Quantitative Assessment of Traditional and Imported Meat Consumption by Indigenous and Local Caucasian Populations of the Modern Arctic

Fatima A. Bichkaeva; Бичкаева Фатима Артемовна; Fatima A. Bichkaeva; Ekaterina V. Nesterova; Нестерова Eкатерина Васильевна; Ekaterina V. Nesterova; Olga S. Vlasova; Власова Ольга Сергеевна; Olga S. Vlasova; Boris A. Shengof; Шенгоф Борис Александрович; Boris A. Shengof; Alexandra V. Strelkova; Стрелкова Александра Витальевна; Alexandra V. Strelkova; Nina F. Baranova; Баранова Нина Федотовна; Nina F. Baranova; Tatyana B. Gretskaya; Грецкая Татьяна Борисовна; Tatyana B. Gretskaya

doi:10.17816/humeco633042

Quantitative Assessment of Traditional and Imported Meat Consumption by Indigenous and Local Caucasian Populations of the Modern Arctic

Authors: Bichkaeva F.A.¹, Nesterova E.V.¹, Vlasova O.S.¹, Shengof B.A.¹, Strelkova A.V.¹, Baranova N.F.¹, Gretskaya T.B.¹
Affiliations:
1. N. Laverov Federal Center for Integrated Arctic Research of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Issue: Vol 32, No 2 (2025)
Pages: 100-109
Section: ORIGINAL STUDY ARTICLES
Submitted: 31.05.2024
Accepted: 21.05.2025
Published: 20.07.2025
URL: https://hum-ecol.ru/1728-0869/article/view/633042
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17816/humeco633042
EDN: https://elibrary.ru/SODBSJ
ID: 633042

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract
Full Text
About the authors
References
Supplementary files
Statistics

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A healthy, balanced diet is essential for preserving metabolic health in high-latitude environments. Indigenous peoples’ traditional lifestyles have shifted from nomadic to settled due to socioeconomic changes caused by industrial growth and urbanization in northern regions. This transition has affected dietary patterns and, consequently, metabolic health.

AIM: To conduct a comparative quantitative assessment of traditional and imported meat product consumption by indigenous and local Caucasian populations of the modern Arctic.

METHODS: During field expeditions to the Yamalo-Nenets and Nenets Autonomous Okrugs, 839 people’s dietary habits were assessed using a questionnaire-based survey. Retrospective data were collected on the consumption of traditional and imported meat products over the preceding 12 months among both indigenous (nomadic and settled) and local Caucasian Arctic residents.

RESULTS: Indigenous populations consumed more traditional meat products, whereas local Caucasian populations consumed more imported meat, both lean and fatty. Among indigenous populations, nomadic people consumed significantly more traditional meat, whereas settled people consumed more fatty imported meat. There were no significant differences in processed meat consumption between the three groups.

CONCLUSION: The abundance of imported meat products in the diet, previously uncharacteristic of the Russian Arctic’s indigenous peoples, has not completely replaced traditional cuisine. Among indigenous populations, nomadic people consume meat in ways that are more similar to traditional diets than their settled counterparts. However, retrospective data indicate a decline in the consumption of reindeer meat, a dietary staple among the Nenets. Therefore, to ensure a high quality of life and good health, indigenous populations of northern regions should stick to their centuries-old traditional dietary patterns, maintaining a high proportion of locally sourced foods.

Keywords

traditional diet, meat products, indigenous populations, Nenets, local Caucasian populations, Arctic

Full Text

BACKGROUND

A wholesome, balanced diet is essential for preserving health. Nutrition is the foundation of human health. A person needs food to build the cellular structures of organs, which is a source of energy used by the body. Historically, the traditional diet of the Arctic indigenous people has differed from the food culture of the population in moderate and middle latitudes and has developed to improve the body's adaptation to extreme living conditions [1–4]. Historically, the key traditional activity of the Nenets was large-scale nomadic reindeer herding; fishing was also widespread, i.e. the staples of their unique diet included reindeer meat, fish, and game (bears, elks, upland game birds, and waterfowl). In addition, the Nenets consumed fresh or boiled reindeer blood. Indeed, for a long time, blood consumption has been actually the only way for the peoples of the North to receive the essential micronutrients [5, 6]. The meat was eaten raw immediately after the animal was slaughtered or dried and frozen. However, in most cases, the peoples of the North consumed heated animal meat as they usually boiled it in a cauldron. The broth was drunk from teacups, chasing it with pieces of boiled meat rather than bread [7]. The indigenous population considered deer heart, liver, fat, bone marrow, and brain as delicacies. In addition, nutritional qualities of these foods (high content of vitamins, proteins, and polyunsaturated fatty acids) were suitable for wholesome nutrition in the extreme natural conditions of the North; their regular consumption contributed to preserving health [8, 9].

