% cited other sources as reference for their definition. The results of the study showed a very low penetration of the general codified ABM term in the literature on farm animal welfare, with only 1.5% of the papers including the term ABM. This does not mean that specific ABM are not studied, but rather that these specific ABM are not defined as such under a common umbrella, and there is no consensus on the use of terminology, not even among scientists. Thus, we cannot expect the stakeholders to use a common language and a standardized terminology. The recognition and the inclusion of ABM in the lists of commonly accepted abbreviations of scientific journals could be a first step to harmonize the terminology in the scientific literature.
| S-EPMC8212950 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The purpose of this study was to describe intake procedures in Colorado animal shelters, compare infectious disease screening protocols in shelters taking in animals from out-of-state to shelters only accepting animals from Colorado, and analyze perceived risk of diseases in Colorado by responding shelter personnel. A questionnaire was designed and administered to shelter personnel across the state of Colorado via the survey tool SurveyMonkey© (http://www.surveymonkey.com) or a mailed hard copy. Information collected concerned general shelter characteristics and intake procedures performed in various circumstances as reported by responding shelter personnel. Only 12.5% (5/40) of respondents reported providing core vaccines to all animals upon intake at their shelter, with young age (65.0%; 26/40), pregnancy (55.0%; 22/40), and mild existing illness (40.0%; 16/40) being cited as the top reasons for not administering core vaccines. A significantly larger proportion of shelters taking animals in from around the U.S. screened for Dirofilaria immitis than shelters taking in animals only from within the state of Colorado (p = 0.001), though a majority of respondents considered cats and dogs to be at risk of heartworm and endoparasitic infection in the state of Colorado. Based on the results of this questionnaire, relatively few shelters test dogs and cats for infectious diseases and some of those utilize tests for diagnostic purposes rather than routine screening. Additionally, vaccination protocols in several shelters are not consistent with The Association of Shelter Veterinarians Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters. This study provides important information on intake procedures in Colorado animal shelters and highlights the importance of educating shelter staff on varying risk of infection based on the history and origin of the animal being taken in.
| S-EPMC5447920 | biostudies-literature
Project description:It was originally hypothesized by Block that what has come to be known as the General Factor of Personality (GFP) reflects ego-resiliency. We test Block's hypothesis in two studies. In Study 1 a meta-analysis (N = 15,609) examining the relationship between the GFP and ego-resiliency/resilience was conducted. In Study 2 (N = 157) archival data from Block and Block was used to examine the association between rater judged ego-resiliency across childhood, adolescence, and into early adulthood and the GFP based on self-report in early adulthood. Using structural equation modeling for the meta-analytic data, the correlation between the GFP and ego-resiliency/resilience was estimated at r = 0.93. Using a trait-state occasion model to test the hypothesis in Study 2, the correlation between the GFP and rated ego-resiliency was estimated at r = 0.85. The results of the two studies offer substantial support for Block's original hypothesis. Given the strength of the associations between the GFP and ego-resiliency/resilience one may conclude that the two constructs largely reflect the same underlying phenomenon.
| S-EPMC8645775 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although animal personality research may have applied uses, this suggestion has yet to be evaluated by assessing empirical studies examining animal personality and conservation. To address this knowledge gap, we performed a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature relating to conservation science and animal personality. Criteria for inclusion in our review included access to full text, primary research articles, and relevant animal conservation or personality focus (i.e., not human personality studies). Ninety-two articles met these criteria. We summarized the conservation contexts, testing procedures (including species and sample size), analytical approach, claimed personality traits (activity, aggression, boldness, exploration, and sociability), and each report's key findings and conservation-focused suggestions. Although providing evidence for repeatability in behavior is crucial for personality studies, repeatability quantification was implemented in only half of the reports. Nonetheless, each of the 5 personality traits were investigated to some extent in a range of conservations contexts. The most robust studies in the field showed variance in how personality relates to other ecologically important variables across species and contexts. Moreover, many studies were first attempts at using personality for conservation purposes in a given study system. Overall, it appears personality is not yet a fully realized tool for conservation. To apply personality research to conservation problems, we suggest researchers think about where individual differences in behavior may affect conservation outcomes in their system, assess where there are opportunities for repeated measures, and follow the most current methodological guides on quantifying personality.
| S-EPMC10084254 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Scientists who perform major survival surgery on laboratory animals face a dual welfare and methodological challenge: how to choose surgical anesthetics and post-operative analgesics that will best control animal suffering, knowing that both pain and the drugs that manage pain can all affect research outcomes. Scientists who publish full descriptions of animal procedures allow critical and systematic reviews of data, demonstrate their adherence to animal welfare norms, and guide other scientists on how to conduct their own studies in the field. We investigated what information on animal pain management a reasonably diligent scientist might find in planning for a successful experiment. To explore how scientists in a range of fields describe their management of this ethical and methodological concern, we scored 400 scientific articles that included major animal survival surgeries as part of their experimental methods, for the completeness of information on anesthesia and analgesia. The 400 articles (250 accepted for publication pre-2011, and 150 in 2014-15, along with 174 articles they reference) included thoracotomies, craniotomies, gonadectomies, organ transplants, peripheral nerve injuries, spinal laminectomies and orthopedic procedures in dogs, primates, swine, mice, rats and other rodents. We scored articles for Publication Completeness (PC), which was any mention of use of anesthetics or analgesics; Analgesia Use (AU) which was any use of post-surgical analgesics, and Analgesia Completeness (a composite score comprising intra-operative analgesia, extended post-surgical analgesia, and use of multimodal analgesia). 338 of 400 articles were PC. 98 of these 338 were AU, with some mention of analgesia, while 240 of 338 mentioned anesthesia only but not post-surgical analgesia. Journals' caliber, as measured by their 2013 Impact Factor, had no effect on PC or AU. We found no effect of whether a journal instructs authors to consult the ARRIVE publishing guidelines published in 2010 on PC or AC for the 150 mouse and rat articles in our 2014-15 dataset. None of the 302 articles that were silent about analgesic use included an explicit statement that analgesics were withheld, or a discussion of how pain management or untreated pain might affect results. We conclude that current scientific literature cannot be trusted to present full detail on use of animal anesthetics and analgesics. We report that publication guidelines focus more on other potential sources of bias in experimental results, under-appreciate the potential for pain and pain drugs to skew data, and thus mostly treat pain management as solely an animal welfare concern, in the jurisdiction of animal care and use committees. At the same time, animal welfare regulations do not include guidance on publishing animal data, even though publication is an integral part of the cycle of research and can affect the welfare of animals in studies building on published work, leaving it to journals and authors to voluntarily decide what details of animal use to publish. We suggest that journals, scientists and animal welfare regulators should revise current guidelines and regulations, on treatment of pain and on transparent reporting of treatment of pain, to improve this dual welfare and data-quality deficiency.
| S-EPMC4865140 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Facing the threats of infectious diseases, we take various actions to protect ourselves, but few studies considered an evolving system with competing strategies. In view of that, we propose an evolutionary epidemic model coupled with human behaviors, where individuals have three strategies: vaccination, self-protection and laissez faire, and could adjust their strategies according to their neighbors' strategies and payoffs at the beginning of each new season of epidemic spreading. We found a counter-intuitive phenomenon analogous to the well-known Braess's Paradox, namely a better condition may lead to worse performance. Specifically speaking, increasing the successful rate of self-protection does not necessarily reduce the epidemic size or improve the system payoff. The range and degree of the Braess's Paradox are sensitive to both the parameters characterizing the epidemic spreading and the strategy payoff, while the existence of the Braess's Paradox is insensitive to the network topologies. This phenomenon can be well explained by a mean-field approximation. Our study demonstrates an important fact that a better condition for individuals may yield a worse outcome for the society.
| S-EPMC3836038 | biostudies-literature
Project description:It is widely recognised that for vertebrate species, personalities vary along an axis with extremes represented by 'proactive' and 'reactive' individuals. The aim of this study was to verify whether there is a relationship between personality and disease vulnerability in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) exposed to an intensely stressful situation such as entering a shelter. Twenty-eight shelter dogs participated in the study. The ethogram consisted of approximately 100 behavioural patterns. Behavioural observations of dogs in their new environment, a Novel Object and a T-maze test were used to evaluate the personality of the dogs captured as strays and entering the shelter. A blood sample from each dog was obtained at admission into the shelter and after a month to evaluate their immunological state. Based on PCA analyses of observational combined with experimental data, the dogs were ordered along the boldness-shyness axis, with the first being the boldest. Excluding one (the 6th), the first 10 dogs showed an improved health status: absence of disease symptoms during the 30 days of monitoring and improved immunological parameters; the opposite was found for shy dogs. The results of this research seem to confirm findings in other vertebrate species, i.e., bold and shy dog vulnerability to diseases might be different, especially when they must cope with a stressful and highly infectious environment such as a dog shelter.
| S-EPMC5875777 | biostudies-literature