A randomized cross over trial of tolerability and compliance of a micronutrient supplement with low iron separated from calcium vs high iron combined with calcium in pregnant women [ISRCTN56071145]

BACKGROUND: Prenatal micronutrient combinations with high iron content are associated with high rates of gastrointestinal symptoms. This coupled with nausea and vomiting of pregnancy results in women often discontinuing their multivitamins. A new prescription supplement (PregVit(®)) that separates iron from calcium in two tablets – morning and evening, has lower elemental iron content (35 mg), but results in similar extent of iron absorption when compared to another supplement containing (60 mg) of elemental iron (Materna(®)). The objectives of this study were to compare tolerability and compliance with PregVit(® )vs. a supplement with high iron content (Materna(®)), in pregnant women. METHODS: Randomized, crossover open labeled study in 135 pregnant women attending outpatient clinics in Ontario and Quebec. RESULTS: Use of PregVit(® )was associated with a 30% reduction in constipation rate as compared to Materna(®). Both products demonstrated similar compliance rates. Compliance of Materna(® )was negatively associated with the severity of nausea and vomiting of pregnancy. No such correlation was found for PregVvit(®). CONCLUSION: PregVit(®), a supplement with lower iron content (35 mg), has significantly decreased constipation rates as compared to 60 mg iron- Materna and has similar compliance rates. High iron content in multivitamin supplements is associated with adverse effects in pregnancy

Does the history of food energy units suggest a solution to "Calorie confusion"?

The Calorie (kcal) of present U.S. food labels is similar to the original French definition of 1825. The original published source (now available on the internet) defined the Calorie as the quantity of heat needed to raise the temperature of 1 kg of water from 0 to 1°C. The Calorie originated in studies concerning fuel efficiency for the steam engine and had entered dictionaries by 1840. It was the only energy unit in English dictionaries available to W.O. Atwater in 1887 for his popular articles on food and tables of food composition. Therefore, the Calorie became the preferred unit of potential energy in nutrition science and dietetics, but was displaced when the joule, g-calorie and kcal were introduced. This article will explain the context in which Nicolas Clément-Desormes defined the original Calorie and the depth of his collaboration with Sadi Carnot. It will review the history of other energy units and show how the original Calorie was usurped during the period of international standardization. As a result, no form of the Calorie is recognized as an SI unit. It is untenable to continue to use the same word for different thermal units (g-calorie and kg-calorie) and to use different words for the same unit (Calorie and kcal). The only valid use of the Calorie is in common speech and public nutrition education. To avoid ongoing confusion, scientists should complete the transition to the joule and cease using kcal in any context

A report on margarine.

Mode of access: Internet

Nutrition locus of control and dietary behaviors of pregnant women,

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/31786/1/0000727.pd