Athletes’ Readiness for Alternative Protein Sources and Green Eating Practices: Towards a More Sustainable Diet in Sports Nutrition

Athletes’ Readiness for Alternative Protein Sources and Green Eating Practices: Towards a More Sustainable Diet in Sports Nutrition | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Athletes’ Readiness for Alternative Protein Sources and Green Eating Practices: Towards a More Sustainable Diet in Sports Nutrition Merve Guney-Coskun, Nesli Ersoy, Gülgün Ersoy This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7534127/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 16 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background Dietary protein is vital for athletic performance, recovery, and long-term health; however, has a significant impact on the environment. Sustainable alternative proteins may fulfil athletes’ performance requirements while reducing ecological impact, yet their acceptance in the athletic population remains underexplored. This study aimed to assess professional athletes’ acceptance of alternative protein sources (plant-based, insect-derived, single-cell, and in vitro proteins) and to examine their association with green eating behaviors, providing insights for sustainable sports nutrition strategies. Methods A cross-sectional online survey was conducted (February–May 2023) among 223 professional athletes aged 15–45 years with ≥ 6 months of regular training. The questionnaire assessed sociodemographic and sport characteristics, dietary habits, Green Eating scale, and acceptance of alternative protein sources (plant-based, insect-based, single-cell, in vitro meat) on a five-point Likert scale. Ordinal logistic regression identified predictors of acceptance. Analyses were performed in SPSS v22 (p < 0.05). Results Among 223 professional athletes (59% male; mean age 19.9 ± 4.6 years), plant-based protein showed the highest acceptance (81%), while insect protein, single-cell protein, and in vitro meat were least accepted (22–27%). Male gender predicted lower acceptance of plant-based protein (OR = 0.223, p = 0.004). Lack of sustainable nutrition education, lower decisional balance pros scores, and higher home self-efficacy were significant negative predictors for single-cell protein and in vitro meat acceptance (all p < 0.020). Conclusion Professional athletes showed high acceptance of plant-based proteins but limited acceptance of insect-based, single-cell, and in vitro meat proteins. Sustainable nutrition education and positive decisional balance were key predictors of acceptance, highlighting the need for targeted educational strategies to promote environmentally sustainable protein choices in sports nutrition. Sustainability Sports Nutrition Alternative Protein Sources Green Eating Figures Figure 1 Background Athletes have distinct nutritional requirements that are essential for optimizing performance, supporting recovery, and maintaining long-term health [ 1 ]. Adequate dietary protein plays a critical role in this context, facilitating muscle protein synthesis (MPS), tissue repair, and adaptive responses to training [ 2 ]. Compared with non-athletic adults—whose protein needs are typically 0.8–1.0 g/kg/day—athletes generally require 1.2–2.0 g/kg/day, depending on training intensity, competition demands, and recovery goals [ 1 , 3 , 4 ]. High-quality proteins, particularly those rich in branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs), are critical for stimulating MPS, maintaining a positive protein balance, and supporting performance outcomes [ 4 ]. Traditionally, animal-derived sources such as milk, eggs, and meat have been the cornerstone of sports nutrition due to their complete amino acid profiles, high digestibility, and proven efficacy [ 5 ]. Protein supplementation, whether as intact proteins, hydrolysates, peptides, or amino acids, is widely used to enhance training capacity, preserve lean mass, promote recovery, prevent deficiencies, and aid in rehabilitation. However, heavy reliance on animal-based proteins raises both environmental and public health concerns. Meat and dairy production contribute disproportionately to greenhouse gas emissions, require substantial water and land resources, and accelerate biodiversity loss [ 6 , 7 ]. Moreover, excessive intake of animal products has been linked to increased risks of chronic diseases, including cardiovascular disease and certain cancers [ 7 , 8 ]. These concerns have driven growing interest in sustainable protein alternatives capable of meeting athletes’ nutritional needs while reducing ecological impact. In recent years, several novel protein sources have gained attention in sports nutrition. Plant-based proteins provide essential amino acids along with antioxidant and anti-inflammatory compounds that may mitigate exercise-induced oxidative stress [ 9 ]. Insect proteins offer high-quality amino acid profiles, are rich in bioavailable micronutrients such as iron, zinc, and B vitamins (especially vitamin B 12 ), and can be produced with minimal environmental resources [ 10 ]. Microalgae proteins combine a complete amino acid profile with high solubility and antioxidant potential, making them suitable for functional recovery beverages [ 11 ]. Mycoproteins have demonstrated anabolic potential comparable to animal-derived proteins but with a markedly lower carbon footprint [ 9 ]. Additionally, protein hydrolysates and bioactive peptides may provide multifunctional benefits, including enhanced performance, reduced injury risk, and support for healthy ageing [ 9 ]. The sports nutrition market remains dominated by protein-based products, which account for around 80% of sales—mainly in powder and bar formats [ 5 ]. Yet, despite the environmental and nutritional potential of alternative proteins, athlete adoption remains low. Barriers include concerns over taste, texture, digestibility, and perceived adequacy for high-performance needs [ 12 – 15 ]. Furthermore, much of the current evidence stems from in vitro or animal studies, with relatively few controlled human trials to confirm efficacy, safety, and long-term outcomes [ 2 ]. While consumer research has explored acceptance of alternative proteins—highlighting factors such as sensory appeal, familiarity, and food neophobia—studies specifically targeting competitive athletes are scarce. This is a critical gap, as athletes have unique physiological demands, established dietary routines, and performance-driven decision-making processes, which may influence their willingness to integrate novel protein sources differently from the general population. There is also emerging evidence that some athletes are incorporating environmentally conscious dietary practices, such as reducing food waste, selecting locally sourced produce, and considering the environmental footprint of meals [ 2 ]. However, the link between these “green eating” behaviors and acceptance of alternative proteins remains unexplored in athletic populations. To address this gap, the present study evaluated professional athletes’ acceptance of plant-based, insect-based, single-cell, and in vitro meat proteins, and examined their association with green eating behaviors. Findings aim to inform sustainable sports nutrition strategies and guide the development of high-performance, eco-friendly protein products tailored to athletes. Methods 2.1. Study design and sampling The present study used a cross-sectional quantitative survey design, and data were collected electronically between February 2023 and May 2023 using Google Forms. A total of 223 professional athletes voluntarily participated in the study. The Google Forms questionnaire allowed for only one response per user, ensuring the absence of duplicate records. The exclusion criteria were (1) being younger than ≤ 15 years old (2) having any disease or health condition requiring specialized dietary planning. The inclusion criteria consisted of individuals: (1) aged between 15 and 45 years, (2) engaging in regular training for at least 6 months, and (3) having a professional sport license. 2.2. Questionnaire and scales The questionnaire consisted of multiple sections, including sociodemographic and sports characteristic information, dietary habits, green eating behavior, and acceptance towards various protein sources. It was developed by the researchers based on a comprehensive review of the relevant literature and was adapted for online administration [ 2 , 9 , 16 – 18 ]. Sociodemographic and sports characteristics Sociodemographic information covered gender, age, and educational level. Sports characteristics questions explored the athletes' specific sport type, duration of engagement in the sport, and details of their training program. 2.2.1. Dietary habits Information on participants’ dietary habits was collected, including the use of dietary supplements, whether they followed a particular diet for sport performance (Yes/No), and the general dietary pattern they adhered to. Participants self-reported their current diet by selecting the category that best matched their usual eating pattern, such as a high protein–low carbohydrate diet, a vegetarian diet including eggs and/or dairy products, a vegan diet, or another specified diet. Brief descriptions of each dietary model were provided in the questionnaire to ensure a consistent understanding among respondents. Dietary regimes were classified as omnivorous or meat-limiting, including semi-vegetarian, vegetarian, vegan, and pescatarian diets. In addition, general knowledge of nutrition, sports nutrition, and sustainable nutrition was assessed, along with the sources from which participants obtained related information. Self-reported weight (kg) and height (cm) were recorded, and Body Mass Index (BMI) was calculated as weight (kg) divided by height squared (m²) according to World Health Organization guidelines.[ 19 ] 2.2.2. Green Eating Behavior scale Green Eating (GE) Behavior (BEH) was assessed using a 25-item GE scale developed by Weller et al. [ 16 ]. The scale was translated into Turkish, and its validity and reliability were confirmed by Cambaz et al. [ 18 ]. This instrument provides insights into environmentally conscious eating and comprises four sections with 25 items, assessing different aspects of GE corresponding to Stages of Change (SOC), Decisional Balance (DB), and Self-efficacy (SE). The SOC section evaluates motivational readiness to change a behavior using a single 1-item scale. The BEH component consists of a single 6-item scale. The DB section explored the advantages (Pros) and disadvantages (Cons) associated with adopting a new behavior, using two subscales: Pros (5 items) and Cons (5 items). The SE section measures individuals’ confidence in engaging and maintaining the new behavior across challenging situations and includes two subscales: school (5 items) and home (3 items). For participants not currently in education, the school and home items were adapted accordingly. All items were assessed using 5-point Likert-type response options. For each scale, the score was calculated by summing the relevant item scores and dividing by the total number of items in that scale. 2.2.3. Acceptance to consume alternative protein sources The questions were adapted from a prior EU-based study on consumer readiness to accept alternative, more sustainable protein sources [ 17 ]. Acceptance to consume food products identified as dietary protein sources in the Turkish Dietary Guidelines, as well as alternative protein sources, was assessed using a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from Very unacceptable (= 1) to Very acceptable (= 5), with an additional I don’t know option. Alternative and more sustainable protein sources were defined as plant-based, insect-based, single-cell-based, and in vitro meat-based proteins, consistent with definitions used in related research [ 9 , 17 , 20 ]. Participants were asked to indicate their level of acceptance for consuming food products containing the following seven protein sources: Plant-based protein (e.g., soy, pea, rice, beans, etc.) Meat-based protein (e.g., red meat, lamb, poultry, etc.) Dairy-based protein (e.g., milk, cheese, yogurt, etc.) Seafood-based protein (e.g., fish, shrimp, etc.) Insect-based protein (e.g., mealworms, crickets, etc.) Single-cell protein (e.g., microorganisms such as algae, yeast, fungi, bacteria) In vitro meat-based protein (e.g., lab-grown or cultured meat) 2.3. Statistical analysis Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 22.