Indigenous peoples' traditional lifestyles have shifted from nomadic to the settled one due to socioeconomic changes in Russia caused by industrial growth and urbanization in northern regions. Subsequently, many of them shifted from a nomadic lifestyle in the tundra to a settled lifestyle in villages [10]. Their diet has westernized: consumption of traditional products available through reindeer herding, hunting, and fishing decreased; on contrary, dependence on purchased products rich in saturated fats and refined carbohydrates, previously not typical for the indigenous population, increased [6, 11]. In addition, the indigenous population cooking methods have changed: they started frying meat in a frying pan, cooking soups that were previously uncommon for them (e.g. borscht, cabbage soup), using semi-finished products and pastry (pies, sweet buns). The traditional diet of indigenous peoples was rich in animal proteins and fats; whereas today, plant carbohydrates and proteins are becoming more common in the diet of the indigenous population of the North [3, 6, 12].

AIM: To conduct a comparative quantitative assessment of traditional and imported meat product consumption by indigenous and local Caucasian populations of the contemporary Arctic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional single-center observational study to investigate the consumption of traditional and imported meat products by the nomadic and settled indigenous population in the Arctic region and the local Caucasian population.

The areas were selected for the study based on the importance of the lands included in the list of the Arctic zone land territories of the Russian Federation (Executive Order of the President of Russia dated May 02, 2014), including the Nenets and Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrugs, and Mezen Municipal District of the Arkhangelsk Region.

This study used materials from 2009–2017 expeditions. We examined a total of 839 people living in villages and the tundra of the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug (YNAO: Krasnoselkup village, Syo-Yakha village, Tolka village, Antipayuta village, Nori village, Nyda village, Gyda village, Tazovsky settlement), the Nenets Autonomous Okrug (NAO: Nelmin-Nos village, Nes village), and the Mezensky District of the Arkhangelsk Region (Dolgoshchelye village, Sovpolye village, Soyana village). 126 nomadic participants (NP), 422 settled participants (SP), who moved from the tundra to the settlement and live together with the local Caucasian population, and 291 participants of the local Caucasian population (LCP) of the settlement were interviewed. The study involved participants aged 22 to 60 years with the mean age of 44 [35; 52] years. By ethnic groups, indigenous population is mainly represented by Nenets and the Caucasian population is mainly represented by Russians [13].

The study complies with the biomedical ethics principles and standards (the 2010 Helsinki Declaration of the World Medical Association, as amended in 2013). The examination procedure was as follows: during expeditions to villages (in the winter and spring), respondents were invited to medical stations. After an explanation of the idea behind the examination, they signed a voluntary consent approved by the Biomedical Ethics Committee at the Natural Adaptations Physiology Institute of the Federal State Budgetary Research Institution Scientific Research Center of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences and filled a questionnaire.

The frequency method of nutritional research is based on recording the frequency of meat consumption. The study identified four groups of meat consumed by the indigenous and local Caucasian population of the North over a 12-month period: 1) traditional (venison, deer liver, game); 2) imported healthy meat (beef, poultry, minced meat, canned goods based on these types of meat); 3) imported fatty meat (pork, lamb, and their offal); 4) processed meat (smoked and cooked sausage, frozen semi-finished products, links, and link sausage) [14]. An analysis of the data identified the frequency of consumption and converted it into numerical daily consumption. The amount of food consumed was assessed using the Album of Portion Sizes of Foods and Courses [15].

Statistical analysis of the results was performed using Microsoft Excel 2010 and SPSS 22.0 for Windows software package. A normality test (Shapiro–Wilk test) was performed. Given the partial asymmetry of the distribution series of the studied parameters in the analyzed groups, we used nonparametric statistical methods. To characterize the variation series, the median (Me), arithmetic mean (M), percentiles (25; 75), and standard mean error (m) were determined. For preliminary assessment of significant differences between independent samples, we used nonparametric Kruskal–Wallis test (H-test). In addition, for assessment of statistical significance of differences between independent samples, we used the Mann–Whitney test. The statistical significance of differences was considered to be established at a probability of type II error of p < 0.05. To adjust the probability of type I error when comparing the analyzed groups, we used a Bonferroni correction of 3 (for three comparisons).

