Effects of cottonseed cake-based diets supplemented with blood meal, alone or with lysine, on the growth of pigs

An experiment was carried out to establish the effect on the growth of pigs of including blood meal or lysine in diets containing gossypol from cottenseed cake. Forty Landrace x Large White pigs (20 of each sex) were randomly allocated to 5 treatments of 8 pigs each in a 2x2 factorial design with two levels of lysine or two levels of blood meal in the diets plus a control diet. The pigs were fed different diets and slaughtered at 75.0+/-2.0 kg live weight for carcase analysis. Supplementing the diets with blood meal resulted in higher live weight gains (p<0.001) and improved feed conversion ratios (p<0.001) than supplementing with lysine. Pigs fed the higher level of cottonseed cake showed a significant (p<0.001) depression in live weight gain and feed conversion ratio compared to those fed a low level of the cake. There was no significant difference (p>0.05) in intake in the pigs fed diets with cottonseed cake including blood meal or synthetic lysine. The kidney and liver weights of the pigs fed the diets with a higher level of cottonseed cake were significantly greater (p<0.001) than in those fed the lower level, but when the diets containing cottonseed cake were supplemented with blood meal or lysine at the same level there was no significant difference (p>0.05) in the weights of these organs. Lysine or other factors derived from blood meal appear to be more efficient than synthetic lysine in reducing the adverse effects of gossypol.

Effects of presenting the baseline risk when communicating absolute and relative risk reductions

This study compares relative and absolute forms of presenting risk information about influenza and the need for vaccination. It investigates whether differences in people's risk estimates and their evaluations of risk information, as a result of the different presentation formats, are still apparent when they are provided with information about the baseline level of risk. The results showed that, in the absence of baseline information, the relative risk format resulted in higher ratings of satisfaction, perceived effectiveness of vaccination, and likelihood of being vaccinated. However, these differences were not apparent when baseline information was presented. Overall, provision of baseline information resulted in more accurate risk estimates and more positive evaluations of the risk messages. It is recommended that, in order to facilitate shared and fully informed decision making, information about baseline level of risk should be included in all health communications specifying risk reductions, irrespective of the particular format adopted.

Communicating risk of medication side effects: an empirical evaluation of EU recommended terminology

Two experiments compared people's interpretation of verbal and numerical descriptions of the risk of medication side effects occurring. The verbal descriptors were selected from those recommended for use by the European Union (very common, common, uncommon, rare, very rare). Both experiments used a controlled empirical methodology, in which nearly 500 members of the general population were presented with a fictitious (but realistic) scenario about visiting the doctor and being prescribed medication, together with information about the medicine's side effects and their probability of occurrence. Experiment 1 found that, in all three age groups tested (18 - 40, 41 - 60 and over 60), participants given a verbal descriptor (very common) estimated side effect risk to be considerably higher than those given a comparable numerical description. Furthermore, the differences in interpretation were reflected in their judgements of side effect severity, risk to health, and intention to comply. Experiment 2 confirmed these findings using two different verbal descriptors (common and rare) and in scenarios which described either relatively severe or relatively mild side effects. Strikingly, only 7 out of 180 participants in this study gave a probability estimate which fell within the EU assigned numerical range. Thus, large scale use of the descriptors could have serious negative consequences for individual and public health. We therefore recommend that the EU and National authorities suspend their recommendations regarding these descriptors until a more substantial evidence base is available to support their appropriate use.

Interpreting information about medication side effects: differences in risk perception and intention to comply when medicines are prescribed for adults or young children

This study investigates whether, and how, people's perception of risk and intended health behaviours are affected by whether a medicine is prescribed for themselves or for a young child. The question is relevant to the issue of whether it is beneficial to produce medicines information that is tailored to particular subgroups of the population, such as parents of young children. In the experiment, participants read scenarios which referred either to themselves or their (imagined) 1-year-old child, and were required to make a number of risk judgements. The results showed that both parents and non-parents were less satisfied, perceived side effects to be more severe and more likely to occur, risk to health to be higher, and said that they would be less likely to take (or give) the medicine when the recipient was the child. On the basis of the findings, it is suggested that it may well be beneficial to tailor materials to broader classes of patient type.