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

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.

A Review of Factors Influencing Athletes’ Food Choices

“…This may include 'diet rules' such as choosing products low in fat and calories or restricting selected food groups [134,135]. Dietary restraint has been researched extensively in non-athlete populations, particularly in the areas of weight loss, dieting and disordered eating [18,118,[135][136][137][138]. Similarly, amongst athlete populations dietary restraint has been explored in relation to disordered eating, bone health and ovulatory disturbances [16,139,140].…”

“…Cognitive dietary restraint is referred to as the conscious restriction of food intake in order to control body weight [133]. This may include 'diet rules' such as choosing products low in fat and calories or restricting selected food groups [134,135]. Dietary restraint has been researched extensively in non-athlete populations, particularly in the areas of weight loss, dieting and disordered eating [18,118,[135][136][137][138].…”

Values, attitudes, and frequency of meat consumption. Predicting meat-reduced diet in Australians

“…The environmental impact of meat production, spiritual purity, and disgust at the sensory properties of meat are less common motivations (Dyett et al, 2013;Fessler, Arguello, Mekdara, & Macias, 2003;Forestell, Spaeth, & Kane, 2012;Fox & Ward, 2008;Rothgerber, 2014;Rozin, Markwith, & Stoess, 1997;Ruby, 2012). While nutrition knowledge does not differ between animal welfare and health oriented vegetarians, animal welfare focused vegetarians have been found to hold stronger convictions about their diet, to exhibit greater dietary restriction, and to remain vegetarian longer than do health vegetarians (Hoffman, Stallings, Bessinger, & Brooks, 2013;Ruby, 2012).…”

The importance of reduced meat and dairy consumption for meeting stringent climate change targets

“…We also make a Flexitarian (FL) scenario, where 75 % of all meat and dairy products are replaced by cereals and pulses (in kcal terms). "Flexitarian" is a term assigned to people that often, but not always, choose to eat vegetarian food (Forestell et al 2012). It should be noted that the degree of substitution of 75 % is not based on any systematic analysis of limiting factors, and should therefore be considered as a tentative basis for an estimate of the upper-end mitigation potential from dietary changes.…”