Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T10:27:52.887Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Absorption of ‘fortification’ iron

Bioavailability in man of different samples of reduced Fe, and prediction of the effects of Fe fortification

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 December 2007

E. Björn-Rasmussen ,
L. Hallberg  and
L. Rossander
E. Björn-Rasmussen
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine II, Sahlgrenska Sjukhuset, S-413 45 Göteborg, Sweden
L. Hallberg
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine II, Sahlgrenska Sjukhuset, S-413 45 Göteborg, Sweden
L. Rossander
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine II, Sahlgrenska Sjukhuset, S-413 45 Göteborg, Sweden
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. The first part of this study was designed to determine the increase in the amount of iron absorbed by hypothetical groups of subjects on the border-line of Fe deficiency when they were given meals fortified with ferrous sulphate. Two levels of Fe fortification were used (1.6 and 8.9 mg/meal) and the increase in the amount of Fe absorbed by the ‘border-line’ groups was 0.13 and 0.7 mg respectively.

2. Subjects which are on the border-line of Fe deficiency may be considered the target group of an Fe-fortification programme. Therefore the experimental model used can provide valuable information on the effects on the prevalence of Fe deficiency which can be expected when such a programme is introduced.

3. In the second part of the study, the bioavailability in man of reduced Fe with different physico-chemical properties was measured. Special emphasis was given to the relationship between the values obtained in vitro and in vivo.

4. The bioavailability was expressed as absorbability relative to that of ferrous sulphate. In four samples of hydrogen-reduced Fe the bioavailability ranged from 90 to 13%. The reduced-Fe products differed considerably with respect to solubility in hydrochloric acid (8–94% dissolved after 30 min), particle size distribution (91–1% < 7 μm) and reactive surface area (< 0.1–2.7 m2/g).

5. The relationships found between physico-chemical information and bioavailability indicated that reactive surface area and dissolution rate were better predictors of the bioavailability than the particle size.

Type
Papers of direct relevance to Clinical and Human Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 37 , Issue 3 , May 1977 , pp. 375 - 388
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1977

References

REFERENCES

Arvidsson, B., Sköldborn, H. & Isaksson, B. (1972). Proc. 3rd int. Conf. med. Phys. including med. Engng 41, 2.Google Scholar
Björn-Rasmussen, E. (1973 a). Scand. J. Haemat. 11, 391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Björn-Rasmussen, E. (1973 b). Scand. J. Gastroent. 8, 645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Björn-Rasmussen, E. (1973 c). Am. J. clin. Nutr. 26, 1311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Björn-Rasmussen, E., Hallberg, L., Isaksson, B. & Arvidsson, B. (1974). J. clin. Invest. 53. 247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Björn-Rasmussen, E., Hallberg, L., Magnusson, B., Rossander, L., Svanberg, B. & Arvidsson, B. (1976). Am. J. clin. Nutr. 29, 772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Björn-Rasmussen, E., Hallberg, L. & Walker, R. B. (1972). Am. J. clin. Nutr. 25, 317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunauer, S., Emmett, P. H. & Teller, E. (1938). J. Am. chem. Soc. 60, 309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, J. D., Layrisse, M., Martinez-Torres, C., Walker, R., Monsen, E. & Finch, C. A. (1972). J. clin. Invest. 51, 805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, J. D., Minnich, V., Moore, C. V., Rasmussen, A., Bradley, W. E. & Finch, C. A. (1973). Am. J. clin. Nutr. 26, 861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eakins, J. D. & Brown, D. A. (1966). Int. J. appl. Radiat. 17, 391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elwood, P. C. (1968). Rep. Publ. Hlth med. Subj., Lond. No. 117.Google Scholar
Hallberg, L. & Björn-Rasmussen, E. (1972). Scand. J. Haemat. 9, 193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herbert, V., Gottlieb, C. W., Lau, K-S., Fisher, M., Gevirtz, N. R. & Wasserman, L. R. (1966). J. Lab. clin. Med. 67, 855.Google Scholar
Höglund, S. & Reizenstein, P. (1969). Blood 34, 496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International Committee for, Standardization in Hematology (1971). Br. J. Haemat. 20, 451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Layrisse, M. & Martinez-Torres, C. (1972). Am. J. clin. Nutr. 25, 401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Layrisse, M., Martinez-Torres, C., Cook, J. D., Walker, R. & Finch, C. A. (1973). Blood 41, 333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sköldborn, H., Arvidsson, B. & Andersson, M. (1972). Acta radiol. Suppl. 313, 233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinkamp, R., Dubach, R. & Moore, C. V. (1955). Arch. intern. Med. 95, 181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar