The Experts below are selected from a list of 27768 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Walter C. Willett - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Red Meat intake and risk of coronary heart disease among US men: prospective cohort study.
BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2020Co-Authors: Laila Al-shaar, Eric B. Rimm, Stephanie A. Smith-warner, Ambika Satija, Dong D. Wang, Meir J. Stampfer, Walter C. WillettAbstract:Abstract Objectives To study total, processed, and unprocessed Red Meat in relation to risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) and to estimate the effects of substituting other protein sources for Red Meat with CHD risk. Design Prospective cohort study with repeated measures of diet and lifestyle factors. Setting Health Professionals Follow-Up Study cohort, United States, 1986-2016. Participants 43 272 men without cardiovascular disease or cancer at baseline. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was total CHD, comprised of acute non-fatal myocardial infarction or fatal CHD. Cox models were used to estimate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals across categories of Red Meat consumption. Substitution analyses were conducted by comparing coefficients for Red Meat and the alternative food in models, including Red Meat and alternative foods as continuous variables. Results During 1 023 872 person years of follow-up, 4456 incident CHD events were documented of which 1860 were fatal. After multivariate adjustment for dietary and non-dietary risk factors, total, unprocessed, and processed Red Meat intake were each associated with a modestly higher risk of CHD (hazard ratio for one serving per day increment: 1.12 (95% confidence interval 1.06 to 1.18) for total Red Meat, 1.11 (1.02 to 1.21) for unprocessed Red Meat, and 1.15 (1.06 to 1.25) for processed Red Meat). CompaRed with Red Meat, the intake of one serving per day of combined plant protein sources (nuts, legumes, and soy) was associated with a lower risk of CHD (0.86 (0.80 to 0.93) compaRed with total Red Meat, 0.87 (0.79 to 0.95) compaRed with unprocessed Red Meat, and 0.83 (0.76 to 0.91) compaRed with processed Red Meat). Substitutions of whole grains and dairy products for total Red Meat and eggs for processed Red Meat were also associated with lower CHD risk. Conclusions Substituting high quality plant foods such as legumes, nuts, or soy for Red Meat might Reduce the risk of CHD. Substituting whole grains and dairy products for total Red Meat, and eggs for processed Red Meat, might also Reduce this risk.
-
Abstract 3471: Total Red Meat, unprocessed Red Meat, processed Meat and risk of breast cancer - a pooled analysis of 23 cohort studies
Molecular and Cellular Biology Genetics, 2020Co-Authors: Walter C. Willett, Stephanie A. Smith-warnerAbstract:Background: The relationship between Red Meat consumption and breast cancer has been evaluated in several epidemiological studies, yet there has been no clear scientific consensus. Further, few studies have comprehensively investigated the effect of substituting other major protein sources for Red Meat on the risk of breast cancer. Thus, we combined data from large cohort studies to examine the associations between total Red Meat, unprocessed Red Meat, and processed Meat intake and breast cancer risk, as well as the effects of substituting alternative protein sources for Red and processed Meat on breast cancer risk. Methods: This study included 23 prospective cohort studies with over 1 million women among whom 46,176 (28,870 estrogen receptor (ER) positive; 6,354 ER negative) breast cancer cases were diagnosed during follow-up. Using harmonized participant-level data, study-specific hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using Cox proportional hazards regression. Consumption of each protein source was analyzed as calories consumed per day and the various sources were modeled as continuous variables simultaneously in multivariable-adjusted models. The difference in beta coefficients between two protein sources was used to estimate substitution effects. The study-specific estimates were pooled using a random-effects model. Results: Median consumption of total Red Meat (63 - 336 kcal/day), unprocessed Red Meat (42 - 300 kcal/day), and processed Meat (11 - 90 kcal/day) varied substantially across studies. Total Red Meat, unprocessed Red Meat, and processed Meat intakes were not significantly associated with risk of breast cancer when holding intake of other protein sources constant. Significant inverse associations were observed when substituting 200kcal/day of Red Meat with an energy-equivalent amount of mature beans (legumes) (pooled HR = 0.92, 95%CI: 0.87-0.98) and dairy products (pooled HR = 0.96 (95% CI: 0.94-0.99). There were no statistically significant substitution effects for chicken, seafood, and nuts. Results were similar for unprocessed Red Meat. For processed Meat, the substitution effects were generally in the same direction, but weaker due to use of a lower increment (50kcal/day, an amount more representative of the quantity of processed Meat consumed in these studies). However, a marginally significant higher risk of breast cancer was observed when substituting egg intake for processed Meat (pooled HR = 1.10, 95% CI: 1.00-1.21). No significant differences in any of these associations were observed between the ER subtypes. Conclusions: Although we found that total Red Meat and unprocessed Red Meat were not associated with breast cancer risk, substituting their consumption with mature beans or dairy products was associated with a significantly lower risk of breast cancer. No significant associations were shown for processed Meat. Citation Format: You Wu, Walter C. Willett, Stephanie A. Smith-Warner. Total Red Meat, unprocessed Red Meat, processed Meat and risk of breast cancer - a pooled analysis of 23 cohort studies [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research 2020; 2020 Apr 27-28 and Jun 22-24. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(16 Suppl):Abstract nr 3471.
