Addressing the risk of inadequate and excessive micronutrient intakes: traditional versus new approaches to setting adequate and safe micronutrient levels in foods

Maaike J Bruins, Gladys Mugambi, Janneke Verkaik-Kloosterman, Jeljer Hoekstra, Klaus Kraemer, Saskia Osendarp, Alida Melse-Boonstra, Alison M Gallagher, Hans Verhagen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Fortification of foods consumed by the general population or specific food products or supplements designed to be consumed by vulnerable target groups is amongst the strategies in developing countries to address micronutrient deficiencies. Any strategy aimed at dietary change needs careful consideration, ensuring the needs of at-risk subgroups are met whilst ensuring safety within the general population. This paper reviews the key principles of two main assessment approaches that may assist developing countries in deciding on effective and safe micronutrient levels in foods or special products designed to address micronutrient deficiencies, that is, the cut-point method and the stepwise approach to risk–benefit assessment. In the first approach, the goal is to shift population intake distributions such that intake prevalences below the Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) and above the Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) are both minimized. However, for some micronutrients like vitamin A and zinc, a narrow margin between the EAR and UL exists. Increasing their intakes through mass fortification may pose a dilemma; not permitting the UL to be exceeded provides assurance about the safety within the population but can potentially leave a proportion of the target population with unmet needs, or vice versa. Risk–benefit approaches assist in decision making at different micronutrient intake scenarios by balancing the magnitude of potential health benefits of reducing inadequate intakes against health risks of excessive intakes. Risk–benefit approaches consider different aspects of health risk including severity and number of people affected. This approach reduces the uncertainty for policy makers as compared to classic cut-point methods.
LanguageEnglish
Pages26020
JournalFood & Nutrition Research
Volume59
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 27 Jan 2015

Fingerprint

Micronutrients
dietary minerals
Food
Estimated Average Requirement
Developing Countries
developing countries
Tolerable Upper Intake Level
risk-benefit analysis
Population
Safety
food fortification
Health Services Needs and Demand
Health
Insurance Benefits
Administrative Personnel
Vitamin A
Uncertainty
vitamin A
dietary supplements
Zinc

Keywords

  • food fortification
  • nutrient reference values
  • requirements
  • cut-point method
  • risk–benefit assessment
  • public health

Cite this

Bruins, Maaike J ; Mugambi, Gladys ; Verkaik-Kloosterman, Janneke ; Hoekstra, Jeljer ; Kraemer, Klaus ; Osendarp, Saskia ; Melse-Boonstra, Alida ; Gallagher, Alison M ; Verhagen, Hans. / Addressing the risk of inadequate and excessive micronutrient intakes: traditional versus new approaches to setting adequate and safe micronutrient levels in foods. In: Food & Nutrition Research. 2015 ; Vol. 59. pp. 26020.
@article{ca5707d1663a43489e5e01e14468af6d,
title = "Addressing the risk of inadequate and excessive micronutrient intakes: traditional versus new approaches to setting adequate and safe micronutrient levels in foods",
abstract = "Fortification of foods consumed by the general population or specific food products or supplements designed to be consumed by vulnerable target groups is amongst the strategies in developing countries to address micronutrient deficiencies. Any strategy aimed at dietary change needs careful consideration, ensuring the needs of at-risk subgroups are met whilst ensuring safety within the general population. This paper reviews the key principles of two main assessment approaches that may assist developing countries in deciding on effective and safe micronutrient levels in foods or special products designed to address micronutrient deficiencies, that is, the cut-point method and the stepwise approach to risk–benefit assessment. In the first approach, the goal is to shift population intake distributions such that intake prevalences below the Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) and above the Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) are both minimized. However, for some micronutrients like vitamin A and zinc, a narrow margin between the EAR and UL exists. Increasing their intakes through mass fortification may pose a dilemma; not permitting the UL to be exceeded provides assurance about the safety within the population but can potentially leave a proportion of the target population with unmet needs, or vice versa. Risk–benefit approaches assist in decision making at different micronutrient intake scenarios by balancing the magnitude of potential health benefits of reducing inadequate intakes against health risks of excessive intakes. Risk–benefit approaches consider different aspects of health risk including severity and number of people affected. This approach reduces the uncertainty for policy makers as compared to classic cut-point methods.",
keywords = "food fortification, nutrient reference values, requirements, cut-point method, risk–benefit assessment, public health",
author = "Bruins, {Maaike J} and Gladys Mugambi and Janneke Verkaik-Kloosterman and Jeljer Hoekstra and Klaus Kraemer and Saskia Osendarp and Alida Melse-Boonstra and Gallagher, {Alison M} and Hans Verhagen",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "27",
doi = "10.3402/fnr.v59.26020",
language = "English",
volume = "59",
pages = "26020",
journal = "Food and Nutrition Research",
issn = "1654-6628",

