Journal of Animal Science

Bentley, Orville, G.

doi: 10.1093/ansci/62.1.1pmid: N/A

Abstract USDA has been involved in the study of food consumption, food quality and safety and the maintenance of a wholesome food supply almost from its inception. Today, concerns regarding high caloric intake, saturated fat and cholesterol and food labeling are heard all around us. Yet despite what the critics may say. Americans are the best-fed people in the world. Statistical evidence shows that the American population is now healthier than at any time in history. Public interest in the relationships between nutrition, diet and health is at an all-time high However few subjects are more controversial than those associated with diet and health These issues affect the economic political, social and cultural affairs of the nation and the world. Changes in food production and processing methods have been vital in providing an ample supply of reaonably priced food to American consumers. Changes in preferences of consumers and their perception of “good nutrition” has significantly influenced demand, prices, form and characteristics of food items. USDA leadership works jointly with the leadership of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) on many important projects concerning diet and health. A notable example was the publication of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans in 1980 and now its revision in 1985. This and other policy issues have wide implications for the role of meat in diet and health. The USDA policy on food and nutrition was stated in Secretary's Memorandum 1020, signed by Secretary Block in May 1985: “It is the policy of USDA to promote optimal human health and well-being through improved nutrition The Department recognizes the importance of coordination of its human nutrition-related activities with the agricultural food industry other governmental agencies and private or public institution.” Some of USDA's important nutrition- and health-related activities are: The study entitled, “The Protein Nutritional Quality of Meat and Poultry Products: Scientific Basis for Regulation.” Three ARS workshops: – Plant Production Research Workshop. Ithaca. New York. March 6–8, 1985; – Animal Production Research Workshop. Beltsville, Maryland; April 11–12. 1985; – Postharvest Research Workshop, Lafayette. Indiana; May 8–9. 1985. Three national symposia-workshops on diet/health scheduled for the fall of 1985 at the University of California-Davis', the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana and the University of Delaware. The forthcoming NAS/NRC Board on Agriculture study entitled, “Technological Options for Nutritional Improvements in Meat and Animal Products.” This content is only available as a PDF. Author notes 1 Assistant Secretary for Science and Education. 1986 by American Society of Animal Science

Hansen, R., Gaurth;Windham, Carol, T.;Wittwer, Carl, T.;Wyse, Bonita, W.

doi: 10.1093/ansci/62.1.7pmid: N/A

Abstract Pronouncements carried by the mass media concerning the relationship of diet to the degenerative diseases have tended to give false hope to the public. Expectations of prevention or even cure of disease have resulted There is the potential for harm to the consumer if nutrient intake is unbalanced though improper selection of foods. The most important public-health benefit that could result from diet modification would be the reduction of both the intake of calories and the proportion of calories from low-nutrient foods high in either fat, sugar or alcohol. Within appropriate caloric allowances, choice of foods from a variety of the basic food commodities, including low-fat meat, is still the most effective way to assure a balanced intake of nutrients. This content is only available as a PDF. Author notes 1 Nutrition and Food Sciences. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry. 2 Nutrition and Food Sciences. 3 Resident, Department of Pathology. 4 Acting Dean, College of Family Life. 1986 by American Society of Animal Science

Schweigert, Bernard, S.

doi: 10.1093/ansci/62.1.16pmid: N/A

Abstract The continuing trend toward minimal amounts of fat in meat and animal products is the key issue for animal scientists in the years ahead. It is difficult to limit caloric intake while consuming fats that contain 2¼ times the calories of carbohydrates and proteins per gram. Diets composed of a variety of foods that are high in nutritive value and high in nutrient density will become increasingly important in human nutrition. Increased knowledge of the properties of foods as they influence the quality (sensory—flavor, texture and appearance; microbiological and chemical safety; nutritive value; functional properties; convenience and price) will be critical The 1985 Dietary Guidelines provide a sound basis for these developments for the future This content is only available as a PDF. Author notes 1 Department of Food Science and Technology 1986 by American Society of Animal Science

