2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.fct.2018.08.031
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Benefit-risk analysis for foods (BRAFO): Evaluation of exposure to dietary nitrates

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 71 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In fact, research surrounding dietary nitrate historically focused on intakes from processed meat and their association with poor health outcomes, primarily cancer [44]. In addition, it is reasonable to expect that not all sources of nitrate are equal with regards to their potential health effects [45]. This is especially relevant given the complex bioactivity of nitrate, nitrite and NO metabolism, in which pro-inflammatory constituents including sodium and saturated fat intakes (common to processed meat and discretionary choices) can interfere with NO production, while anti-inflammatory constituents including vitamin C, polyphenols and antioxidants (common to vegetables) can favor NO production from nitrate [46,47,48].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In fact, research surrounding dietary nitrate historically focused on intakes from processed meat and their association with poor health outcomes, primarily cancer [44]. In addition, it is reasonable to expect that not all sources of nitrate are equal with regards to their potential health effects [45]. This is especially relevant given the complex bioactivity of nitrate, nitrite and NO metabolism, in which pro-inflammatory constituents including sodium and saturated fat intakes (common to processed meat and discretionary choices) can interfere with NO production, while anti-inflammatory constituents including vitamin C, polyphenols and antioxidants (common to vegetables) can favor NO production from nitrate [46,47,48].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A rapidly growing body of scientific evidence has evaluated nitrate in the context of human health benefits ( Bryan and Loscalzo, 2017 ). The production of nitric oxide following the oral consumption of nitrate is believed to be the mechanism for the most well-established benefit to human health of improved cardiovascular health (reviewed by Wikoff et al, 2018 ). Nitric oxide is typically formed by oral bacteria, which reduce nitrate to nitrite and nitrite to nitric oxide.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…MetHb manifests when tissues are significantly deprived of oxygen ( Mensinga et al, 2003 ; EFSA, 2020 ). In an evaluation of nitrate toxicity in humans, Wikoff et al (2018) reported that concerns regarding MetHb have been recently recognized to be confounded by high levels of bacterial contamination in drinking water ( USEPA, 1991 ; ATSDR, 2017 ; OEHHA, 2018 ; Wikoff et al, 2018 ). For example, nitrate levels in drinking water were thought to cause MetHb in infants; however, exposure to high bacterial loads in drinking water was later determined to be a more likely cause of MetHb ( Wikoff et al, 2018 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Dietary nitrate has traditionally been considered a contaminant of concern in foods for humans as well as swine ( Wikoff et al, 2018 ; Doepker et al, 2021 ). Reference documents such as the National Research Council Nutrient Requirements of Swine discuss low-level nitrate (290 to 490 ppm) in well water as being associated with toxicity ( NRC, 2012 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, nitrate has begun to be recognized for favorable physiological effects and has been considered beneficial in the diets of both humans and swine ( Hord et al, 2009 ; van den Bosch et al, 2019a , b ). The reviews of Wikoff et al (2018) in humans and Doepker et al (2021) in swine suggest that the old case reports were confounded (potential bacterial contamination in well water) and lacking in detail. In fact, more recent work suggests that levels well above the 490 ppm value are safe in swine, up to ~600 to 800 mg/kg-bw/d ( Doepker et al, 2021 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%