That’s the conclusion of new research led by Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. The researchers also found that more than 1 billion women and children could lose a large amount of their dietary iron intake, putting them at increased risk of anemia and other diseases.

“Our research makes it clear that decisions we are making every day – how we heat our homes, what we eat, how we move around, what we choose to purchase – are making our food less nutritious and imperiling the health of other populations and future generations,” said Sam Myers, lead author of the study and principal research scientist at Harvard Chan School.

The study was published in Nature Climate Change.

Direct effects on crops

Presently, more than 2 billion people worldwide are estimated to be deficient in one or more nutrients. In general, humans tend to get a majority of key nutrients from plants: 63% of dietary protein comes from vegetal sources, as well as 81% of iron and 68% of zinc.

It has been shown that higher atmospheric levels of CO2 result in less nutritious crop yields, with concentrations of protein, iron, and zinc being 3%-17% lower when crops are grown in environments where CO2 concentrations are 550 parts per million (ppm) compared with crops grown under current atmospheric conditions, in which CO2 levels are just above 400 ppm.

Nutrient shifts

For this new study, researchers sought to develop the most robust and accurate analysis of the global health burden of CO2-related nutrient shifts in crops in 151 countries. To do so, they created a unified set of assumptions across all nutrients and used more detailed age- and sex-specific food supply datasets to improve estimates of the impacts across 225 different foods. The study built on previous analyses by the researchers on CO2-related nutritional deficiencies, which looked at fewer foods and fewer countries.

The study showed that by the middle of this century, when atmospheric CO2 concentrations are expected to reach around 550 ppm, 1.9% of the global population—or roughly 175 million people, based on 2050 population estimates—could become deficient in zinc and that 1.3% of the global population, or 122 million people, could become protein deficient. Additionally, 1.4 billion women of childbearing age and children under 5 who are currently at high risk of iron deficiency could have their dietary iron intakes reduced by 4% or more.

Billions may be vulnerable

The researchers also emphasized that billions of people currently living with nutritional deficiencies would likely see their conditions worsen as a result of less nutritious crops.

According to the study, India would bear the greatest burden, with an estimated 50 million people becoming zinc deficient, 38 million becoming protein deficient, and 502 million women and children becoming vulnerable to diseases associated with iron deficiency. Other countries in South Asia, Southeast Asia, Africa, and the Middle East would also be significantly impacted.

“One thing this research illustrates is a core principle of the emerging field of planetary health,” said Myers, who directs the Planetary Health Alliance, co-housed at Harvard Chan School and Harvard University Center for the Environment. “We cannot disrupt most of the biophysical conditions to which we have adapted over millions of years without unanticipated impacts on our own health and wellbeing.”

• For more on this topic see our articles How a changing climate could affect our health and Climate change – we’re truly forked

Arginine is an amino acid which the body uses to produce nitric oxide which, among other things supports a healthy vascular and nervous system.

The study carried out by the University of Eastern Finland and Kuopio University Hospital compared 99 adults with diagnosed major depressive disorder to 253 non-depressed individuals. The concentrations of three amino acids, namely arginine, citrulline and ornithine, were analysed from their fasting glucose samples, and this data was used to calculate their global arginine bioavailability ratio (GABR) – an indicator of the body’s arginine levels.

The study also analysed whether these concentrations changed in people with depression during a follow-up of eight months, and whether remission of depression had an effect on the concentrations.

A role for inflammation?

People with depression had weaker arginine bioavailability than their non-depressed counterparts. The use of anti-depressants or anti-psychotics did not affect the concentrations, either. There were also no clear differences in the concentrations measured from people who had recovered from depression and people who remained depressed.

Toni Ali-Sisto, the lead author of the study, comments: “It is possible that depression-induced inflammatory responses lead to reduced arginine levels. This may result in insufficient production of nitric oxide for the needs of the nervous system and circulation. However, we don’t know yet what exactly causes reduced arginine bioavailability in people with depression,”

Although the results showed that people with depression have reduced arginine bioavailability, the researchers say this doesn’t mean that taking an arginine supplement would protect against depression. “That’s an area for further research,” Ali-Sisto says

About arginine

Arginine is considered a semi-essential amino acid because while it is needed for children’s growth, it has long been considered nonessential for healthy adults. The body can also make arginine in addition to getting it from food sources, so deficiencies are generally considered rare. However, a person can become deficient in arginine if the body’s production does not meet the body’s requirements or if, as this study suggests, something is interfering with the body’s ability to absorb it.

Adequate arginine can aid the production of nitric oxide, which widens and relaxes arteries and blood vessels, improving blood flow, help heal injuries, aid the kidneys in removing waste and boost immune system function.

Arginine can be taken as a supplement but too much can have side effects such as upset stomach and diarrhoea. Larger doses may also carry risks for people who take other medications or have certain health conditions.

A varied diet should help ensure you get adequate arginine and the best food sources of arginine are:

• Turkey
• Pork loin
• Chicken
• Pumpkin and squash seeds
• Sesame seeds, and tahini paste
• Soybeans
• Nuts, including peanuts, Brazils, pistachios, almonds, walnuts and cashews
• Spirulina
• Chick peas (garbanzo beans)
• Lentils
• Dairy foods

Maternal depression during pregnancy can affect both the mother and her family. Although research has suggested that iron deficiency is associated with depression in the general population, this link has not been studied during the antenatal period.

To find out more Canadian researchers looked back at the records of women between the ages of 18 and 25 who were in middle to late pregnancy and who visited the Women’s Health Concerns Clinic in Hamilton, Ontario, in the period between 2009 and 2016. This particular hospital specialised in treating mood and anxiety disorders during the perinatal period, ​the researchers wrote in their report​​, which was published this month in the Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada.

In addition to information on mood disorders the records also showed whether the women were iron deficient or not

This data showed that 31% of women were iron deficient. On average, those women who were iron deficient also scored higher on questionnaire, used to determine the presence of depression, than pregnant women with normal iron levels.

A potential risk factor

“The study of women in the second or third trimester of pregnancy suggests that a link exists between iron deficiency and antenatal depression”, ​the researchers wrote.

Even after adjusting for confounding variables, the findings persisted, the researchers argued, suggesting that “iron deficiency could be an important risk factor for the development of depression during pregnancy.”​

This was a small study and the researchers say that because the women studied were already at rick of mood disorders, the results may not be true for all pregnant women. They also added that the study design didn’t account for nutritional status of patients during pregnancy, and the iron deficiency may be a marker of poor nutrition in general.

Nevertheless they suggest that, but added that in spite of this “clinicians providing antenatal care may benefit from an awareness of the possible role of iron deficiency in the development and risk of maternal depression during pregnancy.” ​

• For more on this topic see our story Are supplements in pregnancy ‘unnecessary’?

It shows that too often manufacturers add unnecessary ingredients with no proven benefits – so that they can charge a premium price for their products. While it is legal, such practices are unethical and in breach of a voluntary World Health Organization code on the marketing of breastmilk substitutes.

There is no question that exclusively breastfeeding your baby for the first 6 months of life – a practice recommended by every health organisation in the world – provides your baby with everything it needs to grow and thrive. Not just nutrition, but hundreds of non-nutrient factors which cannot be synthesised in the lab and which help protect against illness and promote optimal growth.

Formula you can trust?

Nevertheless there are women who choose not to breastfeed and a very small percentage physically can’t breastfeed. For these women and their babies, being able to trust that infant formula is providing the best possible nutrition is very important.

The new report by non-profit, UK-based Changing Markets Foundation challenges the idea that wide ranges of formula brands, each with different added ingredients do not cater to mothers’ or babies’ needs but instead exist purely to create a fear based market where mothers will pay a premium for certain brands.

Higher prices

The report analysed the retail prices that companies around the world charge for infant formula.

The market, it seems, charges whatever it can get away with and this practice is highlighted by the fact that the same brands that may sell for wildly different prices in different parts of the world.

The most expensive products were found in China and Hong Kong, where families can spend US $286 and US $304 per month to feed a 2-3-month old baby, respectively, based on using the most expensive product in those markets.

Chinese mothers are still reeling from a scandal in which toxic melamine was added to cheap formulas to make them appear as if they had more protein in them than they did. Many infants were made ill and some died from drinking the adulterated formula.

This was in 2008, but many mothers still seek Western brands believing that they are better, or purer, than Chinese brands. Western brands capitalise on this fear by charging exorbitant prices for their products.

As a result, parents in China can spend up to 40% of their average salary on infant formula. In comparison, the most expensive formula in European countries will only cost 1-3% of an average salary.

Closer to breastmilk?

Another industry tactic identified in the report is the creation of different and more expensive varieties of formula with extra ingredients. These formulas with added fats, pre- and probiotics and certain nutrients, claim to make formula closer to breastmilk, to represent the latest developments in nutritional science, to satisfy hungrier babies, promote better digestion, and to aid sleep.

But, says the report, “There is little nutritional science and few beneficial health considerations behind their extensive product ranges.”

Social media spying

The report also highlighted the extent to which formula companies listen in on mothers’ social media posts in order to learn what they hope for – and what they fear – and then tailor their marketing outreach around that.

Infant formula manufacturers are very open about how they use internet platforms such as Facebook, as well as online mother and baby clubs (many of which are financed by formula manufacturers in the first place), to collect vital information on mothers, and to portray themselves as trusted ‘friends’ on the ‘mother’s journey’ in order to sell their products.

“Our report found that instead of nutritional science, companies are basing their selling strategies on market research and consumer preferences,” said Nusa Urbancic from Changing Markets Foundation.

“Product differentials are carefully and deliberately designed to appeal to the tastes and lifestyle preferences of parents, or their natural desire to give their babies the best possible start in life. As such, manufacturers can package these products in ‘premium’ ranges and charge high prices accordingly.”

Changes needed

The report calls for a comprehensive overhaul of global infant milk products and the introduction of stricter regulation, so that only those products based on unequivocal scientific advice and with the highest quality of nutritional ingredients are sold.

It also calls on governments to introduce and enforce national legislation that fully implements the WHO marketing Code and to ensure that the safety and nutritional quality and completeness of products is regularly verified.

• The report, Milking it, along with its executive summary, can be downloaded here.
• To coincide with the report Sum Of Us, the global online campaigning platform, has launched a petition calling for Nestlé to make sure their infant milks are safe, nutritionally complete and based on science. You can sign on and share at this link.

That’s the finding of a large-scale study on women in Finland which appears in the journal Neurology.

Several studies have suggested a link between levels of vitamin D, or 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D), and MS later in life. However, most of these studies were conducted in small groups which made drawing definite conclusions about vitamin D’s impact on MS difficult.

To learn more, researchers at Boston’s Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health — working with Finland’s University of Turku — analysed vitamin D levels in more than 800,000 blood samples from pregnant women, as part of prenatal evaluations, and correlated them with the incidence of MS in this population.

They identified 1,092 cases of MS diagnosed between 1983 and 2009 in women from whom they had at least one blood sample collected prior to the MS diagnosis. Their vitamin D levels were then compared to 2,123 samples collected from women who did not develop the disease.

A significant reduction in risk

For the purposes of the study the researchers defined adequate vitamin D levels to be equal or higher than 50 nmol/L, while levels between 30 to 50 nmol/L were considered as insufficient vitamin D, and levels lower than 30 nmol/L indicated vitamin deficiency.

The analysis showed that 58% of the women who developed MS had vitamin D deficiency, compared to 52% in the control group.

The team found that higher levels of vitamin D (50 nmol/L or higher) reduced the risk of MS in women by 39%. In contrast, those who were deficient in vitamin D were 43% more likely to get MS.

More research needed

“There have only been a few small studies suggesting that levels of vitamin D in the blood can predict risk,” Harvard’s Kassandra Munger, lead author of the report, said

“Our study, involving a large number of women, suggests that correcting vitamin D deficiency in young and middle-age women may reduce their future risk of MS.”

These results may, however, not apply to all populations, since the study group only included women, and primarily of white origin. It urged more studies to evaluate vitamin D association with MS in men and for other racial groups. Also, longer follow-up evaluations could provide additional information on time to disease onset and vitamin D association.

“These results directly support vitamin D deficiency as a risk factor for MS and strengthen the rationale for broad public health interventions to improve vitamin D levels,” said lead author Kassandra Munger, Sc.D.

“More research is needed on the optimal dose of vitamin D for reducing risk of MS. But striving to achieve vitamin D sufficiency over the course of a person’s life will likely have multiple health benefits,” she adds.

• For more on getting enough vitamin D see Q&A: Can you get enough vitamin D without sun? and Vitamin D guidelines need to be updated – here’s why.

According to researchers from the National Institute of Nutrition in India, a greater focus should be placed on enhancing the bioavailability of key nutrients in foods by focusing on synergies. This, they say, could be of real benefit in the fight against malnutrition.

In particular, the researchers warn that a better understanding of bioavailability is ‘essential’ in populations that have a diet primarily dependent on plant based foods (which is most countries outside of the developed West).

• For more on this topic see our article Food synergy – getting the best from food combinations

Eggs from chickens that are allowed to roam outdoors contain more vitamin D than those from birds that are kept in dark sheds or cages, according to a study from the University of Reading, published in the journal Food Chemistry.

Scientists analysed the contents of 270 eggs (organic, free range and indoor bred) sold in UK supermarkets and found that free-range and organic eggs had 42% more vitamin D3 than eggs from birds kept locked indoors.

But eggs from organic farms – which allow hens the most freedom of all – also have elevated levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3, a highly bioavailalbe precursor of vitamin D that is easily converted into the active form of D3 in the body

According to the scientists: ‘The vitamin D nutrition of birds is similar to that of humans; vitamin D is either synthesised by ultraviolet radiation from sunlight or consumed in the diet.”

20% of your daily requirement

They suggest that, one egg per day, from a free range or organic bird, would contribute about 20% of the recommended daily intake of vitamin D – though very high temperature cooking can lead to loss of vitamin D in eggs.

Unlike the intensive indoor egg production system, free range and organic birds have more opportunity to be exposed to sunlight as they can access pasture continuously during the day.

Vitamin D, known as the sunshine vitamin, is primarily produced through exposure to sunlight. And the free-range chickens had more time in the sun.

This is not a new finding, of course, but it is one we should be paying attention to. In 2014 a German study also found that the yolks of eggs laid by hens with access to the outdoors had a vitamin D3 content three- to fourfold higher than those kept indoors.

D for deficiency

Millions of people around the world are thought to be deficient in vitamin D. While controversy reigns over how and how much to supplement, what is clear is that insufficient levels of vitamin D in humans are linked to an increased risk of rickets, osteoporosis, multiple sclerosis, high blood pressure, diabetes, cancer and other diseases. Vitamin D also regulates calcium intake and the immune system, and can help fight depression.

Only a few foods, including eggs (specifically the yolk), are a good source of vitamin D. Other natural sources include red meat, liver, tuna, herring, salmon, shrimp and mushrooms. Vitamin D is also often added to milk, cereal, and yogurt.

The study was, in part, focused on highlighting the importance of correct food labelling on eggs (vis a vis how they are produced) so that consumers can know exactly what they are getting.

