A paragraph from the recently published article:
"WHO/UNICEF/IGN recommends that the iodine status of populations be based on the mUIC. It has been further designated that an optimal iodine intake is where a mUIC in school aged children (SAC) is in the range of 100–299 ug/L and excessive if the mUIC >300 ug/L (UNICEF, 2015). These levels are not as well defined for women of reproductive age, but for pregnant women, the optimal range is 150–249 ug/L, whereas the iodine intake is considered to be above requirements when the mUIC is between 250 and 499 ug/L and excessive >500 ug/L (WHO, 2013). With these criteria in mind, the 2016 survey shows that at the national level, SAC are currently classified in the “excessive” range, whereas pregnant women and women of child bearing age would be classified as “adequate” and “more than adequate,” respectively. Looking at the stratified results for several subgroups in the population, among the 34 strata listed, 19 (56%) were classified as excessive for SAC. Iodine intake was high in the central and western regions, in the Terai, and among a number of ethnic groups including the poorer Terai Janajati. For pregnant women, there were no strata with mUIC >500, but again, the sample size was small rendering these estimates imprecise. In addition, the assessment of iodine content of salt showed that mean iodine content for all salt samples was 44.1 ppm, and that 67.5% were >40 ppm—well above the expected level at the retail (30 ppm) and household (15 ppm) levels. The standards are based on an average per capita consumption of 10-g salt per day, so an iodine content this high will provide more than three times the daily requirement. These findings suggest that the current standard, combined with marked increase in use of a refined packaged product, may require an adjustment of the standard. "
For details read the full text here.
No comments:
Post a Comment