Hybrid meat products and co-creation: What do consumers say, feel and think?

Introduction: What consumers say about food and what kind of words they use to do so offers direct insights into their perceptions, preferences, reasoning, and emotions. Methods: This study explores evaluations of hybrid meat products of 2,405 consumers from England, Denmark, and Spain. As part of a large survey, consumers were prompted to note down four words that come to mind when they read a description of a hybrid meat product, and then again after they were involved in a hypothetical co-creation task of a hybrid meat product. 18,697 words and phrases of language material was processed using computational corpus-based analysis and manual classification into semantic categories including: Evaluation, Sensory, Production, Emotion, Diets, Quality, Ethics, and Other. Results: Consumers consider many dimensions when it comes to the evaluation of hybrid meat products including ethical conduct and sustainability. For all three languages, the number of positive words increased and the number of negative words decreased significantly (p < 0.001) following the co-creation task, suggesting that consumers see such products very positively once they are more familiar with them and know more about the ingredients. Subcategories that received most words include: taste, ingredients, healthiness, naturalness, innovation, and environment, implying that these areas are of most importance when it comes to the evaluation of hybrid meat products. The concept of nutrition (especially words pointing to positive aspects such as "rich in vitamins", "nutritious") also rose significantly in use after co-creation. Discussion: The study reveals consumers' vocabulary of hybrid meat products across the three countries and offers important insights for food producers to help them create innovative products that better align with consumers' perceptions and expectations.

Flow Cytometric Findings in Clonal Cytopenia of Undetermined Significance.

OBJECTIVES: To examine flow cytometric (FCM) findings in clonal cytopenia of undetermined significance (CCUS) in relation to variant allele fraction (VAF) and mutation risk. METHODS: Nine FCM parameters, including 5 FCM metrics (Meyerson-Alayed scoring scheme [MASS] parameters) we previously used to identify myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), were compared among 96 CCUS samples, 100 low-grade MDS samples and 100 samples from patients without somatic alterations (controls). RESULTS: FCM findings did not differ between CCUS samples with less than 20% VAF and controls. CCUS samples with more than 20% VAF (CCUS >20% VAF) demonstrated more than 1 abnormal FCM parameter at a frequency between MDS and controls. Abnormalities in CCUS with high-risk alterations (CCUS(hi)) were similar to MDS, with no statistical difference in the percentage of cases with more than 1 FCM abnormality or a positive MASS score. The positive predictive value (PPV) for clinically significant myeloid processes; MDS, CCUS(hi), and CCUS >20% VAF compared with other CCUS samples and controls was 94.8%, with 96.5% specificity and 61% sensitivity using a modified MASS score. A subset of MDS (43%) was distinguished from CCUS(hi) and CCUS >20% VAF using 3 parameters, with a 93.5% PPV and 83.3% specificity. CONCLUSIONS: FCM abnormalities can distinguish high-risk CCUS based on VAF or alteration type from low-risk CCUS and MDS in many cases. The findings are of potential utility in the evaluation of patients with cytopenias.