Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T15:21:44.280Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Can adverse effects of dietary fat intake be overestimated as a consequence of dietary fat underreporting?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2007

Berit Lilienthal Heitmann  and
Lauren Lissner
Berit Lilienthal Heitmann*
Affiliation:
Research Unit for Dietary Studies and Danish Epidemiology Science Centre, Institute of Preventive Medicine, Copenhagen University Hospital, DK-1399 Copenhagen K, Denmark Research Centre for Prevention and Health, Glostrup University Hospital, Glostrup, Denmark
Lauren Lissner
Affiliation:
Department of Internal Medicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenborg University, Gothenborg, 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

To describe the consequences of systematic reporting bias by the obese for diet–disease relationships.

Design

The present report used 24-hour urinary nitrogen and estimates of 24-hour energy expenditure to assess error in diet reporting, and examined the consequence of accounting for this error for associations between dietary fat intake and serum low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol.

Setting

Sub-study to the Danish MONICA (Monitoring Trends and Determinants in Cardiovascular Disease) project, carried out in 1987–1988.

Subjects

A random sub-sample of the adult Danish male population (n = 152).

Results

Correcting dietary fat for underreporting error weakened, rather than strengthened, the association between dietary fat intake and LDL-cholesterol by reducing the slope of the regression from β = 3.4, P = 0.02 to β = 2.7, P = 0.04.

Conclusion

This example illustrates that systematic underreporting of dietary fat by high-risk groups such as the obese may produce an overestimated association. These results imply that previous epidemiological studies showing a positive association between percentage of energy from fat and other health outcomes, e.g. cancer and heart disease, may have overestimated the negative effects of a high-fat diet. If we were able to correctly assess dietary fat intake in general populations, recommendations for fat intake may be more liberal than the 30% suggested today. Improved assessment of fat intake in epidemiological studies is necessary for future development of evidence-based recommendations for diet and health.

Keywords

Fat intakeObesityBiasEpidemiology
Type
Research Article
Information
Public Health Nutrition , Volume 8 , Issue 8 , December 2005 , pp. 1322 - 1327
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2005

References

1Committee on Diet, Nutrition, and Cancer, National Academy of Sciences. Diet, Nutrition, and Cancer. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1982.Google Scholar
2Keyes, A. Official recommendations from Scandinavia. Circulation 1968; 38: 227–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3Doll, R, Peto, R. The causes of cancer. Quantitative estimates of avoidable risks of cancer in the United States today. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 1981; 66: 1191–308.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4Hebert, JR, Clemow, L, Pbert, L, Ockene, IS, Ockene, J. Social desirability bias in dietary self-report may compromise the validity of dietary intake measures. International Journal of Epidemiology 1995; 24: 389–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5Wu, ML, Whittemore, AS, Jung, DL. Errors in reported dietary intakes. 2. Long-term recall. American Journal of Epidemiology 1988; 128: 1137–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6Willett, W. An overview of issues related to the correction of non-differential exposure measurement error in epidemiologic studies. Statistics in Medicine 1989; 8: 1031–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7Heitmann, BL. Social desirability bias in dietary self-report may compromise the validity of dietary intake measures. Implications for diet–disease relationships. International Journal of Epidemiology 1996; 25: 222–3.Google Scholar
8Heitmann, BL. The influence of fatness, weight change, slimming history and other lifestyle variables on diet reporting in Danish men and women aged 35–65 years. International Journal of Obesity and Related Metabolic Disorders 1993; 17: 329–36.Google Scholar
9Black, AE, Goldberg, GR, Jebb, SA, Livingstone, MBE, Cole, TJ, Prentice, AM. Critical evaluation of energy intake data using fundamental principles of energy physiology: 2. Evaluating the results of published surveys. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 1991; 45: 583–99.Google ScholarPubMed
10Heitmann, BL, Lissner, L. Dietary underreporting by obese individuals – is it specific or non-specific? British Medical Journal 1995; 311: 986–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11Møller, A, ed. Levnedsmiddeltabeller 1985 [Danish Food Composition Tables 1985], 2nd ed. Ministry of the Environment Publication No. 75. Søborg: National Food Agency, 1986.Google Scholar
12Bingham, S, Cummings, JH. The use of 4-aminobenzoic acid as a marker to validate the completeness of 24 h urine collections. Clinical Science 1983; 64: 629–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13World Health Organization (WHO). Measuring Obesity – Classification and Description of Anthropometric Data. Report on a WHO Consultation of the Epidemiology of Obesity, Warsaw, 21–23 October 1987. Nutrition Unit Document, EUR/ICP/NUT 125. Copenhagen: WHO, 1989.Google Scholar
14Heitmann, BL. Prediction of body water and fat in adult Danes from measurement of electrical impedance. A validation study. International Journal of Obesity 1990; 14: 789–802.Google ScholarPubMed
15Garby, L, Garrow, JS, Jørgensen, B, lammert, O, Madsen, K, Sørensen, P. Relation between energy expenditure and body composition in man: specific energy expenditure in vivo of fat and fat-free tissue. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 1988; 42: 301–5.Google ScholarPubMed
16World Health Organization (WHO). Energy and Protein Requirements. Report of a Joint Food and Agriculture Organization/WHO/United Nations University Expert Consultation. Technical Report Series No. 724. Geneva: WHO, 1985.Google Scholar
17Jacobsen, BK, Thelle, DS. Risk factors for coronary heart disease and level of education. The Tromsö Heart Study. American Journal of Epidemiology 1988; 127: 923–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18Prevention of coronary heart disease: scientific background and new clinical guidelines. Recommendations of the European Atherosclerosis Society prepared by the International Task Force for Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease. Nutrition, Metabolism, and Cardiovascular Diseases 1992; 2: 113–56.Google Scholar
19Astrup, A, Buemann, B, Western, P, Toubro, S, Raben, A, Christensen, NJ. Obesity as an adaptation to a high fat diet: evidence from a cross-sectional study. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 1994; 59: 350–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20Tyroler, H. Review of lipid-lowering trials in relation to observational epidemiologic studies. Circulation 1987; 76: 515–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21Lissner, L, Heitmann, BL, Lindroos, AK. Measuring intake in free-living humans: a question of bias. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 1998; 57: 333–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed