AJCN EB Program 2010
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Byers, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Byers, T.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Byers, T.
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 69, No. 6, 1304S-1308S, June 1999
© 1999 American Society for Clinical Nutrition


Supplements

The role of epidemiology in developing nutritional recommendations: past, present, and future 1 ,2

Tim Byers

Observations of the relations between food choices and health have been made since ancient times, but epidemiology, which can be regarded as the science of systematically studying these relations, has played a key role in official nutritional guidance only in recent years. In the past 20 y the principal goal of nutritional guidance has changed from the prevention of nutritional deficiencies to the prevention of chronic diseases. This evolving purpose of nutritional guidance has demanded that nutritional epidemiology play an increasingly important role. Although no other type of nutritional science can equal epidemiology in the relevance of either the dietary exposures or the health outcomes, substantial problems limit the ability of nutritional epidemiology to convincingly prove causal associations. The classic criteria for causation are often not met by nutritional epidemiologic studies, in large part because many dietary factors are weak and do not show linear dose-response relations with disease risk within the range of exposures common in the population. The most important problem in nutritional epidemiology in the past has been the inaccuracy of dietary assessment. In the future, an additional problem will be the proliferation of hypotheses that can be tested in multiple ways among the many subgroups of the population that can be defined by factors such as age, sex, and genotype. Future progress in our understanding of the relations between diet and health will necessitate improved methods in nutritional epidemiology and a better integration of epidemiologic methods with those used in the clinical nutritional sciences.

Key Words: Epidemiology • nutrition • diet • dietary guidelines • nutritional recommendations • dietary assessment • chronic disease risk • public health • disease prevention • health promotion




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Clin. Nutr.Home page
R. Granger
Importance of consistency in reporting of research
Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, January 1, 2000; 71(1): 156 - 156.
[Full Text]


Home page
Am. J. Clin. Nutr.Home page
T. Byers
Reply to R Granger
Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, January 1, 2000; 71(1): 156 - 157.
[Full Text]


Home page
Am. J. Clin. Nutr.Home page
T. Byers, B. Lyle, and W. Participants
Summary statement
Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, June 1, 1999; 69 (6): 1365S - 1367S.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1999 by The American Society for Nutrition