Search

Background: Potatoes are a staple food in many traditional cuisines, yet their impact on long-term risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and mortality is unclear, hampering evidence-based dietary guidelines., Objectives: This study aimed to examine the association between potato consumption and all-cause and CVD-specific death over a substantial follow-up period within a cohort predominantly consuming boiled potatoes., Methods: Adults from 3 Norwegian counties were invited to 3 health screenings in 1974-1988 (>80% attendance). Dietary data were collected using semiquantitative food frequency questionnaires at each screening to categorize weekly potato consumption (≤6, 7-13, or ≥14 potatoes/wk) and calculate daily cumulative mean intakes (grams/day). Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using multivariable Cox regression to estimate HRs and 95% CIs for the association between potato consumption and risk of death from all causes, CVD, ischemic heart disease (IHD), and acute myocardial infarction (AMI)., Results: Among 77,297 participants with a mean baseline age of 41.1 y (range: 18.0-63.9 y), we observed 27,848 deaths, including 9072 deaths due to CVD, over a median follow-up of 33.5 y. Participants who consumed ≥14 potatoes/wk had a lower risk of all-cause death compared with those consuming ≤6 potatoes/wk (HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.84, 0.93). Potato consumption was associated with a minor, inverse risk of death due to CVD, IHD, and AMI. In continuous analyses of cumulative intakes, each 100 g/d increment was associated with 4% lower risk of death from all causes (HR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.94, 0.98), CVD (HR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.93, 0.99), IHD (HR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.91, 1.00), and AMI (HR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.91, 1.01)., Conclusions: In this cohort with a generally high consumption of predominantly boiled potatoes, we find modest, inverse associations between potato consumption and death from all causes, CVD, and IHD., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Copper functions as a structural component in many proteins involved in energy and iron metabolism, production of neurotransmitters, formation of connective tissue and endogenous antioxidant defence. Several biochemical indices have been suggested and used to assess copper status, but none of these has been found suitable for the detection of marginal copper deficiency or marginal copper toxicity. Copper imbalances have been linked to the pathogenesis of several chronic inflammatory diseases. During the last decade, a number of meta-analyses and systematic reviews have been published shedding light on the association between copper imbalances and some of these pathologies. Most of these meta-analyses are based on case--control studies. All show that blood copper concentrations are higher in cases than in controls, but there is inconclusive evidence to change the recommendations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The aim was to systematically review the associations among white meat consumption, cardiovascular diseases (CVD), and type 2 diabetes (T2D). Methods: Databases MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Scopus were searched (15th October 2021) for randomized intervention trials (RCTs, ≥ 4 weeks of duration) and prospective cohort studies (≥12 month of follow-up) assessing the consumption of white meat as the intervention/exposure. Eligible outcomes for RCTs were cardiometabolic risk factors and for cohorts, fatal and non-fatal CVD and incident T2D. Risk of bias was estimated using the Cochrane's RoB2 and Risk of Bias for Nutrition Observational Studies. Meta-analysis was conducted in case of ≥3 relevant intervention studies or ≥5 cohort studies using random-effects models. The strength of evidence was evaluated using the World Cancer Research Fund's criteria. Results: The literature search yielded 5,795 scientific articles, and after screening 43 full-text articles, 23 cohort studies and three intervention studies were included. All included intervention studies matched fat content of intervention and control diets, and none of them showed any significant effects on the selected outcomes of white meat when compared to red meat. Findings from the cohort studies generally did not support any associations between white meat intake and outcomes. Meta-analyses were conducted for CVD mortality (RR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.87-1.02, P = 0.23, I² = 25%) and T2D incidence (RR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.87-1.11, P = 0.81, I² = 82%). Conclusion: The currently available evidence does not indicate a role, beneficial or detrimental, of white meat consumption for CVD and T2D. Future studies investigating potentially different health effects of processed versus unprocessed white meat and substitution of red meat with white meat are warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The scientific evidence supporting the current dietary recommendations for fat quality keeps accumulating; however, a paradoxical distrust has taken root among many researchers, clinicians, and in parts of the general public. One explanation for this distrust may relate to an incomplete overview of the totality