Today, according to researchers from the Polytechnic Institute of Bragança in Portugal edible flowers represent “an unexplored niche market with great economic and social importance being used since ancient times in culinary preparations, such as sauces, liquors, salads and desserts, and also in the preparation of hot beverages (tisane and infusion), mainly in European countries, due to their medicinal properties.”

Edible petals

The researchers selected edible petals and infusions of dahlia, rose, centaurea (knapweed) and calendula – commonly known as marigolds and already used by the nutrition industry as a source of carotenoids.

They analysed the macronutrient composition, energetic value, fatty acids, soluble sugars, organic acids and tocopherols of the petals, which was then compared to the nutritional composition of their infusions.

Carbohydrates were the most abundant macronutrients, followed by proteins and ash. Fructose, glucose and sucrose were identified in all the petals and infusions

More specifically the results published in the journal Food Chemistry showed that calendula petals provided the highest content in total fat, ash and energetic contribution, as well as polyunsaturated fatty acids mainly as linolenic acid and total tocopherols mainly as alpha-tocopherol.

The  highest values of total proteins, soluble sugars and organic acids were found in rose petals.

Meanwhile centaurea provided the highest carbohydrate content and the lowest percentage of saturated fatty acids.

Time for tea

The researchers then made infusions from all the flowers and analyzed these. Dahlia and rose showed the highest content in carbohydrates and rose the highest energetic contribution.

Calendula infusion showed the highest content in sugars, while the highest content in organic acids was found in the centaurea infusion.

“These results demonstrate that edible petals can be consumed in a daily diet as a nutrient source, and could also be used to prepare infusions to be consumed worldwide,” the researchers said.

Other researchers agree

Previous research agrees. Spanish researchers note that edible flowers including roses, violets and nasturtium can provide “biologically active substances” including vitamin A, C, riboflavin, niacin, minerals such as calcium, phosphorous, iron and potassium.

Other European research has shown elderflowers, mallow and French honeysuckle contain valuable antioxidants including rutin, quercetin, luteolin, kaempferol, and myricetin.

Results from these and other studies suggest that some of the distinctions we make between food and not food may be arbitrary and may mean we are missing out on some extra nutritional benefits.

• For more on this topic see our story 42 flowers you can eat

Participants in the controlled clinical trial at a well-known Ayurvedic centre in California showed measurable decreases in various blood-based metabolites associated with inflammation, cardiovascular disease risk and cholesterol regulation.

The findings, published in Scientific Reports, represent a rare attempt to use metabolic biomarkers to assess the reported health benefits of integrative medicine and holistic practices.

The study involved 119 healthy male and female participants, 30-80 years of age, who stayed at the Chopra Center for Wellbeing in Carlsbad, Calif. Just over half were assigned to the Center’s Perfect Health programme, a 6-day Ayurvedic Panchakarma intervention. Panchakarma refers to a detoxification and rejuvenation regimen involving massage, herbal therapy and other procedures to help strengthen and rejuvenate the body.

Changes in the blood

The remainder were assigned to a control group who were simply enjoying a relaxing resort holiday. Blood plasma analyses, using liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry, were taken before and after the six-day testing period.

The researchers found that in the Panchakarma group there was a measurable decrease in 12 specific cell-membrane chemicals (phosphatidylcholines).  High levels of some of the chemicals detected have been shown to be associated with higher serum cholesterol and some others have associations with both higher and lower risk of type-2 diabetes risk.

These phospholipids exert broad effects on pathways related to inflammation and cholesterol metabolism. In general plasma and serum levels of the metabolites of phosphatidylcholine are highly predictive of cardiovascular disease risk.

Application of a less stringent measurement standard identified 57 additional metabolites differentially abundant between the two groups of participants.

Senior author of the study, which included researchers from multiple institutions, was Deepak Chopra, MD, clinical professor in the Department of Family Medicine and Public Health at University of California San Diego School of Medicine, author and a noted proponent of integrative medicine.

