Modeling Possible Outcomes of Updated Daily Values on Nutrient Intakes of the United States Adult Population.

The United States (US) Food and Drug Administration has updated the Daily Values (DVs) for the Nutrition Facts Label on packaged foods. We used the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2009-2012 data with the International Life Sciences Institute, North America Fortification Database, which identifies intrinsic, mandatory enriched, and fortified sources of nutrients in foods and beverages, to model the new DVs' potential impact on adult (≥19 years of age) intake. We assumed that manufacturers will adjust voluntary fortification to maintain percent DV claims. We assessed the percent of the US population whose usual intake (UI) was < the Estimated Average Requirement (EAR), and ≥ the Upper Limit (UL) based on the current DVs, and modeled estimated UI and %

Race/Ethnicity, Enrichment/Fortification, and Dietary Supplementation in the U.S. Population, NHANES 2009⁻2012.

In the United States (U.S.), food fortification and/or enrichment and dietary supplement (DS) use impacts nutrient intakes. Our aim was to examine race/ethnicity and income (Poverty Income Ratio, PIR) differences in meeting the Dietary Reference Intakes based on estimated dietary intakes among the U.S. population age ≥2 years (n = 16,975). Two 24-hour recalls from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) cycles 2009-2012 were used to estimate the intake of 15 nutrients as naturally occurring, enriched/fortified, and plus DSs. Across racial/ethnic groups and within PIR categories, significant differences were observed in the %< Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) for vitamin A following enrichment/fortification (E/F) and for vitamin B12 and riboflavin following both E/F and DS use when comparing non-Hispanic blacks, Hispanics, and the other race/ethnicity group to non-Hispanic whites. The %

Nutrients in the US Diet: Naturally Occurring or Enriched/Fortified Food and Beverage Sources, Plus Dietary Supplements: NHANES 2009-2012.

BACKGROUND: Nutrients are added to the diet through fortification/enrichment and dietary supplements (DSs). Meeting the US Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) varies by nutrient and population subsegments. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the relative role of naturally occurring, enriched/fortified, and DS sources of 15 micronutrients with reference to the DRIs. METHODS: We used the NHANES 2009-2012 (≥2 y old, n = 16,975) data, the ILSI North America Fortification database, and the National Cancer Institute usual intake method. RESULTS: Prevalence of nutrient intake from naturally occurring sources below the Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) varied from 5% for vitamin B-12 to 100% for vitamin D, with ≥40% of the population below the EAR for 8 of the 14 nutrients (ages ≥2 y). With enrichment/fortification, the percentage below the EAR decreased to the following for vitamins A (35%), C (34%), and B-6 (7%), folate (8%), thiamin (5%), riboflavin (3%), niacin (1%), and iron (2%). Nutrients from DSs further improved intakes related to the EAR for 12 nutrients (ages ≥2 y). For 9-18-y-olds, the percentages of nutrient intakes below the EAR were 14-50% higher than for 2-8-y-olds. The Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) was exceeded among children aged 2-8 y for folate (41.7%), niacin (10.1%), and zinc (39.9%), whereas among ages ≥2 y and 9-18 y no prevalence of intakes over the UL exceeded 10%. CONCLUSIONS: Fortification/enrichment constitutes a meaningful contribution to reducing the percentage of individuals with less than the EAR for their demographic. These data underscore the need to encourage better dietary patterns to improve the intake of nutrients at risk of low intake.

National Cholesterol Education Program versus World Health Organization metabolic syndrome in relation to all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in the San Antonio Heart Study.

BACKGROUND: To assess the utility of clinical definitions of the metabolic syndrome (MetS) to identify individuals with increased cardiovascular risk, we examined the relation between the MetS, using both the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) and the World Health Organization definitions, and all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in San Antonio Heart Study participants enrolled between 1984 and 1988. METHODS AND RESULTS: Among 2815 participants, 25 to 64 years of age at enrollment, 509 met both criteria, 197 met NCEP criteria only, and 199 met WHO criteria only. Over an average of 12.7 years, 229 deaths occurred (117 from cardiovascular disease). Moreover, in the primary prevention population of 2372 participants (ie, those without diabetes or cardiovascular disease at baseline), 132 deaths occurred (50 from cardiovascular disease). In the primary prevention population, the only significant association adjusted for age, gender, and ethnic group was between NCEP-MetS and cardiovascular mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 2.01; 95% CI, 1.13-3.57). In the general population, all-cause mortality HRs were 1.47 (95% CI, 1.13-1.92) for NCEP-MetS and 1.27 (95% CI, 0.97-1.66) for WHO-MetS. Furthermore, for cardiovascular mortality, there was evidence that gender modified the predictive ability of the MetS. For women and men, respectively, HRs for NCEP-MetS were 4.65 (95% CI, 2.35-9.21) and 1.82 (95% CI, 1.14-2.91), whereas HRs for WHO-MetS were 2.83 (95% CI, 1.55-5.17) and 1.15 (95% CI, 0.72-1.86). CONCLUSIONS: In summary, although both definitions were predictive in the general population, the simpler NCEP definition tended to be more predictive in lower-risk subjects.