doi: 10.1093/ansci/62.1.19pmid: N/A

Abstract Question: Has there been any progress made concerning the changing of beef carcass grades? I believe there is sufficient information to suggest that a change should be made. (Dr. O. D. Butler, Texas A&M University.) Answer:(Dr. Bentley) This responsibility lies with AMS (Agricultural Marketing Service) within the department. USDA went through a difficult period a few years ago and lost in its efforts to make changes. It is my understanding that there has been a recent request for this issue to again be reviewed and I presume this will be done. Now I would like to give you my personal view on this topic, not speaking for the department. I agree with you wholeheartedly in that we should again review the grading standards in hopes of revising them. When I was a graduate student at the University of Wisconsin, we were talking of revising milk standards for marketing on a solids, nonfat basis rather than marketing on a fat basis and you know we have not changed anything with those discussions There are many people in the industry who would like to see the beef-grading issue resolved in the near future. Question: Are we expecting too much from nutrition in relation to its impact on good health and longevity, especially in view of all the complicating factors that are involved compared to medical interventions? (Dr. Ed Young, University of Maryland.) Answer:(Dr. Schweigert) Nutrition is only one of the quality factors in food. I hope I made that point. This content is only available as a PDF. 1986 by American Society of Animal Science

DeWys, William, D.

doi: 10.1093/ansci/62.1.21pmid: N/A

Abstract Prevention of cancer is an extremely important health issue because approximately 20% of the U.S. population is expected to die of cancer. The levels of some nutrients in the diet and the interrelationships and(or) interactions among nutrients may impact the risk of developing cancer. Diet and nutritional factors may influence carcinogenesis in a variety of ways. Foods may contain carcinogenic substances. Carcinogens may be ingested and modified by dietary factors prior to absorption. Metabolic activation or deactivation of carcinogens within the body may be influenced by diet. The metabolic fate of a compound is determined by a complex series of reactions including activation and deactivation. Scavenging and other defense mechanisms may be altered by diet The repair of damaged DNA with its effect on the carcinogenic process may be influenced by diet Dietary factors may enhance or protect against the cellular activity in the promotion phase of carcinogenesis Research on cancer prevention includes epidemiologic studies laboratory studies biochemical-epidemiologic studies and clinical trials Each type of study requires, careful evaluation and interpretation Mathematical models are often employed to determine the relative importance of variables in studies of risk factors. Proper interpretation of the models requires broad understanding of the methods and variables: thus, caution in interpretation is indicated Risk of some types of cancer is increased by 1) excessive body weight, 2) high intake of fats, 3) some types of pickled foods and 4) alcohol. A decrease in risks of some types of cancer seems to result from increased consumption of 1) fiber 2) beta carotene and(or) vitamin A, 3) vitamin C, 4) small amounts of selenium and 5) cruciferous vegetables. It should be possible to formulate diets and develop eating and lifestyle habits that 1) incorporate the dietary recommendations aimed at lowering cancer risk, 2) conform with general dietary guidelines such as those currently published by USDA and DHHS and 3) capitalize on the excellent nutritive value of meat. This content is only available as a PDF. Author notes 1 Associate Director, Prevention Program, Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Cancer Institute. 1986 by American Society of Animal Science

Levy, Robert, I.;Ernst, Nancy, D.

doi: 10.1093/ansci/62.1.38pmid: N/A

Abstract Many of the risk factors for cardiovascular disease can be lowered. Several can be lowered by dietary change. Achieving and maintaining desirable weight levels is important for control of abnormal glucose intolerance, high blood pressure and elevated blood cholesterol levels. Controlling the type of fat we consume is important for regulating blood cholesterol levels. Restricting sodium intake is important to many with high blood pressure. We do not have all the answers about the influence of food on cardiovascular health, but we know enough to take action. Today in the United States one person dies every minute of a heart attack. That makes this problem yours and mine. This content is only available as a PDF. Author notes 1 Professor of Medicine. 2 Nutrition Coordinator, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. 1986 by American Society of Animal Science