RESULTS

The survey of respondents showed that meat products are quite widely consumed by the indigenous and local Caucasian population of the Arctic. Moreover, the total consumption of meat and meat products is higher in the indigenous population as compared to the non-indigenous population (р <0.001); the consumption of non-traditional meat products (imported healthy (low-fat) and fatty meat) gradually and significantly increases in groups from NP to LCP (р <0.001; see Table 1).

Table 1. Quantitative overall consumption (g/day) of meat and meat-containing products, non-traditional meat products (imported lean and fatty meat), and traditional meat products by indigenous and local Caucasian populations of the Arctic

Food products	Lifestyle	M±m	Ме (p25; p75)	Kruskal–Wallis test and p-values
Meat and meat-containing products	NIP (1)	387.4±36.1	200.0 (149.6; 613.3)	Kruskal–Wallis test=25.3 p <0.001 p_1–2=0.528 p_1–3 <0.001 p_1–3 <0.001
	SIP (2)	398.1±19.7	207.6 (112.4; 653.2)
	LCP (3)	274.8±18.2	150.2 (98.9; 289.2)
Non-traditional meat products	NIP (1)	63.7±9.0	33.8 (17.9; 69.6)	Kruskal–Wallis test=49.4 p <0.001 p_1–2=0.004 p_1–3 <0.001 p_1–3 <0.001
	SIP (2)	129.5±10.3	53.3 (20.9; 128.6)
	LCP (3)	157.9±13.5	78.7 (40.0; 171.9)
Traditional meat products:	NIP (1)	333.4±35.1	134.3 (132.5; 542.9)	Kruskal–Wallis test=136.7 p <0.001 p_1–2=0.029 p_1–3 <0.001 p_2–3 <0.001
	SIP (2)	277.3±15.4	134.3 (86.5; 413.3)
	LCP (3)	122.0±11.8	41.5 (26.7; 113.8)
Reindeer meat	NIP (1)	293.9±29.0	114.3 (114.3; 450.0)	Kruskal–Wallis test=147.7 р <0.001 p_1–2=0.050 p_1–3 <0.001 p_2–3 <0.001
	SIP (2)	258.6±15.1	114.3 (71.4; 400.0)
	LCP (3)	103.5±11.7	16.7 (6.7; 114.3)
Reindeer liver	NIP (1)	50.0±16.9	13.3 (13.3; 31.7)	Kruskal–Wallis test=5.9 p=0.053 p_1–2=0.051 p_1–3=0.228 p_2–3=2.168
	SIP (2)	27.9±4.3	13.3 (6.7; 26.7)
	LCP (3)	27.5±7.7	13.3 (6.7; 25.0)
Reindeer blood	NIP (1)	40.7±9.9	19.3 (6.7; 28.6)	Kruskal–Wallis test=23.2 p <0.001 p_1–2 <0.001 p_1–3=0.001 p_2–3=0.400
	SIP (2)	47.8±13.9	6.7 (2.6;14.3)
	LCP (3)	10.0±5.2	3.3 (1.7; 6.8)
Game meat	NIP (1)	6.1±1.0	5.0 (5.0; 5.0)	Kruskal–Wallis test=23.9 p <0.001 p_1–2=2.177 p_1–3=0.006 p_2–3 <0.001
	SIP (2)	6.0±0.5	5.0 (5.0; 5.0)
	LCP (3)	13.3±1.5	5.0 (5.0; 5.0)

Note: NIP, nomadic indigenous populations; SIP, settled indigenous populations; LCP, local Caucasian populations; bold indicates significant differences (p < 0.05).

Consumption of traditional meat products was highest in the NP group as compared both to SP (р_1–2=0.029) and LCP (р_1–3 <0.001). A similar trend was identified in relation to SP as compared to LCP (р_2–3 <0.001). The average daily consumption of venison and other game in the NP and SP groups is significantly higher as compared to the local Caucasian population (р_1–3 <0.001; р_2–3 <0.001; p_1–3=0.006, p_2–3 <0.001 respectively). Analysis of deer liver consumption did not show any significant differences in the analyzed groups. The consumption of deer blood was significantly higher in the NP group as compared to SP and LCP (p <0.001).

The consumption of imported healthy meat products is significantly higher in the LCP group (р_{1–3, 2–3} <0.001; see Table 2). However, the consumption of this meat in all studied groups was higher as compared to imported fatty meat products (see Table 3).

