Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T15:26:10.925Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Global iodine status has improved: but we must not be complacent

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 February 2017

Louise Brough*
Affiliation:
Massey Institute of Food Science and TechnologySchool of Food and NutritionMassey UniversityPalmerston North 4442New Zealand
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Invited Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © The Author 2017 

I deficiency has been described as the single greatest cause of preventable mental impairment( Reference Zimmermann, Jooste and Pandav 1 ). I is an essential nutrient necessary for the production of thyroid hormones, which control metabolic processes and growth and development, especially of the brain and central nervous system( 2 ). I deficiency is a global problem affecting both developed and developing countries; however, in the recent years there has been excellent progress in improving global I status. The most recent Iodine Global Network (IGN) scorecard (2015) designates twenty-six countries, including Ireland, as I insufficient compared with 116 countries in 1993( 3 , 4 ).

In a recent issue of the British Journal of Nutrition, McNulty et al. ( Reference McNulty, Nugent and Walton 5 ) presents the I intake and status of the Irish population using data from the Irish National Adult Survey (2008–2010)( 6 ) and the Irish Total Diet Study (2012–2014)( 7 ). The median urinary iodine concentration (UIC) for the Irish adult population was 107 µg/l, which is within the range of 100–199 µg/l recommended by the World Health Organization for dietary adequacy for adults and children( 8 , Reference Thomson 9 ). Thus, at a glance, it might appear that the population now has an adequate status, which seemingly indicates there is no cause for concern.

However, the assessment of I status is far from straight forward. There is currently no definitive method to assess the I status of an individual. Furthermore, thyroid hormones are not good measures of I status as populations with suboptimal status can have concentrations within normal reference ranges( Reference Zimmermann 10 ). The WHO recommends assessing the I status of a population using a spot sample of urine. The median UIC of a population is then compared with recommended cut-offs. The IGN defines the I status of a country based on the UIC of school-aged children (≥6 years of age) and the Irish data date from 1999( 4 ). School-age children would need to be surveyed for the IGN to review the I status of Ireland. In other developed countries such as Australia and New Zealand UIC is higher in school-aged children than adults( 11 ). Although children’s dietary intake of I is lower their urine is much more concentrated than adults, although both have the same cut-offs to indicate deficiency (median UIC<100 µg/l). It has been argued that the median UIC cut-off for deficiency in adults should be lower at 60–70 µg/l( Reference Zimmermann and Andersson 12 ), which would put the Irish adult population well into the sufficient category. It is probable that the population assessment based on school-aged children would indicate sufficiency.

Recent research has found that when I status is sufficient in school-age children, there could still be deficiency in pregnant and breast-feeding women in the same population( Reference Pearce, Andersson and Zimmermann 13 , Reference Brough, Thomson and Skeaff 14 ). McNulty et al. ( Reference McNulty, Nugent and Walton 5 ) found that 66 % of women achieved the Institute of Medicine’s estimated average requirement (EAR; 95 µg/d) for I, although intakes were lowest in women aged 18–35 years.( Reference Pearce, Lazarus and Moreno-Reyes 15 ). I requirements increase significantly during pregnancy to meet both maternal and fetal needs and increased maternal renal loss( Reference Zimmermann 16 ); I is also secreted into breastmilk thus maternal requirements are high during lactation( Reference Azizi, Smyth and Azizi 17 ). Using current intakes, 77 % of Irish women of childbearing age (18–50 years) would have intakes below the EAR for pregnancy (160 µg/d)( 18 ). Thus, even with increased food intake during pregnancy, many of these women would be unlikely to achieve an adequate intake of I if they became pregnant. It is well established that severe I deficiency during pregnancy can result in cretinism in the infant, characterized by serious mental and physical impairment; this is not likely to occur in Ireland at the observed intakes. However, even mild to moderate deficiency in early life may affect neurobehavioural development. Thus, it is essential that I status is monitored not only in school-age children but also in both pregnant and breast-feeding women. In other countries where intakes are sufficient for children but suboptimal for pregnant and breast-feeding women supplementation is recommended for these women( 19 ). It has also been suggested that the IGN global score card should reflects both school-age children and pregnant women( Reference Brough, Thomson and Skeaff 14 ).

McNulty et al. ( Reference McNulty, Nugent and Walton 5 ) demonstrated that milk was the main dietary source of I and I status was higher in the winter than the summer (median UIC 152 v. 108 µg/l, respectively). Levels of I in Irish milk are currently bolstered by farming practices, which involve the use of I-containing compounds in dairy sanitation; winter intakes are further increased by salt licks and fodder for dairy cows enriched with I. Any change to these practices could markedly influence the I intake of the Irish population. Moreover, European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has recommended reducing the levels of I permitted in complete animal feed from 5 to 2 mg/kg, which could reduce human I intake in Ireland( 20 ). It is essential that Ireland continue to monitor the I content of milk in order to prevent I deficiency, but also I excess. Further research should also consider individuals who exclude milk from the diet.

