BackgroundMayonnaise is used widely in contemporary human diet with widespread use as a salad dressing or spread on breads. Vegetable oils used in its formulation may be a rich source of ω-6 PUFAs and the higher-PUFA content of mayonnaise may be beneficial in mediating a hypocholesterolemic effect. This study, therefore, evaluated the functionality of mayonnaise on cardiometabolic risk within a regular human consumption scenario.MethodsSubjects underwent a randomized double-blind crossover trial, consuming diets supplemented with 20 g/day of either soybean oil-based mayonnaise (SB-mayo) or palm olein-based mayonnaise (PO-mayo) for 4 weeks each with a 2-week wash-out period. The magnitude of changes for metabolic outcomes between dietary treatments was compared with PO-mayo serving as the control. The data was analyzed by ANCOVA using the GLM model. Analysis was adjusted for weight changes.ResultsTreatments resulted in significant reductions in TC (diff = −0.25 mmol/L; P = 0.001), LDL-C (diff = −0.17 mmol/L; P = 0.016) and HDL-C (diff = −0.12 mmol/L; P < 0.001) in SB-mayo compared to PO-mayo without affecting LDL-C:HDL-C ratio (P > 0.05). Lipoprotein particle change was significant with large LDL particles increasing after PO-mayo (diff = +63.2 nmol/L; P = 0.007) compared to SB-mayo but small LDL particles remained unaffected. Plasma glucose, apolipoproteins and oxidative stress markers remained unchanged.ConclusionsDaily use with 20 g of linoleic acid-rich SB-mayo elicited reductions in TC and LDL-C concentrations without significantly changing LDL-C:HDL-C ratio or small LDL particle distributions compared to the PO-mayo diet.Trial registrationThis clinical trial was retrospectively registered with the National Medical Research Register, National Institute of Health, Ministry of Health Malaysia, (NMRR-15-40-24035; registered on 29/01/2015; https://www.nmrr.gov.my/fwbPage.jsp?fwbPageId=ResearchISRForm&fwbAction=Update&fwbStep=10&pk.researchID=24035&fwbVMenu=3&fwbResearchAction=Update). Ethical approval was obtained from the National University of Malaysia’s Medical Ethics Committee (UKM 1.5.3.5/244/SPP/NN-054-2011, approved on 25/05/2011).

We conducted this cross-sectional population study with a healthy multi-ethnic urban population (n = 577) in Malaysia, combining nutritional assessments with cardiometabolic biomarkers defined by lipid, atherogenic lipoproteins, inflammation and insulin resistance. We found diametrically opposing associations of carbohydrate (246·6 ± 57·7 g, 54·3 ± 6·5%-TEI) and fat (total = 64·5 ± 19·8 g, 31·6 ± 5·5%-TEI; saturated fat = 14·1 ± 2·7%-TEI) intakes as regards waist circumference, HDL-C, blood pressure, glucose, insulin and HOMA2-IR as well as the large-LDL and large-HDL lipoprotein particles. Diets were then differentiated into either low fat (LF, <30% TEI or <50 g) or high fat (HF, >35% TEI or >70 g) and low carbohydrate (LC, <210 g) or high carbohydrate (HC, >285 g) which yielded LFLC, LFHC, HFLC and HFHC groupings. Cardiometabolic biomarkers were not significantly different (P > 0.05) between LFLC and HFLC groups. LFLC had significantly higher large-LDL particle concentrations compared to HFHC. HOMA-IR2 was significantly higher with HFHC (1·91 ± 1·85, P < 0·001) versus other fat-carbohydrate combinations (LFLC = 1·34 ± 1·07, HFLC = 1·41 ± 1·07; LFHC = 1·31 ± 0·93). After co-variate adjustment, odds of having HOMA2-IR >1.7 in the HFHC group was 2.43 (95% CI: 1·03, 5·72) times more compared to LFLC while odds of having large-LDL <450 nmol/L in the HFHC group was 1.91 (95% CI: 1·06, 3·44) more compared to latter group. Our data suggests that a HFHC dietary combination in Malaysian adults is associated with significant impact on lipoprotein particles and insulin resistance.

Oral nutritional supplements (ONS) are used to promote catch-up growth in children with undernutrition. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the evidence of ONS intervention effects on growth for 9-month- to 12-year-old children who were undernourished or at nutritional risk. Eleven randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria; trials compared changes in anthropometric measures in children using ONS or ONS + DC (dietary counselling) to measures for those following usual diet or placebo or DC alone. The RCTs included 2287 children without chronic diseases (mean age 5.87 years [SD, 1.35]; 56% boys). At follow-up time points up to 6 months, results showed that children in the ONS intervention group had greater gains in weight (0.423 kg, [95% confidence interval 0.234, 0.613], p < 0.001) and height (0.417 cm [0.059, 0.776], p = 0.022) versus control; greater gains in weight (0.089 kg [0.049, 0.130], p < 0.001) were evident as early as 7–10 days. Longitudinal analyses with repeated measures at 30, 60, and 90 days showed greater gains in weight parameters from 30 days onwards (p < 0.001), a trend towards greater height gains at 90 days (p = 0.056), and significantly greater gains in height-for-age percentiles and z-scores at 30 and 90 days, respectively (p < 0.05). Similar results were found in subgroup analyses of studies comparing ONS + DC to DC alone. For children with undernutrition, particularly those who were mildly and moderately undernourished, usage of ONS in a nutritional intervention resulted in significantly better growth outcomes when compared to control treatments (usual diet, placebo or DC alone).