-
abstract p407 associations between Red Meat intake and biomarkers of inflammation and glucose metabolism in women
Circulation, 2014Co-Authors: Sylvia H Ley, Walter C. Willett, Qi Sun, An Pan, Heather Eliassen, Fran GrodsteinAbstract:Background: Greater Red Meat intake is associated with increased type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease risk (CVD). Recently, inclusion of lean Red Meat in a heart-healthy diet to Reduce CVD risk was suggested based on short-term controlled feeding trial evidence, indicating that varying amounts of lean Red Meat intakes had similar effects on a lipid profile. However, the fat content of Red Meat may not be solely responsible for the adverse effects of Red Meat contributing to progression of metabolic abnormalities. Other components and mediating pathways including obesity-related inflammation and insulin resistance may be involved. We hypothesized that greater Red Meat intake would be associated with biomarkers of inflammation and glucose metabolism and that these potential associations would be partly explained by body mass index (BMI). Design: We analyzed data from diabetes-free female participants in the Nurses’ Health Study (n=3690). Multiple linear regression was conducted to assess the associations of total, unprocessed and processed Red Meat intakes (quartile categories) with plasma C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, adiponectin, fasting insulin, and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). The contribution of BMI on the associations between Red Meat intake and biomarkers was evaluated using publicly available SAS macro. The effect of substituting a serving of Red Meat with a serving of another major protein food source was estimated. Results: Greater total, unprocessed and processed Red Meat consumptions were associated with higher plasma CRP, ferritin, fasting insulin, and HbA1c and lower adiponectin after adjustment for demographic information (all p for trend ≤0.03). Adiponectin was not associated with any types of Red Meat intake when further adjusted for medical and lifestyle factors. After adjustment for BMI, most of these associations with inflammatory and glucose metabolic biomarkers were substantially attenuated and no longer significant. BMI accounted for a statistically significant proportion of associations with CRP, HbA1c, and fasting insulin (all p for contribution ≤0.02), but not with ferritin. Substituting a serving of total Red Meat intake with alternative protein food in a combination of poultry, fish, legumes and nuts was associated with significantly lower CRP (β±SE: -0.106±0.043), ferritin (-0.212±0.075), HbA1c (-0.052±0.015), and fasting insulin (-0.0119±0.036)(all p≤0.02 for comparing extreme quartiles). Conclusions: Greater Red Meat intake is associated with unfavorable plasma concentrations of inflammatory and glucose metabolic biomarkers in diabetes-free women. BMI accounts for a significant proportion of the associations with these biomarkers, except for ferritin. Substituting Red Meat with another protein food is associated with a healthier biomarker profile of inflammatory and glucose metabolism.
