Extensive research exists on who does or might purchase organic food products, however little research has addressed either who values organic production methods when deciding what to eat, and correspondingly, who does not purchase organics regularly. This paper reports that values about organic farming often do not translate into corresponding stated preferences about organic food consumption behavior. The paradox is examined within the context of the consumers' sociodemographic characteristics as well as through opinions and preferences related to food in their lives.Results show that consumer claims of buying organics and placing importance on organic production systems when deciding what to eat are highly correlated (.472 at 1% significance level; p<. 001). Organic consumers, however, comprise only slightly more than one quarter (27%) of the highly enthusiastic proponents of organic production methods. Our results corroborate existing research that well-educated persons and those who are primary household shoppers purchase organics most frequently. Additionally, women and those who are older, have higher incomes, and are more liberal, as well as respondents who claim food production knowledge also tend to buy organic food regularly.Regression and factor analysis show that those who value organic production systems when deciding what to eat may be ranked in the following order: the religiously observant, older and female respondents, persons of color, and those who claim food production knowledge. Results show that many of these organic system proponents are under-represented as buyers, in particular: the religiously observant, those for whom food plays an integral role in their lives, the less educated, and lower income and older respondents.More attention should be directed to people who value organic production systems yet do not purchase organics. This will enhance understanding of the transaction barriers that impede consumer participation in the organic market. How this population values organic production systems also has implications for the development of public policy related to sustainable and organic agriculture.

or (800) . USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.Trade and company names are used in this publication solely to provide specific information. Mention of a trade or company name does not constitute a warranty or an endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture to the exclusion of other products or organizations not mentioned.

Background Infection with the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has been associated with a hypercoagulable state. Emerging data from China and Europe have consistently shown an increased incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE). We aimed to identify the VTE incidence and early predictors of VTE at our high-volume tertiary care center. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study of 147 patients who had been admitted to Temple University Hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from April 1, 2020 to April 27, 2020. We first identified the VTE (pulmonary embolism [PE] and deep vein thrombosis [DVT]) incidence in our cohort. The VTE and no-VTE groups were compared by univariable analysis for demographics, comorbidities, laboratory data, and treatment outcomes. Subsequently, multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the early predictors of VTE. Results The 147 patients (20.9% of all admissions) admitted to a designated COVID-19 unit at Temple University Hospital with a high clinical suspicion of acute VTE had undergone testing for VTE using computed tomography pulmonary angiography and/or extremity venous duplex ultrasonography. The overall incidence of VTE was 17% (25 of 147). Of the 25 patients, 16 had had acute PE, 14 had had acute DVT, and 5 had had both PE and DVT. The need for invasive mechanical ventilation (adjusted odds ratio, 3.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-9.55) and the admission D-dimer level ≥1500 ng/mL (adjusted odds ratio, 3.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-9.78) were independent markers associated with VTE. The all-cause mortality in the VTE group was greater than that in the non-VTE group (48% vs 22%; P = .007). Conclusion Our study represents one of the earliest reported from the United States on the incidence rate of VTE in patients with COVID-19. Patients with a high clinical suspicion and the identified risk factors (invasive mechanical ventilation, admission D-dimer level ≥1500 ng/mL) should be considered for early VTE testing. We did not screen all patients admitted for VTE; therefore, the true incidence of VTE could have been underestimated. Our findings require confirmation in future prospective studies.

In response to low margins in traditional commodity markets and consumer demand for decommodified food, food value chains have emerged in the last decade as strategies for differentiating farm products and opening new, more financially viable market channels for smaller farmers. These business networks incorporate strategic coordination between food producers, distributors, and sellers in pursuit of common financial and social goals. Our analysis of the aggregation, distribution and marketing functions of eight food value chains of diverse character across the United States reveals four summary findings that encapsulate the challenges and opportunities facing these business organizations: (1) private infrastructure investment should match the organizational stage of development and market capacities; (2) identity preservation is a critical market differentiation strategy; (3) informal networks can be highly effective tools for coordinating the marketing efforts of diverse agricultural producers; and (4) nonprofits and cooperatives both can play key roles in value chain development, but should recognize their organizational competencies and limitations.

No abstract

No abstract

Marketing Services Division The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and, where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.

IntroductionThis paper discusses a trial of the use of CompTracker© – an online platform used to link the student, preceptor and academic in a time sensitive manner during student clinical placement – within a cohort of 330 first and second year paramedic students studying at an Australian university. CompTracker© allows for preceptors to identify and assess clinical competencies, and for the student to reflect after each case is completed on placement. The tool was initially piloted, and then remodeled on several attempts to improve its overall functionality and relevance for the placement learning experience. The study aims to educate and inform other health disciplines that may have an interest in using online tools for competency tracking and education in diverse workplaces. MethodsMultiple surveys were conducted over a 3-year period, using both Likert 5-point scales and open-ended questions, to evaluate 330 first and second year students’ and 261 preceptors’ experiences. ResultsOf the 54 student responses, 92% felt the tool was useful and 67% felt it was easy to use. Within the preceptor results, 63 ± 2% preferred CompTracker© over traditional paper-based methods. ConclusionCompTracker© can be used to support students and preceptors in clinical placement. The flexibility of this online tool makes it adaptable to most clinical workplaces, and should be considered in any workplace that requires the use of competency-based clinical assessment and used in place of traditional paper-based portfolios.