Title |
Dietary strategies to maintain adequacy of circulating 25-Hydroxyvitamin D concentrations.
|
---|---|
Published in |
Scandinavian Journal of Clinical & Laboratory Investigation. Supplement, January 2012
|
DOI | 10.3109/00365513.2012.681893 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Kiely, Mairead, Black, Lucinda J |
Abstract |
The importance of vitamin D intake to nutritional status is a corollary of sunshine deficit. There is a dose-response of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentrations to total vitamin D intake in persons who do not receive UVB exposure. This updated summary of vitamin D intakes and sources in adults and children focuses on data from North America and Europe. We explore the evidence that intakes of vitamin D are inadequate with reference to the Institute of Medicine (IOM) Dietary Reference Intakes. Due to mandatory fortification, usual vitamin D intakes are higher in the US and Canada than most of Europe, with the exception of the Nordic countries. Intakes of vitamin D in national surveys are typically below 5 μg/d in most European countries and vary according to country-specific fortification practices, sex and age. The main source of variation is the contribution from nutritional supplements. Usual vitamin D intake estimates need to capture data on the contributions from fortified and supplemental sources as well as the base diet. The current dietary supply of vitamin D makes it unfeasible for most adults to meet the IOM Estimated Average Requirement of 10 μg/d. While supplements are an effective method for individuals to increase their intake, food fortification represents the best opportunity to increase the vitamin D supply to the population. Well-designed sustainable fortification strategies, which use a range of foods to accommodate diversity, have potential to increase vitamin D intakes across the population distribution and minimize the prevalence of low 25(OH)D concentrations. |
Twitter Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 61 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 16% |
Student > Master | 9 | 15% |
Student > Bachelor | 8 | 13% |
Researcher | 8 | 13% |
Other | 5 | 8% |
Other | 11 | 18% |
Unknown | 10 | 16% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 25% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 18% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 18% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 10% |
Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
Other | 4 | 7% |
Unknown | 11 | 18% |