Table 2. Quantitative consumption (g/day) of imported fatty and lean meat products by indigenous and local Caucasian populations of the Arctic

Food products	Lifestyle	M±m	Ме (p25; p75)	Kruskal–Wallis test and p-values
Imported lean meat products:	NIP (1)	35.3±5.1	20.0 (6.7; 47.0)	Kruskal–Wallis test=47.3 p <0.001 p_1–2=0.112 p_1–3 <0.001 p_2–3<0.001
	SIP (2)	58.9±5.6	25.6 (10.7; 55.9)
	LCP (3)	87.6±8.3	42.9 (20.4; 88.6)
Beef	NIP (1)	31.7±10.8	20.0 (10.0; 40.0)	Kruskal–Wallis test=3.4 р=0.176 p_1–2=0.222 p_1–3=0.209 p_2–3=2.881
	SIP (2)	67.5±11.6	28.6 (20.0; 85.7)
	LCP (3)	78.3±13.0	32.1 (16.7; 85.7)
Poultry (chicken, etc.)	NIP (1)	17.5±3.7	5.0 (2.5; 20.0)	Kruskal–Wallis test=6.8 p <0.001 p_1–2<0.001 p_1–3<0.001 p_2–3=0.408
	SIP (2)	40.8±4.3	13.3 (6.3; 38.6)
	LCP (3)	43.4±4.4	20.0 (6.3; 40.0)
Canned meat	NIP (1)	7.8±2.3	1.7 (1.7; 1.7)	Kruskal–Wallis test=20.8 p <0.001 p_1–2 <0.001 p_1–3=0.040 p_2–3=0.007
	SIP (2)	11.9±1.1	4.2 (1.7; 16.7)
	LCP (3)	10.3±1.6	1.7 (1.7; 13.3)
Minced meat (cutlets)	NIP (1)	16.79±3.1	2.5 (2.5; 42.9)	Kruskal–Wallis test=9.2 р=0.010 p_1–2=0.765 p_1–3=1.714 p_2–3=0.005
	SIP (2)	8.97±1.1	2.5 (2.5; 10.7)
	LCP (3)	11.68±0.8	6.3 (2.5; 21.4)
Imported fatty meat products	NIP (1)	6.9±1.5	2.5 (2.5; 2.5)	Kruskal–Wallis test=29.2 p <0.001 p_1–2=0.027 p_1–3 <0.001 p_2–3=0.001
	SIP (2)	24.4±4.6	2.5 (2.5; 18.6)
	LCP (3)	31.6±3.9	10.7 (2.5; 37.5)
Pork	NIP (1)	14.4±1.7	13.8 (9.6; 20.0)	Kruskal–Wallis test=5.2 р=0.073 p_1–2=0.215 p_1–3=2.091 p_2–3=0.127
	SIP (2)	59.0±11.1	23.4 (13.3; 80.3)
	LCP (3)	41.4±6.9	13.3 (6.7; 40.0)
Mutton	NIP (1)	9.2±1.1	9.2 (7.1; 11.3)	Kruskal–Wallis test=1.6 p=0.448 p_1–2=0.728 p_1–3=0.706 p_2–3=2.077
	SIP (2)	15.0±3.9	14.2 (7.9; 22.9)
	LCP (3)	30.2±4.7	16.7 (6.7; 28.6)
Offal	NIP (1)	3.9±1.4	2.5 (2.5; 2.5)	Kruskal–Wallis test=8.0 p=0.018 p_1–2=0.765 p_1–3=0.064 p_2–3=0.143
	SIP (2)	3.7±0.6	2.5 (2.5; 2.5)
	LCP (3)	4.9±0.5	2.5 (2.5; 2.5)

Note: NIP, nomadic indigenous populations; SIP, settled indigenous populations; LCP, local Caucasian populations; bold indicates significant differences (p < 0.05).

Table 3. Quantitative consumption (g/day) of processed meat by indigenous and local Caucasian populations of the Arctic

