AJCN North Carolina Research Campus
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Untoro, J.
Right arrow Articles by Hautvast, J. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Untoro, J.
Right arrow Articles by Hautvast, J. G.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Untoro, J.
Right arrow Articles by Hautvast, J. G.
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 84, No. 5, 1208-1214, November 2006
© 2006 American Society for Nutrition

ORIGINAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATION

Efficacy of oral iodized peanut oil is greater than that of iodized poppy seed oil among Indonesian schoolchildren1,2,3,4,5

Juliawati Untoro, Werner Schultink, Clive E West, Rainer Gross and Joseph GAJ Hautvast

1 From the Division of Human Nutrition, Wageningen University, Wageningen, Netherlands (JU, CEW, and JGAJH); the Regional SEAMEO-TROPMED Center for Community Nutrition at the University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia (JU); and Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn, Germany (WS and RG)

Background: Oral iodized poppy seed oil is an appropriate measure for controlling iodine deficiency in areas where iodized salt is not yet available. However, a more effective and cheaper iodized oil preparation is needed.

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of iodized peanut oil with that of iodized poppy seed oil.

Design: Schoolchildren aged 8–10 y were supplemented with a single oral dose of iodized peanut oil (P200, P400, or P800 mg I), iodized poppy seed oil (PS400 mg I), or peanut oil (placebo). The concentration of urinary iodine (UI) was measured at 0, 4, 12, 25, and 50 wk, whereas thyroid volume and serum thyrotropin and free thyroxine concentrations were measured at 0, 25, and 50 wk.

Results: UI was higher in all treatment groups than in the placebo group, except at baseline. UI in the P200 group was not significantly different from that in the PS400 group at all times of measurement. In a comparison of preparations supplying 400 mg I conducted by using a mathematical model, iodine retention from the peanut oil preparation was 3 times that from the poppy seed oil, and the protection period for peanut oil was twice as long as that for the poppy seed oil (P < 0.001 for both). The reduction in thyroid volume was greater in the treatment groups than in the placebo group (P < 0.001). No significant differences in serum hormone concentrations were observed between groups before or after treatment.

Conclusion: Iodized peanut oil is more efficacious in controlling iodine deficiency than is iodized poppy seed oil containing the same amount of iodine.

Key Words: Iodized oil • peanut oil • poppy seed oil • efficacy • iodine • deficiency • schoolchildren • Indonesia






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2006 by The American Society for Nutrition