Addressing the Harms of Structural Racism on Health in Incarcerated Youth Through Improved Nutrition and Exercise Programs.

Every year, hundreds of thousands of youth across the country enter the juvenile legal system. A significantly disproportionate number of them are youth of color. While youth arrests have declined over the past several decades, racial disparities have increased and persist at every stage of the system. Many youth of color enter the juvenile legal system with a history of trauma and stress that compromises their health and well-being. Arrest, prosecution, and incarceration exacerbate these poor health outcomes. This paper examines several of the health impacts of structural racism in the policing and incarceration of youth of color. The paper begins by highlighting some of the most pressing social determinants of adolescent health and then considers how youth detention and incarceration contribute to unhealthy weight, hypertension, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease through unhealthy food environments, limited physical activity, and the added stress of the incarceration setting. This paper adds to the existing literature on the harms of youth detention and advocates for harms elimination strategies grounded in a public health approach to public safety and community-based alternatives to detention. For those youth who will remain in detention, the authors offer suggestions to reduce harms and improve the health of systems-involved youth, including opportunities for research.

Addressing misinformation about the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.

The Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) provides science-based advice on dietary intake to promote health, reduce risk of chronic disease, and meet nutrient needs. It is jointly published by the United States Departments of Health and Human Services and Agriculture (USDA) every 5 y. As chronic diseases continue to rise to pervasive levels, helping the United States population follow the DGA is especially important for improving the health of our nation. The DGA is developed using a rigorous and transparent scientific process, and with the advice of an independent, external committee of leading scientists. Career federal nutrition scientists who manage the process ensure that the methods used to develop the DGA remain state of the art. Unfortunately, misinformation about the scientific basis, transparency, and relevance of the DGA for the United States population threatens its credibility. The main objective of this article is to correct this misinformation with factual information about the process used to develop the DGA. The DGA provides guidelines for the general public, and its primary audience includes policymakers and nutrition and health professionals who help individuals and families consume a healthy dietary pattern. Providing accurate information may bolster trust in the recommendations among these audiences while improving implementation across sectors to promote better adherence to the DGA, thereby improving diet quality among the United States population.

Improving Nutrition in the First 1000 Days in the United States: A Federal Perspective.

The first 1000 days begins with pregnancy and ends at the child's second birthday. Nutrition throughout the life course, and especially during the first 1000 days, supports maternal health and optimal growth and development for children. We give a high-level summary of the state of nutrition in the first 1000 days in the United States. We provide examples where continued efforts are needed. We then discuss select opportunities to strengthen federal research and surveillance, programs, and communication and dissemination efforts aimed at improving nutrition and positively, and equitably, influencing the health and well-being of mothers and children. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(S8):S817-S825. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.307028).

Perspective: Impact of the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Report on the Process for the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee.

The National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) recommended steps to redesign the process of developing the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) are based on 5 guiding principles (enhance transparency; promote diversity of expertise and experience; support a deliberative process; manage biases and conflicts of interest; and adopt state-of-the-art processes and methods). Using these principles and recommendations, the USDA and HHS updated the process for developing the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines, including the process for appointing members and managing the work of the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. Modifications included having public comment on the topics and questions to be addressed by the Federal Advisory Committee, reviewing professional and financial activities on potential appointees to the committee prior to their appointment, redesigning the website to provide status updates on the work of the committee as analytical frameworks and draft conclusions were developed, strengthening the approaches for conducting systematic reviews, and adding a public meeting for discussion of the final report before its submission to the Secretaries of the USDA and HHS. Because the DGA is reviewed and updated every 5 y, it is possible to learn from each cycle what works well and where improvements in the process can be implemented. The current article illustrates, from the perspective of the advisory committee, the impact of the NASEM report on the development of the scientific report by examining changes in the process consistent with the 5 principles.

Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025: Understanding the Scientific Process, Guidelines, and Key Recommendations.

The Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025 was issued jointly by the US Departments of Agriculture and of Health and Human Services in December 2020. It is the ninth edition of the Dietary Guidelines and is the first to provide recommendations by life stage, from birth to older adulthood. The Dietary Guidelines is grounded in the current body of scientific evidence on diet and health outcomes and aims to promote health and prevent chronic diseases. The process to develop the Dietary Guidelines involved 4 steps: (1) identifying the topics and supporting scientific questions, (2) appointing a Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (Committee) to review current scientific evidence, (3) developing the new edition of the Dietary Guidelines, and (4) implementing the Dietary Guidelines. The 2020-2025 edition provides 4 overarching guidelines and supporting key recommendations that encourage healthy dietary patterns across the life span. The foods and beverages that people consume have a profound impact on health, and it is never too late or too early to eat healthfully.

A report of activities related to the Dietary Reference Intakes from the Joint Canada-US Dietary Reference Intakes Working Group.

The governments of the United States and Canada have jointly undertaken the development of the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) since the mid-1990s. The Federal DRI committees from each country work collaboratively to identify DRI needs, prioritize nutrient reviews, advance work to resolve methodological issues that is necessary for new reviews, and sponsor DRI-related committees through the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. In recent years, the Joint Canada-US DRI Working Group, consisting of members from both Federal DRI committees, developed an open and transparent nomination process for prioritizing nutrients for DRI review, by which sodium, the omega-3 (n-3) fatty acids, vitamin E, and magnesium were identified. In addition, discussions during the nutrient nomination process prompted the Federal DRI committees to address previously identified issues related to the use of chronic disease endpoints when setting DRIs. The development of guiding principles for setting DRIs based on chronic disease risk reduction will be applied for the first time during the DRI review of sodium and potassium. In summary, the US and Canadian governments have worked collaboratively to adapt our approach to prioritizing nutrients for DRI review and to broaden the scope of the DRIs to better incorporate the concept of chronic disease risk reduction in order to improve public health.

Implementation Research to Address the United States Health Disadvantage: Report of a National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Workshop.

Four decades ago, U.S. life expectancy was within the same range as other high-income peer countries. However, during the past decades, the United States has fared worse in many key health domains resulting in shorter life expectancy and poorer health-a health disadvantage. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened a panel of national and international health experts and stakeholders for a Think Tank meeting to explore the U.S. health disadvantage and to seek specific recommendations for implementation research opportunities for heart, lung, blood, and sleep disorders. Recommendations for National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute consideration were made in several areas including understanding the drivers of the disadvantage, identifying potential solutions, creating strategic partnerships with common goals, and finally enhancing and fostering a research workforce for implementation research. Key recommendations included exploring why the United States is doing better for health indicators in a few areas compared with peer countries; targeting populations across the entire socioeconomic spectrum with interventions at all levels in order to prevent missing a substantial proportion of the disadvantage; assuring partnership have high-level goals that can create systemic change through collective impact; and finally, increasing opportunities for implementation research training to meet the current needs. Connecting with the research community at large and building on ongoing research efforts will be an important strategy. Broad partnerships and collaboration across the social, political, economic, and private sectors and all civil society will be critical-not only for implementation research but also for implementing the findings to have the desired population impact. Developing the relevant knowledge to tackle the U.S. health disadvantage is the necessary first step to improve U.S. health outcomes.

A Systematic Review of Obesity Disparities Research.

CONTEXT: A review of interventions addressing obesity disparities could reveal gaps in the literature and provide guidance on future research, particularly for populations with a high prevalence of obesity and obesity-related cardiometabolic risk. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review of clinical trials in obesity disparities research that were published in 2011-2016 in PubMed/MEDLINE resulted in 328 peer-reviewed articles. Articles were excluded if they had no BMI, weight, or body composition measure as primary outcome or were foreign (n=201); were epidemiologic or secondary data analyses of clinical trials (n=12); design or protocol papers (n=54); systematic reviews (n=3); or retracted or duplicates (n=9). Forty-nine published trials were summarized and supplemented with a review of ongoing obesity disparities grants being funded by the National, Heart, Lung and Blood Institute. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Of the 49 peer-reviewed trials, 27 targeted adults and 22 children only or parent-child dyads (5 of 22). Interventions were individually focused; mostly in single settings (e.g., school or community); of short duration (mostly ≤12 months); and primarily used behavioral modification (e.g., self-monitoring) strategies. Many of the trials had small sample sizes and moderate to high attrition rates. A meta-analysis of 13 adult trials obtained a pooled intervention effect of BMI -1.31 (95% CI=-2.11, -0.52, p=0.0012). Institutional review identified 140 ongoing obesity-related health disparities grants, but only 19% (n=27) were clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: The reviews call for cardiovascular-related obesity disparities research that is long term and includes population research, and multilevel, policy, and environmental, or "whole of community," interventions.

Perspectives from NHLBI Global Health Think Tank Meeting for Late Stage (T4) Translation Research.

Almost three-quarters (74%) of all the noncommunicable disease burden is found within low- and middle-income countries. In September 2014, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute held a Global Health Think Tank meeting to obtain expert advice and recommendations for addressing compelling scientific questions for late stage (T4) research-research that studies implementation strategies for proven effective interventions-to inform and guide the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's global health research and training efforts. Major themes emerged in two broad categories: 1) developing research capacity; and 2) efficiently defining compelling scientific questions within the local context. Compelling scientific questions included how to deliver inexpensive, scalable, and sustainable interventions using alternative health delivery models that leverage existing human capital, technologies and therapeutics, and entrepreneurial strategies. These broad themes provide perspectives that inform an overarching strategy needed to reduce the heart, lung, blood, and sleep disorders disease burden and global health disparities.

Nutrition Interventions for Cardiovascular Disease.

Nutrition therapy is effective at controlling cardiovascular disease risk factors and therefore reducing cardiovascular disease risk. Physicians should play an active role in providing nutrition interventions for patients who would benefit from cardiovascular disease risk reduction or refer them to other professionals as needed. The evidence on nutrition interventions for blood pressure and lipid control, including overall dietary patterns, dietary fat and macronutrients, dietary cholesterol, sodium, and alcohol intake, is discussed.

Reducing Health Inequities in the U.S.: Recommendations From the NHLBI's Health Inequities Think Tank Meeting.

The National, Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened a Think Tank meeting to obtain insight and recommendations regarding the objectives and design of the next generation of research aimed at reducing health inequities in the United States. The panel recommended several specific actions, including: 1) embrace broad and inclusive research themes; 2) develop research platforms that optimize the ability to conduct informative and innovative research, and promote systems science approaches; 3) develop networks of collaborators and stakeholders, and launch transformative studies that can serve as benchmarks; 4) optimize the use of new data sources, platforms, and natural experiments; and 5) develop unique transdisciplinary training programs to build research capacity. Confronting health inequities will require engaging multiple disciplines and sectors (including communities), using systems science, and intervening through combinations of individual, family, provider, health system, and community-targeted approaches. Details of the panel's remarks and recommendations are provided in this report.

Dietary sodium reduction does not affect circulating glucose concentrations in fasting children or adults: findings from a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although evidence shows that reduced sodium intake lowers blood pressure, some studies suggest that sodium reduction may adversely affect insulin resistance and glucose tolerance. OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to assess the effects of sodium reduction on glucose tolerance, evaluate strengths and weaknesses of the relevant scientific literature, and provide direction for future research. METHODS: We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science through August 2014. Both randomized and nonrandomized intervention trials were included in our meta-analyses. The effects of sodium reduction on glucose tolerance were evaluated in 37 articles, but because of a lack of comparable data, 8 trials were excluded from the meta-analyses. RESULTS: Participants were 10-79 y old, either primarily healthy or with hypertension. In meta-analyses of 20 randomized, crossover trials (n = 504 participants) and 9 nonrandomized crossover trials (n = 337), circulating glucose concentrations of fasting participants were not affected by reduction in sodium intake. In contrast, in meta-analyses of 19 of the 20 randomized, crossover trials (n = 494), fasting insulin concentrations were 9.53 pmol/L higher (95% CI: 5.04, 14.02 pmol/L higher) with sodium reduction. In 9 nonrandomized trials (n = 337), fasting insulin did not differ with reduced sodium intake. Results differed little when the analyses were restricted to studies with a low risk of bias and duration of ≥7 d. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis revealed no evidence that, in trials with a short intervention and large reductions in sodium, circulating glucose concentrations differed between groups. Recommendations for future studies include extending intervention durations, ensuring comparability of groups at baseline through randomization, and assessing sodium intakes relevant to population sodium reduction. In addition, analyses on other metabolic variables were limited because of the number of trials reporting these outcomes and lack of consistency across measures, suggesting a need for comparable measures of glucose tolerance across studies.