QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Leroy, J. L. Articles by Frongillo, E. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Leroy, J. L. Articles by Frongillo, E. A.

---

Community and International Nutrition

Can Interventions to Promote Animal Production Ameliorate Undernutrition?^1,2

³ Center for Evaluation Research and Surveys, National Institute of Public Health, Col. Santa María Ahuacatitlán, CP 62508, Cuernavaca, Morelos, Mexico; and ⁴ Department of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: jleroy{at}correo.insp.mx.

The potential of animal-source foods (ASF) to alleviate micronutrient deficiencies is well recognized. How the intake of ASF can be effectively increased is not known, but promoting animal production (AP) is one possible method. We reviewed the impact of interventions promoting AP on nutritional status and on 6 nutrition-related outcomes: production, household income and expenditure, caregiver income, caregiver time and workload, zoonosis, and dietary intake. Information about the effects on each of the possible outcomes is needed to be able to weigh trade-offs in the potential benefits and costs of promoting AP. The majority of the 14 identified studies found a positive effect of the promotion of AP on production. All studies evaluating the impact on household income or expenditure reported a positive effect on these outcomes. Evidence regarding impact on caregiver income and on caregiver time and workload is too limited to draw any conclusions. We found no studies that examined the impact of the promotion of AP on zoonosis. The studies generally reported a positive impact on dietary intake. Only 4 studies evaluated the impact on nutritional status and found a positive effect. It is unclear whether the improvements in dietary intake and nutritional status were a direct effect of increased production or an indirect effect of increased income. Future studies on the AP-nutrition link would benefit from stronger methodological designs. Available evidence is insufficient to answer whether the promotion of AP is an effective means to alleviate undernutrition.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. F. Randolph, E. Schelling, D. Grace, C. F. Nicholson, J. L. Leroy, D. C. Cole, M. W. Demment, A. Omore, J. Zinsstag, and M. Ruel Invited Review: Role of livestock in human nutrition and health for poverty reduction in developing countries J Anim Sci, November 1, 2007; 85(11): 2788 - 2800. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]