Food products	Lifestyle	M±m	Ме (p25; p75)	Kruskal–Wallis test and p-values
Processed meat	КА (1) \| NIP (1)	37.7±8.3	15.1 (8.7; 35.7)	Kruskal–Wallis test=3.64 p=0.162 p_1–2=0.184 p_1–3=0.435. p_2–3=1.585
	ОА (2) \| SIP (2)	72.2±7.1	21.4 (8.7; 57.1)
	МЕ (3) \| LCP (3)	51.6±6.5	19.7 (8.7; 49.6)
Smoked sausage	КА (1) \| NIP (1)	28.9±13.5	13.3 (6.7; 24.1)	Kruskal–Wallis test=4.69 p=0.096 p_1–2=0.950 p_1–3=0.067 p_2–3=0.359
	ОА (2) \| SIP (2)	58.4±7.6	13.3 (6.7; 85.7)
	МЕ (3) \| LCP (3)	63.6±11.7	26.7 (6.7; 42.9)
Boiled sausage	КА (1) \| NIP (1)	29.6±12.2	13.3 (6.7; 38.9)	Kruskal–Wallis test=4.7 p=0.050 p_1–2=1.109 p_1–3=0.066 p_2–3=0.309
	ОА (2) \| SIP (2)	58.8±7.5	14.3 (6.7; 80.0)
	МЕ (3) \| LCP (3)	67.9±13.1	42.9 (7.1; 42.9)
Frozen semi-finished products (e.g., dumplings)	КА (1) \| NIP (1)	19.9±3.9	5.0 (2.5; 26.7)	Kruskal–Wallis test=23.5 p <0.001 p_1–2=0.045 p_1–3=2.275 p_2–3 <0.001
	ОА (2) \| SIP (2)	23.5±2.0	10.7 (5.0; 26.8)
	МЕ (3) \| LCP (3)	15.7±2.1	5.0 (2.5; 20.0)
Frankfurters and sausages	КА (1) \| NIP (1)	6.1±1.4	3.3 (3.3; 3.3)	Kruskal–Wallis test=14.6 p=0.001 p_1–2=0.015 p_1–3 <0.001 p_2–3=0.442
	ОА (2) \| SIP (2)	10.2±1.2	3.3 (3.3; 14.3)
	МЕ (3) \| LCP (3)	11.8±1.0	3.3 (3.3; 14.3)

Note: NIP, nomadic indigenous populations; SIP, settled indigenous populations; LCP, local Caucasian populations; bold indicates significant differences (p < 0.05).

A significantly higher consumption of chicken meat (р_{1–2, 1–3} <0.001) and minced meat (р_2–3=0.005) was found in the SP and LCP groups as compared to NP. Despite the highest daily consumption of beef by the LCP group, no significant differences were found between the analyzed groups. An analysis of the consumption of canned meat showed significant differences between the groups (p_1–2 <0.001; p_1–3=0.040; p_2–3=0.007) with the highest daily consumption in the SP group (see Table 2).

An analysis of the average daily consumption of imported fatty meat showed that it was significantly lower in the NP group diets (р_1–2=0.027, р_1–3 <0.001) as compared to SP and LCP (р_2–3=0.001). An analysis of some fatty meat products showed the highest consumption of pork in SP, offal in LCP, and lamb in SP. However, there were no significant differences (see Table 2).

We believe that all this would, first and foremost, impair the energy balance and the balance of essential nutrients in the indigenous population, especially in the SP group.

An analysis of the consumption of processed meat showed no significant difference in their overall consumption, neither in the indigenous nor local Caucasian population (see Table 3). However, for individual products, we can see that the NP group less often consumed cooked and smoked sausages and significantly less often consumed links and linked sausage (р_1–2=0.015, р_1–3=0.001) as compared to SP and LCP. Nevertheless, the NP group is inferior only to SP in terms of consumption of frozen semi-finished products (р_1–2=0.045; р_2–3 <0.001 as compared to SP and LCP, respectively).

DISCUSSION

The ethnically specific activity of the indigenous peoples of the Russian Arctic is reindeer breeding [15]. This determines the nomadic or semi-nomadic lifestyle of reindeer breeders. The venison is valued for its nutrition properties, making it an indispensable product in the diet of the indigenous population of the North. Venison is a dietary protein that sets favorably apart from natural meat of other domestic animals due to its low energy value, delicate taste, and low fat content. It has high bioavailability as it contains 16 amino acids, B vitamins, tocopherols, ascorbic acid, and some bioelements (K, Mg, Na, Fe, Se, Mn, Zn, Cu, and P) [16–18]. Large-scale urbanization of the Arctic strongly affects the indigenous lifestyle, traditional work associated with breeding of domestic reindeer, fishing, and hunting. In recent years, there has been a decrease in the reindeer population, leading to reindeer meat shortage in the diet of indigenous people [17]. Summarizing the numerical data on the consumption of venison by indigenous populations of the Russian Arctic in 1960–2010 from literature, the average daily consumption was about 440 g in the range of 149–700 g [4, 8, 10]. Our study showed a lower venison consumption, 294 g in the NP group and 259 g in the SP group.

