Limits...
Role of Young Child Formulae and Supplements to Ensure Nutritional Adequacy in U.K. Young Children

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) states that young child formulae (YCFs) “cannot be considered as a necessity to satisfy the nutritional requirements” of children aged 12–36 months. This study quantifies the dietary changes needed to ensure nutritional adequacy in U.K. young children who consume YCFs and/or supplements and in those who do not. Dietary data from 1147 young children (aged 12–18 months) were used to identify, using linear programming models, the minimum changes needed to ensure nutritional adequacy: (i) by changing the quantities of foods initially consumed by each child (repertoire-foods); and (ii) by introducing new foods (non-repertoire-foods). Most of the children consumed neither YCFs, nor supplements (61.6%). Nutritional adequacy with repertoire-foods alone was ensured for only one child in this group, against 74.4% of the children consuming YCFs and supplement. When access to all foods was allowed, smaller food changes were required when YCFs and supplements were initially consumed than when they were not. In the total sample, the main dietary shifts needed to ensure nutritional adequacy were an increase in YCF and a decrease in cow’s milk (+226 g/day and −181 g/day, respectively). Increasing YCF and supplement consumption was the shortest way to cover the EFSA nutrient requirements of U.K. children.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Percentage of children for whom it was feasible to model a nutritionally-adequate diet with their repertoire-foods only for the whole sample and across the four groups of children with and without vitamin D constraint a,b. a Significant (p < 0.01) associations were observed between the percentage of feasibility and groups of children whatever the model (i.e., with and without the vitamin D constraint), with and without adjustments for age and energy (using logistic regression and chi-squared tests, respectively); b “no YCF, no Suppl” refers to children who did not consume either YCFs or supplements during the four days of dietary record; “no YCF, Suppl” refers to those who did not consume YCFs, but who consumed supplements; “YCF, no Suppl” refers to those who consumed YCFs, but not supplements; “YCF & Suppl” refers to those who consumed both YCFs and supplements.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5037526&req=5

nutrients-08-00539-f001: Percentage of children for whom it was feasible to model a nutritionally-adequate diet with their repertoire-foods only for the whole sample and across the four groups of children with and without vitamin D constraint a,b. a Significant (p < 0.01) associations were observed between the percentage of feasibility and groups of children whatever the model (i.e., with and without the vitamin D constraint), with and without adjustments for age and energy (using logistic regression and chi-squared tests, respectively); b “no YCF, no Suppl” refers to children who did not consume either YCFs or supplements during the four days of dietary record; “no YCF, Suppl” refers to those who did not consume YCFs, but who consumed supplements; “YCF, no Suppl” refers to those who consumed YCFs, but not supplements; “YCF & Suppl” refers to those who consumed both YCFs and supplements.

Mentions: When only repertoire-foods were allowed, achieving EFSA nutritional adequacy was almost impossible for children in the “no YCF, no Suppl” group (Figure 1). The percentage of feasibility in this group was 0.1% (only one child out of 707). By contrast, feasibility reached 74.4% in the “YCF & Suppl” group. As vitamin D was the least frequently attained RVs in the observed diets, it was removed from the sensitivity analysis. The percentage of feasibility consequently increased for each group of children.


Role of Young Child Formulae and Supplements to Ensure Nutritional Adequacy in U.K. Young Children
Percentage of children for whom it was feasible to model a nutritionally-adequate diet with their repertoire-foods only for the whole sample and across the four groups of children with and without vitamin D constraint a,b. a Significant (p < 0.01) associations were observed between the percentage of feasibility and groups of children whatever the model (i.e., with and without the vitamin D constraint), with and without adjustments for age and energy (using logistic regression and chi-squared tests, respectively); b “no YCF, no Suppl” refers to children who did not consume either YCFs or supplements during the four days of dietary record; “no YCF, Suppl” refers to those who did not consume YCFs, but who consumed supplements; “YCF, no Suppl” refers to those who consumed YCFs, but not supplements; “YCF & Suppl” refers to those who consumed both YCFs and supplements.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5037526&req=5

nutrients-08-00539-f001: Percentage of children for whom it was feasible to model a nutritionally-adequate diet with their repertoire-foods only for the whole sample and across the four groups of children with and without vitamin D constraint a,b. a Significant (p < 0.01) associations were observed between the percentage of feasibility and groups of children whatever the model (i.e., with and without the vitamin D constraint), with and without adjustments for age and energy (using logistic regression and chi-squared tests, respectively); b “no YCF, no Suppl” refers to children who did not consume either YCFs or supplements during the four days of dietary record; “no YCF, Suppl” refers to those who did not consume YCFs, but who consumed supplements; “YCF, no Suppl” refers to those who consumed YCFs, but not supplements; “YCF & Suppl” refers to those who consumed both YCFs and supplements.
Mentions: When only repertoire-foods were allowed, achieving EFSA nutritional adequacy was almost impossible for children in the “no YCF, no Suppl” group (Figure 1). The percentage of feasibility in this group was 0.1% (only one child out of 707). By contrast, feasibility reached 74.4% in the “YCF & Suppl” group. As vitamin D was the least frequently attained RVs in the observed diets, it was removed from the sensitivity analysis. The percentage of feasibility consequently increased for each group of children.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) states that young child formulae (YCFs) &ldquo;cannot be considered as a necessity to satisfy the nutritional requirements&rdquo; of children aged 12&ndash;36 months. This study quantifies the dietary changes needed to ensure nutritional adequacy in U.K. young children who consume YCFs and/or supplements and in those who do not. Dietary data from 1147 young children (aged 12&ndash;18 months) were used to identify, using linear programming models, the minimum changes needed to ensure nutritional adequacy: (i) by changing the quantities of foods initially consumed by each child (repertoire-foods); and (ii) by introducing new foods (non-repertoire-foods). Most of the children consumed neither YCFs, nor supplements (61.6%). Nutritional adequacy with repertoire-foods alone was ensured for only one child in this group, against 74.4% of the children consuming YCFs and supplement. When access to all foods was allowed, smaller food changes were required when YCFs and supplements were initially consumed than when they were not. In the total sample, the main dietary shifts needed to ensure nutritional adequacy were an increase in YCF and a decrease in cow&rsquo;s milk (+226 g/day and &minus;181 g/day, respectively). Increasing YCF and supplement consumption was the shortest way to cover the EFSA nutrient requirements of U.K. children.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus