This review utilizes current national dietary guidelines and published databases to evaluate the impacts of reasonable shifts in the amount and type of protein intake in the United States on the intersection of human and environmental health. The established scientific basis and recommendations for protein intake as described in the US Dietary Reference Intakes are reviewed. Data on food availability from both the US Department of Agriculture and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and data on consumption from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey are used to examine estimates of current US protein consumption. Greenhouse gas (carbon dioxide equivalents, CO 2 eq) and blue and green water impacts of US protein consumption resulting from US agricultural practices were obtained from previously published meta-analyses. A 25% decrease in protein intake paired with a 25% shift from animal food to plant food protein intake—from an 85:15 ratio to a 60:40 ratio—would best align protein intake with national dietary recommendations while simultaneously resulting in 40% fewer CO 2 eq emissions and 10% less consumptive water use. The modeling of this strategy suggests a savings of 129 billion kilograms of CO 2 eq and 3.1 trillion gallons of water relative to current consumption.
Numerous studies have attempted to identify successful dietary strategies for weight loss, and many have focused on Low-Fat vs. Low-Carbohydrate comparisons. Despite relatively small between-group differences in weight loss found in most previous studies, researchers have consistently observed relatively large between-subject differences in weight loss within any given diet group (e.g., ~25 kg weight loss to ~5 kg weight gain). The primary objective of this study was to identify predisposing individual factors at baseline that help explain differential weight loss achieved by individuals assigned to the same diet, particularly a pre-determined multi-locus genotype pattern and insulin resistance status. Secondary objectives included discovery strategies for further identifying potential genetic risk scores. Exploratory objectives included investigation of an extensive set of physiological, psychosocial, dietary, and behavioral variables as moderating and/or mediating variables and/or secondary outcomes. The target population was generally healthy, free-living adults with BMI 28-40 kg/m2 (n=600). The intervention consisted of a 12-month protocol of 22 one-hour evening instructional sessions led by registered dietitians, with ~15-20 participants/class. Key objectives of dietary instruction included focusing on maximizing the dietary quality of both Low-Fat and Low-Carbohydrate diets (i.e., Healthy Low-Fat vs. Healthy Low-Carbohydrate), and maximally differentiating the two diets from one another. Rather than seeking to determine if one dietary approach was better than the other for the general population, this study sought to examine whether greater overall weight loss success could be achieved by matching different people to different diets. Here we present the design and methods of the study.
OBJECTIVE To test for differential weight loss response to Low-Fat (LF) vs. Low-Carbohydrate (LC) diets by insulin resistance status with emphasis on overall quality of both diets. METHODS Sixty-one adults, BMI 28-40 kg/m2, were randomized in a 2X2 design to LF or LC by insulin resistance status in this pilot study. Primary outcome was 6-month weight change. Participants were characterized as more insulin resistant (IR) or more insulin sensitive (IS) by median split of baseline insulin-area-under-the-curve from an oral glucose tolerance test. Intervention consisted of 14 one-hour class-based educational sessions. RESULTS Baseline % carb:% fat:% protein was 44:38:18. At 6m the LF group reported 57:21:22 and the LC group reported 22:53:25 (IR and IS combined). Six-month weight loss (kg) was 7.4 ± 6.0 (LF-IR), 10.4 ± 7.8 (LF-IS), 9.6 ± 6.6 (LC-IR), and 8.6 ± 5.6 (LC-IS). No significant main effects were detected for weight loss by diet group or IR status; no significant diet X IR interaction. Significant differences in several secondary outcomes were observed. CONCLUSION Substantial weight loss was achieved overall, but a significant diet X IR status interaction was not observed. Opportunity to detect differential response may have been limited by the focus on high diet quality for both diet groups and sample size.
Background Exposure to Bisphenol A (BPA) is ubiquitous and includes dietary and environmental pathways. BPA is rapidly glucuronidated in the body, and both BPA and its conjugates can be readily measured in urine. Objectives To investigate the contribution of canned food and beverages, known sources of BPA contamination, to BPA biomarkers of exposure using dietary and urinary BPA concentration information in a representative sample of the U.S. population. Methods We evaluated 7,669 NHANES 2003–2008 participants 6 years and older with 24-hour dietary recall information and urinary BPA concentrations available. Using linear regression models, we evaluated the associations between recent canned food and beverage consumption and urinary BPA concentrations, adjusting for potential confounders. Results We found 9% of our participants consumed one canned food in the past 24 hours and 2% consumed two or more canned foods. The consumption of one canned food vs. none was associated with 24% (95% CI 1.11, 1.38) higher urinary BPA concentrations. The consumption of two or more canned foods vs. none was associated with 54% (95% CI 1.27, 1.88) higher urinary BPA concentrations. The consumption of one or more of some specific types of canned foods vs. none were associated with higher urinary BPA concentrations: 41% (95% CI 1.23, 1.63) higher BPA for vegetable and fruit, 70% (95% CI 1.18, 2.44) higher for canned pasta, and 229% (95% CI 1.22, 4.30) higher for canned soup. Canned beverages were not associated with urinary BPA concentrations. Conclusions Canned food, including some specific types such as canned vegetable and fruit, canned pasta, and canned soup were associated with higher levels of urinary BPA concentrations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.