-
associations between Red Meat intake and biomarkers of inflammation and glucose metabolism in women
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2014Co-Authors: Sylvia H Ley, Walter C. Willett, Qi Sun, Heather A Eliassen, An Pan, Fran GrodsteinAbstract:Background: Greater Red Meat intake is associated with an increased type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease risk. However, the relation of Red Meat intake to biomarkers of inflammation and glucose metabolism has not been investigated thoroughly. Objective: We hypothesized that greater Red Meat intake would be associated with biomarkers of inflammation and glucose metabolism, which would be partly explained by body mass index (BMI). Design: We analyzed cross-sectional data from diabetes-free female participants in the Nurses’ Health Study (n = 3690). Multiple linear regression was conducted to assess the associations of total, unprocessed, and processed Red Meat intakes (quartile categories) with plasma C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, adiponectin, fasting insulin, and hemoglobin A1c (Hb A1c). Results: Greater total, unprocessed, and processed Red Meat intakes were associated with higher plasma CRP, ferritin, fasting insulin, and Hb A1c and lower adiponectin after adjustment for demographic information (P-trend ≤ 0.03 for all). Adiponectin was not associated with any type of Red Meat intake when further adjusted for medical and lifestyle factors. After adjustment for BMI, most of these associations with inflammatory and glucose metabolic biomarkers were substantially attenuated and no longer significant. BMI accounted for a statistically significant proportion of associations with CRP, Hb A1c, and fasting insulin (P-contribution ≤ 0.02 for all) but not with ferritin. Substituting a serving of total Red Meat intake with alternative protein food in a combination of poultry, fish, legumes, and nuts was associated with significantly lower CRP (β ± SE: −0.106 ± 0.043), ferritin (−0.212 ± 0.075), Hb A1c (−0.052 ± 0.015), and fasting insulin (−0.119 ± 0.036) (all P ≤ 0.02 for comparison of extreme quartiles for all). Conclusions: Greater Red Meat intake is associated with unfavorable plasma concentrations of inflammatory and glucose metabolic biomarkers in diabetes-free women. BMI accounts for a significant proportion of the associations with these biomarkers, except for ferritin. Substituting Red Meat with another protein food is associated with a healthier biomarker profile of inflammatory and glucose metabolism.
-
Red Meat consumption and mortality results from 2 prospective cohort studies
JAMA Internal Medicine, 2012Co-Authors: Qi Sun, Adam M. Bernstein, Meir J. Stampfer, Matthias B Schulze, Joann E Manson, Walter C. WillettAbstract:1.23) and 1.21 (1.13-1.31) for CVD mortality and 1.10 (1.06-1.14) and 1.16 (1.09-1.23) for cancer mortality. We estimated that substitutions of 1 serving per day of other foods (including fish, poultry, nuts, legumes, low-fat dairy, and whole grains) for 1 serving per day of Red Meat were associated with a 7% to 19% lower mortality risk. We also estimated that 9.3% of deaths in men and 7.6% in women in these cohorts could be prevented at the end of follow-up if all the individuals consumed fewer than 0.5 servings per day (approximately 42 g/d) of Red Meat. Conclusions: Red Meat consumption is associated with an increased risk of total, CVD, and cancer mortality. Substitution of other healthy protein sources for Red Meat is associated with a lower mortality risk.
Alicja Wolk - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
consumption of Red Meat genetic susceptibility and risk of lada and type 2 diabetes
European Journal of Nutrition, 2020Co-Authors: J E Lofvenborg, Alicja Wolk, Emma Ahlqvist, Lars Alfredsson, Tomas Andersson, Leif Groop, Tiinamaija Tuomi, Sofia CarlssonAbstract:Red Meat consumption is positively associated with type 1 (T1D) and type 2 (T2D) diabetes. We investigated if Red Meat consumption increases the risk of latent autoimmune diabetes in adults (LADA) and T2D, and potential interaction with family history of diabetes (FHD), HLA and TCF7L2 genotypes. Analyses were based on Swedish case–control data comprising incident cases of LADA (n = 465) and T2D (n = 1528) with matched, population-based controls (n = 1789; n = 1553 in genetic analyses). Multivariable-adjusted ORs in relation to self-reported processed and unprocessed Red Meat intake were estimated by conditional logistic regression models. Attributable proportion (AP) due to interaction was used to assess departure from additivity of effects. Consumption of processed Red Meat was associated with increased risk of LADA (per one servings/day OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.07–1.52), whereas no association was observed for unprocessed Red Meat. For T2D, there was no association with Red Meat intake once BMI was taken into account. The combination of high (> 0.3 servings/day vs. less) processed Red Meat intake and high-risk HLA-DQB1 and -DRB1 genotypes yielded OR 8.05 (95% CI 4.86–13.34) for LADA, with indications of significant interaction (AP 0.53, 95% CI 0.32–0.73). Results were similar for the combination of FHD-T1D and processed Red Meat. No interaction between processed Red Meat intake and FHD-T2D or risk variants of TCF7L2 was seen in relation to LADA or T2D. Consumption of processed but not unprocessed Red Meat may increase the risk of LADA, especially in individuals with FHD-T1D or high-risk HLA genotypes.
