Both vitamin D insufficiency and deficiency are now well-documented worldwide in relation to human health, and this has raised interest in vitamin D research. The aim of this article is therefore to review the literature on sources of vitamin D. It can be endogenously synthesised under ultraviolet B radiation in the skin, or ingested through dietary supplements and dietary sources, which include food of animal and plant origin, as well as fortified foods. Vitamin D is mainly found in two forms, D₃ (cholecalciferol) and D₂ (ergocalciferol). In addition to the D₃ and D₂ forms of vitamin D, 25-hydroxy vitamin D also contributes significantly to dietary vitamin D intake. It is found in many animal-derived products. Fortified food can contain D₃ or D₂ forms or vitamin D metabolite 25-hydroxy vitamin D. Not many foods are a rich source (> 4 μg/100 g) of vitamin D (D represents D₃ and/or D₂), e.g., many but not all fish (5–25 μg/100 g), mushrooms (21.1–58.7 μg/100 g), Reindeer lichen (87 μg/100 g) and fish liver oils (250 μg/100 g). Other dietary sources are cheese, beef liver and eggs (1.3–2.9 μg/100 g), dark chocolate (4 μg/100 g), as well as fortified foods (milk, yoghurt, fat spreads, orange juice, breakfast grains, plant-based beverages). Since an adequate intake of vitamin D (15 μg/day set by the European Food Safety Authority) is hard to achieve through diet alone, dietary supplements of vitamin D are usually recommended. This review summarizes current knowledge about different sources of vitamin D for humans.

Rapid weight loss (RWL) followed by rapid weight gain (RWG) is a regular pre-competition routine in combat sports and weightlifting. With the prevalence of these sports exceeding 20% at the 2020 To...

Sound and timely microbial gut colonization completes newborn’s healthy metabolic programming and manifests in infant appropriate growth and weight development. Feces, collected at 3, 30, and 90 days after birth from 60 breastfed Slovenian newborns, was submitted to microbial DNA extraction and qPCR quantification of selected gut associated taxa. Multivariate regression analysis was applied to evaluate microbial dynamics with respect to infant demographic, environmental, clinical characteristics and first year growth data. Early microbial variability was marked by the proportion of Bacilli, but diminished and converged in later samples, as bifidobacteria started to prevail. The first month proportions of enterococci were associated with maternity hospital locality and supplementation of breastfeeding with formulae, while Enterococcus faecalis proportion reflected the mode of delivery. Group Bacteroides-Prevotella proportion was associated with infant weight and ponderal index at first month. Infant mixed feeding pattern and health issues within the first month revealed the most profound and extended microbial perturbations. Our findings raise concerns over the ability of the early feeding supplementation to emulate and support the gut microbiota in a way similar to the exclusively breastfed infants. Additionally, practicing supplementation beyond the first month also manifested in higher first year weight and weight gain Z-score.

Background: Partial enteral nutrition (PEN) coupled with the Crohn’s disease (CD) exclusion diet (CDED) was shown to be effective in inducing clinical remission in paediatric CD. There are currently no robust data on the endoscopic outcomes of PEN. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and endoscopic rates of remission after PEN combined with a modified CDED (mCDED) adjusted to the local cuisine in comparison with exclusive enteral nutrition (EEN) for the induction of remission. Methods: Between June 2017 and February 2021, a prospective cohort study on children with active CD, treated with PEN + mCDED or EEN, was performed at a single tertiary centre. Results: During the study period, 54 patients were screened and 15 were excluded according to the exclusion criteria, with six patients excluded in the first two days due to intolerance of the enteral formula. Fourteen patients were included in the PEN and 19 in the EEN group. They were assessed at Weeks 0, 1, 3 and 6, using clinical and laboratory parameters. Endoscopy was performed at Weeks 0 and 6. Clinical remission rates per protocol analysis were 84.6% in the PEN group and 81.3% in the EEN group (p = 0.99). At Week 6, an endoscopic response (a decline in the Simple Endoscopic Score for CD (SES-CD) > 50%) was observed in 84.6% of patients on PEN and in 68.8% on EEN treatment (p = 0.41). Endoscopic remission (SES-CD ≤ 2) was achieved in 53.8% of patients in the PEN group and in 50.0% in the EEN group (p = 0.99), while the mucosal healing rates (SES-CD = 0) were 38.5% with PEN and 43.8% with EEN (p = 0.99). A significant decline in the clinical and endoscopic activity scores was observed in both groups. Conclusion: Our study suggests that PEN + mCDED could be effective in inducing endoscopic remission and mucosal healing in active paediatric CD patients. Here, we present an analysis of the data from our cohort of patients and our real-world experience with PEN + mCDED.