Eagan Bailey H, Wang Siyun, Hall Nathaniel, Protopopova Alexandra
Animal Welfare Program, Faculty of Land and Food Systems, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Food, Nutrition and Health, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Front Vet Sci. 2022 Aug 11;9:921508. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2022.921508. eCollection 2022.
This study used a two-part questionnaire to investigate consumer knowledge and attitudes toward bacteriophage applications in pet food, pet food safety, and environmental sustainability. Part 1 included questions about pet food safety, sustainability, and knowledge and attitudes toward bacteriophages. Next, participants reviewed educational materials about each, and Part 2 assessed if this increased knowledge of, or changed attitudes toward, bacteriophage application. Participants ( = 80), were recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk (MT) ( = 45) and Social Media (SM) ( = 35). Mean responses in Part 1 and Part 2 were compared by paired -tests, and mean responses between MT and SM were compared by -tests. Participants reported pet food safety was important to them (combined proportion strongly agree or agree, mean ± SD) (75/80, 94%, MT 4.66 ± 0.60, SM 4.71 ± 0.95) and were most concerned with raw pet food safety (51/80, 64%, MT 3.88 ± 0.80, SM 3.17 ± 1.40). Participants rated environmental sustainability as important (61/80, 76%, MT 3.86 ± 0.94, SM 3.97 ± 0.66); however, it was not a strong driver of pet food purchasing (26/80, 33%, MT 3.31 ± 1.25, SM 2.82 ± 0.82). Overall, data showed an increase in knowledge of bacteriophages following a review of educational material. However, in the SM group, no statistically significant difference was observed in the comfort eating food with bacteriophage additives (SM Part 1 3.37 ± 1.05, SM Part 2 3.48 ± 1.12, = 0.279), whereas the MT group did show an increase (MT Part 1 3.57 ± 1.01, MT Part 2 4.08 ± 0.92, < 0.001). In the SM group, no statistically significant difference was observed in comfort feeding their pet food with bacteriophage additives (SM Part 1 3.40 ± 1.03, SM Part 2 3.45 ± 1.14, = 0.571), whereas the MT group did show an increase (MT Part 1 3.57 ± 0.98, MT Part 2 4.31 ± 0.84, < 0.001). The strongest objections related to safety concerns (20/53, 38%, MT 2.83 ± 0.96, SM 3.27 ± 0.84). These results demonstrate that despite increasing knowledge, there is still hesitancy among some consumers toward bacteriophage applications in pet food.
本研究使用了一份两部分的问卷来调查消费者对噬菌体在宠物食品中的应用、宠物食品安全和环境可持续性的了解及态度。第一部分包括有关宠物食品安全、可持续性以及对噬菌体的了解和态度的问题。接下来,参与者阅读了关于每个方面的教育材料,第二部分评估这是否增加了对噬菌体应用的了解或改变了态度。参与者((n = 80))通过亚马逊土耳其机器人(MT)((n = 45))和社交媒体(SM)((n = 35))招募。通过配对(t)检验比较第一部分和第二部分的平均反应,并通过(t)检验比较MT和SM之间的平均反应。参与者报告宠物食品安全对他们很重要(强烈同意或同意的综合比例,平均值±标准差)(75/80,94%,MT 4.66±0.60,SM 4.71±0.95),并且最关注生宠物食品安全(51/80,64%,MT 3.88±0.80,SM 3.17±1.40)。参与者将环境可持续性评为重要(61/80,76%,MT 3.86±0.94,SM 3.97±0.66);然而,它并不是宠物食品购买的主要驱动力(26/80,33%,MT 3.31±1.25,SM 2.82±0.82)。总体而言,数据显示在阅读教育材料后,对噬菌体的了解有所增加。然而,在SM组中,食用含有噬菌体添加剂的食品时的舒适度方面未观察到统计学上的显著差异(SM第一部分3.37±1.05,SM第二部分3.48±1.12,(p = 0.279)),而MT组确实有所增加(MT第一部分3.57±1.01,MT第二部分4.08±0.92,(p < 0.001))。在SM组中,给宠物喂食含有噬菌体添加剂的食品时的舒适度方面未观察到统计学上的显著差异(SM第一部分3.40±1.03,SM第二部分3.45±1.14,(p = 0.571)),而MT组确实有所增加(MT第一部分3.57±0.98,MT第二部分4.31±0.84,(p < 0.001))。最强烈的反对意见与安全担忧有关(20/53,38%,MT 2.83±0.96,SM 3.27±0.84)。这些结果表明,尽管知识有所增加,但一些消费者对噬菌体在宠物食品中的应用仍存在犹豫。