-
Consumption of Red Meat, genetic susceptibility, and risk of LADA and type 2 diabetes
European Journal of Nutrition, 2020Co-Authors: J E Lofvenborg, Alicja Wolk, Emma Ahlqvist, Lars Alfredsson, Tomas Andersson, Leif Groop, Tiinamaija Tuomi, Sofia CarlssonAbstract:Purpose Red Meat consumption is positively associated with type 1 (T1D) and type 2 (T2D) diabetes. We investigated if Red Meat consumption increases the risk of latent autoimmune diabetes in adults (LADA) and T2D, and potential interaction with family history of diabetes (FHD), HLA and TCF7L2 genotypes. Methods Analyses were based on Swedish case–control data comprising incident cases of LADA ( n = 465) and T2D ( n = 1528) with matched, population-based controls ( n = 1789; n = 1553 in genetic analyses). Multivariable-adjusted ORs in relation to self-reported processed and unprocessed Red Meat intake were estimated by conditional logistic regression models. Attributable proportion (AP) due to interaction was used to assess departure from additivity of effects. Results Consumption of processed Red Meat was associated with increased risk of LADA (per one servings/day OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.07–1.52), whereas no association was observed for unprocessed Red Meat. For T2D, there was no association with Red Meat intake once BMI was taken into account. The combination of high (> 0.3 servings/day vs. less) processed Red Meat intake and high-risk HLA- DQB1 and - DRB1 genotypes yielded OR 8.05 (95% CI 4.86–13.34) for LADA, with indications of significant interaction (AP 0.53, 95% CI 0.32–0.73). Results were similar for the combination of FHD-T1D and processed Red Meat. No interaction between processed Red Meat intake and FHD-T2D or risk variants of TCF7L2 was seen in relation to LADA or T2D. Conclusion Consumption of processed but not unprocessed Red Meat may increase the risk of LADA, especially in individuals with FHD-T1D or high-risk HLA genotypes.
-
potential health hazards of eating Red Meat
Journal of Internal Medicine, 2017Co-Authors: Alicja WolkAbstract:Red Meat (beef, veal, pork, lamb and mutton) consumption contributes several important nutrients to the diet, for example essential amino acids, vitamins (including B12) and minerals (including iron and zinc). Processed Red Meat (ham, sausages, bacon, frankfurters, salami, etc.) undergoes treatment (curing, smoking, salting or the use of chemical preservatives and additives) to improve its shelf life and/or taste. During recent decades, consumption of Red Meat has been increasing globally, especially in developing countries. At the same time, there has been growing evidence that high consumption of Red Meat, especially of processed Meat, may be associated with an increased risk of several major chronic diseases. Here, a comprehensive summary is provided of the accumulated evidence based on prospective cohort studies regarding the potential adverse health effects of Red Meat consumption on major chronic diseases, such as diabetes, coronary heart disease, heart failure, stroke and cancer at several sites, and mortality. Risk estimates from pooled analyses and meta-analyses are presented together with recently published findings. Based on at least six cohorts, summary results for the consumption of unprocessed Red Meat of 100 g day-1 varied from nonsignificant to statistically significantly increased risk (11% for stroke and for breast cancer, 15% for cardiovascular mortality, 17% for colorectal and 19% for advanced prostate cancer); for the consumption of 50 g day-1 processed Meat, the risks were statistically significantly increased for most of the studied diseases (4% for total prostate cancer, 8% for cancer mortality, 9% for breast, 18% for colorectal and 19% for pancreatic cancer, 13% for stroke, 22% for total and 24% for cardiovascular mortality and 32% for diabetes). Potential biological mechanisms underlying the observed risks and the environmental impact of Red Meat production are also discussed. The evidence-based integrated message is that it is plausible to conclude that high consumption of Red Meat, and especially processed Meat, is associated with an increased risk of several major chronic diseases and preterm mortality. Production of Red Meat involves an environmental burden. Therefore, some European countries have already integrated these two issues, human health and the 'health of the planet', into new dietary guidelines and recommended limiting consumption of Red Meat.
