How different are GM food accepters and rejecters really? A means-end chains application to yogurt in Germany

The purpose of the paper is to identify and describe differences in cognitive structures between consumer segments with differing levels of acceptance of genetically modified (GM) food. Among a sample of 60 mothers three segments are distinguished with respect to purchase intentions for GM yogurt: non-buyers, maybe-buyers and likely-buyers. A homogeneity test for the elicited laddering data suggests merging maybe- and likely-buyers, yielding two segments termed accepters and rejecters. Still, overlap between the segments’ cognitive structures is considerable, in particular with respect to a health focus in the evaluation of perceived consequences and ambivalence in technology assessment. Distinct differences are found in the assessment of benefits offered by GM food and the importance of values driving product evaluation and thus purchase decisions.

Differential effects of dairy snacks on appetite, but not overall energy intake

Dietary regulation of appetite may contribute to the prevention and management of excess body weight. The present study examined the effect of consumption of individual dairy products as snacks on appetite and subsequent ad libitum lunch energy intake. In a randomised cross-over trial, forty overweight men (age 32 (sd 9) years; BMI 27 (sd 2) kg/m2) attended four sessions 1 week apart and received three isoenergetic (841 kJ) and isovolumetric (410 ml) servings of dairy snacks or water (control) 120 min after breakfast. Appetite profile was determined throughout the morning and ad libitum energy intake was assessed 90 min after the intake of snacks. Concentrations of amino acids, glucose, insulin, ghrelin and peptide tyrosine tyrosine were measured at baseline (0 min) and 80 min after the intake of snacks. Although the results showed that yogurt had the greatest suppressive effect on appetite, this could be confounded by the poor sensory ratings of yogurt. Hunger rating was 8, 10 and 24 % (P < 0·001) lower after the intake of yogurt than cheese, milk and water, respectively. Energy intake was 11, 9 and 12 % (P < 0·02) lower after the intake of yogurt, cheese and milk, respectively, compared with water (4312 (se 226) kJ). Although there was no difference in the postprandial responses of hormones, alanine and isoleucine concentrations were higher after the intake of yogurt than cheese and milk (P < 0·05). In conclusion, all dairy snacks reduced appetite and lunch intake compared with water. Yogurt had the greatest effect on suppressing subjective appetite ratings, but did not affect subsequent food intake compared with milk or cheese.

Effect of food models and low-temperature storage on the adhesion of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG to Caco-2 cells

This study evaluated the effects of fat and sugar levels on the surface properties of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG during storage in food model systems, simulating yogurt and ice cream, and related them with the ability of the bacterial cells to adhere to Caco-2 cells. Freeze-dried L. rhamnosus GG cells were added to the model food systems and stored for 7 days. The bacterial cells were analyzed for cell viability, hydrophobicity, ζ potential, and their ability to adhere to Caco-2 cells. The results indicated that the food type and its composition affected the surface and adhesion properties of the bacterial cells during storage, with yogurt being a better delivery vehicle than ice cream in terms of bacterial adhesion to Caco-2 cells. The most important factor influencing bacterial adhesion was the storage time rather than the levels of fats and sugars, indicating that conformational changes were taking place on the surface of the bacterial cells during storage.