Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29876120›Full record

ArticleFood science & nutrition2018

Enhancing the fatty acid profile of milk through forage-based rations, with nutrition modeling of diet outcomes.

Charles M Benbrook, Donald R Davis, Bradley J Heins, Maged A Latif, Carlo Leifert, Logan Peterman, Gillian Butler, Ole Faergeman, Silvia Abel-Caines, Marcin Baranski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Food science & nutrition, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Effects ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Organic versus Conventional Raw Cow Milk as Material for Processing.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Charles M BenbrookBloomberg School of Public Health Johns Hopkins University Baltimore MD USA.
Donald R DavisBiochemical Institute University of Texas at Austin Austin TX USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8343-1268
Bradley J HeinsWest Central Research and Outreach Center University of Minnesota Morris MN USA.
Maged A LatifOrganic Valley/CROPP Cooperative Lafarge WI USA.
Carlo LeifertCentre for Organics Research Southern Cross University Lismore NSW Australia.
Logan PetermanOrganic Valley/CROPP Cooperative Lafarge WI USA.
Gillian ButlerSchool of Natural and Environmental Science Newcastle University Newcastle upon Tyne UK.
Ole FaergemanDepartment of Cardiology Aarhus University Hospital Aarhus Denmark.
Silvia Abel-CainesOrganic Valley/CROPP Cooperative Lafarge WI USA.
Marcin BaranskiCentre for Organics Research Southern Cross University Lismore NSW Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Consumer demand for milk and meat from grass-fed cattle is growing, driven mostly by perceived health benefits and concerns about animal welfare. In a U. S.-wide study of 1,163 milk samples collected over 3 years, we quantified the fatty acid profile in milk from cows fed a nearly 100% forage-based diet (grassmilk) and compared it to profiles from a similar nationwide study of milk from cows under conventional and organic management. We also explored how much the observed differences might help reverse the large changes in fatty acid intakes that have occurred in the United States over the last century. Key features of the fatty acid profile of milk fat include its omega-6/omega-3 ratio (lower is desirable), and amounts of total omega-3, conjugated linoleic acid, and long-chain omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids. For each, we find that grassmilk is markedly different than both organic and conventional milk. The omega-6/omega-3 ratios were, respectively, 0.95, 2.28, and 5.77 in grassmilk, organic, and conventional milk; total omega-3 levels were 0.049, 0.032, and 0.020 g/100 g milk; total conjugated linoleic acid levels were 0.043, 0.023, and 0.019 g/100 g milk; and eicosapentaenoic acid levels were 0.0036, 0.0033, and 0.0025 g/100 g milk. Because of often high per-capita dairy consumption relative to most other sources of omega-3 fatty acids and conjugated linoleic acid, these differences in grassmilk can help restore a historical balance of fatty acids and potentially reduce the risk of cardiovascular and other metabolic diseases. Although oily fish have superior concentrations of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids, most fish have low levels of α-linolenic acid (the major omega-3), and an omega-6/omega-3 ratio near 7. Moreover, fish is not consumed regularly, or at all, by ~70% of the U. S. POPULATION:

Indexed as

dairy farmingdairy fatty acidsgrass milkGrassmilkTMomega‐6/omega‐3 ratioorganic milk

Identifiers

PMID29876120
PMCPMC5980250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.