[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.FSP participants,however, had significantly lower usual intakes of potassium compared with higher-incomenonparticipants (52 percent of the AI vs.59 percent) (Figure 2-3).This difference wasconcentrated among adults and older adults.The differences in mean usual daily intakes ofpotassium do not necessarily imply that FSP participants were less likely than higher- incomenonparticipants to have adequate usual intakes.Mean percent of AI Usual Daily Intakes of Vitamins, Minerals, and Fiber 43120%100%80%61% *59% *58%57% *56%55% 55%60%56%52% 52%49%47%40%20%0%All persons Children Adults Older adultsFSP Income-elig Higher-income* Denotes statistically significant difference from FSP participants at the.05 level or better.Estimatesare age adjusted.Figure 2-3.Mean Usual Daily Intakes as Percents of Adequate Intake (AI) PotassiumSodiumMean usual daily sodium intakes of both FSP participants and higher-incomenonparticipants were more than twice the AI (Table 2.1).In addition, more than three-quartersof both groups had usual daily sodium intakes that exceeded the UL.FSP participants,however, had a lower mean usual sodium intake than higher-income nonparticipants (226percent of the AI vs.244 percent) and were less likely to have usual sodium intakes thatexceeded the UL (79 percent versus 88 percent) (Table 2-1).FiberUsual daily fiber intakes were examined in two ways (1) mean intakes, expressed as apercentage of the AI, and (2) mean intakes, expressed on a gram-per-calorie basis.Thestandard used to establish AIs for fiber was 14 grams per 1,000 calories, based on the medianenergy intake of specific age-and-gender subgroups, as reported in the 1994-96, 98Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII) (IOM, 2005b).Mean usual daily intakes of fiber for all persons was about 50 percent of the AI (Table 2-1) about half of the recommended 14 grams per 1,000 calories (Table B-18).On a gram-per-1,000 calorie basis, FSP participants had lower mean usual daily intakes of fibercompared with both income-eligible nonparticipants and higher-income nonparticipants (6.6vs.7.2 and 7.3) (Figure 2-4).The between- group differences were significant overall and foradults, but not for children and older adults.Mean percent of AI 44 Nancy Cole and Mary Kay FoxUsual daily fiber intakes of all groups were low, relative to the AIs; even the 95thpercentile of the distribution of usual fiber intake was less than the AI.This pattern has beenreported by others (Fox and Cole, 2004; Devaney et al., 2007; and Devaney et al., 2005).Partof the discrepancy is due to the fact that the AIs are defined for total fiber, but foodcomposition databases are limited to information on dietary fiber.4 However, the magnitudeof this discrepancy is relatively small compared to the gap between usual intakes and the AIs.For this reason, some have suggested that the methods used to establish the AIs for fiber mayneed to be reexamined, especially for children and adolescents (Devaney et al., 2007).51614.914129.39.2108.67.3*7.2* 7.2*86.8*6.66.46.2 6.26.0642All persons Children Adults Older adults Recommended intakeof total fiberFSP Income-elig Higher-income* Denotes statistically significant difference from FSP participants at the.05 level or better.Estimatesare age adjusted.Figure 2-4.Mean Usual Daily Intakes of Dietary Fiber (grams per 1,000 calories)USE OF DIETARY SUPPLEMENTSNHANES 1999-2004 collected detailed data about the use of dietary supplements.Respondents were first asked whether they used any dietary supplements during the past 30days.To help them answer this question, respondents were handed a card defining 13 types ofsupplements, including single and multiple vitamin or mineral products; antacid taken as acalcium supplement; fiber taken as a dietary supplement; botanicals, herbs, and herbalmedicine products; amino acids; and fish oils.6 Respondents who reported supplement usewere asked to show the actual bottles or jars to interviewers so the type of supplement andassociated dosage information could be recorded [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl odbijak.htw.pl
.FSP participants,however, had significantly lower usual intakes of potassium compared with higher-incomenonparticipants (52 percent of the AI vs.59 percent) (Figure 2-3).This difference wasconcentrated among adults and older adults.The differences in mean usual daily intakes ofpotassium do not necessarily imply that FSP participants were less likely than higher- incomenonparticipants to have adequate usual intakes.Mean percent of AI Usual Daily Intakes of Vitamins, Minerals, and Fiber 43120%100%80%61% *59% *58%57% *56%55% 55%60%56%52% 52%49%47%40%20%0%All persons Children Adults Older adultsFSP Income-elig Higher-income* Denotes statistically significant difference from FSP participants at the.05 level or better.Estimatesare age adjusted.Figure 2-3.Mean Usual Daily Intakes as Percents of Adequate Intake (AI) PotassiumSodiumMean usual daily sodium intakes of both FSP participants and higher-incomenonparticipants were more than twice the AI (Table 2.1).In addition, more than three-quartersof both groups had usual daily sodium intakes that exceeded the UL.FSP participants,however, had a lower mean usual sodium intake than higher-income nonparticipants (226percent of the AI vs.244 percent) and were less likely to have usual sodium intakes thatexceeded the UL (79 percent versus 88 percent) (Table 2-1).FiberUsual daily fiber intakes were examined in two ways (1) mean intakes, expressed as apercentage of the AI, and (2) mean intakes, expressed on a gram-per-calorie basis.Thestandard used to establish AIs for fiber was 14 grams per 1,000 calories, based on the medianenergy intake of specific age-and-gender subgroups, as reported in the 1994-96, 98Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII) (IOM, 2005b).Mean usual daily intakes of fiber for all persons was about 50 percent of the AI (Table 2-1) about half of the recommended 14 grams per 1,000 calories (Table B-18).On a gram-per-1,000 calorie basis, FSP participants had lower mean usual daily intakes of fibercompared with both income-eligible nonparticipants and higher-income nonparticipants (6.6vs.7.2 and 7.3) (Figure 2-4).The between- group differences were significant overall and foradults, but not for children and older adults.Mean percent of AI 44 Nancy Cole and Mary Kay FoxUsual daily fiber intakes of all groups were low, relative to the AIs; even the 95thpercentile of the distribution of usual fiber intake was less than the AI.This pattern has beenreported by others (Fox and Cole, 2004; Devaney et al., 2007; and Devaney et al., 2005).Partof the discrepancy is due to the fact that the AIs are defined for total fiber, but foodcomposition databases are limited to information on dietary fiber.4 However, the magnitudeof this discrepancy is relatively small compared to the gap between usual intakes and the AIs.For this reason, some have suggested that the methods used to establish the AIs for fiber mayneed to be reexamined, especially for children and adolescents (Devaney et al., 2007).51614.914129.39.2108.67.3*7.2* 7.2*86.8*6.66.46.2 6.26.0642All persons Children Adults Older adults Recommended intakeof total fiberFSP Income-elig Higher-income* Denotes statistically significant difference from FSP participants at the.05 level or better.Estimatesare age adjusted.Figure 2-4.Mean Usual Daily Intakes of Dietary Fiber (grams per 1,000 calories)USE OF DIETARY SUPPLEMENTSNHANES 1999-2004 collected detailed data about the use of dietary supplements.Respondents were first asked whether they used any dietary supplements during the past 30days.To help them answer this question, respondents were handed a card defining 13 types ofsupplements, including single and multiple vitamin or mineral products; antacid taken as acalcium supplement; fiber taken as a dietary supplement; botanicals, herbs, and herbalmedicine products; amino acids; and fish oils.6 Respondents who reported supplement usewere asked to show the actual bottles or jars to interviewers so the type of supplement andassociated dosage information could be recorded [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]