What is Vitamin C?

Highlights The Basics Vitamin C is a water-soluble vitamin found in many foods and beverages, particularly fruits and vegetables and their juices. It is also a commonly consumed dietary supplement. Because of its water-soluble nature, vitamin C is not stored well in the body—therefore, we need to consume it on a regular basis. Vitamin C plays an important role in immune health and wound healing and is part of the formation of many hormones and chemical messengers used by the nervous system. It is a powerful antioxidant, working to help prevent cell damage that may lead to the development of certain cancers, cardiovascular disease and other health conditions. Vitamin C is also required for collagen synthesis, an important process that helps maintain our bone, skin, muscle and ligament structure. It has been proposed that taking large doses of vitamin C may help to prevent or treat certain health conditions (see “Vitamin C and Health”, below). However, there is little evidence to suggest a benefit of vitamin C supplementation for these conditions. One reason for this may be that as the amount of vitamin C we consume increases, we tend to absorb less of it, which moderates the amount of the nutrient circulating in our bodies. That is, our bodies absorb vitamin C more efficiently in the amounts found in fruits and vegetables than in the larger doses found in dietary supplements. Vitamin C and Health Because of its antioxidant functions and role in immune health, vitamin C has been explored as a treatment or preventive measure for many health conditions – notably, cancer, cardiovascular disease, vision-related diseases like macular degeneration and the common cold. Overall, while observational studies have demonstrated a lower risk of these conditions in people who consume higher amounts of fruits and vegetables, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) […]

article

Five Specialty Culinary Oils: Their Health Benefits and How To Use Them

The first article in our two-part series on culinary oils covered different types of popular cooking oils. Many popular oils have great utility in the kitchen due to their wide range of smoke points, their shelf-stability, and their fat profiles. By contrast, specialty oils often have very specific flavor profiles and low tolerance for heat, and they can be more perishable. Why? Let’s do a quick education session before we get started. Many types of oils can be described as either “refined” or “unrefined.” Refined oils are made by using high heat or chemicals to extract the oils, a process that often destroys or inactivates nutrients present in the raw product. However, refined oils can better withstand heat and can be less expensive. In contrast, unrefined oils are derived through processes that don’t involve high heat or chemicals, like pressing. While unrefined oils retain much of the nutritional profile, flavor and aroma of their original source, they are more prone to spoilage than refined cooking oils. Both types are useful in different scenarios, but in general, the specialty oils listed below are more commonly found in unrefined form. For those big on flavor, specialty oils add a richness often unmatched by everyday cooking oils, along with potential health benefits. In this article, we highlight five unique oils you might be considering including in your own culinary adventures. Almond Oil While we might often refer to them as a type of nut, almonds are actually a seed that is very rich in fat, making them a good source of oil. Almond oil contains both monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids, though it’s higher in monounsaturated fats. Both types of unsaturated fats have heart–health benefits, especially when used to replace saturated fats in our diets. Almond oil is also a source of vitamin […]

article

Communicating The Connection Among Low- And No-Calorie Sweeteners, Safety, And Health

In the world of perceived public health nutrition enemies, low- and no-calorie sweeteners (LNCS) are often at the top of the heap. However, when we are faced with a communications environment where misinformation persists (and facts can be elusive), it is critical to ensure that the scientific evidence influencing consumer perceptions and eating behaviors contains more than a “grain” of truth. Low- And No-Calorie Sweeteners: Bad Guys Or Bad Rap? It may be surprising that low- and no-calorie sweeteners are among the most studied ingredients in the food supply. Before making it to market, comprehensive scientific research reports are submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with data that indicate each ingredient’s safety. A risk assessment factoring in the degree of potential hazard (through extensive toxicological testing) and exposure (based on consumption level) combine to inform ingredient safety levels. And, while this sounds relatively simple, in practice, it is anything but. Consider this: Hazard testing is based on a wide variety of endpoints including effects on DNA (e.g., damage, mutations), metabolism and excretion, short/long-term impact of consumption, adverse events on vulnerable audiences (individuals with specific health conditions, babies in utero), and potential to cause allergic response. Exposure is aimed at pinpointing an exact dosage, if any, where adverse effects may take place. These factors inform the development of an “acceptable daily intake” or ADI– which is “the amount that can be ingested daily for a lifetime without appreciable health risk” and not only applies to the general population, but to vulnerable groups such as children and pregnant women. It is important to note that while LNCS are often lumped together in today’s vernacular, each sweetener is its own formulation that has a unique metabolic footprint in the body. They are grouped together only by their capacity to impart sweetness. […]

insights

Processed Foods

There’s more to process with processed food. Grounded in science and guided by consumer research, the Processed Foods Toolkit offers resources, continuing education and more to support your communication around this complex topic.

toolkit

Understanding, Evaluating, and Communicating Nutrition, Part III: Research Funding

