Efficacy of oral iodized peanut oil is greater than that of iodized poppy seed oil among Indonesian schoolchildren.

BACKGROUND

Oral iodized poppy seed oil is an appropriate measure for controlling iodine deficiency in areas where iodized salt is not yet available. However, a more effective and cheaper iodized oil preparation is needed.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of iodized peanut oil with that of iodized poppy seed oil.

DESIGN

Schoolchildren aged 8-10 y were supplemented with a single oral dose of iodized peanut oil (P200, P400, or P800 mg I), iodized poppy seed oil (PS400 mg I), or peanut oil (placebo). The concentration of urinary iodine (UI) was measured at 0, 4, 12, 25, and 50 wk, whereas thyroid volume and serum thyrotropin and free thyroxine concentrations were measured at 0, 25, and 50 wk.

RESULTS

UI was higher in all treatment groups than in the placebo group, except at baseline. UI in the P200 group was not significantly different from that in the PS400 group at all times of measurement. In a comparison of preparations supplying 400 mg I conducted by using a mathematical model, iodine retention from the peanut oil preparation was 3 times that from the poppy seed oil, and the protection period for peanut oil was twice as long as that for the poppy seed oil (P < 0.001 for both). The reduction in thyroid volume was greater in the treatment groups than in the placebo group (P < 0.001). No significant differences in serum hormone concentrations were observed between groups before or after treatment.

CONCLUSION

Iodized peanut oil is more efficacious in controlling iodine deficiency than is iodized poppy seed oil containing the same amount of iodine.