Data on the vitamin A equivalency of beta-carotene in food are inconsistent. We quantified the vitamin A equivalency (microg) of beta-carotene in two diets using the dual-isotope dilution technique and the oral-faecal balance technique. A diet-controlled, cross-over intervention study was conducted in twenty-four healthy adults. Each subject followed two diets for 3 weeks each: a diet containing vegetables low in beta-carotene with supplemental beta-carotene in salad dressing oil ('oil diet') and a diet containing vegetables and fruits high in beta-carotene ('mixed diet'). During all 6 weeks, each subject daily consumed a mean of 55 (sd 0.5) microg [13C10]beta-carotene and 55 (sd 0.5) microg [13C10]retinyl palmitate in oil capsules. The vitamin A equivalency of beta-carotene was calculated as the dose-corrected ratio of [13C5]retinol to [13C10]retinol in serum and from apparent absorption by oral-faecal balance. Isotopic data quantified a vitamin A equivalency of [13C10]beta-carotene in oil of 3.4 microg (95 % CI 2.8, 3.9), thus the bio-efficacy of the beta-carotene in oil was 28 % in the presence of both diets. However, data from oral-faecal balance estimated vitamin A equivalency as 6:1 microg (95 % CI 4, 7) for beta-carotene in the 'oil diet'. beta-Carotene in the 'oil diet' had 2.9-fold higher vitamin A equivalency than beta-carotene in the 'mixed diet'. In conclusion, this extrinsic labelling technique cannot measure effects of mixed vegetables and fruits matrices, but can measure precisely the vitamin A equivalency of the beta-carotene in oil capsules.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bouwman et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: