Child and Adolescent DRI Table
Nutrition & Sports Nutrition Reference Tables
Child and Adolescent DRI Table
Examples show why age and life stage must be retained when using a nutrient reference.
| Group | Calcium RDA | Vitamin D RDA |
|---|---|---|
| Age 9-18 years | 1300 mg/day | 15 µg/day |
| Age 19-50 years | 1000 mg/day | 15 µg/day |
| Women age 51-70 | 1200 mg/day | 15 µg/day |
| Adults over 70 | 1200 mg/day | 20 µg/day |
Dietary Reference Intake (DRI) The umbrella reference framework used to plan and assess nutrient intake in specified healthy populations, with several distinct types of reference values.
Dietary reference systems distinguish average requirements, recommended intakes, adequate intakes and upper limits. Their meaning depends on the authority, population, life stage and nutrient. An average requirement is intended to meet the needs of about half of a specified healthy group, whereas a recommended allowance covers nearly all. These are not interchangeable with food-label values. For an athlete, identify the reference system first, then consider whether training or clinical circumstances require an individualized assessment beyond that population framework.
An adequate intake is used when evidence is insufficient to establish an average requirement and a recommended allowance. Intake at or above that value can support a judgment of adequacy, but intake below it does not establish the probability of inadequacy. An upper intake level concerns risk of adverse effects, not an intake goal. Its scope may include all sources or only specified forms. Check the nutrient-specific definition before combining food, fortified products and supplements in an athlete's intake review.
Assess adequacy using usual intake, an appropriate requirement distribution and the purpose of the assessment. A single day below a recommended allowance does not diagnose deficiency. Population estimates and decisions about an individual require different reasoning; some methods also rely on assumptions that do not hold for every nutrient. Intake ratios summarize a comparison, not absorption or clinical status. An apparently favorable average across nutrients can hide a serious shortfall in one, so retain the individual nutrient findings and relevant clinical context.
For example, compare a supplement review with the nutrient-specific reference for the athlete's age and life stage. Identify whether the number is an average requirement, recommended intake or upper limit before calculating a gap. An intake below a recommended allowance is a reason to assess the pattern, not an automatic diagnosis of deficiency.
Usual intake describes a longer-term average rather than the intake of one isolated day. Day-to-day variation includes real differences between training, rest and competition days as well as measurement noise. Repeated observations should cover relevant conditions and be collected with a suitable method. Averaging a few unusual days can still give a misleading estimate. For the athlete, preserve useful information about distribution and timing: an acceptable weekly energy average can coexist with repeated underfueling around demanding sessions.
Nutrient status reflects intake, absorption, distribution, stores, losses and physiological demand. A normal blood concentration may not exclude depleted stores, while an abnormal result can have non-nutritional causes. Calcium in blood, for example, does not directly measure dietary calcium adequacy or skeletal reserves. Different nutrients require different assessment strategies. Select tests for a defined clinical question and interpret them with symptoms, diet, relevant disease and sampling conditions instead of ordering a broad panel and assuming every number is a performance target.
A guideline translates evidence into recommendations for a defined population and setting; a consensus statement records an agreed expert interpretation. Neither format removes the need to inspect evidence quality, conflicts of interest, publication date and applicability. A strong-sounding position is not automatically supported by strong trials. Distinguish established practice from a research hypothesis, and revise advice when better evidence emerges. For athletes, explain which part is broadly supported and which is an individualized practical choice rather than presenting every option as mandatory.
Table references: Health Canada · 1 · Health Canada · 2
Home
Academy
Site Map