Beef tallow and emulsifier in growing-finishing pig diets

ABSTRACT Two trials were aimed to evaluate beef tallow in diets with and without emulsifier on performance of pigs at growing-finishing phases. In the first trial, 15 barrows (22.03±0.62 kg) were distributed among three treatments: reference diet; test diet 1 (5% beef tallow) and test diet 2 (10% beef tallow). Beef tallow presented average value of 7130.97 kcal ME/kg. For the performance trail, 30 barrows (24.85±1.18 kg) were distributed among five treatments: T1 - diet with soybean oil and 3230 kcal ME /kg; T2 - diet with beef tallow and 3230 kcal ME/kg; T3 - diet with beef tallow and 3080 kcal ME/kg; T4 - diet with beef tallow, 3080 kcal/kg and 0.1% emulsifier; T5 - diet with beef tallow, 2930 kcal ME/kg and 0.1% emulsifier. Feed conversion was worse in animals fed diet with 3080 kcal ME/kg containing beef tallow and with 2930 kcal ME/kg with beef tallow and emulsifier. For economic availability, animals fed diet with beef tallow and 3230 kcal ME/kg and those fed diet with 3080 kcal ME/kg containing beef tallow and emulsifier, did not differ from animals fed diet with soybean oil, which enables the reduction up to 150 kcal ME/kg be compensated by emulsifier addition.

Can health care providers recognise a fibromyalgia personality?

OBJECTIVES: To determine if experienced health care providers (HCPs) can recognise patients with fibromyalgia (FM) based on a limited set of personality items, exploring the existence of a FM personality. METHODS: From the 240-item NEO-PI-R personality questionnaire, 8 HCPs from two different countries each selected 20 items they considered most discriminative of FM personality. Then, evaluating the scores on these items of 129 female patients with FM and 127 female controls, each HCP rated the probability of FM for each individual on a 0-10 scale. Personality characteristics (domains and facets) of selected items were determined. Scores of patients with FM and controls on the eight 20-item sets, and HCPs' estimates of each individual's probability of FM were analysed for their discriminative value. RESULTS: The eight 20-item sets discriminated for FM, with areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve ranging from 0.71-0.81. The estimated probabilities for FM showed, in general, percentages of correct classifications above 50%, with rising correct percentages for higher estimated probabilities. The most often chosen and discriminatory items were predominantly of the domain neuroticism (all with higher scores in FM), followed by some items of the facet trust (lower scores in FM). CONCLUSIONS: HCPs can, based on a limited set of items from a personality questionnaire, distinguish patients with FM from controls with a statistically significant probability. The HCPs' expectation that personality in FM patients is associated with higher levels for aspects of neuroticism (proneness to psychological distress) and lower scores for aspects of trust, proved to be correct.