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA, released 2011). Statistical significance for all tests was set at p < 0.05. Prior to analysis, the normality of variable distributions was assessed using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. Descriptive statistics were calculated as frequencies (n) and percentages (%) for categorical variables and means with standard deviations (SD) for continuous variables. Acceptance levels for consuming alternative, more sustainable protein sources, as well as other dietary protein sources, were reported as percentages. Ordinal logistic regression analyses were performed to identify determinants of acceptance for alternative sustainable protein sources. Participants who answered “I don’t know” were excluded from the regression analyses, as this response does not fit within the ordered scale (very unacceptable (= 1) to very acceptable (= 5)). Differences between those who answered, “I don’t know” and those who selected an option within the ordered scale were assessed separately for each protein source using the Chi-square test or the Mann–Whitney U test, as appropriate. In total, 3–18% of respondents were excluded from the regression analyses (Appendices Table A1). For regression analyses, the original five-point acceptance scale was collapsed into three ordered categories: unacceptable, neutral, and acceptable. Separate ordinal logistic regression models were tested for each alternative sustainable protein source as the dependent variable (ordinal). Independent variables included sociodemographic characteristics (nominal: gender, sport category, dietary supplementation, nutrition and sustainable nutrition education, dietary regime, specific diet for sport) and continuous variables (interval: age, duration of sport participation, Green Eating score). Dietary regime was recoded into two groups: omnivore and meat-limiting diets (semi-vegetarian, pescatarian, vegetarian, and vegan). Correlation matrices of all potential explanatory variables were examined to detect multicollinearity prior to regression. Multicollinearity was considered present if the correlation coefficient between two explanatory variables exceeded 0.8 [ 21 ] (Appendices Table A2). The parallel lines assumption for ordinal regression was tested for each model. This assumption was met for insect-based protein (p = 0.986), single-cell protein (p = 0.460), and in vitro meat-based protein (p = 0.343), but not for plant-based protein (p = 0.009). 2.4. Ethical approval This study was conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethics approval was obtained from the Non-Interventional Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Istanbul Medipol University (Reference No: E-10840098-604.01.01-1352). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to data collection. As all included participants were ≥16 years of age, no parental or guardian consent was required. Results The study included 223 professional athletes (59% male, 41% female) with a mean age of 19.9 ± 4.6 years (Table 1). Males were significantly younger than females ( p = 0.005) and had higher mean weight (73.4 ± 14.9 kg vs. 60.1 ± 9.7 kg, p < 0.001), height (179.0 ± 10.0 cm vs. 167.6 ± 8.2 cm, p < 0.001), and BMI (22.8 ± 3.5 kg/m² vs. 21.4 ± 2.7 kg/m², p = 0.001). More than half of the participants were university students (52%), and the majority participated in team sports (65%), with smaller proportions in combat sports (9%), water sports (9%), and other individual sports (16%). Dietary supplement use was reported by 27% (n=61) of the athletes. Thirty percent (n=68) had received nutrition education, whereas only 17% (n=37) had received education specifically on sustainable nutrition. Most athletes (95%, n=211) reported an omnivorous dietary regime, and 26% (n=57) indicated following a particular diet for sport performance. Figure 1 presents the overall acceptance levels for various dietary protein sources among athletes (Fig 1.). Detailed percentage distributions for each acceptance category are provided in Appendices Table A3, as these proportions cannot be clearly visualized from the figures alone. Animal-based (meat-based) and dairy-based protein were the most accepted protein sources, with 84% and 83% of respondents, respectively, rating them as acceptable or very acceptable. Seafood-based protein was accepted by 78% of athletes. Among alternative, more sustainable protein sources, plant-based protein was the most accepted, with 81% (41% acceptable, 40% very acceptable) indicating positive acceptance. Single-cell protein was accepted by 27% of respondents, followed by insect-based protein (22%) and in vitro meat-based protein (22%). Negative perceptions were most pronounced for insect-based protein (82% very unacceptable or unacceptable) and in vitro meat-based protein (73% very unacceptable or unacceptable). The highest proportion of “I don’t know” responses was reported for in vitro meat (18%) and single-cell protein (12%), compared to 3% for plant-based protein. Mean GE subscale scores by gender are shown in Table 2. In the total sample, the highest mean score was for SE at Home (3.2 ± 1.2), while the lowest was for SOC (2.1 ± 1.9). Female athletes had significantly higher DB Pros scores compared to males (3.2 ± 1.0 vs. 2.8 ± 1.0, p = 0.001), indicating greater perceived advantages of environmentally friendly eating. No significant gender differences were found for SOC, BEH, DB Cons, SE at School, or SE at Home. Ordinal logistic regression analyses were performed only for participants who provided an ordered response on the acceptance scale (ranging from very unacceptable to very acceptable) (Table 3). Participants selecting “I don’t know” were excluded, as this option could not be positioned within the ordinal framework. The proportion excluded varied by protein source, from 3% for plant-based protein to 18% for in vitro meat. To examine potential selection bias, the sociodemographic, anthropometric, and behavioral characteristics of the “I don’t know” group were compared with those of respondents who provided an ordered response (Supplementary Table S1). Significant differences were observed for certain protein sources: for single-cell protein, “I don’t know” respondents had lower mean height (p = 0.018) and BMI (p = 0.028); for in vitro meat, they were more likely to report no dietary supplement use (p = 0.030), to follow an omnivorous diet (p = 0.044), and were less likely to adhere to a particular diet for sport (p = 0.021). Ordinal logistic regression analysis identified several significant predictors of acceptance toward alternative, more sustainable protein sources (Table 3). For plant-based proteins, male participants were significantly less likely to express acceptance compared with females (OR = 0.223, 95% CI: 0.080–0.620, p = 0.004). For insect-based proteins, lower acceptance was associated with higher self-efficacy at home (OR = 0.469, 95% CI: 0.324–0.679, p < 0.001). In the case of single-cell proteins, the absence of sustainable nutrition education (OR = 0.156, 95% CI: 0.052–0.463, p = 0.001), lower decisional balance pros scores (OR = 0.630, 95% CI: 0.432–0.918, p = 0.016), and higher self-efficacy at home (OR = 0.682, 95% CI: 0.494–0.943, p = 0.020) were significant negative predictors. For in vitro meat, significant negative predictors included not having received sustainable nutrition education (OR = 0.171, 95% CI: 0.051–0.575, p = 0.004), following an omnivorous dietary regime (OR = 0.055, 95% CI: 0.006–0.515, p = 0.011), lower decisional balance pros scores (OR = 0.549, 95% CI: 0.351–0.857, p = 0.008), and higher self-efficacy at home (OR = 0.579, 95% CI: 0.398–0.842, p = 0.004). No other demographic, sport-related, or green eating behavior variables reached statistical significance. The Nagelkerke R² values indicated that the models explained 16% of the variance for plant-based protein, 21% for insect-based protein, 19% for single-cell protein, and 27% for in vitro meat acceptance. Discussion This study provides novel insights into professional athletes’ acceptance of alternative protein sources and their relationship with environmentally conscious green eating behaviors. The results revealed a clear hierarchy of acceptance: plant-based proteins were widely endorsed, whereas insect-based, single-cell, and in vitro meat proteins were substantially less accepted. Predictors of acceptance included gender (lower acceptance of plant-based protein among males), the presence of sustainable nutrition education (associated with higher acceptance of single-cell and in vitro proteins), DB pros scores (higher perceived benefits associated with higher acceptance), and SE at home, which showed an inverse association with acceptance of several novel protein sources. The strong acceptance of plant-based proteins aligns with evidence showing that when appropriately planned, plant-derived proteins can match animal proteins in supporting muscle protein synthesis, training adaptations, and body composition outcomes [22–26]. Improvements in product quality, taste, and market availability of plant-based products have helped normalize their use in athletic contexts [22]. In contrast, insect, single-cell, and in vitro meat proteins received limited acceptance, similar consumer research in the general population [12, 27]. Resistance is largely explained by sensory attributes (taste, texture, aroma), low familiarity, and food neophobia [20, 28]. This is particularly pronounced in Western contexts, where entomophagy lacks cultural precedent, despite insects offering a high-quality amino acid profile and superior feed efficiency [29, 30]. Similarly, although mycoprotein and microalgae demonstrate robust anabolic and antioxidant properties [31, 32], their higher costs, limited availability, and sensory unfamiliarity constrain broader adoption [33]. In vitro meat, meanwhile, remains hindered by skepticism over naturalness and safety, despite its clear sustainability potential [34]. Gender also appeared to play a key role, with male athletes showing lower acceptance of plant-based proteins. This finding is consistent with prior research linking meat consumption to masculinity and strength [35, 36]. These sociocultural norms may be amplified in high-performance environments where strength and endurance are highly valorized. Education that frames plant proteins as performance-supportive and anabolic, supported by recent sports nutrition evidence [37], may help reduce gender-related biases and encourage integration of plant proteins into performance-oriented diets. The role of education more broadly was evident in the higher acceptance of single-cell and in vitro proteins among athletes who had received sustainable nutrition training. These proteins, being less familiar and more technologically novel, require cognitive flexibility that education appears to facilitate. Moreover, DB Pros scores—reflecting perceived benefits—were positively associated with acceptance, underscoring that athletes prioritize evidence of efficacy and recovery benefits over abstract sustainability appeals. Education that combines performance benefits with sustainability messages may therefore represent a powerful strategy to shift attitudes. An additional insight was the inverse association between self-efficacy at home and acceptance of novel proteins. Athletes who feel confident managing their diets in domestic environments may prefer routine and familiarity, making them less open to change. This suggests that product development strategies should introduce alternative proteins in familiar, convenient formats, such as shakes, bars, or patties, that integrate seamlessly into established routines. Prior research has consistently shown that taste, texture, and convenience are decisive for consumer acceptance [12, 20], highlighting the need for athlete-centered innovation. Sustainability considerations amplify the importance of these findings. The environmental impacts of animal-based protein production are well documented [6, 7]. Their dietary practices influence not only peers and teammates but also broader consumer markets which visibility through sponsorships, team catering, or public campaigns can normalize sustainable protein choices. Importantly, their preferences can directly shape industry innovation, driving the development of products that combine sustainability with the functionality, palatability, and convenience required in performance nutrition. A key strength of this study is its focus on professional athletes, a population underrepresented in research on sustainable protein acceptance. The use of a validated Green Eating scale alongside ordinal regression modeling provides robust insights into both psychosocial and behavioral determinants of acceptance. Embedding sustainability within athlete nutrition education which can be delivered through sports dietitians and performance staff, could increase awareness and acceptance of novel proteins, especially when performance benefits are emphasized. Product development should prioritize familiar, convenient formats co-designed with athletes to ensure palatability and integration into training routines. Exposure strategies, such as team tastings, cafeteria nudges, and ambassador-led campaigns, could further normalize consumption and reduce food neophobia. Nevertheless, several limitations should be acknowledged. The cross-sectional design precludes causal inference; while education and DB were associated with acceptance, directionality cannot be established. The relatively young, nationally specific cohort also limits generalizability, particularly in cultural contexts where insect consumption or alternative protein exposure differs. Reliance on self-reported data may introduce bias, and survey-based acceptance does not necessarily equate to actual consumption, which is influenced by factors such as cost, product availability, sensory qualities, and institutional food environments. Future research should build on these foundations. Longitudinal and cross-cultural studies could clarify how education, cultural norms, and repeated exposure shape acceptance over time. Additionally, mixed methods approaches that combine quantitative and qualitative insights may further illuminate the nuanced barriers and motivators that shape athlete behavior. Conclusion In conclusion, professional athletes demonstrated strong acceptance of plant-based proteins but substantial reluctance toward insect-based, single-cell, and in vitro meat proteins. Acceptance was shaped by gender, sustainable nutrition education, decisional balance, and home self-efficacy, reflecting both psychological and contextual influences. These findings highlight the importance of education, product innovation, and supportive food environments in facilitating the integration of sustainable protein sources into athlete diets. With targeted strategies, alternative proteins can simultaneously meet performance demands and contribute to the broader goal of environmentally responsible sports nutrition. Abbreviations BCAAs: Branched-Chain Amino Acids BMI: Body Mass Index DB: Decisional Balance DB Pros: Decisional Balance – Perceived Advantages (Pros) DB Cons: Decisional Balance – Perceived Disadvantages (Cons) GE: Green Eating MPS: Muscle Protein Synthesis OR: Odds Ratio SD: Standard Deviation SE: Self-Efficacy SE at Home: Self-Efficacy in the Home Environment SE at School: Self-Efficacy in the School Environment SOC: Stages of Change Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethics approval was obtained from the Non-Interventional Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Istanbul Medipol University (Reference No: E-10840098-604.01.01-1352). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to data collection. As all included participants were ≥16 years of age, no parental or guardian consent was required. Consent for publication All participants provided consent for their anonymized data to be used for research purposes and for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Availability of data and materials The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Competing interests The authors report there are no competing interests to declare. Funding The authors report there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article. Authors’ Contributions Conceptualization: MGC, NE, GE Methodology: MGC, NE, GE Formal analysis: MGC Investigation: MGC Supervision: GE Writing – original draft: MGC Writing – review & editing: MGC, NE, GE. Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank Yaren Beşer for her valuable contribution to the data collection process. References Thomas DT, Erdman KA, Burke LM. Nutrition and Athletic Performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2016;48:543–68. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000000852. Meyer NL, Reguant-Closa A, Nemecek T. Sustainable Diets for Athletes. Curr Nutr Rep. 2020;9:147–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13668-020-00318-0. Jäger R, Kerksick CM, Campbell BI, Cribb PJ, Wells SD, Skwiat TM, et al. International Society of Sports Nutrition Position Stand: protein and exercise. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2017;14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12970-017-0177-8. Ziegenfuss TN, Landis JA, Lemieux RA. Protein for Sports-New Data and New Recommendations. Strength Cond J. 2010;32:65–70. https://doi.org/10.1519/SSC.0b013e3181c16f83. Arenas-Jal M, Suñé-Negre JM, Pérez-Lozano P, García-Montoya E. Trends in the food and sports nutrition industry: A review. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2020;60:2405–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2019.1643287. Poore J, Nemecek T. Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science (1979). 2018;360:987–92. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaq0216. Clark MA, Springmann M, Hill J, Tilman D. Multiple health and environmental impacts of foods. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2019;116:23357–62. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1906908116. Satija A, Bhupathiraju SN, Spiegelman D, Chiuve SE, Manson JE, Willett W, et al. Healthful and Unhealthful Plant-Based Diets and the Risk of Coronary Heart Disease in U.S. Adults. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70:411–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.05.047. López-Martínez MI, Miguel M, Garcés-Rimón M. Protein and Sport: Alternative Sources and Strategies for Bioactive and Sustainable Sports Nutrition. Front Nutr. 2022;9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2022.926043. Kamalakannan M, Gudla K. Insect protein: the next frontier in bodybuilding nutrition. J Sci Food Agric. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.70040. Kaur M, Bhatia S, Bagchi D, Tak Y, Kaur G, Kaur C, et al. Enhancing microalgal proteins for nutraceutical and functional food applications. Future Foods. 2025;11:100564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fufo.2025.100564. Hartmann C, Siegrist M. Consumer perception and behaviour regarding sustainable protein consumption: A systematic review. Trends Food Sci Technol. 2017;61:11–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2016.12.006. Pakseresht A, Ahmadi Kaliji S, Canavari M. Review of factors affecting consumer acceptance of cultured meat. Appetite. 2022;170:105829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105829. van Huis A. Potential of Insects as Food and Feed in Assuring Food Security. Annu Rev Entomol. 2013;58:563–83. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-120811-153704. Zhao S, Xu Y, Li J, Ning Z. The Effect of Plant-Based Protein Ingestion on Athletic Ability in Healthy People—A Bayesian Meta-Analysis with Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials. Nutrients. 2024;16:2748. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16162748. Weller KE, Greene GW, Redding CA, Paiva AL, Lofgren I, Nash JT, et al. Development and Validation of Green Eating Behaviors, Stage of Change, Decisional Balance, and Self-Efficacy Scales in College Students. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2014;46:324–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2014.01.002. Grasso AC, Hung Y, Olthof MR, Verbeke W, Brouwer IA. Older Consumers’ Readiness to Accept Alternative, More Sustainable Protein Sources in the European Union. Nutrients. 2019;11:1904. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11081904. Cambaz M. Turkish Version of Green Eating Survey: Validity and Reliability. Yeditepe University, Graduate School of Health Sciences; 2021. World Health Organisation. A healthy lifestyle - WHO recommendations. WHO Global Database for Body Mass Index. https://www.who.int/europe/news-room/fact-sheets/item/a-healthy-lifestyle---who-recommendations. Accessed 3 Dec 2024. Onwezen MC, Bouwman EP, Reinders MJ, Dagevos H. A systematic review on consumer acceptance of alternative proteins: Pulses, algae, insects, plant-based meat alternatives, and cultured meat. Appetite. 2021;159:105058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2020.105058. Hair J, Black W, Babin B, Anderson R, Tatham R. Multivariate Data Analysis. 6th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.; 2006. Rogerson D. Vegan diets: practical advice for athletes and exercisers. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2017;14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12970-017-0192-9. Babault N, Païzis C, Deley G, Guérin-Deremaux L, Saniez M-H, Lefranc-Millot C, et al. Pea proteins oral supplementation promotes muscle thickness gains during resistance training: a double-blind, randomized, Placebo-controlled clinical trial vs. Whey protein. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2015;12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12970-014-0064-5. Hevia-Larraín V, Gualano B, Longobardi I, Gil S, Fernandes AL, Costa LAR, et al. High-Protein Plant-Based Diet Versus a Protein-Matched Omnivorous Diet to Support Resistance Training Adaptations: A Comparison Between Habitual Vegans and Omnivores. Sports Medicine. 2021;51:1317–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-021-01434-9. Joy JM, Lowery RP, Wilson JM, Purpura M, De Souza EO, Wilson SM, et al. The effects of 8 weeks of whey or rice protein supplementation on body composition and exercise performance. Nutr J. 2013;12:86. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-2891-12-86. Lim MT, Pan BJ, Toh DWK, Sutanto CN, Kim JE. Animal Protein versus Plant Protein in Supporting Lean Mass and Muscle Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Nutrients. 2021;13:661. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu13020661. Mancini MC, Antonioli F. Exploring consumers’ attitude towards cultured meat in Italy. Meat Sci. 2019;150:101–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.12.014. Verbeke W. Profiling consumers who are ready to adopt insects as a meat substitute in a Western society. Food Qual Prefer. 2015;39:147–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.07.008. van Huis A. Potential of Insects as Food and Feed in Assuring Food Security. Annu Rev Entomol. 2013;58:563–83. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-120811-153704. Vangsoe MT, Thogersen R, Bertram HC, Heckmann L-HL, Hansen M. Ingestion of Insect Protein Isolate Enhances Blood Amino Acid Concentrations Similar to Soy Protein in A Human Trial. Nutrients. 2018;10:1357. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu10101357. Dunlop M V., Kilroe SP, Bowtell JL, Finnigan TJA, Salmon DL, Wall BT. Mycoprotein represents a bioavailable and insulinotropic non-animal-derived dietary protein source: a dose–response study. British Journal of Nutrition. 2017;118:673–85. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114517002409. Monteyne AJ, Coelho MO, Porter C, Abdelrahman DR, Jameson TS, Jackman SR, et al. Mycoprotein ingestion stimulates protein synthesis rates to a greater extent than milk protein in rested and exercised skeletal muscle of healthy young men: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 2020;112:318–33. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqaa092. Bleakley S, Hayes M. Algal Proteins: Extraction, Application, and Challenges Concerning Production. Foods. 2017;6:33. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods6050033. Bryant CJ, Barnett JC. What’s in a name? Consumer perceptions of in vitro meat under different names. Appetite. 2019;137:104–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.02.021. Rothgerber H. Real men don’t eat (vegetable) quiche: Masculinity and the justification of meat consumption. Psychol Men Masc. 2013;14:363–75. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030379. Graça J, Calheiros MM, Oliveira A. Attached to meat? (Un)Willingness and intentions to adopt a more plant-based diet. Appetite. 2015;95:113–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2015.06.024. Pinckaers PJM, Trommelen J, Snijders T, van Loon LJC. The Anabolic Response to Plant-Based Protein Ingestion. Sports Medicine. 2021;51:59–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-021-01540-8. Tables Table 1. Background characteristics of athletes. Male (n=131) Female (n=92) Total (n=223) p-value mean ± SD mean ± SD mean ± SD Age (years) 19,4 ± 4,8 20,8 ± 4,4 19,9 ± 4,6 0,005 Duration of sport (month) 88,3 ± 56,7 85,6 ± 53,8 87,2 ± 55,4 0,938 Anthropometric Measurements Weight (kg) 73,4 ± 14,9 60,1 ± 9,7 67,9 ± 14,6 0,000 Heaight (m) 179,0 ± 10,0 167,6 ± 8,2 174,3 ± 10,8 0,000 BMI (kg/m 2 ) 22,8 ± 3,5 21,4 ± 2,7 22,2 ± 3,3 0,001 n % n % n % Education Primary school 15 11 4 4 19 9 0,000* High school 57 44 21 23 78 35 University 52 40 64 70 116 52 Higher education 7 5 3 3 10 4 Sport category Team 97 74 49 53 146 65 0,013* Combat sport 10 8 11 12 21 9 Water sport 10 8 11 12 21 9 Other 14 11 21 23 35 16 Dietary Supplementation No 97 74 65 71 162 73 0,648 Yes 34 26 27 29 61 27 Nutrition Education No 99 76 56 61 155 70 0,026* Yes 32 24 36 39 68 30 Sustainable Nutrition Education No 112 85 74 80 186 83 0,362 Yes 19 15 18 20 37 17 Dietary regime Omnivore 125 95 86 93 211 95 0,558 Meat limiting 6 5 6 7 12 5 Particular diet for sport No 100 76 66 72 166 74 0,441 Yes 31 24 26 28 57 26 Abbreviations: SD, standard deviation; BMI, body mass index. Descriptive statistics are expressed as frequency, percentage, or mean ± standard deviation. * p < 0.05 obtained from chi-square test for categorical variables or a Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables. Table 2. Results of the Green Eating Score and gender comparison Male (n=131) Female (n=92) Total (=223) p-value mean ± SD mean ± SD mean ± SD GE Score SOC 2,0 ± 1.8 2,4 ± 2.0 2,1 ± 1.9 0,093 BEH 2,7 ± 1.1 3,0 ± 1.0 2,9 ± 1.1 0,108 DB Pros 2,8 ± 1.0 3,2 ± 1.0 2,9 ± 1.0 0,001* DB Cons 2,5 ± 0.9 2,7 ± 0.8 2,6 ± 0.9 0,065 SE at School 2,4 ± 1.0 2,5 ± 1.1 2,4 ± 1.1 0,525 SE at Home 3,2 ± 1.2 3,3 ± 1.1 3,2 ± 1.2 0,384 Abbreviations: GE, Green Eating; SOC, Stages of Change; BEH, Behavior; DB, Decisional Balance; Pros, advantages; Cons, disadvantages; SE, Self-efficacy. * p < 0.05 obtained from Mann-Whitney U test. Table 3 is available in the Supplementary Files section. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files AppendicesSUSsportManuscript.docx Table3.