Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

What nutrients am I missing in my diet?

diet nutrients

  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 McMc86

  • Registered User
  • 9 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Copenhagen

Posted 25 December 2011 - 07:11 PM


Hi.

Currently I am following this diet:

Breakfast: Oatmeal

During the day: Broccoli, bread & mackerel in tomato sauce

18.30: Tomatoes, bread, avocado.

Before going to bed:Salad and tomates.


I also eat salmon a couple of days a week.

Supplements I am taking are a multivitamin, Omega 3 & vit K and D.
  • 0

#2 hippocampus

  • Registered User
  • 733 posts
  • 115
  • Location:medial temporal lobe, brain

Posted 25 December 2011 - 07:46 PM

use cron-o-meter for a week or two and you'll see.
you may also have some mild deficiency even if you get all the nutrients from food, because some foods contain "antinutrients", but I don't think this is true for you. did you check your blood or have done some other tests?
  • 0

#3 McMc86

  • Registered User
  • 9 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Copenhagen

Posted 26 December 2011 - 08:52 AM

Does anyone have a link to the cron-o-meter?
  • 0

#4 Richard4099

  • Registered User
  • 1 posts
  • 0
  • Location:Bremen

Posted 26 December 2011 - 12:25 PM

http://cronometer.com/download/


:)
  • 0

#5 hippocampus

  • Registered User
  • 733 posts
  • 115
  • Location:medial temporal lobe, brain

Posted 26 December 2011 - 03:44 PM

http://cronometer.com/
  • 0

#6 TheKidInside

  • Registered User
  • 135 posts
  • 39
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY

Posted 28 December 2011 - 08:35 PM

you MUST MUST MUST visit a specialty clinic that specializes in this. they will take both urine and stool samples as well as blood work to see what's what. It's hard to determine based on your diet to be honest
  • 0

#7 Michael

  • Member, Advisor
  • 767 posts
  • 166
  • Location:Location Location

Posted 30 December 2011 - 02:55 PM

you MUST MUST MUST visit a specialty clinic that specializes in this. they will take both urine and stool samples as well as blood work to see what's what.

Very few blood tests provide any meaningful insight into nutrition status (GSH-Px for Se; 25(OH)D3 for D; Hcy and MMA for B12; ferritin for Fe; a few others -- simple blood levels of nutrients are almost meaningless for functional status), and even fewer for urine (Na, K, I), and none AFAIK for stool. CRON-O-Meter and a food scale is your best bet for most.
  • 2

#8 TheKidInside

  • Registered User
  • 135 posts
  • 39
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY

Posted 30 December 2011 - 03:02 PM

I am sorry but that is an untruth...in the past yes, but hence I said specialty clinics. They are few and far between but still worth looking into ... Cron-o-meter's bank of food is terrible.

MyFitnessPal has a MUCH better bank, including a vegan restaurant that delivers sandwiches to many health food stores in NYC but unfortunately doesn't track your nutrients from what I remember.
  • 0

#9 ramon25

  • Registered User
  • 110 posts
  • 0

Posted 10 January 2012 - 01:12 AM

Off the top of my head

Choline
B vitamins
Zinc
Calcium
Phosphorous
Vitamin A
Iodine
Maybe more.....
  • 0

#10 McMc86

  • Registered User
  • 9 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Copenhagen

Posted 14 January 2012 - 01:18 PM

Through multivitamin I am getting B vitamins, vitamin A, iodine.

Through extra supplementation I am getting: Calcium & Zinc and some phosphorous.

The rest of the phosphorous I am getting through milk.
  • 0

#11 pamojja

  • Registered User
  • 482 posts
  • 72
  • Location:Austria

Posted 14 January 2012 - 02:00 PM

Though cronometer is a necessary beginning, I have do agree that dietary and supplemental intake doesn't correlate with what the more accurate blood tests (some listed by Michael) reveal. Our bio-chemistry is just too different, some nutrients in their various dietary or supplemental forms are too differently absorbed, or there are synergies/antagonisms and antinutrients at different doses of intake.

Just as example, my 25(OH)D came up nicely when my vit D to retinol mcg ratio was at 1 : 8, but halved on the spot when retinol increased to a 1 : 10 ratio. Or I get about 700mg of magnesium from diet, however, have to supplement an other 1000mgs highly bio-available form, if I don't want to experience painful muscle cramps.

Cronometer, beside it's many faulty data and inherent inaccuracy in tracking (not to talk about guessing from memory or what supplement one takes,,) just won't tell you anything about that, and only gives a wrong sense of adequacy.


edit: But of course, the combined data from intake and blood/tissue tests does give a more accurate picture of actual individual needs, much more than each alone.

Edited by pamojja, 14 January 2012 - 02:07 PM.

