Food Insecurity Prevalence Across Diverse Sites During COVID-19: A Year of Comprehensive Data

Key Findings NFACT includes 18 study sites in 15 states as well as a national poll, collectively representing a sample size of more than 26,000 people. Some sites have implemented multiple survey rounds, here we report results from 22 separate surveys conducted during the year since the COVID-19 pandemic began in March 2020. 18 out of 19 surveys in 14 sites with data for before and since the pandemic began found an increase in food insecurity since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic as compared to before the pandemic. In nearly all surveys (18/19) that measured food insecurity both before and during the pandemic, more Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) were classified as food insecure during the pandemic as compared to before it began. Prevalence of food insecurity for BIPOC respondents was higher than the overall population in the majority of surveys (19/20) sampling a general population. In almost all surveys (21/22), the prevalence of food insecurity for households with children was higher than the overall prevalence of food insecurity. Food insecurity prevalence was higher for households experiencing a negative job impact during the pandemic (i.e. job loss, furlough, reduction in hours) in nearly all surveys and study sites (21/22). Food insecurity prevalence in most sites was significantly higher before COVID-19 than estimates from that time period. Reporting a percent change between pre and during COVID-19 prevalence may provide additional information about the rate of change in food insecurity since the start of the pandemic, which absolute prevalence of food insecurity may not capture. Results highlight consistent trends in food insecurity outcomes since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, across diverse study sites, methodological approaches, and time

Supplementary Data from: Responsible antibiotic use labeling and consumers’ willingness to buy and pay for fluid milk

These files contain data along supporting all results reported in Schell et al 2021 Responsible antibiotic use labeling and consumers’ willingness to buy and pay for fluid milk.This study was supported by USDA-NIFA’ Federal Formula Funds under Accession # 1014331 and Multistate Research Funds accession number #1016738 awarded to Renata Ivanek

Consumer perceptions of antibiotic use in animal agriculture in the United States, Canada, and the European Union: A scoping review

Given the global rise of antibiotic resistance, many industries have been called on to minimize antibiotic use. The purpose of this review is to specifically understand consumer opinions surrounding the use of antibiotics in animal agriculture

Consumer perceptions of antimicrobial use in animal husbandry: A scoping review

International audienceAntimicrobial use in animal agriculture is often perceived to play a role in the emerging threat of antimicrobial resistance. Increased consumer awareness of this issue places pressure on animal husbandry to adopt policies to reduce or eliminate antimicrobial use. We use a scoping review methodology to assess research on consumer perceptions of antimicrobial drugs in meat products in the United States, Canada, or the European Union. Evaluating peerreviewed and grey literature, we included studies for assessment if they met these topical and geographic requirements, involved primary data collection, and were originally published in English. Our screening process identified 124 relevant studies. Three reviewers jointly developed a data charting form and independently charted the contents of the studies. Of the 105 studies that measured consumer concern, 77.1% found that consumers were concerned about antimicrobial use in meat production. A minority of studies (29.8% of all studies) queried why consumers hold these views. These studies found human health and animal welfare were the main reasons for concern. Antimicrobial resistance rarely registered as an explicit reason for concern. A smaller group of studies (23.3%) measured the personal characteristics of consumers that expressed concern about antimicrobials. Among these studies, the most common and consistent features of these consumers were gender, age, income, and education. Regarding the methodology used, studies tended to be dominated by either willingness-to-pay studies or Likert scale questionnaires (73.64% of all studies). We recommend consideration of qualitative research into consumer views on this topic, which may provide new perspectives that explain consumer decision-making and mentality that are lacking in the literature. In addition, more research into the difference

Understanding Antibiotic Resistance as a Perceived Threat towards Dairy Cattle through Beliefs and Practices: A Survey-Based Study of Dairy Farmers

Antibiotic use is an important component in dairy herd management both to treat bacterial diseases and to maximize animal welfare. However, there is concern among scientists that antibiotic misuse and/or overuse by farmers might promote the emergence of resistant pathogens. We conducted a cross-sectional web-based questionnaire study with dairy farmers/managers in New York, USA to evaluate their (i) level of concern about antibiotic resistance and (ii) interest in adopting new judicious antibiotic use practices regarding mastitis treatment. A total of 118 responses were subjected to statistical analysis. The findings revealed that nearly half (45%) of study participants were undecided or disagreed that antibiotic resistance due to antibiotic use in dairy farming may negatively impact the health of dairy cattle. In contrast, the majority (78%) of participants self-reported that they do not treat with antibiotics at the first sign of mastitis, and the majority (66%) have either fully or partially implemented culture-based mastitis treatment on their farm. The self-reported adoption of culture-based mastitis treatment practices was statistically significantly associated with higher numbers of injectable and intramammary doses of antibiotics used on the participants’ farms. These findings will aid future research investigations on how to promote sustainable antibiotic use practices in dairy cattle

Wild and backyard food use during COVID-19 in upstate New York, United States

IntroductionCOVID-19 acutely shocked both socio-economic and food systems in 2020. We investigated the impact of COVID-19 on production and consumption of gardened produce, backyard poultry, wild game and fish, and foraged mushrooms, berries, and other plants in New York State, aiming to understand crisis influenced food choice and motivations, including food security.MethodsWe conducted an online, cross-sectional survey in October–December 2020 with a convenience sample of participants (n = 505) with an interest in gardening, poultry rearing, foraging, hunting, and/or fishing from six counties in upstate New York. We recruited through the New York Department of Environmental Conservation, Cornell Cooperative Extension, and other relevant email and social media pages.ResultsAcross the wild and backyard food production strategies, 4.0–14.3% of respondents reported engaging for the first time and 39.6–45.7% reported increased production (a little or a lot more), and 31.6–42.7% of respondents’ production was the same as the previous year. Consumption of foods produced was widespread, including fruit and vegetables (97.6% of producers also consumed), backyard eggs (92.7%), and foraged foods (93.8%). For meats, a majority consumed backyard poultry meat (51.2%), wild-caught fish (69.7%), and wild game they hunted (80.1%). The frequency of consumption of fruit and vegetables (average of 13.5 times/month) and eggs (16.4 times/month) was very high, while average consumption of poultry meat, foraged foods, fish, and wild game ranged from 3.1 to 5.8 times/month. The number of respondents who reported “have more control over food availability” as motivation to produce all wild and backyard foods increased from 2019 to 2020 (p < 0.05 - p < 0.001). There was also a significant relationship between experiences of COVID-19 related hardship (i.e., food insecurity, income loss) with gardening and poultry-rearing (p ≤ 0.05), but not with other production methods or with consumption of wild and backyard foods.DiscussionOur findings help to locate wild and backyard foods within COVID-19 impacted food environments, and describe food security as a particularly relevant motivation, among others, reported by respondents in 2020. Given this, New York State service providers can use these findings to tailor current future support for households exerting control over their own food environments with wild and backyard foods, allowing the state to be better prepared for future crises