Integrating the totality of food and nutrition evidence for public health decision making and communication.

The interpretation and integration of epidemiological studies detecting weak associations (RR <2) with data from other study designs (e.g., animal models and human intervention trials) is both challenging and vital for making science-based dietary recommendations in the nutrition and food safety communities. The 2008 ILSI North America "Decision-Making for Recommendations and Communication Based on Totality of Food-Related Research" workshop provided an overview of epidemiological methods, and case-study examples of how weak associations have been incorporated into decision making for nutritional recommendations. Based on the workshop presentations and dialogue among the participants, three clear strategies were provided for the use of weak associations in informing nutritional recommendations for optimal health. First, enable more effective integration of data from all sources through the use of genetic and nutritional biomarkers; second, minimize the risk of bias and confounding through the adoption of rigorous quality-control standards, greater emphasis on the replication of study results, and better integration of results from independent studies, perhaps using adaptive study designs and Bayesian meta-analysis methods; and third, emphasize more effective and truthful communication to the public about the evolving understanding of the often complex relationship between nutrition, lifestyle, and optimal health.

Factors affecting the determination of threshold doses for allergenic foods: how much is too much?

BACKGROUND: Ingestion of small amounts of an offending food can elicit adverse reactions in individuals with IgE-mediated food allergies. The threshold dose for provocation of such reactions is often considered to be zero. However, because of various practical limitations in food production and processing, foods may occasionally contain trace residues of the offending food. Are these very low, residual quantities hazardous to allergic consumers? How much of the offending food is too much? Very little quantitative information exists to allow any risk assessments to be conducted by the food industry. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether the quality and quantity of existing clinical data on threshold doses for commonly allergenic foods were sufficient to allow consensus to be reached on establishment of threshold doses for specific foods. METHODS: In September 1999, 12 clinical allergists and other interested parties were invited to participate in a roundtable conference to share existing data on threshold doses and to discuss clinical approaches that would allow the acquisition of that information. RESULTS: Considerable data were identified in clinical files relating to the threshold doses for peanut, cows' milk, and egg; limited data were available for other foods, such as fish and mustard. CONCLUSIONS: Because these data were often obtained by means of different protocols, the estimation of a threshold dose was very difficult. Development of a standardized protocol for clinical experiments to allow determination of the threshold dose is needed.