From the editor.

This issue of the journal represents a landmark stage as we move online with Blackwell Publishing and look to the future. The logistics of the change has meant that we have a bumper issue for June/September with an extended range of articles. These appropriately take us through a spectrum of nutrition and dietetic issues throughout the life cycle, in practice contexts and into our classrooms.

Just as timely is the guest editorial from our American colleague and expert in nutrigenomics, Dr Ruth DeBusk. Dr DeBusk's address on the future of dietetics in the light of nutrigenomics provides a detailed and thoughtful piece to lead us into the next stage of development. We learn that nutrigenomics is based on an understanding of how dietary components interact with genetic sequences and their products, which in turn have an impact on physiological functions related to health and disease. While the components of knowledge are not new, it is the integration of this knowledge base that creates the exciting new frontiers for research and practice.

The implications for the practice of nutrition and dietetics are substantial. It means we need to seriously revisit our understanding of food itself, the currency of our advice. We need to ensure our knowledge base on food is up-to-date not just from a food composition perspective, but also from our understanding of the impact of bioactive components and of whole foods on physiological functions. This is necessary to ensure our advice is more accurate and targeted to the desired outcomes. Dr DeBusk argues that nutrigenomics puts the emphasis on the 'fit' between the organism, food and the environment. This calls for critical thinking skills from practitioners and a strong engagement with our scientific knowledge base. Furthermore, the applications lie across all areas of practice. We can expect to hear more on this development as we move into the future.

Critical thinking skills will of course also relate to the approaches we take to intervention. The lead article by Australian expert, Dr Jenny O'Dea, presents us with the quandary of meeting nutrition needs in adolescents against a background of increasing obesity. While the referent article by Giskes and colleagues focuses on adolescent perceptions of health and nutrition, Dr O'Dea argues for a concurrent consideration of parent perceptions and health beliefs while dealing with adolescent food habits. As stated earlier, the knowledge is not new, but the integration of the broader knowledge base may provide greater clarity to achieve targeted outcomes.

The knowledge provided by the work of Giskes and colleagues through qualitative research will no doubt prove to be useful in this context. Among their Brisbane sample, they found that adolescents are quite aware of risk factors that may influence their health and that they are amenable to being well informed. In-depth analysis of their views, however, revealed that nutrition interventions cannot just be based on knowledge of sound nutrition, it has to be set in the context of their lives, and their needs for taste and convenience in the foods supply. This research also reminds us of the ever changing social tapestry in which we work, and how important it is to research and keep up to date with the belief systems and attitudes of our consumer groups.

Scoping the environment further, Worsley and colleagues examine the characteristics of food service in Victorian government primary and secondary schools through a survey sent to the principal. Some things remained the same, that is, these services targeted lunchtime and morning recess, but over 40% were outsourced services. The considerable responsiveness to food policy development and willingness to improve nutritional quality of food supplied represented a real opportunity for practitioners. This research provides a useful view of the contemporary school context that now needs to be integrated with other forms of knowledge on food, nutrition and the business of food service operations to address the health problem.

Moving to the earliest stages in life, the survey by Binns and colleagues reflect another dimension to the knowledge base that would need to be integrated into practice: that of cultural and social differences. This descriptive study of 506 Mandarin-speaking mothers in Perth found that infant feeding practices reflected both Western and Eastern influences, with the support for breastfeeding in the Australian context appearing to be beneficial for migrant women bearing their babies in Australia. This reflects the impact of environment on health practices. At the other end of the spectrum, the survey by Brownie and colleagues of a random sample of 2500 older Australians found that 43% used supplements, and mainly to enhance energy, improve stamina and promote wellness. The study provided insight into the beliefs of older Australians regarding health, and the attributes they are seeking with respect to supplements. The authors acknowledge, however, that further research is required to examine the real benefits and risks associated with these practices. Nutrigenomics would seem to have substantial relevance here.

Determining effects is a real challenge in any area of practice, and this means having the ability to measure outcomes as accurately as possible. Still with older people, but moving to the clinical practice context, Isenring and colleagues provide a very welcome methodological study on the reliability and relative construct validity of the Modified Constipation Assessment Scale to assess bowel function. With a sample of 30 patients undergoing radio-therapy, they found the score to be reliable and supported the use of the Scale in practice, with some qualifications. This kind of research is very useful for practitioners as they piece together information to undertake the professional task with the most up-to-date knowledge.

With this theme of integrating knowledge, it is fitting that the final two articles in this issue concern dietetic education. The systematic report by Somerset and colleagues on an issues-based approach to teaching food regulations provides an excellent insight into how teaching methodology can help to engage students in areas that are soon to become practice. Likewise, the report by Hughes and Desbrow uncovering the aspirations of student dietitians based on an interest in health, food and helping people, gives the profession a lead on where to focus educational approaches and how to generate interest in health areas where professional input is very much required.

The Continuing Education section of the June/September issue contains the second component on Complementary Medicine, and we have a conference report on the OCEANIAFOODS meeting, and some interesting book reviews. As always, the Journal serves to provide information from a range of areas, all of which need to be integrated in a meaningful way to progress nutrition and dietetics as both a science and a practice. For many reasons, this issue leads the way for a future that continues to look very promising.

Linda C. Tapsell, PhD, FDAA 

Editor