Skip to main content

What is Nutrigenetics/Nutrigenomics?

It should be pretty obvious but I nearly forgot to make this post - defining nutrigenetics and nutrigenomics

Nutrigenetics: This is, in my opinion, more of the clinical definition. Nutrigenetics seeks to understand the interplay between the genome, variant alleles and nutrition and this interplay's effect on health and athletic performance.

Nutrigenomics: This is a broader definition, looking at everything from nutrigenetics to also understanding how gene transcription is affected by nutrients and their metabolites - whether that be by acting directly as a transcription factor, altering the epigenetic state, or by altering the microbiota, which can subsequently alter gene expression.

The goal of this discipline: personalized medical nutrition therapy and a greater understanding of human evolution. It's been established that nutrition and the genome interact with each. Nutrition affects gene expression, methylation and acetylation, and nutrient requirements are defined by DNA's coding sequence, with some variants affecting nutrient needs. Ultimately, understanding what kind of nutrition in a specific environment is ideal would be the goal of nutrigenetics/nutrigenomics research. Understanding nutrigenetics may also lead to a greater understanding of how nutrition has acted as a selective factor for specific populations and give evolutionary insights. The science can hopefully, in the future, allow health practitioners to make personalized dietary recommendations, as well as employ better public policy.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Beware the Meta-Analysis: Fat, Guidelines, and Biases

Headlines were abuzz this week, reporting that a new review of randomized controlled trials at the time of the low-fat guidelines didn't support their institution. Time , Business Insider , and The Verge all covered the topic with sensationalist headlines (e.g. 'We should never have told people to stop eating fat' #weneverdid). I won't spend every part of this blog picking apart the entire meta-analysis; you can read it over at the open access journal, BMJ Open Heart (1) -- (note, for myself, i'm adding an extra level of skepticism for anything that gets published in this journal). I'm also not going to defend low-fat diets either, but rather, use this meta-analysis to point out some critical shortcomings in nutritional sciences research, and note that we should be wary of meta-analyses when it comes to diet trials. First off, let's discuss randomized controlled trials (RCTs). They are considered the gold standard in biomedical research; in the hierarc...

On PURE

The PURE macronutrients studies were published in the Lancet journals today and the headlines / commentaries are reminding us that everything we thought we think we were told we knew about nutrition is wrong/misguided, etc. Below is my non-epidemiologist's run down of what happened in PURE. A couple papers came out related to PURE, but the one causing the most buzz is the relationship of the macronutrients to mortality. With a median follow up of 7.4 years, 5796 people died and 4784 had a major cardiovascular event (stroke, MCI). The paper modeled the impacts of self reported dietary carbohydrate, total fat, protein, monounsaturated (MUFA), saturated (SFA), and polyunsaturated (PUFA) fatty acid intakes on cardiovascular (CVD), non-CVD and total mortality; all macros were represented as a percentage of total self reported energy intakes and reported/analyzed in quintiles (energy intakes between 500-5000kcals/day were considered plausible..). All dietary data was determined by a ...

Much Ado About Funding

Michele Simon, a public health lawyer and advocate , recently published an expose of the ties between the American Society for Nutrition (ASN) and certain industries - you can find the full report here . The report caused quite the stir on twitter, getting play from the MotherJones ,  ScientificAmerican , and the accolades of a number of twitter celebs. Yoni Freedhoff kindly tweeted the report, suggesting that Ms Simon is only 'questioning' the ties between ASN and industry; alas, reading the report shows that much more than just 'questioning' is going on here - the title alone speaks to that': "Nutrition Scientists on the Take from Big Food - Has the American Society for Nutrition lost all credibility?" As Andrew Kniss pointed out on twitter, ASN being "on the take" is quite the accusation. The report won't surprise anyone who has followed Ms Simon in the past. She wrote a similar report about the Academy of Nutrition and Dieteti...