Nature Publishing Group, publisher of Nature, and other science journals and reference works NATURE.COM NATURE NEWS NATUREJOBS NATUREEVENTS ABOUT NPG
Help Nature.com site index  
International Journal of Obesity
SEARCH     advanced search my account e-alerts subscribe register
Journal home
Advance online publication
Current issue
Archive
Press releases
For authors
For referees
Contact editorial office
About the journal
For librarians
Subscribe
Advertising
naturereprints
Contact NPG
Customer services
Site features
NPG Subject areas
Access material from all our publications in your subject area:
Biotechnology Biotechnology
Cancer Cancer
Chemistry Chemistry
Dentistry Dentistry
Development Development
Drug Discovery Drug Discovery
Earth Sciences Earth Sciences
Evolution & Ecology Evolution & Ecology
Genetics Genetics
Immunology Immunology
Materials Materials Science
Medical Research Medical Research
Microbiology Microbiology
Molecular Cell Biology Molecular Cell Biology
Neuroscience Neuroscience
Pharmacology Pharmacology
Physics Physics
Browse all publications
 
April 2000, Volume 24, Number 4, Pages 435-442
Table of contents    Previous  Abstract  Next   Full text  PDF
Paper
Do we eat less fat, or just report so?
B L Heitmann1,2,3, L Lissner4 and M Osler1,5

1Unit for Dietary Studies at the The Copenhagen County Centre for Preventive Medicine, Department of Medicine CF, Glostrup University Hospital, Denmark

2Institute of Preventive Medicine, Copenhagen Hospital Corporation, H:S Copenhagen Municipal Hospital, Denmark

3Research Department of Human Nutrition, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Copenhagen Denmark

4Centre for Nutritional Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Göteborg University, Göteberg, Sweden

5Institute of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

Correspondence to: B L Heitmann, Unit for Dietary Studies at the Centre for Preventive Medicine, Glostrup University Hospital, DK-2600 Glostrup, Denmark. BeHe@Glostruphosp.KbhAmt.dk

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine secular trends in diet reporting error.

METHODS: Dietary information was obtained from 228 Danish men and women in 1987-88, and from 122 men and women in 1993-94.

RESULTS: Bias in dietary reporting of energy and protein intake was assessed by comparing reported intake with intake data, estimated from 24 h nitrogen output, validated by administering P-aminobenzoic acid, and estimated 24 h energy expenditure. Total energy was under-reported more than energy from protein at both surveys, suggesting that energy from other nutrients, like fat and/or carbohydrate, must have been under-reported too. There was a greater under-reporting for energy than for protein in 1993-94 (29%) than in 1987-88 (15%). Obesity was positively associated with under-reporting, both in 1987-88 and in 1993-94.

CONCLUSION: The higher macro-nutrient specific error in 1993-94 compared to 1987-88 may reflect a trend to increasingly omitting fat and/or carbohydrate-rich foods in dietary reporting. This may be a consequence of increased awareness of diet intake, which, in turn, may be related to intensified public health campaigns to reduce intake of fat and/or simple carbohydrate. These results may have consequences for our understanding of the apparent decline in dietary fat and associated health benefits.

International Journal of Obesity (2000)24, 435-442

Keywords

secular trends; dietary under-reporting; obesity; macro-nutrient intakes

Received 26 April 1999; revised 23 August 1999; accepted 4 November 1999
April 2000, Volume 24, Number 4, Pages 435-442
Table of contents    Previous  Abstract  Next   Full text  PDF
Privacy Policy © 2000 Nature Publishing Group