In conclusion, the recent work by McNulty et al. ( Reference McNulty, Nugent and Walton 5 ) suggests that for the majority of Irish adults I status is currently sufficient, although intakes in women of childbearing age are the lowest and of concern. It is essential that I status is now assessed in children and also pregnant and breast-feeding women; supplementation may be required during pregnancy and lactation. As milk is the major source of I in Ireland it is vital that both the I content of the diet and also I status of the population continues to be monitored, as changing farming practices could dramatically influence status. This Irish study is a comprehensive example of the complexities of assessing I status. There has been much progress in improving global I status among school-aged children in the recent years; however, sufficient I status is not something that can be taken for granted. Population I status is vulnerable to farming practices, changes in the food supply and also individual dietary choices. We must continue to evaluate both I status in the population and also dietary sources of I. Sufficiency in one group does not equate to sufficiency in all groups and the use of school-age children alone to determine the status of the whole population needs to be reconsidered.

References

1. Zimmermann, MB, Jooste, PL & Pandav, CS (2008) Iodine-deficiency disorders. Lancet 372, 12511262.Google Scholar
2. World Health Organization & Food and Agriculture Organization (2004) Vitamin and Mineral Requirements in Human Nutrition, 2nd ed. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
3. Iodine Global Network (2016) The Iodine Global Network: 2015 Annual Report. Zurich: IGN.Google Scholar
4. Iodine Global Network (2015) Global Iodine Nutrition Scorecard 2015. http://ign.org/cm_data/Scorecard_2015_August_26.pdf (accessed December 2016).Google Scholar
5. McNulty, BA, Nugent, AP, Walton, J, et al. (2017) Iodine intakes and status in Irish adults: is there cause for concern? Br J Nutr (epublication ahead of print version).Google Scholar
6. Irish Universities National Alliance (2011) National Adult Nutrition Survey: summary report. Cork: Irish Universities National Alliance.Google Scholar
7. Food Safety Authority of Ireland (2016) Report on a Total Diet Study carried out by the Food Safety Authority of Ireland in the period 2012–2014. Monitoring & Surveillance Series. Dublin: Food Safety Authority of Ireland.Google Scholar
8. World Health Organization, United Nations Children’s Fund & International Council for Control of Iodine Deficiency Disorders (2007) Assessment of Iodine Deficiency Disorders and Monitoring Their Elimination: A Guide for Programme Managers, 3rd ed. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
9. Thomson, CD (2004) Selenium and iodine intakes and status in New Zealand and Australia. Br J Nutr 91, 661672.Google Scholar
10. Zimmermann, MB (2008) Methods to assess iron and iodine status. Br J Nutr 99, Suppl. 3, S2S9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2016) Monitoring the Health Impacts of Mandatory Folic Acid and Iodine Fortification. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.Google Scholar
12. Zimmermann, MB & Andersson, M (2012) Assessment of iodine nutrition in populations: past, present, and future. Nutr Rev 70, 553570.Google Scholar
13. Pearce, EN, Andersson, M & Zimmermann, MB (2013) Global iodine nutrition: where do we stand in 2013? Thyroid 23, 523528.Google Scholar
14. Brough, L, Thomson, BM & Skeaff, SA (2016) Revisiting the Iodine Global Network’s definition of iodine status by country. Br J Nutr 115, 374376.Google Scholar
15. Pearce, EN, Lazarus, JH, Moreno-Reyes, R, et al. (2016) Consequences of iodine deficiency and excess in pregnant women: an overview of current knowns and unknowns. Am J Clin Nutr 104, 918S923S.Google Scholar
16. Zimmermann, MB (2012) The effects of iodine deficiency in pregnancy and infancy. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 26, Suppl. 1, 108117.Google Scholar
17. Azizi, F, Smyth, P, Azizi, F, et al. (2009) Breastfeeding and maternal and infant iodine nutrition. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 70, 803809.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18. Institute of Medicine (2001) Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin A, Vitamin K, Arsenic, Boron, Chromium, Copper, Iodine, Iron, Manganese, Molybdenum, Nickel, Silicon, Vanadium, and Zinc. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
19. National Health and Medical Research Council (2010) Iodine supplementation for pregnant and breastfeeding women. Canberra: National Health and Medical Research Council.Google Scholar
20. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (2013) Scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of iodine compounds (E2) as feed additives for all species: calcium iodate anhydrous and potassium iodide, based on a dossier submitted by HELM AG. EFSA J 11, 31013103.Google Scholar