Archives in Food and Nutrition

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.
Reach Us +1 (629)348-3199

Perspective - Archives in Food and Nutrition (2022) Volume 5, Issue 3

A snippet of dietary protein aetiology.

De Jong*

Department of Epidemiology, School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands

*Corresponding Author:
De Jong
Department of Epidemiology
School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism
Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands
E-mail: jong.aed@maastrichtuniversity.nl

Received: 03-Jun-2022, Manuscript No. AAAFN-22-67373; Editor assigned: 06-Jun-2022, PreQC No. AAAFN-22-67373(PQ); Reviewed: 20-Jun-2022, QC No. AAAFN-22-67373; Revised: 23-Jun-2022, Manuscript No. AAAFN-22-67373(R); Published: 27-Jun-2022, DOI:10.35841/aaafn-5.3.112

Citation: Jong D. A snippet of dietary protein aetiology. Arch Food Nutr. 2022;5(3):112

Visit for more related articles at Archives in Food and Nutrition

Introduction

Diet-related illness studies provide far more difficult methodological obstacles than most epidemiological studies. Diet is a huge set of several interconnected continuous factors, not a single exposure. Furthermore, these factors are likely to interact with one another and have non-linear correlations with illness. Because of the conformity of food consumption and the imprecision of assessment methodologies, many epidemiologists have questioned whether reliable measures of individual diets might be produced within communities. Several recent studies, however, have demonstrated reasonable levels of association between basic, standardized meal frequency surveys and thorough, weighted diet evaluations. Biochemical screening tests give an alternate estimate of exposure for a limited selection of nutrients. It needs to be seen if these approaches can be used successfully in case-control studies because even minor biases owing to sickness, which may influence recollection of diet or levels of biochemical indicators, may dramatically alter interactions between diet and disease.

History of nutritional epidemiology

In the 1980s, nutritional epidemiology was a specialized branch of epidemiology before becoming a key discipline in epidemiology [1]. It is concerned with the impact that dietary exposures have in the incidence of medical issues. The measurement of these exposures, as well as the research of the relationship between exposure and result, are at the heart of nutritional epidemiology. It got tremendous relevance later in the twentieth century when the function of exposure in chronic illness became more known. Since then, the use of nutritional epidemiology knowledge has resulted in important scientific and societal achievements. For ages, epidemiological approaches have been employed to analyse the relation between nutrition and disease.

Provides accurate, detailed, open-ended data on dietary intake, with no reliance on memory, and direct computation of portion sizes [2]. Provides fairly accurate, detailed, open-ended data on dietary intake, without reliance on long-term memory [3]. Provides detailed, open-ended data on dietary intake, without reliance on long-term memory

What impact does dietary reference hygiene play in deducing causality?

One of the most frequent complaints levied against nutritional epidemiology is that it mostly depends on observational data, which is seen to be inferior to experimental data in identifying causality. the usual evidence hierarchy from several study designs. While randomised trials with concrete outcomes are at the top of the social ladder, they are not always the best or most viable research design for evaluating nutritional epidemiology concerns about the sustainability impacts around certain meals or nutrients [4].

Is the drug trial format useful in addressing dietdisease relationships?

This viewpoint may be valid in the pharmaceutical sector, but the drug trial model cannot easily be applied to the nutritional science highlights the distinctions between observational prospective cohort studies and Randomized Controlled Trials [5]. Unlike traditional pharmacological trials, Randomized Controlled Trials of dietary treatments are often not blinded, raising the potential that the intervention's benefit is attributable to knowledge of treatment assignment rather than the nutritional component of the intervention.

Conclusion

The collection of biological samples to improve and validate estimates of exposure, enhance the pursuit of scientific hypotheses, and enable gene–nutrient interactions to be studied, should become the routine in nutritional epidemiology.

References

  1. Satija A, Yu E, Willett WC, et al. Understanding nutritional epidemiology and its role in policy. Adv Nutr. 2015;6(1):5-18.

    2. Indexed At, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  2. Hu FB. Dietary pattern analysis: a new direction in nutritional epidemiology. Curr Opin Lipidol. 2002;13(1):3-9.

    3. Indexed At, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  3. Boeing H. Nutritional epidemiology: New perspectives for understanding the diet-disease relationship? Eur J Clin Nutr. 2013;67(5):424-9.

    4. Indexed At, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  4. Michels KB. Nutritional epidemiology-past, present, future. Int J Epidemiol. 2003;32(4):486-8.

    5. Indexed At, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  5. Willett W. Nutritional epidemiology: issues and challenges. Int J Epidemiol. 1987;16(2):312-7.

    6. Indexed At, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Get the App