}

Addressing the risk of inadequate and excessive micronutrient intakes: traditional versus new approaches to setting adequate and safe micronutrient levels in foods. / Bruins, Maaike J; Mugambi, Gladys; Verkaik-Kloosterman, Janneke; Hoekstra, Jeljer; Kraemer, Klaus; Osendarp, Saskia; Melse-Boonstra, Alida; Gallagher, Alison M; Verhagen, Hans.

In: Food & Nutrition Research, Vol. 59, 27.01.2015, p. 26020.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Addressing the risk of inadequate and excessive micronutrient intakes: traditional versus new approaches to setting adequate and safe micronutrient levels in foods

AU - Bruins, Maaike J

AU - Mugambi, Gladys

AU - Verkaik-Kloosterman, Janneke

AU - Hoekstra, Jeljer

AU - Kraemer, Klaus

AU - Osendarp, Saskia

AU - Melse-Boonstra, Alida

AU - Gallagher, Alison M

AU - Verhagen, Hans

PY - 2015/1/27

Y1 - 2015/1/27

N2 - Fortification of foods consumed by the general population or specific food products or supplements designed to be consumed by vulnerable target groups is amongst the strategies in developing countries to address micronutrient deficiencies. Any strategy aimed at dietary change needs careful consideration, ensuring the needs of at-risk subgroups are met whilst ensuring safety within the general population. This paper reviews the key principles of two main assessment approaches that may assist developing countries in deciding on effective and safe micronutrient levels in foods or special products designed to address micronutrient deficiencies, that is, the cut-point method and the stepwise approach to risk–benefit assessment. In the first approach, the goal is to shift population intake distributions such that intake prevalences below the Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) and above the Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) are both minimized. However, for some micronutrients like vitamin A and zinc, a narrow margin between the EAR and UL exists. Increasing their intakes through mass fortification may pose a dilemma; not permitting the UL to be exceeded provides assurance about the safety within the population but can potentially leave a proportion of the target population with unmet needs, or vice versa. Risk–benefit approaches assist in decision making at different micronutrient intake scenarios by balancing the magnitude of potential health benefits of reducing inadequate intakes against health risks of excessive intakes. Risk–benefit approaches consider different aspects of health risk including severity and number of people affected. This approach reduces the uncertainty for policy makers as compared to classic cut-point methods.

AB - Fortification of foods consumed by the general population or specific food products or supplements designed to be consumed by vulnerable target groups is amongst the strategies in developing countries to address micronutrient deficiencies. Any strategy aimed at dietary change needs careful consideration, ensuring the needs of at-risk subgroups are met whilst ensuring safety within the general population. This paper reviews the key principles of two main assessment approaches that may assist developing countries in deciding on effective and safe micronutrient levels in foods or special products designed to address micronutrient deficiencies, that is, the cut-point method and the stepwise approach to risk–benefit assessment. In the first approach, the goal is to shift population intake distributions such that intake prevalences below the Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) and above the Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) are both minimized. However, for some micronutrients like vitamin A and zinc, a narrow margin between the EAR and UL exists. Increasing their intakes through mass fortification may pose a dilemma; not permitting the UL to be exceeded provides assurance about the safety within the population but can potentially leave a proportion of the target population with unmet needs, or vice versa. Risk–benefit approaches assist in decision making at different micronutrient intake scenarios by balancing the magnitude of potential health benefits of reducing inadequate intakes against health risks of excessive intakes. Risk–benefit approaches consider different aspects of health risk including severity and number of people affected. This approach reduces the uncertainty for policy makers as compared to classic cut-point methods.

KW - food fortification

KW - nutrient reference values

KW - requirements

KW - cut-point method

KW - risk–benefit assessment

KW - public health

UR - http://www.foodandnutritionresearch.net/index.php/fnr/article/view/26020

U2 - 10.3402/fnr.v59.26020

DO - 10.3402/fnr.v59.26020

M3 - Article

VL - 59

SP - 26020

JO - Food and Nutrition Research

T2 - Food and Nutrition Research

JF - Food and Nutrition Research

SN - 1654-6628

ER -