-
Differences in survival associated with processed and with nonprocessed Red Meat consumption
The American journal of clinical nutrition, 2014Co-Authors: Andrea Bellavia, Susanna C Larsson, Alicja Wolk, Matteo Bottai, Nicola OrsiniAbstract:Background: High Red Meat consumption is associated with an increased mortality risk. This association is partly explained by the negative effect of processed Meat consumption, which is widely established. The role of nonprocessed Meat is unclear.Objective: The objective was to examine the combined association of processed and nonprocessed Meat consumption with survival in a Swedish large prospective cohort.Design: In a population-based cohort of 74,645 Swedish men (40,089) and women (34,556), Red Meat consumption was assessed through a self-administeRed questionnaire. We estimated differences in survival [15th percentile differences (PDs), differences in the time by which the first 15% of the cohort died] according to levels of total Red Meat and combined levels of processed and nonprocessed Red Meat consumption.Results: During 15 y of follow-up (January 1998 to December 2012), we documented 16,683 deaths (6948 women; 9735 men). CompaRed with no consumption, consumption of Red Meat >100 g/d was progressively associated with shorter survival—up to 2 y for participants consuming an average of 300 g/d (15th PD: –21 mo; 95% CI: –31, –10). CompaRed with no consumption, high consumption of processed Red Meat (100 g/d) was associated with shorter survival (15th PD: –9 mo; 95% CI: –16, –2). High and moderate intakes of nonprocessed Red Meat were associated with shorter survival only when accompanied by a high intake of processed Red Meat.Conclusions: We found that high total Red Meat consumption was associated with progressively shorter survival, largely because of the consumption of processed Red Meat. Consumption of nonprocessed Red Meat alone was not associated with shorter survival. The Swedish Mammography Cohort and the Cohort of Swedish Men were registeRed at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01127698 and NCT01127711, respectively.
-
Red Meat consumption and risk of stroke a meta analysis of prospective studies
Stroke, 2012Co-Authors: Joanna Kaluza, Alicja Wolk, Susanna C LarssonAbstract:Background and Purpose—Prospective studies of Red Meat consumption and risk of stroke have provided inconsistent results. We performed a meta-analysis to summarize the evidence regarding the effects of Red Meat (fresh, processed, and total) consumption on stroke risk. Methods—Studies were identified by searching the PubMed database through May 26, 2012, and by reviewing the reference lists of retrieved articles. Prospective studies that reported relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between Red Meat consumption and risk of stroke were eligible. Results were combined using a random-effects model. Results—Five articles including results from 6 prospective studies with 10 630 cases of stroke and 329 495 participants were included in the meta-analysis. For each serving per day increase in fresh Red Meat, processed Meat, and total Red Meat consumption, the RR (95% CI) of total stroke were 1.11 (1.03–1.20), 1.13 (1.03–1.24), and 1.11 (1.06–1.16), respectively, without hetero...
Kim Overvad - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Substitution of Fish for Red Meat or Poultry and Risk of Ischemic Stroke.
Nutrients, 2018Co-Authors: Stine Krogh Venø, Anne Tjønneland, Erik Berg Schmidt, Marianne Uhre Jakobsen, Christian Sørensen Bork, Søren Lundbye-christensen, Flemming W. Bach, Peter L Mclennan, Kim OvervadAbstract:We investigated the risk of ischemic stroke and its subtypes when Red Meat or poultry was substituted with fish. A total of 57,053 participants aged 50–65 years at baseline were included in the Danish Diet, Cancer and Health study. All participants filled in a food-frequency questionnaire at recruitment. Potential ischemic stroke cases were identified by linkage to the Danish National Patient Register, and all cases were validated and subclassified. Substitutions were investigated as 150 g/week of fish for 150 g/week of Red Meat or of poultry using multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression models. During 13.5 years of follow-up, 1879 participants developed an ischemic stroke. Replacing Red Meat or poultry with fish was not associated with the rate of total ischemic stroke, but there was a statistically significant lower rate of large artery atherosclerosis when fish replaced processed (hazard ratio (HR): 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.67; 0.90) and unprocessed (HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.75; 0.99) Red Meat. A statistically significant higher rate of cardioembolism was found when poultry was replaced by total fish (HR: 1.42; 95% CI: 1.04; 1.93). When fatty fish replaced unprocessed Red Meat, a statistically significant lower rate of small-vessel occlusion was found (HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.77; 0.99). In conclusion, replacing Red Meat with fish was not associated with risk of total ischemic stroke but was associated with a lower risk of subtypes of ischemic stroke.
-
Substitution of Red Meat with poultry or fish and risk of type 2 diabetes: a Danish cohort study.
European journal of nutrition, 2018Co-Authors: Daniel B Ibsen, Anne Mette Lund Würtz, Kim Overvad, Christine Kloster Warberg, Christina C. DahmAbstract:We examined associations between substitution of Red Meat (total, processed and unprocessed, low fat and high fat) with poultry or fish and substitution of processed Red Meat with unprocessed Red Meat and the risk of type 2 diabetes. A cohort of 53,163 participants from the Danish Diet, Cancer and Health study were followed for incident type 2 diabetes (6879 cases; median follow-up time 15.4 years). Diet was assessed by a validated 192-item food frequency questionnaire at baseline. Adjusted Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for type 2 diabetes associated with specified food substitutions of 150 g/week. Replacing total Red Meat with fish was associated with a lower risk of type 2 diabetes [HR 0.96 (95% CI 0.94, 0.99)] as was replacement of processed Red Meat with poultry or fish [HR poultry 0.96 (95% CI 0.93, 0.99)]; HR fish 0.94 [(95% CI 0.91, 0.97)]. Replacing low fat Red Meat or high fat Red Meat with fish was associated with a lower risk of type 2 diabetes whereas similar substitutions, with poultry, were not. Replacing processed Red Meat with unprocessed Red Meat was also associated with a lower risk of type 2 diabetes [HR 0.96 (95% CI 0.93, 0.99)]. Replacing processed Red Meat with poultry, replacing total or processed Red Meat with fish, and replacing processed Red Meat with unprocessed Red Meat were all associated with a lower risk of type 2 diabetes.
-
Substitutions of Red Meat, poultry and fish and risk of myocardial infarction.
The British journal of nutrition, 2016Co-Authors: Anne Mette Lund Würtz, Mette D Hansen, Anne Tjønneland, Eric B. Rimm, Erik Berg Schmidt, Kim Overvad, Marianne Uhre JakobsenAbstract:Red Meat has been suggested to be adversely associated with risk of myocardial infarction (MI), but previous studies have rarely taken replacement foods into consideration. We aimed to investigate optimal substitutions between and within the food groups of Red Meat, poultry and fish for MI prevention. We followed up 55 171 women and men aged 50-64 years with no known history of MI at recruitment. Diet was assessed by a validated 192-item FFQ at baseline. Adjusted Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) and 95 % CI for specified food substitutions of 150 g/week. During a median follow-up time of 13·6 years, we identified 656 female and 1694 male cases. Among women, the HR for replacing Red Meat with fatty fish was 0·76 (95 % CI 0·64, 0·89), whereas the HR for replacing Red Meat with lean fish was 1·00 (95 % CI 0·89, 1·14). Similarly, replacing poultry with fatty but not lean fish was inversely associated with MI: the HR was 0·81 (95 % CI 0·67, 0·98) for fatty fish and was 1·08 (95 % CI 0·92, 1·27) for lean fish. The HR for replacing lean with fatty fish was 0·75 (95 % CI 0·60, 0·94). Replacing processed with unprocessed Red Meat was not associated with MI. Among men, a similar pattern was found, although the associations were not statistically significant. This study suggests that replacing Red Meat, poultry or lean fish with fatty fish is associated with a lower risk of MI.
