Scan Science and Technology
Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies
The Experts below are selected from a list of 237 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Melinda R Ramsay – 1st expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform
Vitamin B12 and vegetarian dietsThe Medical Journal of Australia, 2012Co-Authors: Carol L Zeuschner, Bevan D Hokin, Kate A Marsh, Angela V Saunders, Michelle A Reid, Melinda R RamsayAbstract:
Vitamin B(1)(2) is found almost exclusively in Animal-Based Foods and is therefore a nutrient of potential concern for those following a vegetarian or vegan diet. Vegans, and anyone who significantly limits intake of Animal-Based Foods, require vitamin B(1)(2)-fortified Foods or supplements. Vitamin B(1)(2) deficiency has several stages and may be present even if a person does not have anaemia. Anyone following a vegan or vegetarian diet should have their vitamin B(1)(2) status regularly assessed to identify a potential problem. A useful process for assessing vitamin B(1)(2) status in clinical practice is the combination of taking a diet history, testing serum vitamin B(1)(2) level and testing homocysteine, holotranscobalamin II or methylmalonic acid serum levels. Pregnant and lactating vegan or vegetarian women should ensure an adequate intake of vitamin B(1)(2) to provide for their developing baby. In people who can absorb vitamin B(1)(2), small amounts (in line with the recommended dietary intake) and frequent (daily) doses appear to be more effective than infrequent large doses, including intramuscular injections. Fortification of a wider range of Foods products with vitamin B(1)(2), particularly Foods commonly consumed by vegetarians, is likely to be beneficial, and the feasibility of this should be explored by relevant food authorities.
Victor L Fulgoni – 2nd expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform
Increasing plant based Foods or dairy Foods differentially affects nutrient intakes: Dietary scenarios using NHANES 2007–2010Nutrients, 2016Co-Authors: Christopher J. Cifelli, Jenny A. Houchins, Elieke Demmer, Victor L FulgoniAbstract:
Diets rich in plant Foods and lower in Animal-Based products have garnered increased attention among researchers, dietitians and health professionals in recent years for their potential to, not only improve health, but also to lessen the environmental impact. However, the potential effects of increasing plant-based Foods at the expense of Animal-Based Foods on macro- and micronutrient nutrient adequacy in the U.S. diet is unknown. In addition, dairy Foods are consistently under consumed, thus the impact of increased dairy on nutrient adequacy is important to measure. Accordingly, the objective of this study was to use national survey data to model three different dietary scenarios to assess the effects of increasing plant-based Foods or dairy Foods on macronutrient intake and nutrient adequacy. Data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2007–2010 for persons two years and older (n = 17,387) were used in all the analyses. Comparisons were made of usual intake of macronutrients and shortfall nutrients of three dietary scenarios that increased intakes by 100%: (i) plant-based Foods; (ii) protein-rich plant-based Foods (i.e., legumes, nuts, seeds, soy); and (iii) milk, cheese and yogurt. Scenarios (i) and (ii) had commensurate reductions in animal product intake. In both children (2–18 years) and adults (≥19 years), the percent not meeting the Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) decreased for vitamin C, magnesium, vitamin E, folate and iron when plant-based Foods were increased. However the percent not meeting the EAR increased for calcium, protein, vitamin A, and vitamin D in this scenario. Doubling protein-rich plant-based Foods had no effect on nutrient intake because they were consumed in very low quantities in the baseline diet. The dairy model reduced the percent not meeting the EAR for calcium, vitamin A, vitamin D, magnesium, and protein, while sodium and saturated fat levels increased. Our modeling shows that increasing plant-based Foods could lead to unintended dietary outcomes without simultaneous changes in the types and amounts of plant Foods currently consumed. Increasing dairy Foods, which are currently under-consumed, could assist in improving the intakes of many nutrients of concern.
Olaf Christen – 3rd expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform
Gender as a factor in an environmental assessment of the consumption of animal and plant-based Foods in GermanyThe International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2012Co-Authors: Toni Meier, Olaf ChristenAbstract:
Purpose Due to their production intensity, different Foods of animal or plant origin play a crucial role in the assessment of the environmental impacts of human nutrition and diets. Based on a representative nutrition survey in Germany from the year 2006, a life cycle assessment (LCA) was conducted to quantify nutrition-related emissions of animal and plant-based Foods (excluding beverages), with a special focus on the socio-demographic factor gender. Materials and methods For the study, representative data sets concerning German food production and consumption were used. These were complemented by the Danish LCA Food database and other LCA data to analyse the impact of food imports. As regards environmental impact assessment, global warming potential (GWP) was assessed, which included emissions from direct land use change and land use (dLUC, LU), along with three inventory indicators (ammonia emissions, land use, blue water use). The following food groups were analysed from cradle-to-store and their impacts were evaluated and compared with each other: Animal-Based Foods (meat products, milk products, egg products and fish products), plant-based Foods (grain products, vegetables, fruits, potato products, margarine/oils, sugar/sweets). The reference year in the study is the year 2006. Results and discussion For all indicators, the results show strong variation between the genders. Even if the physiologically different consumption patterns among men and women are adjusted on a weight basis, men show a higher impact in terms of GWP (CO_2 eq. +25%), ammonia emissions (+30%) and land use (+24%). In contrast, women demonstrate a higher water demand (+11%). These differences are primarily caused by a higher share of meat and meat products in the usual diet of men (+28%) as well as of fruit and vegetables in the diet of women (+40%). If men were to shift qualitatively to the usual diet of women, then 14.8 Mt CO_2 eq. and 60.1 kt ammonia emissions could be saved annually. Within the system boundaries of our study, this would translate into a reduction of 12% of CO_2 eq. and 14% of ammonia emissions. With regard to land use, this equals an area of 15,613 km^2 year^−1 (−11%), whereas the total blue water demand would be increased by 94 Mm^3 year^−1 (+7%). Limitations within this study are caused by the system boundaries cradle-to-store and are also due to the restricted set of environmental indicators which were analysed. Nonetheless, our results for GWP and land use are in keeping with previous studies. The results concerning ammonia and blue water use are limited when compared with other study results. Conclusions The study shows that within one society distinct diet profiles with markedly different environmental impacts are already established. Taking cultural and physiological considerations among the genders into account, these differences could be seen as offering potential opportunities to strengthen sustainable diet profiles. Further research should also consider health impact assessments to ensure that alterations in diet profiles due to environmental constraints do not lead to disadvantageous public health effects. Particular attention should be paid here to potentially undernourished subgroups (such as the elderly, sick people, pregnant women).