Inflammation is a complex systemic response evolved to cope with cellular injury, either due to infectious agents or, in general, with sporadic events challenging tissue integrity and function. Researchers involved in different fields have the tendency to look at the inflammatory response with different angles, according to their specific interest. Established its complexity, one of the most evident features of the inflammatory response is the generation of a pro-oxidative environment due to the production of high fluxes of pro-oxidant species. This production begins locally, close to the sites of tissue damage or infection, but eventually becomes a chronic challenge for the organism, if the inflammatory response is not properly controlled. In this review, we focus on this specific aspect of chronic, low-level sub-clinical inflammatory response. We propose the term “OxInflammation” as a novel operative term describing a permanent pro-oxidative feature that interact, in a positive feed-back manner, to a not yet clinically detectable inflammatory process, leading in a long run (chronically) to a systemic/local damage, as a consequence of the cross talk between inflammatory, and oxidative stress mediators. Therefore, it could be useful to analyze inflammatory markers in pathologies where there is an alteration of the redox homeostasis, although an inflammatory status is not clinically evident.

Nutrigenetic research examines the effects of inter-individual differences in genotype on responses to nutrients and other food components, in the context of health and of nutrient requirements. A practical application of nutrigenetics is the use of personal genetic information to guide recommendations for dietary choices that are more efficacious at the individual or genetic subgroup level relative to generic dietary advice. Nutrigenetics is unregulated, with no defined standards, beyond some commercially adopted codes of practice. Only a few official nutrition-related professional bodies have embraced the subject, and, consequently, there is a lack of educational resources or guidance for implementation of the outcomes of nutrigenetic research. To avoid misuse and to protect the public, personalised nutrigenetic advice and information should be based on clear evidence of validity grounded in a careful and defensible interpretation of outcomes from nutrigenetic research studies. Evidence requirements are clearly stated and assessed within the context of state-of-the-art ‘evidence-based nutrition’. We have developed and present here a draft framework that can be used to assess the strength of the evidence for scientific validity of nutrigenetic knowledge and whether ‘actionable’. In addition, we propose that this framework be used as the basis for developing transparent and scientifically sound advice to the public based on nutrigenetic tests. We feel that although this area is still in its infancy, minimal guidelines are required. Though these guidelines are based on semi-quantitative data, they should stimulate debate on their utility. This framework will be revised biennially, as knowledge on the subject increases.