Baum S.J.,University of Miami |
Kris-Etherton P.M.,Pennsylvania State University |
Willett W.C.,Harvard University |
Lichtenstein A.H.,Tufts University |
And 5 more authors.
Journal of Clinical Lipidology | Year: 2012
Research dating back to the 1950s reported an association between the consumption of saturated fatty acids (SFAs) and risk of coronary heart disease. Recent epidemiological evidence, however, challenges these findings. It is well accepted that the consumption of SFAs increases low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), whereas carbohydrates, monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFAs), and polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) do not. High-density lipoprotein (HDL)-C increases with SFA intake. Among individuals who are insulin resistant, a low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet typically has an adverse effect on lipid profiles (in addition to decreasing HDL-C, it also increases triglyceride and LDL particle concentrations). Consequently, a moderate fat diet in which unsaturated fatty acids replace SFAs and carbohydrates are not augmented is advised to lower LDL-C; compared with a low-fat diet, a moderate-fat diet will lower triglycerides and increase HDL-C. Now, there is some new evidence that is questioning the health benefits of even MUFAs and PUFAs. In addition, in a few recent studies investigators have also failed to demonstrate expected cardiovascular benefits of marine-derived omega-3 fatty acids. To clarify the clinical pros and cons of dietary fats, the National Lipid Association held a fatty acid symposium at the 2011 National Lipid Association Scientific Sessions. During these sessions, the science regarding the effects of different fatty acid classes on coronary heart disease risk was reviewed. © 2012 National Lipid Association. All rights reserved.
Deckelbaum R.J.,Columbia University |
Calder P.C.,University of Southampton |
Harris W.S.,University of South Dakota |
Akoh C.C.,University of Georgia |
And 4 more authors.
Journal of Nutrition | Year: 2012
Faculty who had presented at the symposium "Heart Healthy Omega-3s (n-3 fatty acids) for Food: Stearidonic Acid (SDA) as a Sustainable Choice"met and agreed upon conclusions and recommendations that could be made on the basis of evidence provided at the symposium. The participants also submitted manuscripts relating to their topics and these are presented in this supplement. These manuscripts were reviewed and also contributed to the conclusions and recommendations presented herein. The three major objectives of the symposium were to: 1) increase understanding of the current and emerging knowledge regarding the health benefits of (n-3) fatty acids (FA) including a focus on stearidonic acid (SDA) and EPA; 2) evaluate the importance of increasing (n-3) FA consumption in the US and the current challenge of doing so via mainstream foods; and 3) consider the health and food application benefits of SDA as a precursor to EPA and a plant-based sustainable source of highly unsaturated (n-3) FA for mainstream foods. Specific areas for future research were defined and included in the summary and conclusions herein. Overall evidence-based conclusions included: the current evidence provides a strong rationale for increasing (n-3) FA intakes in the US and other populations; current consumption of (n-3) FA in most populations is either insufficient or not efficient at providing adequate tissue levels of the long-chain (n-3) FA EPA and DHA; SDA in soybean oil appears to be a cost-effective and sustainable plant-based source that could contribute to reaching recommended levels of (n-3) FA intake, but more research and surveillance is needed; and adding SDA-enriched soybean oil to foods should be considered as a natural fortification approach to improving (n-3) FA status in the US and other populations. References for these conclusions and recommendations can be found in the articles included in the supplement. © 2012 American Society for Nutrition.
Maki K.C.,Biofortis Provident Clinical Research |
Gibson G.R.,University of Reading |
Dickmann R.S.,Kellogg Brown and Root |
Kendall C.W.C.,University of Toronto |
And 9 more authors.
Nutrition | Year: 2012
Objective: We assessed whether a wheat bran extract containing arabino-xylan-oligosaccharide (AXOS) elicited a prebiotic effect and influenced other physiologic parameters when consumed in ready-to-eat cereal at two dose levels. Methods: This double-blind, randomized, controlled, crossover trial evaluated the effects of consuming AXOS at 0 (control), 2.2, or 4.8 g/d as part of ready-to-eat cereal for 3 wk in 55 healthy men and women. Fecal microbial levels, postprandial serum ferulic acid concentrations, and other physiologic parameters were assessed at the beginning and end of each condition. Results: The median bifidobacteria content of stool samples (log10/grams of dry weight [DW]) was found to be higher in the subjects consuming the 4.8-g/d dose (10.03) than in those consuming 2.2 g/d (9.93) and control (9.84, P < 0.001). No significant changes in the populations of other fecal microbes were observed, indicating a selective increase in fecal bifidobacteria. Postprandial ferulic acid was measured at 120 min at the start and end of each 3-wk treatment period in subjects at least 50 y old (n = 37) and increased in a dose-dependent manner (end-of-treatment values 0.007, 0.050, and 0.069 μg/mL for the control, AXOS 2.2 g/d, and AXOS 4.8 g/d conditions, respectively, P for trend < 0.001). Conclusion: These results indicate that AXOS has prebiotic properties, selectively increasing fecal bifidobacteria, and increases postprandial ferulic acid concentrations in a dose-dependent manner in healthy men and women. © 2012 Elsevier Inc.
Schmier J.K.,Exponent, Inc. |
Miller P.E.,Exponent, Inc. |
Levine J.A.,Exponent, Inc. |
Perez V.,Exponent, Inc. |
And 5 more authors.
BMC Public Health | Year: 2014
Background: Nearly five percent of Americans suffer from functional constipation, many of whom may benefit from increasing dietary fiber consumption. The annual constipation-related healthcare cost savings associated with increasing intakes may be considerable but have not been examined previously. The objective of the present study was to estimate the economic impact of increased dietary fiber consumption on direct medical costs associated with constipation. Methods. Literature searches were conducted to identify nationally representative input parameters for the U.S. population, which included prevalence of functional constipation; current dietary fiber intakes; proportion of the population meeting recommended intakes; and the percentage that would be expected to respond, in terms of alleviation of constipation, to a change in dietary fiber consumption. A dose-response analysis of published data was conducted to estimate the percent reduction in constipation prevalence per 1 g/day increase in dietary fiber intake. Annual direct medical costs for constipation were derived from the literature and updated to U.S. $ 2012. Sensitivity analyses explored the impact on adult vs. pediatric populations and the robustness of the model to each input parameter. Results: The base case direct medical cost-savings was $12.7 billion annually among adults. The base case assumed that 3% of men and 6% of women currently met recommended dietary fiber intakes; each 1 g/day increase in dietary fiber intake would lead to a reduction of 1.9% in constipation prevalence; and all adults would increase their dietary fiber intake to recommended levels (mean increase of 9 g/day). Sensitivity analyses, which explored numerous alternatives, found that even if only 50% of the adult population increased dietary fiber intake by 3 g/day, annual medical costs savings exceeded $2 billion. All plausible scenarios resulted in cost savings of at least $1 billion. Conclusions: Increasing dietary fiber consumption is associated with considerable cost savings, potentially exceeding $12 billion, which is a conservative estimate given the exclusion of lost productivity costs in the model. The finding that $12.7 billion in direct medical costs of constipation could be averted through simple, realistic changes in dietary practices is promising and highlights the need for strategies to increase dietary fiber intakes. © 2014 Schmier et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
Maki K.C.,Biofortis Provident Clinical Research |
Van Elswyk M.E.,Van Elswyk Consulting Inc. |
Alexander D.D.,Exponent, Inc. |
Rains T.M.,Biofortis Provident Clinical Research |
And 2 more authors.
Journal of Clinical Lipidology | Year: 2012
Background: Limited consumption of red meat, including beef, is one of many often-suggested strategies to reduce the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). However, the role that beef consumption specifically plays in promoting adverse changes in the cardiovascular risk factor profile is unclear. Objective: A meta-analysis of randomized, controlled, clinical trials (RCTs) was conducted to evaluate the effects of beef, independent of other red and processed meats, compared with poultry and/or fish consumption, on lipoprotein lipids. Methods: RCTs published from 1950 to 2010 were considered for inclusion. Studies were included if they reported fasting lipoprotein lipid changes after beef and poultry/fish consumption by subjects free of chronic disease. A total of 124 RCTs were identified, and 8 studies involving 406 subjects met the prespecified entry criteria and were included in the analysis. Results: Relative to the baseline diet, mean ± standard error changes (in mg/dL) after beef versus poultry/fish consumption, respectively, were -8.1 ± 2.8 vs. -6.2 ± 3.1 for total cholesterol (P =.630), -8.2 ± 4.2 vs. -8.9 ± 4.4 for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P =.905), -2.3 ± 1.0 vs. -1.9 ± 0.8 for high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P =.762), and -8.1 ± 3.6 vs. -12.9 ± 4.0 mg/dL for triacylglycerols (P =.367). Conclusion: Changes in the fasting lipid profile were not significantly different with beef consumption compared with those with poultry and/or fish consumption. Inclusion of lean beef in the diet increases the variety of available food choices, which may improve long-term adherence with dietary recommendations for lipid management. © 2012 National Lipid Association. All rights reserved.
PubMed | Biofortis Provident Clinical Research
Type: Journal Article | Journal: Journal of clinical lipidology | Year: 2012
Limited consumption of red meat, including beef, is one of many often-suggested strategies to reduce the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). However, the role that beef consumption specifically plays in promoting adverse changes in the cardiovascular risk factor profile is unclear.A meta-analysis of randomized, controlled, clinical trials (RCTs) was conducted to evaluate the effects of beef, independent of other red and processed meats, compared with poultry and/or fish consumption, on lipoprotein lipids.RCTs published from 1950 to 2010 were considered for inclusion. Studies were included if they reported fasting lipoprotein lipid changes after beef and poultry/fish consumption by subjects free of chronic disease. A total of 124 RCTs were identified, and 8 studies involving 406 subjects met the prespecified entry criteria and were included in the analysis.Relative to the baseline diet, mean standard error changes (in mg/dL) after beef versus poultry/fish consumption, respectively, were -8.1 2.8 vs. -6.2 3.1 for total cholesterol (P= .630), -8.2 4.2 vs. -8.9 4.4 for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P= .905), -2.3 1.0 vs. -1.9 0.8 for high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P= .762), and -8.1 3.6 vs. -12.9 4.0 mg/dL for triacylglycerols (P= .367).Changes in the fasting lipid profile were not significantly different with beef consumption compared with those with poultry and/or fish consumption. Inclusion of lean beef in the diet increases the variety of available food choices, which may improve long-term adherence with dietary recommendations for lipid management.