Loading...
Please wait, while we are loading the content...
Similar Documents
Current framework for DRI development: what are the pros and cons?
| Content Provider | Semantic Scholar |
|---|---|
| Author | Russell, Robert |
| Copyright Year | 2008 |
| Abstract | In 1994, two major changes were made to the development of reference values. One was that the values could be based on an endpoint associated with the risk of chronic disease. The second was that reference values in addition to the Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) would be provided to address the increasingly broad applications of reference values. However, these major changes to the DRI development process have both pros and cons. The Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) is the level of intake for which the risk of inadequacy would be 50 percent. The RDA is two standard deviations (SDs) above the EAR, covering 97 percent of the population. The Adequate Intake (AI) as a reference value was not envisioned until the lack of dose–response data precluded study committees from determining the level at which the risk of inadequacy would be 50 percent. This was often exacerbated by a lack of longitudinal studies. As a result, AIs were generally set when an EAR could not be established.2 These include calcium, vitamin D, chloride, chromium, fluoride, potassium, manganese, sodium, and vitamin K. For calcium, an AI was issued due to uncertainty about methods used in older balance studies, a lack of concordance between observational and experimental data (i.e., the mean intakes of the population are lower than the values needed to achieve calcium retention), and a lack of longitudinal dose–response data to verify an association between the amounts needed for calcium retention and bone fracture or bone loss. For vitamin D, an AI was developed because the study committee did not know how much dietary vitamin D is needed to maintain normal calcium metabolism and bone health, primarily because vitamin D is a complicated hormone: Exposure to sunlight, skin pigmentation, the latitude at which one lives, and the amount of clothing one … |
| File Format | PDF HTM / HTML |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1753-4887.2008.00074.x |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/~/media/Files/Activity%20Files/Nutrition/DRIWS/SessionIRussell.ashx |
| PubMed reference number | 18667006 |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-4887.2008.00074.x |
| Journal | Medline |
| Volume Number | 66 |
| Issue Number | 8 |
| Journal | Nutrition reviews |
| Language | English |
| Access Restriction | Open |
| Content Type | Text |
| Resource Type | Article |
