We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Review
A Review of Dietary Zinc Recommendations.
Food and Nutrition Bulletin 2016 December
BACKGROUND: Large discrepancies exist among the dietary zinc recommendations set by expert groups.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the basis for the differences in the dietary zinc recommendations set by the World Health Organization, the US Institute of Medicine, the International Zinc Nutrition Consultative Group, and the European Food Safety Agency.
METHODS: We compared the sources of the data, the concepts, and methods used by the 4 expert groups to set the physiological requirements for absorbed zinc, the dietary zinc requirements (termed estimated and/or average requirements), recommended dietary allowances (or recommended nutrient intakes or population reference intakes), and tolerable upper intake levels for selected age, sex, and life-stage groups.
RESULTS: All 4 expert groups used the factorial approach to estimate the physiological requirements for zinc. These are based on the estimates of absorbed zinc required to offset all obligatory zinc losses plus any additional requirements for absorbed zinc for growth, pregnancy, or lactation. However, discrepancies exist in the reference body weights used, studies selected, approaches to estimate endogenous fecal zinc (EFZ) losses, the adjustments applied to derive dietary zinc requirements that take into account zinc bioavailability in the habitual diets, number of dietary zinc recommendations set, and the nomenclature used to describe them.
CONCLUSIONS: Estimates for the physiological and dietary requirements varied across the 4 expert groups. The European Food Safety Agency was the only expert group that set dietary zinc recommendations at 4 different levels of dietary phytate for adults (but not for children) and as of yet no tolerable upper intake level for any life-stage group.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the basis for the differences in the dietary zinc recommendations set by the World Health Organization, the US Institute of Medicine, the International Zinc Nutrition Consultative Group, and the European Food Safety Agency.
METHODS: We compared the sources of the data, the concepts, and methods used by the 4 expert groups to set the physiological requirements for absorbed zinc, the dietary zinc requirements (termed estimated and/or average requirements), recommended dietary allowances (or recommended nutrient intakes or population reference intakes), and tolerable upper intake levels for selected age, sex, and life-stage groups.
RESULTS: All 4 expert groups used the factorial approach to estimate the physiological requirements for zinc. These are based on the estimates of absorbed zinc required to offset all obligatory zinc losses plus any additional requirements for absorbed zinc for growth, pregnancy, or lactation. However, discrepancies exist in the reference body weights used, studies selected, approaches to estimate endogenous fecal zinc (EFZ) losses, the adjustments applied to derive dietary zinc requirements that take into account zinc bioavailability in the habitual diets, number of dietary zinc recommendations set, and the nomenclature used to describe them.
CONCLUSIONS: Estimates for the physiological and dietary requirements varied across the 4 expert groups. The European Food Safety Agency was the only expert group that set dietary zinc recommendations at 4 different levels of dietary phytate for adults (but not for children) and as of yet no tolerable upper intake level for any life-stage group.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app