Vitamin D-Do Diet Recommendations for Health Remain Strong?

IF 4.3 2区 医学 Current Osteoporosis Reports Pub Date : 2024-10-02 DOI:10.1007/s11914-024-00893-z
Connie M Weaver, Taylor C Wallace
{"title":"Vitamin D-Do Diet Recommendations for Health Remain Strong?","authors":"Connie M Weaver, Taylor C Wallace","doi":"10.1007/s11914-024-00893-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>How will the scientific community and authoritative bodies define future nutritional requirements for vitamin D? At the International Symposium on Nutritional Aspects of Musculoskeletal Health, the authors debated the strength of current evidence for setting vitamin D intake recommendations from diet: the positive side of the strength of the evidence (PRO) suggests there is a physiological requirement for vitamin D and the opposing view (CON) that in light of negative results from large, recent trials, particularly those with fractures and bone health outcomes, we are left rudderless. Should we provide recommendations based on empiric treatment of vitamin D for most groups and conditions? It is becoming increasingly evident that vitamin D plays a role in many physiological functions and processes associated with long-term human health; however, to what extent are these benefits apparent beyond what is needed for adequate nutritional status, measured as serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels, for active calcium absorption? The meeting attendees voted for the PRO vs. CON position at the end of the session.</p>","PeriodicalId":48750,"journal":{"name":"Current Osteoporosis Reports","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Osteoporosis Reports","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11914-024-00893-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

How will the scientific community and authoritative bodies define future nutritional requirements for vitamin D? At the International Symposium on Nutritional Aspects of Musculoskeletal Health, the authors debated the strength of current evidence for setting vitamin D intake recommendations from diet: the positive side of the strength of the evidence (PRO) suggests there is a physiological requirement for vitamin D and the opposing view (CON) that in light of negative results from large, recent trials, particularly those with fractures and bone health outcomes, we are left rudderless. Should we provide recommendations based on empiric treatment of vitamin D for most groups and conditions? It is becoming increasingly evident that vitamin D plays a role in many physiological functions and processes associated with long-term human health; however, to what extent are these benefits apparent beyond what is needed for adequate nutritional status, measured as serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels, for active calcium absorption? The meeting attendees voted for the PRO vs. CON position at the end of the session.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
维生素 D--有利于健康的饮食建议是否依然有效?
科学界和权威机构将如何定义未来的维生素 D 营养需求?在 "肌肉骨骼健康营养问题国际研讨会 "上,作者们就目前从饮食中确定维生素 D 摄入量建议的证据强度展开了辩论:证据强度的正方(PRO)认为维生素 D 有生理需求,而反方(CON)则认为,鉴于近期大型试验的负面结果,尤其是有关骨折和骨骼健康结果的试验,我们将无所适从。我们是否应该根据大多数群体和病症的维生素 D 经验治疗提供建议?越来越多的事实表明,维生素 D 在许多与人类长期健康相关的生理功能和过程中发挥着作用;然而,除了充足的营养状况(以血清 25- 羟基维生素 D 水平衡量)所需的活性钙吸收外,这些益处在多大程度上是显而易见的呢?会议结束时,与会者对赞成与反对的立场进行了投票。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Current Osteoporosis Reports
Current Osteoporosis Reports ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM-
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
2.30%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: This journal intends to provide clear, insightful, balanced contributions by international experts that review the most important, recently published clinical findings related to the diagnosis, treatment, management, and prevention of osteoporosis. We accomplish this aim by appointing international authorities to serve as Section Editors in key subject areas, such as current and future therapeutics, epidemiology and pathophysiology, and evaluation and management. Section Editors, in turn, select topics for which leading experts contribute comprehensive review articles that emphasize new developments and recently published papers of major importance, highlighted by annotated reference lists. An international Editorial Board reviews the annual table of contents, suggests articles of special interest to their country/region, and ensures that topics are current and include emerging research. Commentaries from well-known figures in the field are also provided.
期刊最新文献
Adiposity and Mineral Balance in Chronic Kidney Disease. Between a Rock and a Short Place-The Impact of Nephrolithiasis on Skeletal Growth and Development Across the Lifespan. Vitamin D-Do Diet Recommendations for Health Remain Strong? Correction: Bringing Mechanical Context to Image-Based Measurements of Bone Integrity. Practical Compass of Single-Cell RNA-Seq Analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1