Maximum levels of vitamins and minerals for safe addition to foods in the current diets of Koreans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Significant subgroups of Koreans were at risk of suboptimal intake of vitamins and minerals. Voluntary fortification was suggested to be an important means of alleviating micronutrient deficiencies. This study was conducted to estimate the levels of vitamins and minerals that can be safely added to foods by voluntary fortification. One day diet record data of 2,201 adult males aged 20–50 years drawn from the 2001 national nutrition survey were analyzed while considering the guidelines of the Institute of Medicine and the experiences by European Union (EU) and Canada. Selected food vehicles for voluntary fortification included all foods except for fresh non processed foods, alcoholic beverages, and widely used standardized staple foods and seasonings. The mean proportion of dietary energy from all potentially fortifiable foods was about 30%. The fractions of foods in the market available for fortification were assumed to be 5, 10, 25, 50, and 100%. With all of the fractions assumed, maximum levels of the addition of micronutrients to foods were greater than 100% Korean Recommended Dietary allowances (KRDAs) for vitamins B 12 , B 1 , niacin, B 2 , B 6 , E and C. With fortification of 50% of all potentially fortifiable foods, the maximum levels of the addition ranged 40–60% of the KRDAs for calcium, folic acid, iron and zinc. Results of this study suggest a wide range of micronutrients added safely to foods in the current diets of Koreans. (Supported by a grant from the Korean Food and Drug Administration, 2005)
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".