doi: 10.1093/ansci/62.1.47pmid: N/A

Abstract Question: I have the impression that genetic background is a predisposing factor in cancer risk. You seem to discount this, not only with your rare mention of genetics but also with the epidemiologic data where you compared second-generation Americans with first-generation Americans and Japanese I am confused Can you clarify this for me? (Dr David Meisinger, National Pork Producers Council.) Answer:(Dr. DeWys) The genetic effect varies from one type of cancer to another. Overall, it's probable that less than 5% of the risk for cancer is genetic. However, for certain types of cancer it's higher; for example for breast cancer, about 10 to 15% of the risk may be genetic To put that in perspective about 25% of the risk for breast cancer may be related to body weight and an additional 15 to 20% may be related to dietary fat But one can cite families where multiple female members all have breast cancer For a woman in such a family the genetic risk becomes 50% or in some rare, situations even higher than that. Question: Please address the issue of triglyceride levels in the blood as compared to cholesterol levels that are associated with increased coronary vascular disease. Also, address the issue of low density lipoproteins (LDL) vs the ratio of low density to high density lipoproteins (HDL). Don't all fats, not just saturated fats contribute to these ratios? (Dr. Karen Jacobson College of Veterinary Medicine University of Georgia.) Answer:(Dr. Levy) The evidence linking triglycerides to coronary This content is only available as a PDF. 1986 by American Society of Animal Science

McNutt,, Kristen

doi: 10.1093/ansci/62.1.51pmid: N/A

Abstract The perception of meat held by many consumers today impairs their ability to make appropriate food choices. Some consumers are overly restricting their consumption of meat and meat products based on exaggerated impressions of the health risks. Of equal importance, other consumers who are at high risk for certain diseases are disregarding advice from health educators to reduce their meat consumption and are, therefore, jeopardizing their health. Meat and animal scientists whose research is funded from public coffers and the industries that sell these products have an opportunity and a responsibility to correct these public misconceptions and to support broad health-education campaigns. This content is only available as a PDF. Author notes 1 Director, Scientific and Public Affairs. 1986 by American Society of Animal Science

Mertz,, Walter

doi: 10.1093/ansci/62.1.55pmid: N/A

Abstract The majority of nutritional guidelines and recommendations call for a reduction in the fat content for consumers of the “American diet.” Trimming visible fat from meats reduces the fat content markedly, and it can be further reduced by processing, cooking or industry production practices. Electrical stimulation of the low-fat beef carcass will improve tenderness but not flavor, juiciness or cooking qualities The fat content of milk is easily reduced, as is lactose, to make the product acceptable to many including lactose-intolerant individuals. This content is only available as a PDF. Author notes 1 Director, Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center. 1986 by American Society of Animal Science

Sweet, Orville, K.

doi: 10.1093/ansci/62.1.60pmid: N/A

Abstract USDA data indicate that there has been a 22% drop in retail demand for beef since 1975, accompanied by a corresponding increase in poultry consumption. A recent study indicates that in 1983, 67% of households held pro-meat attitudes; in 1985, only 50% are similarly inclined. While the use of ham and luncheon meats has remained stable, one-third of the population believes they are serving less bacon in 1985 compared to 1984. Most reasons given are health-related. Livestock producers, once considered the source of healthful, life-sustaining food products, are frustrated by the onslaught of bad publicity; however, they are developing a much better understanding of the diet/health issue and its relationship to red-meat consumption. The industry is establishing a more sophisticated and statesmanlike role through closer cooperation with industry organizations and coordination of industry resources. It is also responding to consumer perceptions and developing a more effective communication program to bring accurate and up-to-date information to consumers. The livestock industry realizes that a science-based educational program is crucial for producers as well as consumers New products are needed in response to perceived consumer desires for new and emerging lifestyles. How federal food policy is developed is the greatest single cause for concern in the entire food industry. High priority must be given to means of influencing public food policy. There is strong justification for developing a “national meat policy institute.” This would have as its primary objective the bringing together of all the forces involved in the giant meat industry into one cohesive unit able to evaluate research needs concerning the health aspects of red-meat consumption. The result would be to remove the adversarial relationship with government and quasi-government agencies and to be more closely involved in the research process. The chief goal would be to assure quality science from definition to review. This content is only available as a PDF. Author notes 1 Executive Vice President. 2 The author has drawn extensively on consultation with the following: Elton Aberle, University of Nebraska; Don Colleton, Chicago, Illinois; Charlie Harness; Christine L. Herbert, David Meisinger and Russ Sanders, National Pork Producers Council; John Huston, National Live Stock and Meat Board; Maniey Molpus, American Meat Institute; David Stroud, Heinold Commodities, Inc.; and Rodger Was-son, American Sheep Producers Council. 1986 by American Society of Animal Science