-
Associations between Red Meat and Risks for Colon and Rectal Cancer Depend on the Type of Red Meat Consumed
The Journal of nutrition, 2013Co-Authors: Rikke Egeberg, Kim Overvad, Marianne Uhre Jakobsen, Anja Olsen, Jane Nyrup Christensen, Jytte Halkjær, Anne TjønnelandAbstract:Cancer prevention guidelines recommend limiting intake of Red Meat and avoiding processed Meat; however, few studies have been conducted on the effects of specific Red Meat subtypes on colon cancer or rectal cancer risk. The study aim was to evaluate associations between intake of Red Meat and its subtypes, processed Meat, fish, and poultry and risk for colon cancer or rectal cancer in the Danish Diet, Cancer and Health cohort study. We also evaluated whether fish or poultry should replace Red Meat intake to prevent colon cancer or rectal cancer. During follow-up (13.4 y), 644 cases of colon cancer and 345 cases of rectal cancer occurRed among 53,988 participants. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compute incidence rate ratio (IRRs) and 95% CIs. No associations were found between intake of Red Meat, processed Meat, fish, or poultry and risk for colon cancer or rectal cancer. The risk associated with specific Red Meat subtypes depended on the animal of origin and cancer subsite; thus, the risk for colon cancer was significantly elevated for higher intake of lamb [IRR(per 5g/d) = 1.07 (95% CI: 1.02-1.13)], whereas the risk for rectal cancer was elevated for higher intake of pork [IRR(per 25g/d) = 1.18 (95% CI: 1.02-1.36)]. Substitution of fish for Red Meat was associated with a significantly lower risk for colon cancer [IRR(per 25g/d) = 0.89 (95% CI: 0.80-0.99)] but not rectal cancer. Substitution of poultry for Red Meat did not Reduce either risk. This study suggests that the risks for colon cancer and potentially for rectal cancer differ according to the specific Red Meat subtype consumed.
Susanna C Larsson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Differences in survival associated with processed and with nonprocessed Red Meat consumption
The American journal of clinical nutrition, 2014Co-Authors: Andrea Bellavia, Susanna C Larsson, Alicja Wolk, Matteo Bottai, Nicola OrsiniAbstract:Background: High Red Meat consumption is associated with an increased mortality risk. This association is partly explained by the negative effect of processed Meat consumption, which is widely established. The role of nonprocessed Meat is unclear.Objective: The objective was to examine the combined association of processed and nonprocessed Meat consumption with survival in a Swedish large prospective cohort.Design: In a population-based cohort of 74,645 Swedish men (40,089) and women (34,556), Red Meat consumption was assessed through a self-administeRed questionnaire. We estimated differences in survival [15th percentile differences (PDs), differences in the time by which the first 15% of the cohort died] according to levels of total Red Meat and combined levels of processed and nonprocessed Red Meat consumption.Results: During 15 y of follow-up (January 1998 to December 2012), we documented 16,683 deaths (6948 women; 9735 men). CompaRed with no consumption, consumption of Red Meat >100 g/d was progressively associated with shorter survival—up to 2 y for participants consuming an average of 300 g/d (15th PD: –21 mo; 95% CI: –31, –10). CompaRed with no consumption, high consumption of processed Red Meat (100 g/d) was associated with shorter survival (15th PD: –9 mo; 95% CI: –16, –2). High and moderate intakes of nonprocessed Red Meat were associated with shorter survival only when accompanied by a high intake of processed Red Meat.Conclusions: We found that high total Red Meat consumption was associated with progressively shorter survival, largely because of the consumption of processed Red Meat. Consumption of nonprocessed Red Meat alone was not associated with shorter survival. The Swedish Mammography Cohort and the Cohort of Swedish Men were registeRed at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01127698 and NCT01127711, respectively.
-
Red Meat and Processed Meat Consumption and All-Cause Mortality: A Meta-Analysis
American Journal of Epidemiology, 2013Co-Authors: Susanna C Larsson, Nicola OrsiniAbstract:High consumption of Red Meat and processed Meat has been associated with increased risk of several chronic diseases. We conducted a meta-analysis to summarize the evidence from prospective studies on Red Meat and processed Meat consumption in relationship to all-cause mortality. Pertinent studies were identified by searching PubMed through May 2013 and by reviewing the reference lists of retrieved articles. Prospective studies that reported relative risks with 95% confidence intervals for the association of Red Meat or processed Meat consumption with all-cause mortality were eligible. Study-specific results were combined by using a random-effects model. Nine prospective studies were included in the meta-analysis. The summary relative risks of all-cause mortality for the highest versus the lowest category of consumption were 1.10 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.98, 1.22; n = 6 studies) for unprocessed Red Meat, 1.23 (95% CI: 1.17, 1.28; n = 6 studies) for processed Meat, and 1.29 (95% CI: 1.24, 1.35; n = 5 studies) for total Red Meat. In a dose-response meta-analysis, consumption of processed Meat and total Red Meat, but not unprocessed Red Meat, was statistically significantly positively associated with all-cause mortality in a nonlinear fashion. These results indicate that high consumption of Red Meat, especially processed Meat, may increase all-cause mortality.