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Reviews received at journal 28 Oct, 2025 Reviews received at journal 25 Oct, 2025 Reviews received at journal 24 Oct, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 18 Oct, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 15 Oct, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 15 Oct, 2025 Reviews received at journal 13 Oct, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 13 Oct, 2025 Reviews received at journal 13 Oct, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 13 Oct, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 13 Oct, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 06 Oct, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 01 Oct, 2025 Editor invited by journal 11 Sep, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 10 Sep, 2025 First submitted to journal 10 Sep, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7534127","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":530077296,"identity":"6937a530-6c13-49be-b948-fa90ed16ebc2","order_by":0,"name":"Merve Guney-Coskun","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Istanbul Medipol University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Merve","middleName":"","lastName":"Guney-Coskun","suffix":""},{"id":530077297,"identity":"fcc47014-2f8e-40fc-a8ca-a84d9af2803d","order_by":1,"name":"Nesli Ersoy","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Hacettepe University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Nesli","middleName":"","lastName":"Ersoy","suffix":""},{"id":530077298,"identity":"9e38f064-e4e2-4c8a-835e-547282c088ab","order_by":2,"name":"Gülgün Ersoy","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Istanbul Medipol University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Gülgün","middleName":"","lastName":"Ersoy","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-09-04 08:53:29","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7534127/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7534127/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":93722061,"identity":"74ac8517-ff67-4189-963d-55f35b3e73a3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-16 23:41:40","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":333147,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"v6.SUSsportManuscriptMGC.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7534127/v1/a45e02fd3a47488fac59a055.docx"},{"id":93722301,"identity":"e249cce0-3af2-486a-999c-7f0ee32a8199","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-16 23:57:40","extension":"json","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":5727,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"d655311818c9459db703d0b85a8a1ffb.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7534127/v1/55a8d19853ae2f6ee29f9a02.json"},{"id":93722118,"identity":"60816c70-a109-45fc-8964-1e503c1eafb9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-16 23:49:41","extension":"docx","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":43542,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"AppendicesSUSsportManuscript.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7534127/v1/b475685e81cd3b24e3070118.docx"},{"id":93722063,"identity":"c6827c18-6055-4a20-8640-ad528b206096","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-16 23:41:40","extension":"xml","order_by":3,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":151349,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"d655311818c9459db703d0b85a8a1ffb1enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7534127/v1/d68fc02f3c01b0cf243e712e.xml"},{"id":93722065,"identity":"69f243be-b2e2-487c-83ed-e0da0c5099c7","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-16 23:41:40","extension":"jpeg","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":155693,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7534127/v1/15d0f98e1091b0d6a98923b6.jpeg"},{"id":93722064,"identity":"56d34c00-1b98-4955-8c04-d57a022404c8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-16 23:41:40","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":42362,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7534127/v1/59fd22830ab08bf060b9cc08.png"},{"id":93722067,"identity":"68b51320-dcfe-47d6-a0b2-570b3d359835","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-16 23:41:41","extension":"xml","order_by":6,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":149714,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"d655311818c9459db703d0b85a8a1ffb1structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7534127/v1/ea1f25aae24ac3c7a2d60209.xml"},{"id":93722066,"identity":"38aed173-b3e3-4fd6-8002-619d1c572e40","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-16 23:41:41","extension":"html","order_by":7,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":161842,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7534127/v1/4e6922f3ef979a444d2afdd6.html"},{"id":93722116,"identity":"90827b35-065d-4ae4-8784-cfc5f9672ea3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-16 23:49:40","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":177327,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eLevel of acceptance to eat dietary protein sources in athletes (%, n=223).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7534127/v1/5614836e977e2c1ac200ee31.png"},{"id":93722368,"identity":"0b015606-e71e-4e94-b62c-eb11bf4a7bb8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-17 00:05:41","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1050171,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7534127/v1/98f56633-1a13-4273-ae90-bb0e9aaba333.pdf"},{"id":93722060,"identity":"e87df05e-ba74-4425-a566-8fa54b603ea4","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-16 23:41:40","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":43542,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"AppendicesSUSsportManuscript.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7534127/v1/b6b45fa42978e9a82117f83d.docx"},{"id":93722057,"identity":"dfe4f8ae-ebac-40c6-8528-7344730c67be","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-16 23:41:40","extension":"docx","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":22454,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Table3.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7534127/v1/dff97a633941b5d47e9b9a05.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Athletes’ Readiness for Alternative Protein Sources and Green Eating Practices: Towards a More Sustainable Diet in Sports Nutrition","fulltext":[{"header":"Background","content":"\u003cp\u003eAthletes have distinct nutritional requirements that are essential for optimizing performance, supporting recovery, and maintaining long-term health [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e]. Adequate dietary protein plays a critical role in this context, facilitating muscle protein synthesis (MPS), tissue repair, and adaptive responses to training [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e]. Compared with non-athletic adults\u0026mdash;whose protein needs are typically 0.8\u0026ndash;1.0 g/kg/day\u0026mdash;athletes generally require 1.2\u0026ndash;2.0 g/kg/day, depending on training intensity, competition demands, and recovery goals [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e]. High-quality proteins, particularly those rich in branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs), are critical for stimulating MPS, maintaining a positive protein balance, and supporting performance outcomes [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e]. Traditionally, animal-derived sources such as milk, eggs, and meat have been the cornerstone of sports nutrition due to their complete amino acid profiles, high digestibility, and proven efficacy [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e]. Protein supplementation, whether as intact proteins, hydrolysates, peptides, or amino acids, is widely used to enhance training capacity, preserve lean mass, promote recovery, prevent deficiencies, and aid in rehabilitation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHowever, heavy reliance on animal-based proteins raises both environmental and public health concerns. Meat and dairy production contribute disproportionately to greenhouse gas emissions, require substantial water and land resources, and accelerate biodiversity loss [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e]. Moreover, excessive intake of animal products has been linked to increased risks of chronic diseases, including cardiovascular disease and certain cancers [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e]. These concerns have driven growing interest in sustainable protein alternatives capable of meeting athletes\u0026rsquo; nutritional needs while reducing ecological impact.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn recent years, several novel protein sources have gained attention in sports nutrition. Plant-based proteins provide essential amino acids along with antioxidant and anti-inflammatory compounds that may mitigate exercise-induced oxidative stress [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e]. Insect proteins offer high-quality amino acid profiles, are rich in bioavailable micronutrients such as iron, zinc, and B vitamins (especially vitamin B\u003csub\u003e12\u003c/sub\u003e), and can be produced with minimal environmental resources [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e]. Microalgae proteins combine a complete amino acid profile with high solubility and antioxidant potential, making them suitable for functional recovery beverages [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e]. Mycoproteins have demonstrated anabolic potential comparable to animal-derived proteins but with a markedly lower carbon footprint [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e]. Additionally, protein hydrolysates and bioactive peptides may provide multifunctional benefits, including enhanced performance, reduced injury risk, and support for healthy ageing [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe sports nutrition market remains dominated by protein-based products, which account for around 80% of sales\u0026mdash;mainly in powder and bar formats [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e]. Yet, despite the environmental and nutritional potential of alternative proteins, athlete adoption remains low. Barriers include concerns over taste, texture, digestibility, and perceived adequacy for high-performance needs [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR13 CR14\" citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e]. Furthermore, much of the current evidence stems from in vitro or animal studies, with relatively few controlled human trials to confirm efficacy, safety, and long-term outcomes [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhile consumer research has explored acceptance of alternative proteins\u0026mdash;highlighting factors such as sensory appeal, familiarity, and food neophobia\u0026mdash;studies specifically targeting competitive athletes are scarce. This is a critical gap, as athletes have unique physiological demands, established dietary routines, and performance-driven decision-making processes, which may influence their willingness to integrate novel protein sources differently from the general population.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThere is also emerging evidence that some athletes are incorporating environmentally conscious dietary practices, such as reducing food waste, selecting locally sourced produce, and considering the environmental footprint of meals [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e]. However, the link between these \u0026ldquo;green eating\u0026rdquo; behaviors and acceptance of alternative proteins remains unexplored in athletic populations. To address this gap, the present study evaluated professional athletes\u0026rsquo; acceptance of plant-based, insect-based, single-cell, and in vitro meat proteins, and examined their association with green eating behaviors. Findings aim to inform sustainable sports nutrition strategies and guide the development of high-performance, eco-friendly protein products tailored to athletes.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.1. Study design and sampling\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe present study used a cross-sectional quantitative survey design, and data were collected electronically between February 2023 and May 2023 using Google Forms. A total of 223 professional athletes voluntarily participated in the study. The Google Forms questionnaire allowed for only one response per user, ensuring the absence of duplicate records.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe exclusion criteria were (1) being younger than \u0026le;\u0026thinsp;15 years old (2) having any disease or health condition requiring specialized dietary planning. The inclusion criteria consisted of individuals: (1) aged between 15 and 45 years, (2) engaging in regular training for at least 6 months, and (3) having a professional sport license.