Annual review of nutrition最新文献

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), a spectrum of metabolic liver disease associated with obesity, ranges from relatively benign hepatic steatosis to nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). The latter is characterized by persistent liver injury, inflammation, and liver fibrosis, which collectively increase the risk for end-stage liver diseases such as cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Recent work has shed new light on the pathophysiology of NAFLD/NASH, particularly the role of genetic, epigenetic, and dietary factors and metabolic dysfunctions in other tissues in driving excess hepatic fat accumulation and liver injury. In parallel, single-cell RNA sequencing studies have revealed unprecedented details of the molecular nature of liver cell heterogeneity, intrahepatic cross talk, and disease-associated reprogramming of the liver immune and stromal vascular microenvironment. This review covers the recent advances in these areas, the emerging concepts of NASH pathogenesis, and potential new therapeutic opportunities.

National dietary surveillance produces dietary intake data used for various purposes including development and evaluation of national policies in food and nutrition. Since 2000, What We Eat in America, the dietary component of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, has collected dietary data and reported on the dietary intake of the US population. Continual innovations are required to improve methods of data collection, quality, and relevance. This review article evaluates the strengths and limitations of current and newer methods in national dietary data collection, underscoring the use of technology and emerging technology applications. We offer four objectives for national dietary surveillance that serve as guiding principles in the evaluation. Moving forward, national dietary surveillance must take advantage of new technologies for their potential in enhanced efficiency and objectivity in data operations while continuing to collect accurate dietary information that is standardized, validated, and publicly transparent.

For three decades, the US Public Health Service has recommended that all persons capable of becoming pregnant consume 400 μg/day of folic acid (FA) to prevent neural tube defects (NTDs). The neural tube forms by 28 days after conception. Fortification can be an effective NTD prevention strategy in populations with limited access to folic acid foods and/or supplements. This review describes the status of mandatory FA fortification among countries that fortify (n = 71) and the research describing the impact of those programs on NTD rates (up to 78% reduction), blood folate concentrations [red blood cell folate concentrations increased ∼1.47-fold (95% CI, 1.27, 1.70) following fortification], and other health outcomes. Across settings, high-quality studies such as those with randomized exposures (e.g., randomized controlled trials, Mendelian randomization studies) are needed to elucidate interactions of FA with vitamin B₁₂ as well as expanded biomarker testing.

The consumption of fructose as sugar and high-fructose corn syrup has markedly increased during the past several decades. This trend coincides with the exponential rise of metabolic diseases, including obesity, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes. While the biochemical pathways of fructose metabolism were elucidated in the early 1990s, organismal-level fructose metabolism and its whole-body pathophysiological impacts have been only recently investigated. In this review, we discuss the history of fructose consumption, biochemical and molecular pathways involved in fructose metabolism in different organs and gut microbiota, the role of fructose in the pathogenesis of metabolic diseases, and the remaining questions to treat such diseases.

Population-based solutions are needed to stabilize and then reverse the continued upward trends in obesity prevalence in the US population and worldwide. This review focuses on the related, urgent issue of disparities in obesity prevalence affecting US racial/ethnic minority and other socially marginalized populations. The review provides background on these disparities from a health equity perspective and highlights evidence of progress in equity-focused obesity efforts. Five recommendations for advancing equity efforts are offered as potential approaches to build on progress to date: (a) give equity issues higher priority, (b) adopt a health equity lens, (c) strengthen approaches by using health equity frameworks, (d) broaden the types of policies considered, and (e) emphasize implementation science concepts and tools. Potential challenges and opportunities are identified, including the prospect of longer-term, transformative solutions that integrate global and national initiatives to address obesity, undernutrition, and climate change.

After a long career at the National Center for Health Statistics, I retired and joined the Stanford Prevention Research Center as an unpaid associate. I was once described by a former US Food and Drug Administration commissioner as "one of the great epidemiologists." The chair of the Harvard nutrition department, speaking on National Public Radio, once described my research as "rubbish." Both may be exaggerations. Here I address some of the events that led to these contrasting descriptions. I also address the extent to which the so-called Matilda effect may have influenced my career. Are women in science on an equal footing with men? The Matilda effect suggests not. Unlike the Matthew effect for scientists, whereby those of higher prestige accrue a disproportionate share of recognition and rewards, the Matilda effect proposes that women scientists are systematically undervalued and underrecognized. I could never get a faculty job and was often treated like an underling. Nonetheless I persevered to publish highly cited research on several high-profile and sometimes controversial topics. Though overt sexism in science and workplaces has diminished over the course of my career, progress toward eliminating unconscious bias has been slower. The Matthew and Matilda effects are still powerful forces that distort incentives and rewards in science.