In the descriptions of preparations for mineral, trace element and vitamin supplements we often encounter the concept of daily need. "The product covers the daily needs" - read on the side of the box or, for several ingredients, the number of ingredients for each component to represent the percentage of the daily requirement. Few people know that there is a tough fight in this area behind the scenes for the percentages! In addition, this fight is often not on a professional basis, and ignoring the unpleasant professional arguments is one of the most important aspects! For an advertising professional, a higher percentage is preferable. If possible, I would surely exceed 100%. Reality is so complicated.
Image source: https://www.pexels.com/photo/yellow-health-medicine-wellness-33355/
The concept of daily need
By daily requirement, we mean the number of nutrients that should be provided to our body daily to preserve our health. It is easy to understand and simple. Problems - as always - occur when choosing the way of realization. The classic way of taking nutrients is to eat several times a day. The composition of our foods is influenced by countless factors. At the beginning of the 20th century, we started to think that our usual dietary methods do not cover our daily nutritional needs. It is difficult to support this statement with figures, because an investigation that could provide the right information would cost millions if it were feasible. At the same time, this theory has come to the fore for an industry that is increasingly gaining ground. The result: the man of the present day is supplying nutrients from two sources, from food consumed and from food supplements afterward, under the influence of the uncontrollable flow of information. The situation is really complicated by the fact that the ratio between the two sources can hardly be determined.
Current values of the daily requirement
During the attempts to identify daily needs, a number of concepts were born and later forgotten, reflecting the difficulty of solving the problem. The most widespread concept is the RDA, which is the abbreviation for the English Recommended Dietary Allowances and the recommended daily intake. Be careful not to write a need! You should know about the RDA:
The recommended value is always the total daily intake, regardless of the form and frequency of intake. This is very important, because when we want to provide our vitamin and trace element with a tablet, we should not forget that we are eating, that is, we need the necessary nutrients with the food, otherwise we would do!
The determination of RDA values was always based on tests. This is the reason why RDA is really a little nutrient known. Public knowledge cannot be determined by tests, so values that are otherwise appreciated are included as RDA data, as manufacturers do not take the trouble to inform consumers properly! Not to mention the fact that there is so little space on the boxes of preparations that it is not possible to provide accurate information.
Professionals have taken into account the entire international literature to determine RDA values. This is important because many people think that the RDA is primarily for the North American continent because it was released there. Well, that's not true. The reality is that it is valid worldwide. Some countries have defined minimum differences for their country. These changes are so small that they have no biological significance. Usually, the tolerance of our body is much higher in case of possible deficiency or overdose.
The first RDA values were determined in 1943. The numerical values later changed, as the results of the recent studies revealed. On average, the recommendations were reviewed every 10 years. The last such chart appeared in 1989. After 10 years, when the need for the next change has arisen, professionals have decided to make a radical change. Between 1999 and 2001, a more thorough review of the literature so far known as the creation of a new concept, DRI, which stands for the Dietary Reference Intake. This has replaced the RDA on January 1, 2001! The RDA has been retained, but only as part of the new concept!
What you need to know about DRI
DRI has integrated the RDA and others into a single system, while the concept of ESSADDI, AI, RDI, etc., which was not described in the absence of space, was defined. As an example, Table 1 lists vitamins according to age and physiology, while Table 2 lists new DRI values for minerals and trace elements. The numbers in the tables are blue in color, which have decreased compared to the previous ones, the black ones have not changed, while the red ones have increased. The tables also indicate a change in the state of health of mankind, as the numbers marked in the red show clearly which microelements played a role in the last decade! At the same time, the number set out here reflects well the huge analytical work carried out between 1999 and 2001.
Europe is on separate roads (or wants to walk)!
We've just arrived at the point where this booklet came into the Family of Amazing Tales. It is Europe, and thus Hungary, that it would not have heard of DRI, which, like the RDA, is not an American peculiarity, as it is based on a series of tests conducted in different countries of the world. In Europe, the Codex Alimentarius, the Food Book, is decisive. There is a Hungarian version of this, which essentially translates into European. There is a chapter in the Food Book that determines how to include ingredients in different foods. The European version of Council Directive 90/496 / EEC, while in Hungarian 1-1-90 / 496. referred to as:
It is also thought-provoking that Europe is addressing the problem as part of a label inscription, but comparing the data in Tables 1, 2 and 3, we can notice serious discrepancies, which may raise additional specific thoughts:
First of all, the title of Table 3 is only clear for first reading, and can be better thought of as covering the total daily requirement than the number of nutrients added with food supplements!
The data in the table have not changed since 1990 and are very close to the values established in 1989. The relevant chapter of the Hungarian Food Book was updated in 2001 (when the new DRI came to light), and was essentially harmonized with EU standards. However, this harmonization meant preserving the previous state. From now on, the Honorable Reader is left to decide whether the time has stopped in Europe or what other explanation he is trying to find for the surprising differences.
To make the decision, I definitely recommend keeping in mind:
On the one hand, DRI is based on worldwide (and this includes Europe) results, and on the other hand, old Europe faces the same health problems as the people of the North American continent, where DRI has come to light.
The problem of daily necessity actually exists only because advertising materials rely heavily on these values. In this situation, the phrase "covering the daily need" has become virtually meaningless because the figures of daily need show biologically unexplained differences on each continent. Maybe we're over again?