Benefits associated with nutrigenomics research and their reporting in the scientific literature: researchers' perspectives

From Food for Survival to Food for Personalized Optimal Health: A Historical Perspective of How Food and Nutrition Gave Rise to Nutrigenomics

Human nutrition has progressed impressively from the hunter-gatherer mode to that of promising personalized nutrition for health optimization through advanced and sophisticated omics technologies. The contemporary major diseases, while having strong genetic components, do not conform to Mendelian genetics; hence, their expression/manifestation is not controlled by a single gene. Noncommunicable diseases such as obesity, cancer, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and cardiovascular disease are attributed to a series of chronic anomalies closely related to dietary, among other, environmental factors, and consistent deregulation of one or more groups of genes (polygenic). Collectively, these diseases constitute the main cause of death globally and pose tremendous financial burden on healthcare systems. Dietary interventions offer significant possibilities for cost-effective strategies to reduce risk of a series of metabolic diseases and/or improve the outcome of prognosis. In recent decades, the ability of particular nutrients to influence certain cellular functions as well as the regulation of several metabolic pathways via genomic interplay has been demonstrated. Nutrients can influence cellular responses and hence exert an effect on health parameters and outcomes. Several nutrients have been documented to extend their regulatory capacity at various levels including gene expression profile signatures' modulation. In addition, specific nutrients can modulate expression/activation of genes that encode regulatory hormones, which in turn are signaling agents strongly affecting metabolism and subsequently risk levels for certain metabolic diseases. The field of nutrigenomics attempts to revolutionize modern thinking on diet, food, and health; whether it will deliver is still an open matter of debate Key teaching points: A brief, yet comprehensive account on how food and nutrition evolved to give rise to nutrigenomics. Discusses potential of nutrigenomics for public health contribution in noncommunicable diseases. Debates credibility of nutrigenomics' commercial products versus the bio-hype in the field. Presents experts' and stakeholders' opinions for future directions of nutrigenomics.

Personalised nutrition and health

Jose Ordovas and colleagues consider that nutrition interventions tailored to individual characteristics and behaviours have promise but more work is needed before they can deliver

Evaluation of a cartoon-based knowledge dissemination intervention on scientific and ethical challenges raised by nutrigenomics/nutrigenetics research

CONTEXT

The push for knowledge translation on the part of health research funding agencies is significant in Canada, and many strategies have been adopted to promote the conversion of knowledge into action. In recent years, an increasing number of health researchers have been studying arts-based interventions to transform knowledge into action. This article reports on the results of an online questionnaire aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of a knowledge dissemination intervention (KDI) conveying findings from a study on the scientific and ethical challenges raised by nutrigenomics-nutrigenetics (NGx) research. The KDI was based on the use of four Web pages combining original, interactive cartoon-like illustrations accompanied by text to disseminate findings to Canadian Research Ethics Boards members, as well as to NGx researchers and researchers in ethics worldwide.

METHODS

Between May and October 2012, the links to the Web pages were sent in a personal email to target audience members, one thematic Web page at a time. On each thematic Web page, members of the target audience were invited to answer nine evaluation questions assessing the effectiveness of the KDI on four criteria, (i) acquisition of knowledge; (ii) change in initial understanding; (iii) generation of questions from the findings; and (iv) intent to change own practice.

FINDINGS

Response rate was low; results indicate that: (i) content of the four Web pages did not bring new knowledge to a majority of the respondents, (ii) initial understanding of the findings did not change for a majority of NGx researchers and a minority of ethics respondents, (iii) although the KDI did raise questions for respondents, it did not move them to change their practice.

CONCLUSIONS

While target end-users may not feel that they actually learned from the KDI, it seems that the findings conveyed encouraged reflection and raised useful and valuable questions for them. Moreover, the evaluation of the KDI proved to be useful to gain knowledge about our target audiences' views since respondents' comments allowed us to improve our understanding of the disseminated knowledge as well as to modify (and hopefully improve) the content of the Web pages used for dissemination.

Risks of nutrigenomics and nutrigenetics? What the scientists say

Nutrigenomics and nutrigenetics (hereafter NGx) have stimulated expectations for beneficial applications in public health and individuals. Yet, the potential achievability of such promise is not without socioethical considerations that challenge NGx implementation. This paper focuses on the opinions of NGx researchers about potential risks raised by NGx. The results of an online survey show that these researchers (n = 126) are fairly confident about the potential benefits of NGx, and that most downplay its potential risks. Researchers in this field do not believe that NGx will reconfigure foods as medication or transform the conception of eating into a health hazard. The majority think that NGx will produce no added burden on individuals to get tested or to remain compliant with NGx recommendations, nor that NGx will threaten individual autonomy in daily food choice. The majority of researchers do not think that NGx will lead to discrimination against and/or stigmatization of people who do not comply with NGx dietary recommendations. Despite this optimism among NGx researchers, we suggest that key risk factors raised by the socioethical context in which NGx applications will be implemented need to be considered.