  • 0

#12 Michael

  • Member, Advisor
  • 767 posts
  • 166
  • Location:Location Location

Posted 04 March 2012 - 10:23 PM

I am sorry but that is an untruth...in the past yes, but hence I said specialty clinics.


The fact that they're specialty clinics doesn't mean that their tests aren't hokum. ;) There are a lot of 'specialty' labs selling worthless blood tests, and a lot of misinformed and/or cynical medical and paramedical clinics quite willing to use them.

What tests would you name, other than those I've mentioned, plus a few urine tests (Na (along with blood levels, which will come with your CBC IAC), K, I), zinc sulphate heptahydrate solution for zinc?GSH-Px is a reasonable, if imperfect, functional test for Se. Transketolase activity, altho' not as solid, is a reasonable stab at a test for thiamine, tho' deficiency is rare unless you drink a lot of alcohol. If you favor others, would you please state what they are and on what evidence you believe that they're reasonable?

Cron-o-meter's bank of food is terrible.


Why would you say that?

MyFitnessPal has a MUCH better bank, including a vegan restaurant that delivers sandwiches to many health food stores in NYC but unfortunately doesn''t track your nutrients from what I remember.[


If it doesn't track your nutrients, then of what possible use is it??

Though cronometer is a necessary beginning, I have do agree that dietary and supplemental intake doesn't correlate with what the more accurate blood tests (some listed by Michael) reveal. Our bio-chemistry is just too different


I'd agree, except that (as noted) you can't test functional status for most nutrients.

Just as example, my 25(OH)D came up nicely when my vit D to retinol mcg ratio was at 1 : 8, but halved on the spot when retinol increased to a 1 : 10 ratio.


Well, fortunately, you can get 25(OH)D3 tested; you can't, meaningfully, for most nutrients.
  • 0

#13 Orajel

  • Registered User
  • 138 posts
  • 12
  • Location:San Diego

Posted 07 March 2012 - 06:42 AM

Vegetable viriety is always good, looks like your stuck with salad and broccoli. both great, but not complete. A quality multivitamin could help. Think synergy. Check out powdered green superfood. It looks like you could be lacking protein as well, but generally, if you can fit your entire diet into a couple of lines of text, get some viriety.

Brewers yeast is an excellent source of bioavailiable b vitamins. heres an interesting link on B vitamin bioavailiability.
http://www.brainread...ilability_.html
  • 0

#14 TheKidInside

  • Registered User
  • 135 posts
  • 39
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY

Posted 07 March 2012 - 09:00 PM

why would I say that? because it's limited to "kiwi"...you do know that an organic kiwi vs "conventional" kiwi probably has double the vitamin C for example?
  • 0

#15 Michael

  • Member, Advisor
  • 767 posts
  • 166
  • Location:Location Location

Posted 07 March 2012 - 11:06 PM

why would I say that? because it's limited to "kiwi"...you do know that an organic kiwi vs "conventional" kiwi probably has double the vitamin C for example?

Even if that were true, why would you then recommend a database that has no nutrient information at all? But in any case, while doubtless individual organic crops in individual years and locations have variable levels of nutrients and will sometimes come up with truly exceptional nutrient levels, on the whole, the available evidence is that it's actually a wash for essential nutrients:


Background: Despite growing consumer demand for organically produced foods, information based on a systematic review of their nutritional quality is lacking. ...


Design: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, and CAB Abstracts for a period of 50 y from 1 January 1958 to 29 February 2008, contacted subject experts, and hand-searched bibliographies. We included peer-reviewed articles with English abstracts in the analysis if they reported nutrient content comparisons between organic and conventional foodstuffs. ...

Results: From a total of 52,471 articles, we identified 162 studies (137 crops and 25 livestock products); 55 were of satisfactory quality. In an analysis that included only satisfactory-quality studies, conventionally produced crops had a significantly higher content of nitrogen, and organically produced crops had a significantly higher content of phosphorus and higher titratable acidity. No evidence of a difference was detected for the remaining 8 of 11 crop nutrient categories analyzed. Analysis of the more limited database on livestock products found no evidence of a difference in nutrient content between organically and conventionally produced livestock products.

Conclusions: On the basis of a systematic review of studies of satisfactory quality, there is no evidence of a difference in nutrient quality between organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs. The small differences in nutrient content detected are biologically plausible and mostly relate to differences in production methods.(1)


On the other hand, there is significant evidence of higher levels of secondary metabolites, including some phenolics and salicylates, in organic vegetables, though even there the relationship isn't ironclad; in any case, of course, these don't enter into nutrition crunching for essential nutrients.

Reference
1: Dangour AD, Dodhia SK, Hayter A, Allen E, Lock K, Uauy R. Nutritional quality of organic foods: a systematic review. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Sep;90(3):680-5. Epub 2009 Jul 29. Review. PubMed PMID: 19640946.
  • 1




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users