Symposium Report: Effective and Safe Micronutrient Interventions, Weighing the Risks against the Benefits
Ingrid Bielderman, Maaike J. Bruins, Reina Engle-Stone, Noel W. Solomons, Hans Verhagen, Lindsay H. Allen, Lynnette M. Neufeld, Klaus Kraemer, Jane Badham
European Journal of Nutrition & Food Safety · pp. 202–228 · Published 27 May 2015
10.9734/EJNFS/2015/17357Abstract
Micronutrient fortification of staple foods can be an effective strategy to combat micronutrient malnutrition. When planning on fortification, challenges faced include the collection of essential information on population food and nutrient intake patterns, as well as the use of this information in a method to select appropriate fortification levels. A symposium was organized aimed at discussing the existing approaches to set effective and safe micronutrient fortification levels and to outline the challenges and needs in this area. Two different approaches to establish effective and safe fortification levels for food fortification were presented. In the first approach, the Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) and Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) are used as cut-points in the micronutrient intake distribution to evaluate and simulate effective and safe micronutrient intakes. This was exemplified by challenges encountered in Guatemala and Cameroon towards unequal vitamin A intake distribution and the impact of the food vehicle choice. Secondly, the risk-benefit approach was presented as an approach in which risks and benefits of micronutrient intakes can be quantified and balanced in order to optimize fortification benefits with the least risks and to allow decision making. This was illustrated by a case on folic acid fortification in The Netherlands. Irrespective of the approach, food and nutrient intake data are required to identify potential vehicles for fortification, quantify the nutrient gap to be addressed, and set the appropriate level of fortification based on consumption pattern. Such information is rarely available to the quality and extent ideal to set fortification levels and requires regular updating, as exemplified in the case of sugar fortification in Guatemala. While the EAR cut-point method can be used to determine the proportion of the population meeting their required and safe nutrient intakes and set goals, risk-benefit assessment may offer an answer to commonly-asked questions as to whether, and at which levels, the benefits of increasing micronutrient intakes outweigh the risks.
Cited by 5
Biniyam Tesfaye, Kate Sinclair, Sara E Wuehler · Public Health Nutrition · 2018
Xu Chen, Jianjun Li, Yanchao Zhang · Future Generation Computer Systems · 2020
Emily C. Keats, Christina Oh, Tamara Chau · Campbell Systematic Reviews: Better Evidence for a Better World · 2021
Marieke Vossenaar, Liza Hernández, Gabriela Montenegro-Bethancourt · Food and Nutrition Bulletin · 2015
Parixit Prajapati, Ragini Sharma · Current Trends in Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Chemistry · 2024
Related research
- Medical Tourism, Public Health and Economic Development in Nigeria: Issues and Prospects — shares topic coverage
- The Cuban Healthcare System: An Insight — shares topic coverage
- The Effect of Educational Intervention on Rational Prescribing in Public Health Facilities in Selected Local Government Areas of Rivers State: An Interventional Study — shares topic coverage
- Role of Community Pharmacist in Public Health Services, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia — shares topic coverage
- Prevalence of Geohelminths among Primary School Children in Edoh Community, Esit Eket Local Government Area, Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria — shares topic coverage
Article metrics
Real usage data collected on this platform.
0
Page views
0
PDF downloads
0
Outbound clicks
5
Citations
Views by country
Approximate, from request IP at view time — not citizenship or institution. Countries with fewer than 5 views are grouped as "Other".
No views recorded yet.
Traffic sources
Referring site, by host.
No traffic recorded yet.
Views and downloads exclude known bots/crawlers. Citations combines this platform's own DOI-resolved index with each external source's own reported total — see Cited by above for individually listed citing works. Last refreshed 0 seconds ago.