What one person eats for optimum health may differ from the next, and scientists are working out how our genetic makeup is responsible.
It could lead to a new era of personalised advice, tailoring our diet to the specific needs of our bodies.
For example, more than one in 10 people have a genetic variation that means they struggle to metabolise folate and are at increased risk of cancer, cardiovascular disease and strokes. Because these people obtain less folate from food than those without the variation, they can benefit from eating more dark green leafy vegetables.
If you knew your enzyme for digesting folate was faulty, would you reach for the dark green leafy vegetables containing folate more often?
That’s the idea behind the EU-funded Food4Me project, which is testing whether differences in genes influence our response to food and affect our likelihood to develop dietary-related diseases such as obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease.
‘The hope is that if nutritional advice is tailored to the individual it will be more meaningful and motivating for that person,’ said Dr Marianne Walsh from University College Dublin, Ireland, who manages the project.
Although the field of nutrigenomics – how our genes affect how we process food – is still in its early stages, the project has already shown some promising results.
So far, researchers have discovered five genes with variations that could impact how someone processes food. For example, people with a particular variation of the gene TCF7L2 are more likely to lose weight than others if they follow a low-fat diet. Another gene – ApoE-e4 – influences a person’s responsiveness to reducing their intake of saturated fat in order to improve their cholesterol levels.
‘Nutrigenomics is one of many tools that can help provide a better understanding of a health condition or an individual’s risk,’ said Dr Walsh. ‘In terms of personalised nutrition, this helps to determine which diet is best for a particular individual.’
If personalised nutrition proves to be more helpful to consumers than the general healthy-eating guidelines, it could potentially have huge implications for public health.
The four-year project is studying all aspects of personalised nutrition, from the science behind it to the business models that could deliver it. It is also exploring the ethical issues that genetic testing and commercial use of the data could raise.
‘It sets out to establish the state of the art in personalised nutrition,’ said Dr Walsh. ‘It’s the first project of its kind internationally.’
‘This whole idea that you can empower people to measure their biology is growing at an enormously fast rate.’
Professor Mike Gibney, University College Dublin, Ireland
Food4Me researchers ran a six-month proof-of-principle trial involving 1 200 volunteers in seven European countries. A quarter of the participants were given the standard ‘one-size-fits-all’ dietary advice via the internet, while the rest received one of three different levels of personalised advice about what types of foods they should eat more or less of, based on an analysis of their nutrient intake, bodily characteristics and function, and genetic makeup. The project’s outcomes will be presented at a conference in February 2015.
There are already companies offering personalised nutrition services, but the science of nutrigenomics still has some way to go before it can be commercialised, according to the Food4Me researchers. This is partly because of the difficulty in proving a genetic relationship between diet and health.
‘It’s too early to speculate on the economic impact (of nutrigenetic dietary advice) and we must do more research before we can consider making it mainstream in healthcare,’ said Dr Walsh.
Empowerment through gadgets
Professor Mike Gibney of University College Dublin, who is the project’s coordinator, said: ‘A very powerful message coming from Food4Me is that personalised nutrition isn’t just about genetics.' The science behind body characteristics and function – which determine phenotype – is much more advanced than nutrigenomics.
Phenotype markers include height, weight, waist measurement, and biomolecules present in the blood such as glucose and folate. There is an ever-widening array of bio-feedback gadgets, such as skin patches for measuring vitamin D levels, and wearable bio-sensing textiles to track heart and lung function. ‘This whole idea that you can empower people to measure their biology is growing at an enormously fast rate,’ said Prof. Gibney. ‘Bio-feedback gadgets are a huge industry.’
Devices for tracking the food that goes in and out of our kitchens could play a part in collecting data to feed into personalised nutrition programmes. ‘My vision of the future is that a person will go shopping, and their food choices in the shop will be connected to a device at home that keeps a record of everything they’ve eaten,’ said Prof. Gibney.
Food4Me is also investigating the effectiveness of differing levels of support and feedback – even down to providing menu ideas and recipes. ‘You can innovate on new products, but ultimately personalised nutrition is about giving people information – empowering consumers to make decisions based on a knowledge of their own bodies,’ he said.
Professor Martijn Nawijn, an immunologist at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands, tells Horizon about his quest to map every cell in a healthy human lung. He says this work should help to understand more about the causes of lung disease - which is comparatively understudied - and should lead to new therapies in the next 15 to 20 years.
There was one science story that dominated 2020 and coronavirus is likely to remain a dominant theme in 2021. But from vaccine rollout to lessons for future pandemics and – that other big challenge that we’re facing – climate change, how will the year in science play out? We asked a selection of our interviewees about lessons from 2020 and what needs to happen in their fields in the coming year.
In the summer of 2014 a strange building began to take shape just outside MoMA PS1, a contemporary art centre in New York City. It looked like someone had started building an igloo and then got carried away, so that the ice-white bricks rose into huge towers. It was a captivating sight, but the truly impressive thing about this building was not so much its looks but the fact that it had been grown.
Bilingual people can effortlessly switch between languages during everyday interactions. But beyond its usefulness in communication, being bilingual could affect how the brain works and enhance certain abilities. Studies into this could inform techniques for learning languages and other skills.
Live mycelium networks, capable of information processing, could be used as building materials.
Researchers are investigating whether bilingualism enhances certain cognitive abilities.
Dr Kate Rychert studies ocean plate structures.