There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.
Abstract
In a cross-sectional survey among 626 Adventists, we investigated their perception
of spiritual dryness, and its association with indicators of Acedia, well-being and
emotional exhaustion. Women, younger persons and those without a specific duty within
the church had significantly higher spiritual dryness scores. Spiritual dryness was
predicted best by perceived
Excessive Spiritual Demands (indicating spiritual exhaustion) and low perception of the sacred. Further predictors
are Acedia’s
Difficulties in Prayer Life, reduced well-being and emotional exhaustion. The underlying causes might be complex
and thus to support persons experiencing these phases, a thorough differentiation
of the underlying ‘spirits’ is required.
Some evidence suggests vegetarian dietary patterns may be associated with reduced mortality, but the relationship is not well established. To evaluate the association between vegetarian dietary patterns and mortality. Prospective cohort study; mortality analysis by Cox proportional hazards regression, controlling for important demographic and lifestyle confounders. Adventist Health Study 2 (AHS-2), a large North American cohort. A total of 96,469 Seventh-day Adventist men and women recruited between 2002 and 2007, from which an analytic sample of 73,308 participants remained after exclusions. Diet was assessed at baseline by a quantitative food frequency questionnaire and categorized into 5 dietary patterns: nonvegetarian, semi-vegetarian, pesco-vegetarian, lacto-ovo-vegetarian, and vegan. The relationship between vegetarian dietary patterns and all-cause and cause-specific mortality; deaths through 2009 were identified from the National Death Index. There were 2570 deaths among 73,308 participants during a mean follow-up time of 5.79 years. The mortality rate was 6.05 (95% CI, 5.82-6.29) deaths per 1000 person-years. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for all-cause mortality in all vegetarians combined vs nonvegetarians was 0.88 (95% CI, 0.80-0.97). The adjusted HR for all-cause mortality in vegans was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.73-1.01); in lacto-ovo-vegetarians, 0.91 (95% CI, 0.82-1.00); in pesco-vegetarians, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.69-0.94); and in semi-vegetarians, 0.92 (95% CI, 0.75-1.13) compared with nonvegetarians. Significant associations with vegetarian diets were detected for cardiovascular mortality, noncardiovascular noncancer mortality, renal mortality, and endocrine mortality. Associations in men were larger and more often significant than were those in women. Vegetarian diets are associated with lower all-cause mortality and with some reductions in cause-specific mortality. Results appeared to be more robust in males. These favorable associations should be considered carefully by those offering dietary guidance.
Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License,
which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium
or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the
source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were
made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the
article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to
the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence
and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted
use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view
a copy of this licence, visit
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
History
Date
accepted
: 18
September
2020
Funding
Funded by: Private Universität Witten/Herdecke gGmbH (3128)
Open Access
:
Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.
scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.