-
Red Meat consumption and risk of stroke a meta analysis of prospective studies
Stroke, 2012Co-Authors: Joanna Kaluza, Alicja Wolk, Susanna C LarssonAbstract:Background and Purpose—Prospective studies of Red Meat consumption and risk of stroke have provided inconsistent results. We performed a meta-analysis to summarize the evidence regarding the effects of Red Meat (fresh, processed, and total) consumption on stroke risk. Methods—Studies were identified by searching the PubMed database through May 26, 2012, and by reviewing the reference lists of retrieved articles. Prospective studies that reported relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between Red Meat consumption and risk of stroke were eligible. Results were combined using a random-effects model. Results—Five articles including results from 6 prospective studies with 10 630 cases of stroke and 329 495 participants were included in the meta-analysis. For each serving per day increase in fresh Red Meat, processed Meat, and total Red Meat consumption, the RR (95% CI) of total stroke were 1.11 (1.03–1.20), 1.13 (1.03–1.24), and 1.11 (1.06–1.16), respectively, without hetero...
-
Red Meat Consumption and Risk of Stroke in Swedish Women
Stroke, 2010Co-Authors: Susanna C Larsson, Jarmo Virtamo, Alicja WolkAbstract:Background and Purpose—High Red Meat consumption has been associated with increased risk of some cancers and may also be a risk factor for cardiovascular diseases. However, epidemiological studies of Red Meat consumption in relation to risk of stroke are very limited. Our objective was to examine the association between Red Meat consumption and stroke incidence in the Swedish Mammography Cohort. Methods—We prospectively followed 34 670 women without cardiovascular disease and cancer at baseline. Participants completed a self-administeRed questionnaire on diet and other risk factors for cardiovascular diseases in 1997. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate multivariable-adjusted relative risks (RR) and 95% CI. Results—During a mean follow-up of 10.4 years, we ascertained 1680 incident cases of stroke, comprising 1310 cerebral infarction, 154 intracerebral hemorrhage, 79 subarachnoid hemorrhage, and 137 unspecified stroke. Total Red Meat and processed Meat consumption was associated with a s...
Thakor G. Patel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Red Meat Consumption (Heme Iron Intake) and Risk for Diabetes and Comorbidities
Current diabetes reports, 2018Co-Authors: Ranjita Misra, Padmini Balagopal, Sudha Raj, Thakor G. PatelAbstract:To examine the role of Red Meat consumption, especially heme iron intake, and risk for diabetes and its comorbidities. Studies consistently show that consumption of Red Meat has been contributory to a multitude of chronic conditions such as diabetes, CVD, and malignancies. There are various emerging reasons that strengthen this link—from the basic constituents of Red Meat like the heme iron component, the metabolic reactions that take place after consumption, and finally to the methods used to cook it. The causative links show that even occasional use raises the risk of T2DM. Prior studies show how nitrites and nitrates in Red Meat can lead to increased insulin resistance, dysregulated blood glucose levels, and elevated oxidative stress all leading to chronic diseases. With the rise in these preventable chronic diseases, we examine how disease-causing links can be eliminated with appropriate lifestyle choices.
-
Red Meat Consumption (Heme Iron Intake) and Risk for Diabetes and Comorbidities?
Current Diabetes Reports, 2018Co-Authors: Ranjita Misra, Padmini Balagopal, Sudha Raj, Thakor G. PatelAbstract:Purpose of Review To examine the role of Red Meat consumption, especially heme iron intake, and risk for diabetes and its comorbidities. Recent Findings Studies consistently show that consumption of Red Meat has been contributory to a multitude of chronic conditions such as diabetes, CVD, and malignancies. There are various emerging reasons that strengthen this link—from the basic constituents of Red Meat like the heme iron component, the metabolic reactions that take place after consumption, and finally to the methods used to cook it. The causative links show that even occasional use raises the risk of T2DM. Summary Prior studies show how nitrites and nitrates in Red Meat can lead to increased insulin resistance, dysregulated blood glucose levels, and elevated oxidative stress all leading to chronic diseases. With the rise in these preventable chronic diseases, we examine how disease-causing links can be eliminated with appropriate lifestyle choices.
