A version of this article appeared in print on December 13,2015, in the News section of the Chicago Tribune with the headline "Man vs nature.", Online from Chicago Tribune. 12 pafwa.
Croney, C.C. (author), Apley, M. (author), Capper, J.L. (author), Mench, J.A. (author), Priest, S. (author), and Department of Animal Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan 66506
Department of Animal Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman 99164
Department of Animal Science, University of California, Davis 95616
Department of Communication, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA 22030
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2015-01-20
Published:
USA: American Society of Animal Science
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 164 Document Number: D08306
7 pages., via online journal., The aim of this work is to explore the relation between morality and diet choice by investigating how animal and
human welfare attitudes and donation behaviors can predict a meat eating versus flexitarian versus vegetarian
diet. The results of a survey study (N=299) show that animal health concerns (measured by the Animal
Attitude Scale) can predict diet choice. Vegetarians are most concerned, while full-time meat eaters are least
concerned, and the contrast between flexitarians and vegetarians is greater than the contrast between
flexitarians and full-time meat eaters.
With regards to human welfare (measured by the Moral Foundations Questionnaire), results show that attitudes
towards human suffering set flexitarians apart from vegetarians and attitudes towards authority and respect
distinguish between flexitarians and meat eaters. To conclude, results show that vegetarians donate more
often to animal oriented charities than flexitarians and meat eaters, while no differences between the three
diet groups occur for donations to human oriented charities.
19 pages., Via online journal., While in vitro animal meat (IVM) is not yet commercially available, the public has already begun to form opinions of IVM as a result of news stories and events drawing attention to its development. As such, we can discern public perceptions of the ethics of IVM before its commercial release. This affords advocates of environmentally sustainable, healthy, and just diets with a unique opportunity to reflect on the social desirability of the development of IVM. This work draws upon an analysis of ethical perceptions of IVM in 814 US news blog comments related to the August 2013 tasting of the world’s first IVM hamburger. Specifically, I address three primary questions: (1) How does the public perceive the ethics of IVM development? (2) How acceptable is IVM to the public relative to alternative approaches to reducing animal meat consumption? and (3) What should all of this mean for the ongoing development and promotion of IVM? Ultimately, it is argued that there is a strong need for facilitation of public dialogue around IVM, as well as further research comparing the acceptability of IVM to other alternatives.