“It appears that a one-week Panchakarma program can significantly alter the metabolic profile of the person undergoing it,” said Chopra, whose foundation provided and managed funding for the study.

More research is needed

Study co-author Paul J. Mills, PhD, professor of family medicine and public health and director of the Center of Excellence for Research and Training in Integrative Health, both at UC San Diego School of Medicine, added that alternative and integrative medicine practices, such as meditation and Ayurveda, are extremely popular, but their effects on the human microbiome, genome and physiology are not fully understood. “Our program of research is dedicated to addressing these gaps in the literature.”

The authors suggested that given the very short duration of the trial, the serum profile changes were likely driven by the vegetarian diet component of Panchakarma.

Other and larger studies of this type would be needed to draw deeper and more meaningful conclusions. Nevertheless, the fact that the authors could see measurable changes in blood profiles after just 6 days does show that the remarkable repair mechanisms of the body can kick in relatively quickly if well supported.

In a damning report that accuses major public health bodies of colluding with the food industry, the National Obesity Forum and the Public Health Collaboration call for a “major overhaul” of current dietary guidelines.

They say the focus on low-fat diets is failing to address Britain’s obesity crisis, while snacking between meals is making people fat.

The report recommends that a return to “whole foods” such as meat, fish and dairy, as well as high-fat, healthy foods including avocados, full-fat dairy, including milk, yoghurt and cheese, could actually protect the heart.

Sensible advice

In spite of the fact that the report has triggered a huge backlash in the media and some scientific circles, its main recommendations of the fully referenced report are hardly ground-breaking:

Eating fat doesn’t make you fat Evidence from multiple trials reveals that a higher-fat, lower carbohydrate diet is superior to a low-fat diet for weight loss and cardiovascular risk reduction.

Stop calorie-counting Calories from different foods have different metabolic effects on the body, so the cumulative calorie count is meaningless.

You can’t outrun a bad diet Obesity is a hormonal disorder leading to abnormal energy partitioning, which cannot be solely fixed by simply increasing exercise.

Saturated fat doesn’t cause heart disease and full-fat dairy is likely to be protective New analysis of the evidence available forty years ago does not support dietary fat restrictions.

Avoid processed foods labelled “low fat”, “lite”, “low cholesterol” etc No single piece of evidence exists that demonstrates reducing dietary saturated fat reduces cardiovascular events and death.

Snacking will make you fat The increase in meal frequency plays an equal if not larger role in obesity and has largely been ignored.

Industry influences

The report also argues that the science of food has also been “corrupted by commercial influences”.

Just as big tobacco companies bought the “loyalty of scientists” when a link was made between smoking and lung cancer, the influence of the food industry represents a “significant threat to public health”, they argue. They also highlight the fact that the UK’s Eatwell Guide produced by Public Health England (PHE) was produced with a large number of people from the food and drink industry.

Prof David Haslam, chairman of the National Obesity Forum, said: “Current efforts have failed – the proof being that obesity levels are higher than they have ever been, and show no chance of reducing despite the best efforts of government and scientists.”

Dr Aseem Malhotra, consultant cardiologist and founding member of the Public Health Collaboration, a group of medics, said dietary guidelines promoting low-fat foods were “perhaps the biggest mistake in modern medical history, resulting in devastating consequences for public health”.

Bring back the fat?

In spite of the backlash several key studies in the last few years have made it clear that we all need dietary fat and that that, when it comes to heart disease, simplistic views of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ fats are not based on sound science. Moreover there is evidence that a healthy diet – rather than a low fat diet – is the key to heart health.

Says Dr Malhotra “We must urgently change the message to the public to reverse obesity and type 2 diabetes. Eat fat to get slim. Don’t fear fat. Fat is your friend. It’s now truly time to bring back the fat.”

Prof Iain Broom, from Robert Gordon University in Aberdeen, adds: “The continuation of a food policy recommending high-carbohydrate, low-fat, low-calorie intakes as ‘healthy eating’ is fatally flawed.