Meat is critical with respect to sustainability because meat products are among the most energy-intensive and ecologically burdensome foods. Empirical studies of the meat-consumption frequency of Dutch consumers show that, apart from meat-avoiders and meat-eaters, many people are meat-reducers that eat no meat at least one day per week. Meat-consumption frequencies provide empirical evidence for different modes of "flexitarianism," including light, medium, and heavy flexitarians. In particular, the existence of heavy flexitarians suggests that the customary position of meat and other animal-based dietary products in the food hierarchy is not inviolable. To improve our understanding of meat reduction, cluster analysis adds information about differences across flexitarians. Given the enormous environmental impact of animal-protein consumption and the apparent sympathy of consumers for meat reduction, it is surprising that politicians and policy makers demonstrate little, if any, interest in strategies to reduce meat consumption and to encourage more sustainable eating practices.

In general, food-allergic consumers were not satisfied with the current labelling practices. Information was thought to be unclear or insufficient, which resulted in personal stress and feelings of insecurity. Further research is needed to identify how best allergy information might be provided.

No abstract

Food allergy is associated with higher health care costs. Severity of allergic symptoms is a key explanatory factor.

Food allergy is a chronic disease that can only be managed through avoidance of problematic proteins in the diet. Inappropriate communication about food allergens can cause stress and insecurity, which may have a negative impact on quality of life. The aim was to investigate whether information provided through current labelling practices meets the need of food allergic consumers. A total of 40 participants (20 adult food allergy suffers and 20 parents of food allergic children) were recruited from two different European countries (Greece and The Netherlands), and interviewed while shopping in a supermarket. Participants were asked to purchase 15 potentially problematic food items as if for their own household. Their information search behaviour was observed, and participants were questioned about their preferences for food allergen information provision. Participants reported experiencing problems associated with current food allergy information provision. It was reported that inappropriate use of fonts, colours and languages, application of precautionary labelling and lack of harmonization in labelling practices across countries can cause (un)necessary dietary restrictions for food allergic consumers. Research is needed to investigate the feasibility and implementation possibilities for new information delivery strategies and amendments to existing European labelling policy