of the evidence for the link between fat quality as a dietary exposure, and health outcomes such as atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Therefore, the main aim of the present narrative review was to provide a comprehensive overview of the rationale for dietary recommendations for fat intake, limiting our discussion to ASCVD as outcome. Herein, we provide a core framework – a causal model – that can help us understand the evidence that has accumulated to date, and that can help us understand new evidence that may become available in the future. The causal model for fat quality and ASCVD is comprised of three key research questions (RQs), each of which determine which scientific methods are most appropriate to use, and thereby which lines of evidence that should feed into the causal model. First, we discuss the link between low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particles and ASCVD (RQ1); we draw especially on evidence from genetic studies, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), epidemiology, and mechanistic studies. Second, we explain the link between dietary fat quality and LDL particles (RQ2); we draw especially on metabolic ward studies, controlled trials (randomized and non-randomized), and mechanistic studies. Third, we explain the link between dietary fat quality, LDL particles, and ASCVD (RQ3); we draw especially on RCTs in animals and humans, epidemiology, population-based changes, and experiments of nature. Additionally, the distrust over dietary recommendations for fat quality may partly relate to an unclear understanding of the scientific method, especially as applied in nutrition research, including the process of developing dietary guidelines. We therefore also aimed to clarify this process. We discuss how we assess causality in nutrition research, and how we progress from scientific evidence to providing dietary recommendations. [Display omitted] • LDL particle concentration, usually estimated by LDL-C, causally affects ASCVD. • Dietary fat quality is the main environmental determinant of plasma LDL-C. • Fat quality affects the risk of ASCVD risk mainly by modifying plasma LDL-C. • Dietary guidelines for fat build on the totality and strength of the evidence. • There is low probability that they will fundamentally change in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As part of the process of updating national dietary reference values (DRVs) and food-based dietary guidelines (FBDGs), the Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2022 project (NNR2022) will select a limited number of topics for systematic reviews (SRs). Objective: To develop and transparently describe the results of a procedure for prioritisation of topics that may be submitted for SRs in the NNR2022 project. Design: In an open call, scientists, health professionals, national food and health authorities, food manufacturers, other stakeholders and the general population in the Nordic and Baltic countries were invited to suggest SR topics. The NNR2022 Committee developed scoping reviews (ScRs) for 51 nutrients and food groups aimed at identifying potential SR topics. These ScRs included the relevant nominations from the open call. SR topics were categorised, ranked and prioritised by the NNR2022 Committee in a modified Delphi process. Existing qualified SRs were identified to omit duplication. Results: A total of 45 nominations with suggestion for more than 200 exposure--outcome pairs were received in the public call. A number of additional topics were identified in ScRs. In order to omit duplication with recently qualified SRs, we defined criteria and identified 76 qualified SRs. The NNR2022 Committee subsequently shortlisted 52 PI/ECOTSS statements, none of which overlapped with the qualified SRs. The PI/ ECOTSS statements were then graded 'High' (n = 21), 'Medium' (n = 9) or 'Low' (n = 22) importance, and the PI/ECOTSS statements with 'High' were ranked in a Delphi process. The nine top prioritised PI/ECOTSS included the following exposure--outcome pairs: 1) plant protein intake in children and body growth, 2) pulses/legumes intake, and cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes, 3) plant protein intake in adults, and atherosclerotic/cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes, 4) fat quality and mental health, 5) vitamin B12 and vitamin B12 status, 6) intake of white meat (no consumption vs. high consumption and white meat replaced with red meat), and all-cause mortality, type 2 diabetes and risk factors, 7) intake of n-3 LPUFAs from supplements during pregnancy, and asthma and allergies in the offspring, 8) nuts intake and cardiovascular disease (CVD) and type 2 diabetes in adults, 9) dietary fibre intake (high vs. low) in children and bowel function. Discussion: The selection of topics for de novo SRs is central in the NNR2022 project, as the results of these SRs may cause adjustment of existing DRVs and FBDGs. That is why we have developed this extensive process for the prioritisation of SR topics. For transparency, the results of the process are reported in this publication. Conclusion: The principles and methodologies developed in the NNR2022 project may serve as a framework for national health authorities or organisations when developing national DRVs and FBDGs. This collaboration between the food and health authorities in Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway and Sweden represents an international effort for harmonisation and sharing of resources and competence when developing national DRVs and FBDGs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Systematic reviews (SRs) constitute a major part of the Nordic Nutrition Recommendations (NNRs). The step-by-step procedure used to develop SRs has evolved considerably over time and is often tailored to fit the exposure and outcomes in focus. Objective: To describe a detailed procedure for developing qualified SRs commissioned by the NNR2022 project. Design: Scrutinizing procedures of recent SRs commissioned by leading national food and health authorities or international food and health organizations. Results: The following eight steps must be included when developing qualified SRs for the NNR2022 project: 1) define research question, 2) protocol development, 3) literature search, 4) screening and selection of studies, 5) data extraction, 6) assessing risk of bias, 7) synthesis and grading of total strength of evidence, and 8) reporting according to certain standards. Discussion: This guide is based on the guidelines developed for the fifth edition of NNR but includes some important new domains in order to adhere to more recent, authoritative standards. Conclusion: All qualified SRs in the NNR2022 project will follow the protocol described here. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Qualified systematic reviews (SRs) will form the main basis for evaluating causal effects of nutrients or food groups on health outcomes in the sixth edition of Nordic Nutrition Recommendations to be published in 2022 (NNR2022). Objective: To describe rationale and structure of SRs used in NNR2022. Design: The SR methodologies of the previous edition of NNR were used as a starting point. Methodologies of recent SRs commissioned by leading national food and health authorities or international food and health organizations were examined and scrutinized. Methodologies for developing SRs were agreed by the NNR2022 Committee in a consensus-driven process. Results: Qualified SRs will be developed by a cross-disciplinary group of experts and reported according to the requirements of the EQUATOR network. A number of additional requirements must also be fulfilled, including 1) a clearly stated set of objectives and research questions with pre-defined eligibility criteria for the studies, 2) an explicit, reproducible methodology, 3) a systematic search that attempts to identify all studies that would meet the eligibility criteria, 4) an assessment of the validity of the findings of the included studies through an assessment of 'risk of bias' of the studies, 5) a systematic presentation and synthesis of the characteristics and findings of the included studies, and 6) a grading of the overall evidence. The complete definition and requirements of a qualified SR are described. Discussion: Most SRs published in scientific journals do not fulfill all criteria of the qualified SRs in the NNR2022 project. This article discusses the structure and rationale for requirements of qualified SRs in NNR2022. National food and health authorities have only recently begun to use qualified SRs as a basis for nutrition recommendations. Conclusion: Qualified SRs will be used to inform dietary reference values (DRVs) and food-based dietary guidelines (FBDGs) in the NNR2022 project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Nordic Nutrition Recommendations (NNRs) constitute the scientific basis for national dietary reference values (DRVs) and food-based dietary guidelines (FBDGs) in the Nordic and Baltic countries. Objective: To define principles and methodologies for the sixth edition of NNR to be published in 2022 (NNR2022). Design: The principles and methodologies of the previous edition of NNR were used as a starting point. Recent nutrition recommendations commissioned by other national food and health authorities or international food and health organizations were examined and dissected. Updated principles and methodologies were agreed by the NNR2022 Committee in a consensus-driven process. Results: An organizational model with 'checks and balances' was developed to minimize the influence of subjective biases of the committee members and experts. Individual chapters on all included nutrients and food groups will be updated as scoping reviews. Systematic reviews (SRs), which are the main basis for evaluating causal effects of nutrients or food groups on health outcomes, will be embedded in each chapter. A NNR SR Centre will be established for performing de novo SRs on prioritized topics. To avoid duplication and optimize the use of resources, qualified SRs commissioned by other national and international organizations and health authorities will also inform DRVs and FBDGs in NNR2022. Discussion: The evidence-based methods defined in the NNR2022 project are compatible with most contemporary methods used by leading national food and health authorities. Global harmonization of methodological approaches to nutrition recommendations is strongly encouraged. Conclusion: Evidence-informed principles and methodologies underpinned by SRs will ensure that DRVs and FBDGs defined in the NNR2022 project are based on the best available evidence and as far as possible free from overt bias. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]