• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

为何《动物解放》能经受住早期批评并对公共卫生至关重要。

Why "Animal (De)liberation" survives early criticism and is pivotal to public health.

作者信息

Deckers Jan

机构信息

School of Medical Education, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

出版信息

J Eval Clin Pract. 2017 Oct;23(5):1105-1112. doi: 10.1111/jep.12807. Epub 2017 Aug 4.

DOI:10.1111/jep.12807
PMID:28776902
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5628628/
Abstract

In 2016, the book Animal (De)liberation: Should the Consumption of Animal Products Be Banned? was published. This article aims to engage with the critique that this book has received and to clarify and reinforce its importance for human health. It is argued that the ideas developed in the book withstand critical scrutiny. As qualified moral veganism avoids the pitfalls of other moral positions on human diets, public health policies must be altered accordingly, subject to adequate political support for its associated vegan project.

摘要

2016年,《动物(非)解放:动物产品消费应被禁止吗?》一书出版。本文旨在回应这本书所受到的批评,并阐明并强化其对人类健康的重要性。有人认为,书中提出的观点经得起严格审视。由于合格的道德素食主义避免了人类饮食方面其他道德立场的缺陷,公共卫生政策必须相应改变,前提是其相关的素食计划能得到足够的政治支持。

相似文献

1
Why "Animal (De)liberation" survives early criticism and is pivotal to public health.为何《动物解放》能经受住早期批评并对公共卫生至关重要。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2017 Oct;23(5):1105-1112. doi: 10.1111/jep.12807. Epub 2017 Aug 4.
2
The pitfalls of qualified moral veganism. A critique of Jan Deckers' holistic health approach to animal ethics.合格道德素食主义的陷阱。对扬·德克斯整体健康动物伦理方法的批判。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2017 Oct;23(5):1113-1117. doi: 10.1111/jep.12786. Epub 2017 Jul 11.
3
Dietary behaviour as a form of collective action: A social identity model of vegan activism.饮食行为作为一种集体行动形式:素食主义激进主义的社会认同模型。
Appetite. 2022 Jan 1;168:105730. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2021.105730. Epub 2021 Oct 4.
4
Moralistic stereotyping of vegans: The role of dietary motivation and advocacy status.对纯素食者的道德主义刻板印象:饮食动机与倡导地位的作用。
Appetite. 2022 Jul 1;174:106006. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2022.106006. Epub 2022 Mar 21.
5
Veganism in Dermatology: Special Considerations for the Vegan Hair Loss Patient.皮肤科的纯素食主义:素食主义脱发患者的特殊考虑。
Skinmed. 2024 Aug 2;22(3):180-186. eCollection 2024.
6
The Ethics of Veganism.纯素食主义的伦理道德
Cureus. 2024 Mar 15;16(3):e56214. doi: 10.7759/cureus.56214. eCollection 2024 Mar.
7
Nutritional practices and experiences of people on vegan diet with healthcare system: a qualitative study.纯素饮食人群与医疗体系的营养实践和体验:一项定性研究。
Cent Eur J Public Health. 2023 Sep;31(3):191-197. doi: 10.21101/cejph.a7693.
8
On Folk Devils, Moral Panics and New Wave Public Health.论民间恶魔、道德恐慌与新波公共卫生。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2019 Dec 1;8(12):678-683. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2019.78.
9
"More than a diet": A qualitative investigation of young vegan Women's relationship to food.“不止是饮食”:一项针对年轻纯素女性与食物关系的定性研究。
Appetite. 2019 Dec 1;143:104418. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2019.104418. Epub 2019 Aug 23.
10
[Vegetarianism and veganism lifestyle: Motivation and psychological dimensions associated with selective diet].[素食主义和纯素食主义生活方式:与选择性饮食相关的动机和心理维度]
Presse Med. 2016 Sep;45(9):726-33. doi: 10.1016/j.lpm.2016.06.031. Epub 2016 Aug 16.

本文引用的文献

1
The Evil Animal: A Terror Management Theory Perspective on the Human Tendency to Kill Animals.《邪恶动物:从恐怖管理论看人类杀生倾向》
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2017 Jun;43(6):743-757. doi: 10.1177/0146167217697092. Epub 2017 Apr 20.
2
The pitfalls of qualified moral veganism. A critique of Jan Deckers' holistic health approach to animal ethics.合格道德素食主义的陷阱。对扬·德克斯整体健康动物伦理方法的批判。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2017 Oct;23(5):1113-1117. doi: 10.1111/jep.12786. Epub 2017 Jul 11.
3
Position of the American Dietetic Association: vegetarian diets.美国饮食协会的立场:素食饮食
J Am Diet Assoc. 2009 Jul;109(7):1266-82. doi: 10.1016/j.jada.2009.05.027.
4
Are those who subscribe to the view that early embryos are persons irrational and inconsistent? A reply to Brock.那些认同早期胚胎即人的观点的人是否不理性且自相矛盾?对布罗克的回应。
J Med Ethics. 2007 Feb;33(2):102-6. doi: 10.1136/jme.2006.016311.
5
The tragedy of the commons. The population problem has no technical solution; it requires a fundamental extension in morality.公地悲剧。人口问题没有技术上的解决方案;它需要道德观念的根本性扩展。
Science. 1968 Dec 13;162(3859):1243-8.