Posted by Larry Hoover on April 26, 2003, at 14:40:07
In reply to Re: Supplements for a near-beginner?, posted by Ame Sans Vie on April 26, 2003, at 13:01:16
> Thanks for the abstracts, that is interesting to think that most of us are really starving ourselves from the inside out by neglecting these small (but important) details.
Just for the record, here's the actual zinc intake status for the most recent analytical period. Take note that "adequate" is defined as obtaining 77% of the appropriate age and gender-matched RDA intake from diet, not 100%.
Table 4. Percentage of the U.S. population with "adequate"1 zinc intake, 1988–1994
Age Total Male FemaleAge Total (S.D.) Male (S.D.) Female (S.D.)
2 mo23 55.6 (0.62) 67.1 (0.78) 44.5 (0.87)
2–11 mo2 96.3 (0.57) 96.9 (0.83) 95.6 (0.86)
1–3 y2 18.9 (1.42) 20.4 (1.73) 17.3 (1.63)
4–6 y 51.5 (2.00) 59.2 (2.59) 43.2 (2.58)
7–10 y 77.1 (1.29) 86.9 (1.64) 66.6 (1.94)
11–18 y3 50.5 (1.43) 61.9 (1.64) 38.7 (2.22)
19–50 y3 60.7 (0.85) 76.7 (1.22) 44.6 (1.22)
51–70 y3 51.1 (1.25) 56.8 (1.73) 46.1 (1.66)
71+ y 42.5 (1.67) 43.9 (1.98) 41.5 (2.19)
Pregnant — — 59.4 (3.91)
Lactating — — 51.5 (9.42)
1 Based on a total zinc intake at or above 77% of the 1989 RDA age/sex-specific value (National Research Coucil 1989) .2 Excludes infants and toddlers who were breast feeding.
3 Excludes pregnant and lactating females.
I have to run. I'll get back to the rest another time. There's a lot you can consider.
Lar
poster:Larry Hoover
thread:222291
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20030423/msgs/222613.html