Search

Background: Eating healthier is associated with a range of favorable health outcomes. Our previous model estimated the impact of dietary changes on life expectancy gains but did not consider height, weight, or physical activity., Objectives: We aimed to estimate the increase in life expectancy resulting from the transition from typical national dietary patterns to longevity-optimizing dietary changes, more feasible dietary modifications, and optimized vegan dietary changes in China, France, Germany, Iran, Norway, the United Kingdom, and the United States., Methods: Our modeling study used data from meta-analyses presenting dose-response relationships between intake of 15 food groups and mortality. Background mortality data were from the Global Burden of Disease Study. We used national food intake data and adjusted for height, weight, and physical activity level., Results: For 40-y-olds, estimated life expectancy gains ranged from 6.2 y (with uncertainty interval [UI]: 5.7, 7.5 y) for Chinese females to 9.7 y (UI: 8.1, 11.3 y) for United States males following sustained changes from typical country-specific dietary patterns to longevity-optimized dietary changes, and from 5.2 y (UI: 4.0, 6.5 y) for Chinese females to 8.7 y (UI: 7.1, 10.3 y) for United States males following changes to optimized vegan dietary changes., Conclusions: A sustained change from country-specific typical dietary pattern patterns to longevity-optimized dietary changes, more feasible dietary changes, or optimized vegan dietary changes are all projected to result in substantial life expectancy gains across ages and countries. These changes included more whole grains, legumes, and nuts and less red/processed meats and sugars and sugar-sweetened beverages. The largest gains from dietary changes would be in the United States., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Some evidence suggests that higher energy intake (EI) later in the day is associated with poor diet quality and obesity. However, EI at one eating occasion (EO) is also dependent on EI at surrounding EOs. Studies that examine the distribution of EOs across the day are rare. Objective: The aim of this study was to examine associations between temporal eating patterns, nutrient intakes, diet quality, and measures of adiposity in a representative sample of Australian adults. Design: Dietary data from two 24-h recalls collected during the cross-sectional 2011-2012 Australian National Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey were analyzed ( n = 4544 adults, aged ≥19 y). Temporal eating patterns, based on the distribution of EOs across the day, were determined by using latent class analysis. Diet quality estimated adherence to healthy eating recommendations and was assessed by using the 2013 Dietary Guidelines Index (DGI). Multivariate regression models assessed associations between temporal eating patterns, nutrient intakes, diet quality, and adiposity (body mass index, waist circumference, weight status, and central weight status). Models were adjusted for potential confounders and energy misreporting. Results: Three patterns, labeled "conventional," "later lunch," and "grazing," were identified. Compared with a "conventional" or "later lunch" pattern, men and women with a "grazing" pattern had lower DGI scores and higher intakes of discretionary (noncore) foods ( P < 0.05). Among women, the "grazing" pattern was associated with overweight or obesity (OR: 1.57; 95% CI: 1.15, 2.13) and central overweight or obesity (OR: 1.73; 95% CI: 1.19, 2.50). These associations were attenuated after the exclusion of energy misreporters and adjustment for total EI. Conclusions: This study found that a "grazing" temporal eating pattern was modestly but significantly associated with poorer diet quality and adiposity among women, after adjustment for covariates and energy misreporting. Future research should consider the impact of energy misreporting on the relation between temporal eating patterns and adiposity. This secondary analysis was registered at anzctr.org.au as ACTRN12617001029381., (© 2017 American Society for Nutrition.)

Background: There has been limited evidence about whether genotype-tailored advice provides extra benefits in reducing obesity-related traits compared with the benefits of conventional one-size-fits-all advice. Objective: We determined whether the disclosure of information on fat-mass and obesity-associated ( FTO ) genotype risk had a greater effect on a reduction of obesity-related traits in risk carriers than in nonrisk carriers across different levels of personalized nutrition. Design: A total of 683 participants (women: 51%; age range: 18-73 y) from the Food4Me randomized controlled trial were included in this analysis. Participants were randomly assigned to 4 intervention arms as follows: level 0, control group; level 1, dietary group; level 2, phenotype group; and level 3, genetic group. FTO (single nucleotide polymorphism rs9939609) was genotyped at baseline in all participants, but only subjects who were randomly assigned to level 3 were informed about their genotypes. Level 3 participants were stratified into risk carriers (AA/AT) and nonrisk carriers (TT) of the FTO gene for analyses. Height, weight, and waist circumference (WC) were self-measured and reported at baseline and months 3 and 6. Results: Changes in adiposity markers were greater in participants who were informed that they carried the FTO risk allele (level 3 AT/AA carriers) than in the nonpersonalized group (level 0) but not in the other personalized groups (level 1 and 2). Mean reductions in weight and WC at month 6 were greater for FTO risk carriers than for noncarriers in the level 3 group [-2.28 kg (95% CI: -3.06, -1.48 kg) compared with -1.99 kg (-2.19, -0.19 kg), respectively ( P = 0.037); and -4.34 cm (-5.63, -3.08 cm) compared with -1.99 cm (-4.04, -0.05 cm), respectively, ( P = 0.048)]. Conclusions: There are greater body weight and WC reductions in risk carriers than in nonrisk carriers of the FTO gene. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01530139., (© 2017 American Society for Nutrition.)

Background: The apolipoprotein E (APOE) risk allele (ɛ4) is associated with higher total cholesterol (TC), amplified response to saturated fatty acid (SFA) reduction, and increased cardiovascular disease. Although knowledge of gene risk may enhance dietary change, it is unclear whether ɛ4 carriers would benefit from gene-based personalized nutrition (PN)., Objectives: The aims of this study were to 1) investigate interactions between APOE genotype and habitual dietary fat intake and modulations of fat intake on metabolic outcomes; 2) determine whether gene-based PN results in greater dietary change than do standard dietary advice (level 0) and nongene-based PN (levels 1-2); and 3) assess the impact of knowledge of APOE risk (risk: E4+, nonrisk: E4-) on dietary change after gene-based PN (level 3)., Design: Individuals (n = 1466) recruited into the Food4Me pan-European PN dietary intervention study were randomly assigned to 4 treatment arms and genotyped for APOE (rs429358 and rs7412). Diet and dried blood spot TC and ω-3 (n-3) index were determined at baseline and after a 6-mo intervention. Data were analyzed with the use of adjusted general linear models., Results: Significantly higher TC concentrations were observed in E4+ participants than in E4- (P < 0.05). Although there were no significant differences in APOE response to gene-based PN (E4+ compared with E4-), both groups had a greater reduction in SFA (percentage of total energy) intake than at level 0 (mean ± SD: E4+, -0.72% ± 0.35% compared with -1.95% ± 0.45%, P = 0.035; E4-, -0.31% ± 0.20% compared with -1.68% ± 0.35%, P = 0.029). Gene-based PN was associated with a smaller reduction in SFA intake than in nongene-based PN (level 2) for E4- participants (-1.68% ± 0.35% compared with -2.56% ± 0.27%, P = 0.025)., Conclusions: The APOE ɛ4 allele was associated with higher TC. Although gene-based PN targeted to APOE was more effective in reducing SFA intake than standard dietary advice, there was no difference between APOE "risk" and "nonrisk" groups. Furthermore, disclosure of APOE nonrisk may have weakened dietary response to PN. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01530139., (© 2016 American Society for Nutrition.)

Background: Little is known about the efficacy of personalized nutrition (PN) interventions for improving consumption of a Mediterranean diet (MedDiet)., Objective: The objective was to evaluate the effect of a PN intervention on dietary changes associated with the MedDiet., Design: Participants (n = 1607) were recruited into a 6-mo, Internet-based, PN randomized controlled trial (Food4Me) designed to evaluate the effect of PN on dietary change. Participants were randomly assigned to receive conventional dietary advice [control; level 0 (L0)] or PN advice on the basis of current diet [level 1 (L1)], diet and phenotype [level 2 (L2)], or diet, phenotype, and genotype [level 3 (L3)]. Dietary intakes from food-frequency questionnaires at baseline and at 6 mo were converted to a MedDiet score. Linear regression compared participant characteristics between high (>5) and low (≤5) MedDiet scores. Differences in MedDiet scores between treatment arms at month 6 were evaluated by using contrast analyses., Results: At baseline, high MedDiet scorers had a 0.5 lower body mass index (in kg/m(2); P = 0.007) and a 0.03 higher physical activity level (P = 0.003) than did low scorers. MedDiet scores at month 6 were greater in individuals randomly assigned to receive PN (L1, L2, and L3) than in controls (PN compared with controls: 5.20 ± 0.05 and 5.48 ± 0.07, respectively; P = 0.002). There was no significant difference in MedDiet scores at month 6 between PN advice on the basis of L1 compared with L2 and L3. However, differences in MedDiet scores at month 6 were greater in L3 than in L2 (L3 compared with L2: 5.63 ± 0.10 and 5.38 ± 0.10, respectively; P = 0.029)., Conclusions: Higher MedDiet scores at baseline were associated with healthier lifestyles and lower adiposity. After the intervention, MedDiet scores were greater in individuals randomly assigned to receive PN than in controls, with the addition of DNA-based dietary advice resulting in the largest differences in MedDiet scores. Although differences were significant, their clinical relevance is modest. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01530139., (© 2016 American Society for Nutrition.)