Khasnulin [19] noted that for the indigenous population of the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug, the lowest daily requirement for animal protein (120 g) is met by 640 g of meat or 800 g of fish. Robbek et al. [16] showed that consumption of 500 g of venison covers all human body needs (according to the Russian standards) in nutrients, such as animal proteins, critical amino acids, fatty acids, including polyunsaturated, some macro- and micronutrients, and vitamins. Thus, our study confirms the new trend of decreasing venison consumption in the indigenous peoples of the North. Based on our study, we can also conclude that the consumption of venison by the Nenets is less than recommended and required for the indigenous peoples of the Russian Arctic.

The ever declining consumption of traditional products affects the health of indigenous people. Disruption of the ethnic diet principles can lead to an increased prevalence of metabolic disorders, endocrine diseases, cardiovascular diseases, and malignant tumors [20]. Bersamin et al. [21] and Little et al. [22] showed that for Arctic indigenous populations in Canada and Alaska the replacement of traditional diets with so-called Western diets contributed to aggravation of several chronic conditions, including obesity, cardiovascular diseases, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Some authors have provided evidence that a diet rich in venison helps to increase antiatherogenic fractions of blood lipids [3, 19–24], which, in turn, helps to prevent myocardial infarctions and ischemic strokes.

Thus, only adequate nutrition in the context of human lifestyle allows to maintain his or her normal functional performance and the level of adaptation to extreme environmental conditions can be defined as satisfactory. This convinces us that traditional dietary habits of the indigenous population must be preserved.

CONCLUSION

The analysis of meat and meat product consumption showed a significantly higher consumption of traditional meat by the indigenous population as compared to the local Caucasian population (LCP). However, the consumption of venison and game is significantly higher in the nomadic population (NP) as compared to the settled population (SP). At the same time, nomadic indigenous populations much less frequently consumed poultry, beef, pork, lamb, and processed meat products. However, the consumption of imported healthy meat is significantly higher in the Caucasian population. It is worth noting that the consumption of this meat in all studied groups was higher than the consumption of fatty meat. It is quite predictable that a reduced consumption of traditional meat in the SP group was due to departure from the traditional nature management (nomadic reindeer herding) and reduced availability of its products. Consumption of traditional products by local non-indigenous populations indicates a certain assimilation of Caucasians due to the use of local food sources in their diet.

Thus, the increase of imported meat products, previously not used often by indigenous peoples of the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation, did not replaced all traditional foods. In the nomadic indigenous population, the consumption of meat products is closer to the traditional diet as compared to the settled indigenous population. However, the consumption of venison, a staple of the Nenets diet, has been declining against past periods. Therefore, to maintain a decent living and health standards, the indigenous people of the northern regions need to adhere to the traditional diet developed over centuries and maintain the share of products produced in the region of residence.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Author contributions: F.A. Bichkaeva: conceptualization, methodology, writing—review & editing; E.V. Nesterova: formal analysis, investigation, data curation, writing—original draft; O.S. Vlasova: formal analysis, writing—original draft; B.A. Shengof: investigation, data curation; A.V. Strelkova: formal analysis; N.F. Baranova, T.B. Gretskaya: data curation. All authors confirm that their authorship meets the international ICMJE criteria (all authors made substantial contributions to the conceptualization, investigation, and manuscript preparation, and reviewed and approved the final version prior to publication).

Ethics approval: The study was approved by the Local Ethics Committee of the Institute of Physiology of Natural Adaptations, Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and the Federal Research Center for Comprehensive Study of the Arctic, Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, on February 2, 2009; February 4, 2013; and November 9, 2016.

Consent for publication: All participants provided written informed consent prior to inclusion in the study.

Funding sources: The study was conducted as part of the research plan of the N. Laverov Federal Center for Integrated Arctic Research, Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences “The Effect of Hormonal Regulation and Dietary Patterns on Metabolic Control in Apparently Healthy Arctic Residents in the Modern” (project ID: FUUW-2025-0015, state registration number: 125021902587-6).

Disclosure of interests: The authors have no relationships, activities, or interests for the last three years related to for-profit or not-for-profit third parties whose interests may be affected by the content of the article.

Statement of originality: No previously published material (text, images, or data) was used in this work.

Data availability statement: The editorial policy regarding data sharing does not apply to this work, as no new data was collected or created.

Generative AI: No generative AI technologies were used to prepare this article.

Provenance and peer-review: This paper was submitted unsolicited and reviewed following the standard procedure. The peer review process involved two external reviewers, a member of the editorial board, and the in-house scientific editor.