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.2. Questionnaire and scales\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe questionnaire consisted of multiple sections, including sociodemographic and sports characteristic information, dietary habits, green eating behavior, and acceptance towards various protein sources. It was developed by the researchers based on a comprehensive review of the relevant literature and was adapted for online administration [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR17\" citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSociodemographic and sports characteristics\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSociodemographic information covered gender, age, and educational level. Sports characteristics questions explored the athletes' specific sport type, duration of engagement in the sport, and details of their training program.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.2.1. Dietary habits\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eInformation on participants\u0026rsquo; dietary habits was collected, including the use of dietary supplements, whether they followed a particular diet for sport performance (Yes/No), and the general dietary pattern they adhered to. Participants self-reported their current diet by selecting the category that best matched their usual eating pattern, such as a high protein\u0026ndash;low carbohydrate diet, a vegetarian diet including eggs and/or dairy products, a vegan diet, or another specified diet. Brief descriptions of each dietary model were provided in the questionnaire to ensure a consistent understanding among respondents. Dietary regimes were classified as omnivorous or meat-limiting, including semi-vegetarian, vegetarian, vegan, and pescatarian diets.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn addition, general knowledge of nutrition, sports nutrition, and sustainable nutrition was assessed, along with the sources from which participants obtained related information. Self-reported weight (kg) and height (cm) were recorded, and Body Mass Index (BMI) was calculated as weight (kg) divided by height squared (m\u0026sup2;) according to World Health Organization guidelines.[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.2.2. Green Eating Behavior scale\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eGreen Eating (GE) Behavior (BEH) was assessed using a 25-item GE scale developed by Weller et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e]. The scale was translated into Turkish, and its validity and reliability were confirmed by Cambaz et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e]. This instrument provides insights into environmentally conscious eating and comprises four sections with 25 items, assessing different aspects of GE corresponding to Stages of Change (SOC), Decisional Balance (DB), and Self-efficacy (SE).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe SOC section evaluates motivational readiness to change a behavior using a single 1-item scale. The BEH component consists of a single 6-item scale. The DB section explored the advantages (Pros) and disadvantages (Cons) associated with adopting a new behavior, using two subscales: Pros (5 items) and Cons (5 items). The SE section measures individuals\u0026rsquo; confidence in engaging and maintaining the new behavior across challenging situations and includes two subscales: school (5 items) and home (3 items). For participants not currently in education, the school and home items were adapted accordingly. All items were assessed using 5-point Likert-type response options. For each scale, the score was calculated by summing the relevant item scores and dividing by the total number of items in that scale.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.2.3. Acceptance to consume alternative protein sources\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe questions were adapted from a prior EU-based study on consumer readiness to accept alternative, more sustainable protein sources [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e]. Acceptance to consume food products identified as dietary protein sources in the Turkish Dietary Guidelines, as well as alternative protein sources, was assessed using a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from Very unacceptable (=\u0026thinsp;1) to Very acceptable (=\u0026thinsp;5), with an additional I don\u0026rsquo;t know option. Alternative and more sustainable protein sources were defined as plant-based, insect-based, single-cell-based, and in vitro meat-based proteins, consistent with definitions used in related research [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e]. Participants were asked to indicate their level of acceptance for consuming food products containing the following seven protein sources:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003col\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003ePlant-based protein (e.g., soy, pea, rice, beans, etc.)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eMeat-based protein (e.g., red meat, lamb, poultry, etc.)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eDairy-based protein (e.g., milk, cheese, yogurt, etc.)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eSeafood-based protein (e.g., fish, shrimp, etc.)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eInsect-based protein (e.g., mealworms, crickets, etc.)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eSingle-cell protein (e.g., microorganisms such as algae, yeast, fungi, bacteria)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn vitro meat-based protein (e.g., lab-grown or cultured meat)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.3. Statistical analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eData were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 22.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA, released 2011). Statistical significance for all tests was set at p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05. Prior to analysis, the normality of variable distributions was assessed using the Kolmogorov\u0026ndash;Smirnov test. Descriptive statistics were calculated as frequencies (n) and percentages (%) for categorical variables and means with standard deviations (SD) for continuous variables. Acceptance levels for consuming alternative, more sustainable protein sources, as well as other dietary protein sources, were reported as percentages.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOrdinal logistic regression analyses were performed to identify determinants of acceptance for alternative sustainable protein sources. Participants who answered \u0026ldquo;I don\u0026rsquo;t know\u0026rdquo; were excluded from the regression analyses, as this response does not fit within the ordered scale (very unacceptable (=\u0026thinsp;1) to very acceptable (=\u0026thinsp;5)). Differences between those who answered, \u0026ldquo;I don\u0026rsquo;t know\u0026rdquo; and those who selected an option within the ordered scale were assessed separately for each protein source using the Chi-square test or the Mann\u0026ndash;Whitney U test, as appropriate. In total, 3\u0026ndash;18% of respondents were excluded from the regression analyses (Appendices Table A1). For regression analyses, the original five-point acceptance scale was collapsed into three ordered categories: unacceptable, neutral, and acceptable. Separate ordinal logistic regression models were tested for each alternative sustainable protein source as the dependent variable (ordinal). Independent variables included sociodemographic characteristics (nominal: gender, sport category, dietary supplementation, nutrition and sustainable nutrition education, dietary regime, specific diet for sport) and continuous variables (interval: age, duration of sport participation, Green Eating score). Dietary regime was recoded into two groups: omnivore and meat-limiting diets (semi-vegetarian, pescatarian, vegetarian, and vegan).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eCorrelation matrices of all potential explanatory variables were examined to detect multicollinearity prior to regression. Multicollinearity was considered present if the correlation coefficient between two explanatory variables exceeded 0.8 [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e] (Appendices Table A2). The parallel lines assumption for ordinal regression was tested for each model. This assumption was met for insect-based protein (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.986), single-cell protein (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.460), and in vitro meat-based protein (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.343), but not for plant-based protein (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.009).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e2.4.\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Ethical approval\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study was conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethics approval was obtained from the Non-Interventional Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Istanbul Medipol University (Reference No: E-10840098-604.01.01-1352). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to data collection. As all included participants were \u0026ge;16 years of age, no parental or guardian consent was required.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe study included 223 professional athletes (59% male, 41% female) with a mean age of 19.9 \u0026plusmn; 4.6 years (Table 1). Males were significantly younger than females (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.005) and had higher mean weight (73.4 \u0026plusmn; 14.9 kg vs. 60.1 \u0026plusmn; 9.7 kg, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001), height (179.0 \u0026plusmn; 10.0 cm vs. 167.6 \u0026plusmn; 8.2 cm, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e \u0026lt; 0.001), and BMI (22.8 \u0026plusmn; 3.5 kg/m\u0026sup2; vs. 21.4 \u0026plusmn; 2.7 kg/m\u0026sup2;,\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.001). More than half of the participants were university students (52%), and the majority participated in team sports (65%), with smaller proportions in combat sports (9%), water sports (9%), and other individual sports (16%).\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;Dietary supplement use was reported by 27% (n=61) of the athletes. Thirty percent (n=68) had received nutrition education, whereas only 17% (n=37) had received education specifically on sustainable nutrition. Most athletes (95%, n=211) reported an omnivorous dietary regime, and 26% (n=57) indicated following a particular diet for sport performance.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFigure 1 presents the overall acceptance levels for various dietary protein sources among athletes (Fig 1.). Detailed percentage distributions for each acceptance category are provided in Appendices Table A3, as these proportions cannot be clearly visualized from the figures alone. Animal-based (meat-based) and dairy-based protein were the most accepted protein sources, with 84% and 83% of respondents, respectively, rating them as acceptable or very acceptable. Seafood-based protein was accepted by 78% of athletes. Among alternative, more sustainable protein sources, plant-based protein was the most accepted, with 81% (41% acceptable, 40% very acceptable) indicating positive acceptance. Single-cell protein was accepted by 27% of respondents, followed by insect-based protein (22%) and in vitro meat-based protein (22%). Negative perceptions were most pronounced for insect-based protein (82% very unacceptable or unacceptable) and in vitro meat-based protein (73% very unacceptable or unacceptable). The highest proportion of \u0026ldquo;I don\u0026rsquo;t know\u0026rdquo; responses was reported for in vitro meat (18%) and single-cell protein (12%), compared to 3% for plant-based protein.\u003c/p\u003e\n\n\n\u003cp\u003eMean GE subscale scores by gender are shown in Table 2. In the total sample, the highest mean score was for SE at Home (3.2 \u0026plusmn; 1.2), while the lowest was for SOC (2.1 \u0026plusmn; 1.9). Female athletes had significantly higher DB Pros scores compared to males (3.2 \u0026plusmn; 1.0 vs. 2.8 \u0026plusmn; 1.0, p = 0.001), indicating greater perceived advantages of environmentally friendly eating. No significant gender differences were found for SOC, BEH, DB Cons, SE at School, or SE at Home.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOrdinal logistic regression analyses were performed only for participants who provided an ordered response on the acceptance scale (ranging from very unacceptable to very acceptable) (Table 3). Participants selecting \u0026ldquo;I don\u0026rsquo;t know\u0026rdquo; were excluded, as this option could not be positioned within the ordinal framework. The proportion excluded varied by protein source, from 3% for plant-based protein to 18% for in vitro meat. To examine potential selection bias, the sociodemographic, anthropometric, and behavioral characteristics of the \u0026ldquo;I don\u0026rsquo;t know\u0026rdquo; group were compared with those of respondents who provided an ordered response (Supplementary Table S1). Significant differences were observed for certain protein sources: for single-cell protein, \u0026ldquo;I don\u0026rsquo;t know\u0026rdquo; respondents had lower mean height\u0026nbsp;(p = 0.018) and BMI (p = 0.028); for in vitro meat, they were more likely to report no dietary supplement use (p = 0.030), to follow an omnivorous diet (p = 0.044), and were less likely to adhere to a particular diet for sport (p = 0.021).