This thesis project explored relationships between factors that may play a role in the intake individuals college students have. Understanding the relationships in previous research between screen time, social context and nutrition the researchers looked to explore these with a new population. College students had not been researched in the study much prior and through the date collected and the relationships observed the researchers were able to see how screen time and social context each affect nutrition, and how they affect each other.

This thesis project explored relationships between factors that may play a role in the intake individuals college students have. Understanding the relationships in previous research between screen time, social context and nutrition the researchers looked to explore these with a new population. College students had not been researched in the study much prior and through the date collected and the relationships observed the researchers were able to see how screen time and social context each affect nutrition, and how they affect each other.

Over the last decade, plant-based diets have grown in popularity. However, these diets have a significant problem- diet adherence and maintenance. Social Support is a key factor in long-term adherence. In response, we created a scale to measure perceived Social Support in the context of plant-based diets to further this growing area of scholarly research.

The maintenance of proper oral health has been shown to be an integral facet of overall well-being, with relationships studied between the progression of life-threatening diseases and improper oral care. Heart disease, Alzheimer’s disease and arthritis are some of the most common types of diseases that can progress as a result of oral negligence, particularly within the United States, where there is a lack of a universal health care system that encompasses dental care. In addition to the lack of proper access to quality oral care, a lack of adequate education surrounding oral care has been found to be present, particularly in rural and suburban areas in the United States. Project Tooth Fairy, a non-profit volunteer program, was established in order to delve deeper into these issues. This review aims to educate on the correlations between severe disease progression and oral health, as well as to acknowledge the importance of keeping a healthy mouth in regards to overall well-being, through a synthesis of Project Tooth Fairy’s findings.

Solutions to mitigating the negative externalities of climate change are deemed necessary for a sustainable future. Residential community composting, such as the Community Compost Program at Vista del Sol, could potentially play an important role within Arizona State University’s (ASU) solution to develop a sustainable institution as programs aspire to develop sustainable behaviors and integrate environmentally positive practices within students’ lives. The research and review of how universities can utilize a residential community compost program to ignite sustainable action within on-campus communities could present helpful information for additional universities to implement on their own. This review will aim to tackle the research question: how can the operational functions of existing university residential composting programs and behavioral science research be implemented within the Community Compost Program at Arizona State University? The review from existing university residential composting programs and behavioral sciences will be completed to provide an explanation of how residential community composting can overall be effectively prompted.

Local food sustainability has gained significant recent attention over the past decade. Considerable research points to a host of economic, social, and environmental benefits resulting from engagement with local food systems. These benefits are more apparent when contrasted with a model in which individuals participate in larger, non-local food systems for all or most of their food sourcing. As such, this project was designed to explore possible barriers, such as lack of awareness, to engagement in local foods among Arizona State University (ASU) students on the main Tempe campus. Furthermore, this creative project aimed to evaluate how a local foods program conducted in a university dining hall might impact students’ awareness and interest in local foods served on site.

In the last five decades, the prevalence of chemicals added to food to enhance its color, texture, flavor, and freshness has increased. These chemicals, known as food additives, are synthetically derived or chemically altered substances that are added to food during processing to achieve a specialized effect. Additives are regulated by the United States Food and Drug Administration and while many are “generally recognized as safe” (GRAS), some emerging research suggests that their safety rulings need to be reexamined.

Considering food additives in one’s diet is of the utmost importance for health, though it can be problematic for those with limited knowledge of additives or nutrition. Common opinion is that good nutrition involves only what is or is not being consumed—calories, fat, etc. But the realm of nutrition depends on quality of food—whole, minimally processed food that subsequently lacks additives—as much as it does the composition of food.
This paper reviews eight of the most common and often problematic food additives in America: high fructose corn syrup, aspartame, sodium nitrate/ sodium nitrite, partially hydrogenated vegetable oil (trans fat), monosodium glutamate (MSG), benzoate preservatives (BHA and BHT), potassium bromate, and caramel coloring. It is important to note that this list is far from comprehensive; these additives receive much attention in America making them some of the most talked about and most easily recognized additives.

This paper aims to present sound depictions of existing research that most often refutes the validity of the “generally recognized as safe” claim currently standing for these food additives, providing consumers with reliable information with which they can make educated decisions when purchasing food and eating healthfully.

This project explores a variety of ways of framing the problem of obesity, beginning with a multidisciplinary assessment of genetic, environmental, cultural, nutritional, and socioeconomic factors involved in the structure and the consequences of each frame. How obesity is framed as a problem has a profound impact on the kinds of solutions that may be deemed scientifically appropriate. But frames are not entirely evidence-based, inasmuch as political and moral values infuse debates about the nature of obesity. Drawing on interdisciplinary resources from bioethics and the philosophy of science, I strive to offer strategic insight in to how to navigate the complexity of these issues.

BACKGROUND: Biotechnology can improve vitamin deficiencies, farming practices and yields, yet it is surrounded by controversy. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to better understand opinions Americans have about genetically modified organisms (GMOs), across multiple perspectives including scientists, farmers, and perceptions shared via social media. METHODS: A Google Scholar search for the term "genetically modified" (GM) produced 1,420,000 results in 0.05 seconds from the year 1988 to present, a portion of this literature was used for this study. In addition a quasi-experimental study on social media (i.e. a blog and Twitter) was performed to inspire reactions of social media users who followed the accounts @Biofortified and @BiotechFood. The study lasted for approximately three months. The analytics website, Topsy was also used to track the number of conversations that included terms like "GMO". Furthermore a plant biologist, sustainability scientist, and local farmers were interviewed to gain insights on their perceptions of GM products. RESULTS: Results generally suggest that there was no stance shared by social media users, local farmers, and researchers. It was clear however that conversation about GMOs happens daily on social media. These conversations however lack the evidence that can be learned through literature and conversations with local farmers. DISCUSSION: A plausible possible reason for the confusion and mixed opinions is that regardless of the resources (like scientific literature and agriculture workers available on GMOs), individuals appear to use moral reasoning \u2014 as defined by Jonathan Haidt \u2014 to defend their stance on GMOs, not necessarily any empirical evidence.