Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T21:37:32.940Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluating the potential health gain of the World Health Organization's recommendation concerning vegetable and fruit consumption

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2007

Kurt Hoffmann ,
Heiner Boeing ,
Jean-Luc Volatier  and
Wulf Becker
Kurt Hoffmann*
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology, German Institute of Human Nutrition Potsdam-Rehbrücke, Arthur-Scheunert-Allee 114–116, D-14558 Bergholz-Rehbrücke, Germany
Heiner Boeing
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology, German Institute of Human Nutrition Potsdam-Rehbrücke, Arthur-Scheunert-Allee 114–116, D-14558 Bergholz-Rehbrücke, Germany
Jean-Luc Volatier
Affiliation:
French Food Safety Agency, Maisons Alfort, France
Wulf Becker
Affiliation:
Swedish National Food Administration, Uppsala, Sweden
*
*Corresponding author: Email [email protected]
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.
Objective:

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends a daily intake of at least 400?g of vegetables and fruit. The aim of this paper was to evaluate the public health benefit of meeting this WHO recommendation by applying a statistical method that combines estimated intake distributions and simulated intake changes.

Design and setting:

The benefit of an increased consumption of vegetables and fruit was quantified by the preventable proportion of diseases. This proportion was estimated by a general formula derived in the paper that incorporates individual relative risks. Three different strategies of increasing usual intake were simulated and compared. The first strategy assumes that all individuals increase their intake by the same amount, the second assumes a constant increase among low consumers, and the third simulates individual increments necessary to meet the WHO recommendation. Calculations were made for three different scenarios with varying relative risks.

Results:

The third simulation strategy turned out to be the most appropriate one to quantify the potential health gain of the current dietary recommendation. Applying this strategy to prevent cancer, the proportion of preventable cases was country-specific. Estimates for France and Sweden were 21.9% and 19.3%, respectively, which are somewhat lower than the non-specific figure published by the World Cancer Research Fund.

Conclusions:

To improve estimates of the preventable proportion of diseases, the estimation formula presented here can be applied. Its application requires intake data to estimate the initial intake distribution in the population and to simulate adequate dietary changes.

Keywords

DietRecommendationVegetablesFruitPublic healthPreventionCancerStatistics
Type
Research Article
Information
Public Health Nutrition , Volume 6 , Issue 8 , December 2003 , pp. 765 - 772
Copyright
Copyright © CAB International 2003

References

1Block, G, Patterson, B, Subar, A. Fruit, vegetables, and cancer prevention: a review of the epidemiological evidence. Nutrition and Cancer 1992; 18: 1–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2Steinmetz, KA, Potter, JD. Vegetables, fruit, and cancer I. Epidemiology. Cancer Causes & Control 1991; 2: 325–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Steinmetz, KA, Potter, JD. Vegetables, fruit, and cancer II. Mechanism. Cancer Causes & Control 1991; 2: 427–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4Margetts, BM, Thompson, R, Duffy, S, on behalf of the Nutritional Epidemiology Working Group on Diet and Cancer. A Review of the Epidemiological Literature linking Fruit and Vegetable Consumption to Risk of Cancer, 1994.Google Scholar
5Ness, AR, Powles, JW. Fruit and vegetables, and cardiovascular disease: a review. International Journal of Epidemiology 1997; 26: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6World Health Organization (WHO). Diet, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases: Report of WHO Study Group. WHO Technical Series Report No. 797 Geneva: WHO, 1990.Google Scholar
7Jansen, MCJF, van't Veer, P, Kok, FK. Fruits and Vegetables in Chronic Disease Prevention. Wageningen: Landbouwuniversiteit, 1995.Google Scholar
8World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF)/American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR). Food, Nutrition and the Prevention of Cancer: A Global Perspective. Washington, DC: WCRF/AICR, 1997.Google Scholar
9Van't Veer, P, Jansen, MCJF, Klerk, M, Kok, FJ. 2000; Fruits and vegetables in the prevention of cancer and cardiovascular disease. Public Health Nutrition 3: 103–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10Joffe, M, Robertson, A. The potential contribution of increased vegetable and fruit consumption to health gain in the European Union. Public Health Nutrition 2001; 4: 893–901.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11Levin, ML. The occurrence of lung cancer in man. Acta Unio International contra Cancrum 1953; 9: 531–41.Google ScholarPubMed
12Walter, SD. Prevention for multifactorial diseases. American Journal of Epidemiology 1980; 112: 409–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13Morgenstern, H, Bursic, ES. A method for using epidemiologic data to estimate the potential impact of an intervention on the health status of a target population. Journal of Community Health 1982; 7: 292–309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14Wahrendorf, J. An estimate of the proportion of colo-rectal and stomach cancers which might be prevented by certain changes in dietary habits. International Journal of Cancer 1987; 40: 625–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15Drescher, K, Becher, H. Estimating the generalized impact fraction from case–control data. Biometrics 1997; 53: 1170–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16Graham, P. Bayesian inference for a generalized population attributable fraction: the impact of early vitamin A levels on chronic lung disease in very low birthweight infants. Statistics in Medicine 2000; 19: 937–56.3.0.CO;2-V>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17Volatier, JL. Enquête Individuelle et Nationale sur les Consommations Alimentaires. Cachan: Editions TEC et DOC Lavoisier, 2000 [in French].Google Scholar
18Becker, W. Riksmaten 1997–98. Dietary Habits and Nutrient Intake in Sweden 1997–98. The Second National Food Consumption Survey. Uppsala: Livsmedelsverket, 2002 [in Swedish].Google Scholar
19Hoffmann, K, Boeing, H, Dufour, A, Volatier, JL, Telman, J, Virtanen, M, et al. Estimating the distribution of usual dietary intake by short-term measurements. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2002; 56(Suppl. 2): S53–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20Ferley, J, Bray, F, Pisani, P, Parkin, DM, eds. Cancer Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence Worldwide, Version 1.0. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Cancer Base No. 5. Lyon: IARC Press, 2001 (http://www-dep.iarc.fr/globocan).Google Scholar
21Nakayama, T. Under-reporting of attributable risk and reporting of the risk ratio in epidemiologic literature. Epidemiology 2000; 11: 366–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22Murray, CJL, Lopez, AD. On the comparable quantification of health risks: lessons from the global burden of disease study. Epidemiology 1999; 10: 594–605CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed