Consumer perception of ecological food product

Research of how customers perceive ecological food products has to be conducted in order to define consumer behavior and foresee opportunities of the eco food product growth. Consumer behavior depends on social, economic and cultural context. Thus, research methods have to be developed for every single case, which turns into scientific problem. This article deals with the factors that form consumer perception of the ecological food product, defines basic specific features of this particular market and describes its growth possibilities. Objective – define consumer perception of the ecological food product. Key points: 1. Characterize basic features of the ecological food product important to consumers; 2. Define major characteristics of the ecological food market; 3. Determine possibilities of this particular market growth. Such common research methods as comparative scientific literature analysis and systemic logical analysis have been used when researching and analyzing ecological food products and basic market characteristics.Conclusions: 1. Ecological foods products are perceived by consumers as healthy, safe, nutritious, vitamin rich, tasty, local, expensive, scarce and remarkable food. Some of the features have not been scientifically proven. However, all of these characteristics regardless if seeming or proven influence consumer perception of the ecological food products. 2. Ecological food market could be defined as the market where consumption changes with the time; demand for the ecological precooked food increases and depends on consumer age, sex, education and occupation; ecological food market growth is stimulated by country’s government. 3. It is important to reduce ecological food prices, improve its accessibility and unify EU trade marks in order to develop and sustain ecological food marke

Consumer perception of ecological food product

Research of how customers perceive ecological food products has to be conducted in order to define consumer behavior and foresee opportunities of the eco food product growth. Consumer behavior depends on social, economic and cultural context. Thus, research methods have to be developed for every single case, which turns into scientific problem. This article deals with the factors that form consumer perception of the ecological food product, defines basic specific features of this particular market and describes its growth possibilities. Objective – define consumer perception of the ecological food product. Key points: 1. Characterize basic features of the ecological food product important to consumers; 2. Define major characteristics of the ecological food market; 3. Determine possibilities of this particular market growth. Such common research methods as comparative scientific literature analysis and systemic logical analysis have been used when researching and analyzing ecological food products and basic market characteristics. Conclusions: 1. Ecological foods products are perceived by consumers as healthy, safe, nutritious, vitamin rich, tasty, local, expensive, scarce and remarkable food. Some of the features have not been scientifically proven. However, all of these characteristics regardless if seeming or proven influence consumer perception of the ecological food products. 2. Ecological food market could be defined as the market where consumption changes with the time; demand for the ecological precooked food increases and depends on consumer age, sex, education and occupation; ecological food market growth is stimulated by country’s government. 3. It is important to reduce ecological food prices, improve its accessibility and unify EU trade marks in order to develop and sustain ecological food market

Hip revision arthroplasty (long-term results)

Objective. To evaluate the risk factors after total hip replacement arthroplasty for rerevision and to analyze complications after hip revision surgery. Material and methods. We obtained data from 117 hip revisions and 12 hip rerevision arthroplasties performed in 1992–2001 in the Department of Orthopedics of Klaipėda Hospital. Special forms were filled in for every patient who participated in the study. Name, operation date, type of implants, operative technique, revision diagnosis, intraoperative and postoperative complications were recorded. All patients were checked for death until 2003. Results. Hip revisions were performed for 77 (66%) women and 50 (44%) men in 1992–2001. We revised 22 (19%) cups, 6 (5%) stems, 86 (74%) total hip revisions; femoral head was exchanged for 3 patients. Revision diagnoses were: aseptic loosening in 106 (90%) cases, recurrent dislocations in 7 (6%) cases, and periprosthetic fractures in 4 (4%) cases. Patients’ age varied from 26–82 years, average 63.5 years. In revision group only 8% of patients were less than 50 years old, compared to 33% in rerevision group. Morselized allografts and bone impaction technique for reconstruction of bone defects were used in 70 (60%) of cases. We rerevised one cup only for which revision morselized allografts were used. Eight (67%) rerevisions were performed after first 28 (24%) hip revisions. Conclusions. Patients, who underwent revision surgery being younger than 50 years old, were at higher risk for rerevision surgery. Revision with morselized bone