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOrdinal logistic regression analysis identified several significant predictors of acceptance toward alternative, more sustainable protein sources (Table 3). For plant-based proteins, male participants were significantly less likely to express acceptance compared with females (OR = 0.223, 95% CI: 0.080\u0026ndash;0.620, p = 0.004). For insect-based proteins, lower acceptance was associated with higher self-efficacy at home (OR = 0.469, 95% CI: 0.324\u0026ndash;0.679, p \u0026lt; 0.001). In the case of single-cell proteins, the absence of sustainable nutrition education (OR = 0.156, 95% CI: 0.052\u0026ndash;0.463, p = 0.001), lower decisional balance pros scores (OR = 0.630, 95% CI: 0.432\u0026ndash;0.918, p = 0.016), and higher self-efficacy at home (OR = 0.682, 95% CI: 0.494\u0026ndash;0.943, p = 0.020) were significant negative predictors. For in vitro meat, significant negative predictors included not having received sustainable nutrition education (OR = 0.171, 95% CI: 0.051\u0026ndash;0.575, p = 0.004), following an omnivorous dietary regime (OR = 0.055, 95% CI: 0.006\u0026ndash;0.515, p = 0.011), lower decisional balance pros scores (OR = 0.549, 95% CI: 0.351\u0026ndash;0.857, p = 0.008), and higher self-efficacy at home (OR = 0.579, 95% CI: 0.398\u0026ndash;0.842, p = 0.004). No other demographic, sport-related, or green eating behavior variables reached statistical significance. The Nagelkerke R\u0026sup2; values indicated that the models explained 16% of the variance for plant-based protein, 21% for insect-based protein, 19% for single-cell protein, and 27% for in vitro meat acceptance.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study provides novel insights into professional athletes\u0026rsquo; acceptance of alternative protein sources and their relationship with environmentally conscious green eating behaviors. The results revealed a clear hierarchy of acceptance: plant-based proteins were widely endorsed, whereas insect-based, single-cell, and in vitro meat proteins were substantially less accepted. Predictors of acceptance included gender (lower acceptance of plant-based protein among males), the presence of sustainable nutrition education (associated with higher acceptance of single-cell and in vitro proteins), DB pros scores (higher perceived benefits associated with higher acceptance), and SE at home, which showed an inverse association with acceptance of several novel protein sources.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe strong acceptance of plant-based proteins aligns with evidence showing that when appropriately planned, plant-derived proteins can match animal proteins in supporting muscle protein synthesis, training adaptations, and body composition outcomes [22\u0026ndash;26]. Improvements in product quality, taste, and market availability of plant-based products have helped normalize their use in athletic contexts [22].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn contrast, insect, single-cell, and in vitro meat proteins received limited acceptance, similar consumer research in the general population [12, 27]. Resistance is largely explained by sensory attributes (taste, texture, aroma), low familiarity, and food neophobia [20, 28]. This is particularly pronounced in Western contexts, where entomophagy lacks cultural precedent, despite insects offering a high-quality amino acid profile and superior feed efficiency [29, 30]. Similarly, although mycoprotein and microalgae demonstrate robust anabolic and antioxidant properties [31, 32], their higher costs, limited availability, and sensory unfamiliarity constrain broader adoption [33]. In vitro meat, meanwhile, remains hindered by skepticism over naturalness and safety, despite its clear sustainability potential [34].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGender also appeared to play a key role, with male athletes showing lower acceptance of plant-based proteins. This finding is consistent with prior research linking meat consumption to masculinity and strength [35, 36]. These sociocultural norms may be amplified in high-performance environments where strength and endurance are highly valorized. Education that frames plant proteins as performance-supportive and anabolic, supported by recent sports nutrition evidence [37], may help reduce gender-related biases and encourage integration of plant proteins into performance-oriented diets.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe role of education more broadly was evident in the higher acceptance of single-cell and in vitro proteins among athletes who had received sustainable nutrition training. These proteins, being less familiar and more technologically novel, require cognitive flexibility that education appears to facilitate. Moreover, DB Pros scores\u0026mdash;reflecting perceived benefits\u0026mdash;were positively associated with acceptance, underscoring that athletes prioritize evidence of efficacy and recovery benefits over abstract sustainability appeals. Education that combines performance benefits with sustainability messages may therefore represent a powerful strategy to shift attitudes.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAn additional insight was the inverse association between self-efficacy at home and acceptance of novel proteins. Athletes who feel confident managing their diets in domestic environments may prefer routine and familiarity, making them less open to change. This suggests that product development strategies should introduce alternative proteins in familiar, convenient formats, such as shakes, bars, or patties, that integrate seamlessly into established routines. Prior research has consistently shown that taste, texture, and convenience are decisive for consumer acceptance [12, 20], highlighting the need for athlete-centered innovation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSustainability considerations amplify the importance of these findings. The environmental impacts of animal-based protein production are well documented [6, 7].\u0026nbsp;Their dietary practices influence not only peers and teammates but also broader consumer markets which visibility through sponsorships, team catering, or public campaigns can normalize sustainable protein choices. Importantly, their preferences can directly shape industry innovation, driving the development of products that combine sustainability with the functionality, palatability, and convenience required in performance nutrition.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA key strength of this study is its focus on professional athletes, a population underrepresented in research on sustainable protein acceptance. The use of a validated Green Eating scale alongside ordinal regression modeling provides robust insights into both psychosocial and behavioral determinants of acceptance. Embedding sustainability within athlete nutrition education which can be delivered through sports dietitians and performance staff, could increase awareness and acceptance of novel proteins, especially when performance benefits are emphasized. Product development should prioritize familiar, convenient formats co-designed with athletes to ensure palatability and integration into training routines. Exposure strategies, such as team tastings, cafeteria nudges, and ambassador-led campaigns, could further normalize consumption and reduce food neophobia.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNevertheless, several limitations should be acknowledged. The cross-sectional design precludes causal inference; while education and DB were associated with acceptance, directionality cannot be established. The relatively young, nationally specific cohort also limits generalizability, particularly in cultural contexts where insect consumption or alternative protein exposure differs. Reliance on self-reported data may introduce bias, and survey-based acceptance does not necessarily equate to actual consumption, which is influenced by factors such as cost, product availability, sensory qualities, and institutional food environments. Future research should build on these foundations. Longitudinal and cross-cultural studies could clarify how education, cultural norms, and repeated exposure shape acceptance over time. Additionally, mixed methods approaches that combine quantitative and qualitative insights may further illuminate the nuanced barriers and motivators that shape athlete behavior.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn conclusion, professional athletes demonstrated strong acceptance of plant-based proteins but substantial reluctance toward insect-based, single-cell, and in vitro meat proteins. Acceptance was shaped by gender, sustainable nutrition education, decisional balance, and home self-efficacy, reflecting both psychological and contextual influences. These findings highlight the importance of education, product innovation, and supportive food environments in facilitating the integration of sustainable protein sources into athlete diets. With targeted strategies, alternative proteins can simultaneously meet performance demands and contribute to the broader goal of environmentally responsible sports nutrition.\u003c/p\u003e\n"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003cp\u003eBCAAs: Branched-Chain Amino Acids\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBMI: Body Mass Index\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDB: Decisional Balance\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDB Pros: Decisional Balance \u0026ndash; Perceived Advantages (Pros)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDB Cons: Decisional Balance \u0026ndash; Perceived Disadvantages (Cons)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGE: Green Eating\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMPS: Muscle Protein Synthesis\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOR: Odds Ratio\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSD: Standard Deviation\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSE: Self-Efficacy\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSE at Home: Self-Efficacy in the Home Environment\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSE at School: Self-Efficacy in the School Environment\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSOC: Stages of Change\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethics approval was obtained from the Non-Interventional Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Istanbul Medipol University (Reference No: E-10840098-604.01.01-1352). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to data collection. As all included participants were \u0026ge;16 years of age, no parental or guardian consent was required.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll participants provided consent for their anonymized data to be used for research purposes and for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of data and materials\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors report there are no competing interests to declare.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors report there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors\u0026rsquo; Contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConceptualization: MGC, NE, GE\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMethodology: MGC, NE, GE\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFormal analysis: MGC\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInvestigation: MGC\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSupervision: GE\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWriting \u0026ndash; original draft: MGC\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWriting \u0026ndash; review \u0026amp; editing: MGC, NE, GE.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors would like to thank Yaren Beşer for her valuable contribution to the data collection process.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThomas DT, Erdman KA, Burke LM. Nutrition and Athletic Performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2016;48:543–68. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000000852.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMeyer NL, Reguant-Closa A, Nemecek T. Sustainable Diets for Athletes. Curr Nutr Rep. 2020;9:147–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13668-020-00318-0.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJäger R, Kerksick CM, Campbell BI, Cribb PJ, Wells SD, Skwiat TM, et al. International Society of Sports Nutrition Position Stand: protein and exercise. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2017;14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12970-017-0177-8.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZiegenfuss TN, Landis JA, Lemieux RA. Protein for Sports-New Data and New Recommendations. Strength Cond J. 2010;32:65–70. https://doi.org/10.1519/SSC.0b013e3181c16f83.