目标,信息来源,以及素食和生酮类饮食趋势作为伪饮食的追随者的经验

B. Vékony, V. Suhajdáné Urbán, R. Andrásné Mikolás, Zsofia Pasztor, E. Mák
{"title":"目标,信息来源,以及素食和生酮类饮食趋势作为伪饮食的追随者的经验","authors":"B. Vékony, V. Suhajdáné Urbán, R. Andrásné Mikolás, Zsofia Pasztor, E. Mák","doi":"10.1556/2066.2022.00058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n Diets other than those recommended by professionals, referred to in the present paper as “pseudo-diets”, can endanger the health of the people who follow them. It is therefore worth assessing why people begin such diets, the information they rely on, and the effects they experience.\n \n \n \n We surveyed and compared people following two pseudo-diets: a ketogenic-like diet (KLD) and a vegan-like diet (VLD). The diets are defined as ketogenic and vegan by the dieters themselves. A cross-sectional study was carried out using self-developed anonymous online questionnaires. The survey participants were adults: 249 KLD and 203 VLD followers.\n \n \n \n The majority (85.14%) of the KLD followers stated that their motivation was weight loss, while 56.16% of the VLD followers stated that they were primarily motivated by ethical considerations. Only 11.64% of the KLD followers and 33.99% of the VLD followers had sought professional help. Both the variety and frequency of the adverse effects were robust in the KLD group, while the VLD followers experienced primarily positive outcomes. We found a statistically significant association between the seeking of professional help and an increase in desirable effects in both groups, and a decrease in adverse effects in the VLD group.\n \n \n \n The dieters used several information sources but only occasionally turned to professionals. Given that dietary changes can represent a significant intervention, professional monitoring is highly recommended to ensure that the diet is valid, effective, personalised and safe.\n","PeriodicalId":52607,"journal":{"name":"Developments in Health Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Objectives, sources of information, and experiences of followers of vegan-like and ketogenic-like dietary trends as pseudo-diets\",\"authors\":\"B. Vékony, V. Suhajdáné Urbán, R. Andrásné Mikolás, Zsofia Pasztor, E. Mák\",\"doi\":\"10.1556/2066.2022.00058\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n \\n Diets other than those recommended by professionals, referred to in the present paper as “pseudo-diets”, can endanger the health of the people who follow them. It is therefore worth assessing why people begin such diets, the information they rely on, and the effects they experience.\\n \\n \\n \\n We surveyed and compared people following two pseudo-diets: a ketogenic-like diet (KLD) and a vegan-like diet (VLD). The diets are defined as ketogenic and vegan by the dieters themselves. A cross-sectional study was carried out using self-developed anonymous online questionnaires. The survey participants were adults: 249 KLD and 203 VLD followers.\\n \\n \\n \\n The majority (85.14%) of the KLD followers stated that their motivation was weight loss, while 56.16% of the VLD followers stated that they were primarily motivated by ethical considerations. Only 11.64% of the KLD followers and 33.99% of the VLD followers had sought professional help. Both the variety and frequency of the adverse effects were robust in the KLD group, while the VLD followers experienced primarily positive outcomes. We found a statistically significant association between the seeking of professional help and an increase in desirable effects in both groups, and a decrease in adverse effects in the VLD group.\\n \\n \\n \\n The dieters used several information sources but only occasionally turned to professionals. Given that dietary changes can represent a significant intervention, professional monitoring is highly recommended to ensure that the diet is valid, effective, personalised and safe.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":52607,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Developments in Health Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Developments in Health Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1556/2066.2022.00058\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Developments in Health Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1556/2066.2022.00058","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

专业人士推荐的饮食之外的饮食,在本论文中被称为“伪饮食”,可能危及遵循这些饮食的人的健康。因此,有必要评估人们为什么开始这种饮食,他们所依赖的信息,以及他们所经历的影响。我们调查并比较了遵循两种伪饮食的人:类生酮饮食(KLD)和类素食饮食(VLD)。这些饮食被节食者自己定义为生酮和纯素。采用自主开发的匿名在线问卷进行横断面研究。调查对象是成年人:249名KLD和203名VLD追随者。大多数(85.14%)的KLD追随者表示他们的动机是减肥,而56.16%的VLD追随者表示他们主要是出于道德考虑。只有11.64%的KLD追随者和33.99%的VLD追随者寻求过专业帮助。在KLD组中,不良反应的种类和频率都很强,而VLD随访者主要经历了积极的结果。我们发现,在两组中,寻求专业帮助与期望效果的增加以及VLD组不良反应的减少之间存在统计学上显著的关联。节食者使用了几种信息来源,但只是偶尔求助于专业人士。考虑到饮食的改变可能是一种重要的干预措施,强烈建议进行专业监测,以确保饮食的有效性、有效性、个性化和安全性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Objectives, sources of information, and experiences of followers of vegan-like and ketogenic-like dietary trends as pseudo-diets
Diets other than those recommended by professionals, referred to in the present paper as “pseudo-diets”, can endanger the health of the people who follow them. It is therefore worth assessing why people begin such diets, the information they rely on, and the effects they experience. We surveyed and compared people following two pseudo-diets: a ketogenic-like diet (KLD) and a vegan-like diet (VLD). The diets are defined as ketogenic and vegan by the dieters themselves. A cross-sectional study was carried out using self-developed anonymous online questionnaires. The survey participants were adults: 249 KLD and 203 VLD followers. The majority (85.14%) of the KLD followers stated that their motivation was weight loss, while 56.16% of the VLD followers stated that they were primarily motivated by ethical considerations. Only 11.64% of the KLD followers and 33.99% of the VLD followers had sought professional help. Both the variety and frequency of the adverse effects were robust in the KLD group, while the VLD followers experienced primarily positive outcomes. We found a statistically significant association between the seeking of professional help and an increase in desirable effects in both groups, and a decrease in adverse effects in the VLD group. The dieters used several information sources but only occasionally turned to professionals. Given that dietary changes can represent a significant intervention, professional monitoring is highly recommended to ensure that the diet is valid, effective, personalised and safe.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
审稿时长
34 weeks
期刊最新文献
Assessment of the knowledge and attitudes of nurses and social caregivers in relation to falls among elderly patients in healthcare settings in a Hungarian county A comparison of the results of old-generation (MEL 60) and new-generation (SCHWIND AMARIS) refractive excimer laser treatments Should academics be concerned about articles written by ChatGPT? Investigation of the effectiveness of a complex injury prevention programme among young swimmers National eye health data from the Hungary's Comprehensive Health Protection Screening Program 2010–2020–2030 (MÁESZ)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1