(Third in a series of three articles. Parts one and two were published in the September 2015 and October 2015 editions of the Food Insight Newsletter.) The relationship between nutrition and health is fully entrenched in the mainstream media, and everyone from career scientists to our next-door neighbor seems to be an expert on the topic. Becoming skilled in research evaluation, being aware of media perspectives, and understanding different forms of bias are extremely important in this rapidly evolving field. We recently interviewed Dr. Andrew Brown of the University of Alabama at Birmingham’s Office of Energetics and Nutrition Obesity Research Center, whose voice has risen to the foreground in discussing research evaluation and scientific integrity. In the last of our three-part series, Dr. Brown discusses research funding and bias. FOOD INSIGHT: Let’s talk about another hot topic in your field: the funding of research. You have received funding from a variety of sources to conduct research. Can you describe how, if at all, working with different funders impacts your work? DR. ANDREW BROWN: I think it is first important to clarify that none of the research funding comes directly to me. Funding goes to the university, which has a number of checks and balances to assure ethical research conduct and disclosure of potential financial conflicts of interest. With the exception of a current NIH grant, none of the funding that I have worked with was granted or gifted to the university under my name. These details are very important to help separate various interests from the science—regardless of whether those interests arise from industries, foundations, or government—and from personal interests, political viewpoints, or financial gain. We always clarify and specify conditions for collaborations, gifts, or grants. For instance, unrestricted gifts are just that: There is no explicit restriction on what the university can do with the […]

insights

Understanding, Evaluating, and Communicating Nutrition, Part II: Accurate Research Reporting

(Second in a series of three articles.) The relationship between nutrition and health is fully entrenched in the mainstream media, and everyone from career scientists to our next-door neighbor seems to be an expert on the topic. Becoming skilled in research evaluation, being aware of media perspectives, and understanding different forms of bias are extremely important in this rapidly evolving field. We recently interviewed Dr. Andrew Brown of the University of Alabama at Birmingham’s Office of Energetics and Nutrition Obesity Research Center, whose voice has risen to the foreground in discussing research evaluation and scientific integrity. In the second of our three-part series, Dr. Brown discusses media reporting of nutrition research and issues while maintaining accuracy. FOOD INSIGHT: Let’s talk about how research gets reported. How much of the burden of accurate nutrition reporting falls on the media and how much falls on the researchers themselves? ANDREW BROWN: The burden of accurate nutrition reporting falls on all of us: scientists, media, media relations, clinicians, educators, politicians, and information consumers. If the initial scientific report is communicated poorly, there is little hope that the information will be described well thereafter, so there is additional pressure on the originator of the information to communicate clearly, precisely, and accurately. However, if we collectively stop creating a market for nonsensical, over-hyped science, then the supply will likely decrease (assuming basic economics principles apply to scientific communication, which is a huge assumption). Politicians want information to support their proposed policy; consumers want information that will reinforce their world views; readers want entertaining stories; media want clicks and subscriptions; and scientists want tenure, promotion, grants, and glory. None of those things necessarily overlaps with the principal goal of science: systematic pursuit of objective truths. FOOD INSIGHT: In your opinion, what steps should be taken so that […]

insights

Understanding, Evaluating, and Communicating Nutrition: A Researcher’s Perspective

(First in a series of three articles.) The relationship between nutrition and health is fully entrenched in the mainstream media, and everyone from career scientists to our next-door neighbor seems to be an expert on the topic. Becoming skilled in research evaluation, being aware of media perspectives, and understanding different forms of bias are extremely important in this rapidly evolving field. We recently interviewed Dr. Andrew Brown of the University of Alabama-Birmingham’s Office of Energetics and Nutrition Obesity Research Center, whose research group has a strong voice in the discussion of research evaluation and scientific integrity. In the first part of this series, Dr. Brown discusses the foundations of study design, which are vital to understanding research publications. FOOD INSIGHT: Can you explain the differences between observational and experimental studies? ANDREW BROWN: Observational studies and experimental studies describe two very broad classes of studies. In observational studies, the researcher tries to look for relationships in the world as it is. In experimental studies, the scientist tries to determine whether a change in the world will alter an outcome. To give some examples: An observational study may ask whether people with higher biomarker levels of  nutrient have a lower incidence of a disease than those who have lower levels. Think of blood concentrations of omega-3 fatty acids and heart disease, for instance. This type of study looks at how those characteristics relate to health outcomes. This can be a very different question from determining whether changing the biomarker (e.g., increasing omega-3 intake) causes a change in the disease compared to not changing the biomarker. The former example describes how characteristics and outcomes exist together; the latter helps determine whether changing people will change their outcomes. Often, observational evidence will be described as “hypothesis generating,” and experimental evidence will be described as “establishing causation.” This […]

insights

12 Nutrient-Dense, Shelf-Stable Foods To Include in Your Shopping Cart

It’s helpful to have a mix of fresh, frozen, canned and packaged foods in your kitchen for all of your cooking and eating needs. Today we’re spotlighting twelve nutrient-dense, shelf-stable foods to include on your shopping list. These foods in particular can aid in reducing the frequency of your grocery trips and can translate to less food (and money) being wasted. Read on to see our list of foods that will keep you stocked and ready for several weeks to months (or more!). Potatoes contain vitamin C, potassium, folate and vitamin B6 and come in many shapes, sizes and colors. Choose from red, white, fingerling, sweet potatoes and more. Depending on the type, potatoes should last 2–5 weeks if stored in a cool, dry, dark place, such as a pantry cabinet, or several months if stored 43-60°F. Like potatoes, onions contain vitamin C, potassium and vitamin B and come in a few different varieties. Onions will last 1–2 months if stored properly in a cool, dark, place. But don’t store them in the same place you store your potatoes; the gases these foods give off can cause one another to spoil more quickly. Apples contain vitamin C and potassium, offer a wide variety of flavor profiles and can be used in all kinds of dishes—from breakfasts to lunches, dinners and snacks. Fresh apples will keep well at room temperature on the counter for 5–7 days or will last up to six months if stored at 30–40°F. Oats are a whole grain, a source of (soluble and insoluble) fiber and contain many vitamins and minerals, including manganese, phosphorus, copper, vitamin B1, iron, selenium and magnesium. This heart-healthy option will last in your pantry for up to two years. Of course, always be mindful for any signs of spoilage (e.g. mold or […]

insights