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArenas-Jal M, Suñé-Negre JM, Pérez-Lozano P, García-Montoya E. Trends in the food and sports nutrition industry: A review. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2020;60:2405–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2019.1643287.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePoore J, Nemecek T. Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science (1979). 2018;360:987–92. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaq0216.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eClark MA, Springmann M, Hill J, Tilman D. Multiple health and environmental impacts of foods. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2019;116:23357–62. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1906908116.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSatija A, Bhupathiraju SN, Spiegelman D, Chiuve SE, Manson JE, Willett W, et al. Healthful and Unhealthful Plant-Based Diets and the Risk of Coronary Heart Disease in U.S. Adults. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70:411–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.05.047.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLópez-Martínez MI, Miguel M, Garcés-Rimón M. Protein and Sport: Alternative Sources and Strategies for Bioactive and Sustainable Sports Nutrition. Front Nutr. 2022;9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2022.926043.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKamalakannan M, Gudla K. Insect protein: the next frontier in bodybuilding nutrition. J Sci Food Agric. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.70040.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKaur M, Bhatia S, Bagchi D, Tak Y, Kaur G, Kaur C, et al. Enhancing microalgal proteins for nutraceutical and functional food applications. Future Foods. 2025;11:100564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fufo.2025.100564.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHartmann C, Siegrist M. Consumer perception and behaviour regarding sustainable protein consumption: A systematic review. Trends Food Sci Technol. 2017;61:11–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2016.12.006.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePakseresht A, Ahmadi Kaliji S, Canavari M. Review of factors affecting consumer acceptance of cultured meat. Appetite. 2022;170:105829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105829.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003evan Huis A. Potential of Insects as Food and Feed in Assuring Food Security. Annu Rev Entomol. 2013;58:563–83. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-120811-153704.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhao S, Xu Y, Li J, Ning Z. The Effect of Plant-Based Protein Ingestion on Athletic Ability in Healthy People—A Bayesian Meta-Analysis with Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials. Nutrients. 2024;16:2748. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16162748.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWeller KE, Greene GW, Redding CA, Paiva AL, Lofgren I, Nash JT, et al. Development and Validation of Green Eating Behaviors, Stage of Change, Decisional Balance, and Self-Efficacy Scales in College Students. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2014;46:324–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2014.01.002.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGrasso AC, Hung Y, Olthof MR, Verbeke W, Brouwer IA. Older Consumers’ Readiness to Accept Alternative, More Sustainable Protein Sources in the European Union. Nutrients. 2019;11:1904. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11081904.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCambaz M. Turkish Version of Green Eating Survey: Validity and Reliability. Yeditepe University, Graduate School of Health Sciences; 2021.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWorld Health Organisation. A healthy lifestyle - WHO recommendations. WHO Global Database for Body Mass Index. https://www.who.int/europe/news-room/fact-sheets/item/a-healthy-lifestyle---who-recommendations. Accessed 3 Dec 2024.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOnwezen MC, Bouwman EP, Reinders MJ, Dagevos H. A systematic review on consumer acceptance of alternative proteins: Pulses, algae, insects, plant-based meat alternatives, and cultured meat. Appetite. 2021;159:105058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2020.105058.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHair J, Black W, Babin B, Anderson R, Tatham R. Multivariate Data Analysis. 6th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.; 2006.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRogerson D. Vegan diets: practical advice for athletes and exercisers. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2017;14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12970-017-0192-9.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBabault N, Païzis C, Deley G, Guérin-Deremaux L, Saniez M-H, Lefranc-Millot C, et al. Pea proteins oral supplementation promotes muscle thickness gains during resistance training: a double-blind, randomized, Placebo-controlled clinical trial vs. Whey protein. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2015;12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12970-014-0064-5.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHevia-Larraín V, Gualano B, Longobardi I, Gil S, Fernandes AL, Costa LAR, et al. High-Protein Plant-Based Diet Versus a Protein-Matched Omnivorous Diet to Support Resistance Training Adaptations: A Comparison Between Habitual Vegans and Omnivores. Sports Medicine. 2021;51:1317–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-021-01434-9.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJoy JM, Lowery RP, Wilson JM, Purpura M, De Souza EO, Wilson SM, et al. The effects of 8 weeks of whey or rice protein supplementation on body composition and exercise performance. Nutr J. 2013;12:86. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-2891-12-86.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLim MT, Pan BJ, Toh DWK, Sutanto CN, Kim JE. Animal Protein versus Plant Protein in Supporting Lean Mass and Muscle Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Nutrients. 2021;13:661. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu13020661.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMancini MC, Antonioli F. Exploring consumers’ attitude towards cultured meat in Italy. Meat Sci. 2019;150:101–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.12.014.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVerbeke W. Profiling consumers who are ready to adopt insects as a meat substitute in a Western society. Food Qual Prefer. 2015;39:147–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.07.008.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003evan Huis A. Potential of Insects as Food and Feed in Assuring Food Security. Annu Rev Entomol. 2013;58:563–83. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-120811-153704.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVangsoe MT, Thogersen R, Bertram HC, Heckmann L-HL, Hansen M. Ingestion of Insect Protein Isolate Enhances Blood Amino Acid Concentrations Similar to Soy Protein in A Human Trial. Nutrients. 2018;10:1357. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu10101357.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDunlop M V., Kilroe SP, Bowtell JL, Finnigan TJA, Salmon DL, Wall BT. Mycoprotein represents a bioavailable and insulinotropic non-animal-derived dietary protein source: a dose–response study. British Journal of Nutrition. 2017;118:673–85. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114517002409.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMonteyne AJ, Coelho MO, Porter C, Abdelrahman DR, Jameson TS, Jackman SR, et al. Mycoprotein ingestion stimulates protein synthesis rates to a greater extent than milk protein in rested and exercised skeletal muscle of healthy young men: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 2020;112:318–33. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqaa092.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBleakley S, Hayes M. Algal Proteins: Extraction, Application, and Challenges Concerning Production. Foods. 2017;6:33. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods6050033.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBryant CJ, Barnett JC. What’s in a name? Consumer perceptions of in vitro meat under different names. Appetite. 2019;137:104–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.02.021.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRothgerber H. Real men don’t eat (vegetable) quiche: Masculinity and the justification of meat consumption. Psychol Men Masc. 2013;14:363–75. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030379.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGraça J, Calheiros MM, Oliveira A. Attached to meat? (Un)Willingness and intentions to adopt a more plant-based diet. Appetite. 2015;95:113–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2015.06.024.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePinckaers PJM, Trommelen J, Snijders T, van Loon LJC. The Anabolic Response to Plant-Based Protein Ingestion. Sports Medicine. 2021;51:59–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-021-01540-8.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Tables","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 1.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eBackground characteristics of athletes.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv align=\"center\"\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 17px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMale (n=131)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFemale (n=92)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal (n=223)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ep-value\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 17px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003emean \u0026plusmn; SD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003emean \u0026plusmn; SD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003emean \u0026plusmn; SD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAge (years)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 17px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19,4 \u0026plusmn; 4,8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20,8 \u0026plusmn; 4,4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19,9 \u0026plusmn; 4,6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0,005\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDuration of sport (month)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 17px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e88,3 \u0026plusmn; 56,7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e85,6 \u0026plusmn; 53,8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e87,2 \u0026plusmn; 55,4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0,938\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAnthropometric Measurements\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 17px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWeight (kg)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 17px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e73,4 \u0026plusmn; 14,9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e60,1 \u0026plusmn; 9,7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e67,9 \u0026plusmn; 14,6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0,000\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHeaight (m)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 17px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e179,0 \u0026plusmn; 10,0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e167,6 \u0026plusmn; 8,2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e174,3 \u0026plusmn; 10,8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0,000\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBMI (kg/m\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 17px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22,8 \u0026plusmn; 3,5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21,4 \u0026plusmn; 2,7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22,2 \u0026plusmn; 3,3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0,001\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003en\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e%\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003en\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e%\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003en\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e%\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEducation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePrimary school\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0,000*\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigh school\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e44\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUniversity\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e64\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e116\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHigher education\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSport category\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTeam\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e97\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e74\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e53\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e146\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e65\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0,013*\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCombat sport\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWater sport\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOther\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDietary Supplementation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e97\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e74\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e65\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e71\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e162\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e73\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0,648\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e34\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e61\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNutrition Education\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e99\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e76\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e56\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e61\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e155\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0,026*\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e36\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 44px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSustainable Nutrition Education\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e112\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e85\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e74\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e186\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e83\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0,362\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e37\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDietary regime\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOmnivore\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e125\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e95\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e86\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e93\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e211\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e95\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0,558\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMeat limiting\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eParticular diet for sport\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e76\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e66\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e72\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e166\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e74\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0,441\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 34px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAbbreviations: SD, standard deviation; BMI, body mass index. Descriptive statistics are expressed as frequency, percentage, or mean \u0026plusmn; standard deviation. * p \u0026lt; 0.05 obtained from chi-square test for categorical variables or a Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables.\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 2. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eResults of the Green Eating Score and gender comparison\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMale (n=131)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFemale (n=92)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal (=223)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ep-value\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003emean \u0026plusmn; SD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003emean\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026plusmn; SD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003emean\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026plusmn; SD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGE Score\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSOC\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2,0 \u0026plusmn; 1.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2,4 \u0026plusmn; 2.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2,1 \u0026plusmn; 1.9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0,093\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBEH\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2,7 \u0026plusmn; 1.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3,0 \u0026plusmn; 1.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2,9 \u0026plusmn; 1.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0,108\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDB Pros\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2,8 \u0026plusmn; 1.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3,2 \u0026plusmn; 1.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2,9 \u0026plusmn; 1.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0,001*\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDB Cons\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2,5 \u0026plusmn; 0.9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2,7 \u0026plusmn; 0.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2,6 \u0026plusmn; 0.9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0,065\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSE at School\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2,4 \u0026plusmn; 1.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2,5 \u0026plusmn; 1.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2,4 \u0026plusmn; 1.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0,525\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSE at Home\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3,2 \u0026plusmn; 1.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3,3 \u0026plusmn; 1.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3,2 \u0026plusmn; 1.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0,384\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAbbreviations: GE, Green Eating; SOC, Stages of Change; BEH, Behavior; DB, Decisional Balance; Pros, advantages; Cons, disadvantages; SE, Self-efficacy. * p \u0026lt; 0.05 obtained from Mann-Whitney U test.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 3 is available in the Supplementary Files section.\u003c/p\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"bmc-sports-science-medicine-and-rehabilitation","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"ssmr","sideBox":"Learn more about [BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation](http://bmcsportsscimedrehabil.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/ssmr/default.aspx","title":"BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation","twitterHandle":"BMC_series","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"BMC Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Sustainability, Sports Nutrition, Alternative Protein Sources, Green Eating","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7534127/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7534127/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003ch2\u003eBackground\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDietary protein is vital for athletic performance, recovery, and long-term health; however, has a significant impact on the environment. Sustainable alternative proteins may fulfil athletes\u0026rsquo; performance requirements while reducing ecological impact, yet their acceptance in the athletic population remains underexplored. This study aimed to assess professional athletes\u0026rsquo; acceptance of alternative protein sources (plant-based, insect-derived, single-cell, and in vitro proteins) and to examine their association with green eating behaviors, providing insights for sustainable sports nutrition strategies.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eMethods\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eA cross-sectional online survey was conducted (February\u0026ndash;May 2023) among 223 professional athletes aged 15\u0026ndash;45 years with \u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;6 months of regular training. The questionnaire assessed sociodemographic and sport characteristics, dietary habits, Green Eating scale, and acceptance of alternative protein sources (plant-based, insect-based, single-cell, in vitro meat) on a five-point Likert scale. Ordinal logistic regression identified predictors of acceptance. Analyses were performed in SPSS v22 (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eResults\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAmong 223 professional athletes (59% male; mean age 19.9\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.6 years), plant-based protein showed the highest acceptance (81%), while insect protein, single-cell protein, and in vitro meat were least accepted (22\u0026ndash;27%). Male gender predicted lower acceptance of plant-based protein (OR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.223, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.004). Lack of sustainable nutrition education, lower decisional balance pros scores, and higher home self-efficacy were significant negative predictors for single-cell protein and in vitro meat acceptance (all p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.020).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eConclusion\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eProfessional athletes showed high acceptance of plant-based proteins but limited acceptance of insect-based, single-cell, and in vitro meat proteins. Sustainable nutrition education and positive decisional balance were key predictors of acceptance, highlighting the need for targeted educational strategies to promote environmentally sustainable protein choices in sports nutrition.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Athletes’ Readiness for Alternative Protein Sources and Green Eating Practices: Towards a More Sustainable Diet in Sports Nutrition","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-10-16 23:41:36","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7534127/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-10-28T16:16:32+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-10-25T09:43:21+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-10-24T22:03:12+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"46211879361241048541637350666507964670","date":"2025-10-18T07:38:09+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"22863401081909232562506552884342984762","date":"2025-10-15T12:52:49+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"223579159865125904731469470940071005625","date":"2025-10-15T06:04:18+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-10-13T16:18:44+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"30490378017969876920825001491510522030","date":"2025-10-13T15:58:18+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-10-13T15:32:06+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"251062299696226419620224489633500821546","date":"2025-10-13T15:21:53+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"143761341007082801182941876484860831585","date":"2025-10-13T11:50:47+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-10-06T04:33:26+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-10-01T08:36:29+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2025-09-11T05:45:15+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-09-10T15:27:34+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation","date":"2025-09-10T15:24:32+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"bmc-sports-science-medicine-and-rehabilitation","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"ssmr","sideBox":"Learn more about [BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation](http://bmcsportsscimedrehabil.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/ssmr/default.aspx","title":"BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation","twitterHandle":"BMC_series","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"BMC Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"d6273512-d845-404c-9146-c5c5b8c6b903","owner":[],"postedDate":"October 16th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-10-16T23:41:36+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-10-16 23:41:36","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7534127","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7534127","identity":"rs-7534127","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}