HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Supplemental data All Versions of this Article: 89/3/719    most recent ajcn.2008.26903v1 Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Yetley, E. A Articles by Trumbo, P. R Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Yetley, E. A Articles by Trumbo, P. R Agricola Articles by Yetley, E. A Articles by Trumbo, P. R

Dietary Reference Intakes for vitamin D: justification for a review of the 1997 values

¹ From the Agricultural Research Service (DMK) and the Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion (PMG), US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC; the US Army Medical Research and Material Command, Ft Detrick, MD (KEF); the Bureau of Nutritional Sciences, Food Directorate (PWFF and MRL), and the Office of Nutrition Policy and Promotion, Health Canada, Ottawa, Canada (DB, MCC, and KAE); the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, US Food and Drug Administration, College Park, MD (PRT); the Division of Nutrition Research Coordination (PES-R), National Cancer Institute (CDD), and Office of Dietary Supplements (EAY), National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD; the Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, US Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC (KYM); and the Public Health Agency of Canada, Ottawa, Canada (LSG-F).

² The authors are responsible for the content of this article. The perspectives contained herein may not represent official opinions or positions of the United States and Canadian government organizations with which the authors are affiliated.

³ Address correspondence and reprint requests to EA Yetley, Office of Dietary Supplements, National Institutes of Health, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 3B01, Bethesda, MD 20892-7517. E-mail: beth{at}yetley.com.

Recent Institute of Medicine (IOM) reviews of the process for deriving Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) suggest that determining the need for a new nutrient review should be evaluated against criteria set a priori. After selecting the criterion of significant new and relevant research, a working group of US and Canadian government scientists used results from a systematic review and 2 conferences on vitamin D and health to evaluate whether significant new and relevant scientific evidence had become available since the 1997 IOM publication of the DRIs for vitamin D. This working group concluded that there appears to be new research meeting the criteria for 4 key DRI questions. The new research is of larger quantity and quality for the elderly than for other groups, but overall 1) adds to the bone-related and status evidence available to the 1997 DRI Committee for several of the life-stage groups, 2) identifies new outcomes with respect to risk of falls and performance measures in the elderly and potential adverse effects, and 3) provides additional information on dose-response relations between intakes and circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations and between 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations and several health outcomes (ie, bone-related outcomes for all ages and risk of falls and performance measures in older adults). Members of the working group concluded that significant new and relevant research was available for reviewing the existing DRIs for vitamin D while leaving the decision of whether the new research will result in changes to the current DRIs to a future IOM-convened DRI committee.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Maillot, F. Vieux, E. F. Ferguson, J.-L. Volatier, M. J. Amiot, and N. Darmon To Meet Nutrient Recommendations, Most French Adults Need to Expand Their Habitual Food Repertoire J. Nutr., September 1, 2009; 139(9): 1721 - 1727. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]