0
Original Investigation |

Red Meat Consumption and Mortality:  Results From 2 Prospective Cohort Studies FREE

An Pan, PhD; Qi Sun, MD, ScD; Adam M. Bernstein, MD, ScD; Matthias B. Schulze, DrPH; JoAnn E. Manson, MD, DrPH; Meir J. Stampfer, MD, DrPH; Walter C. Willett, MD, DrPH; Frank B. Hu, MD, PhD
[+] Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Departments of Nutrition (Drs Pan, Sun, Bernstein, Stampfer, Willett, and Hu) and Epidemiology (Drs Manson, Stampfer, Willett, and Hu), Harvard School of Public Health, and Channing Laboratory (Drs Sun, Stampfer, Willett, and Hu) and Division of Preventive Medicine (Dr Manson), Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Wellness Institute of the Cleveland Clinic, Lyndhurst, Ohio (Dr Bernstein); and Department of Molecular Epidemiology, German Institute of Human Nutrition, Nuthetal, Germany (Dr Schulze).


Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(7):555-563. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2011.2287.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Background Red meat consumption has been associated with an increased risk of chronic diseases. However, its relationship with mortality remains uncertain.

Methods We prospectively observed 37 698 men from the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (1986-2008) and 83 644 women from the Nurses' Health Study (1980-2008) who were free of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer at baseline. Diet was assessed by validated food frequency questionnaires and updated every 4 years.

Results We documented 23 926 deaths (including 5910 CVD and 9464 cancer deaths) during 2.96 million person-years of follow-up. After multivariate adjustment for major lifestyle and dietary risk factors, the pooled hazard ratio (HR) (95% CI) of total mortality for a 1-serving-per-day increase was 1.13 (1.07-1.20) for unprocessed red meat and 1.20 (1.15-1.24) for processed red meat. The corresponding HRs (95% CIs) were 1.18 (1.13-1.23) 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.

Figures in this Article

Meat is a major source of protein and fat in most diets. Substantial evidence from epidemiological studies shows that consumption of meat, particularly red meat, is associated with increased risks of diabetes,1 cardiovascular disease (CVD),2 and certain cancers.3 Several studies also suggest an elevated risk of mortality associated with red meat intake. However, most of these studies have been performed in populations with a particularly high proportion of vegetarians (such as Seventh-Day Adventists in the United States4 and several studies in Europe5). A recent large cohort study6 with 10 years of follow-up found that a higher intake of total red meat and total processed meat was associated with an increased risk of mortality. However, this study did not differentiate unprocessed from processed red meat, and diet and other covariates were assessed at baseline only. Furthermore, to our knowledge, no study has examined whether substitution of other dietary components for red meat is associated with a reduced mortality risk.

Therefore, we investigated the association between red meat intake and cause-specific and total mortality in 2 large cohorts with repeated measures of diet and up to 28 years of follow-up: the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (HPFS) and the Nurses' Health Study (NHS). We also estimated the associations of substituting other healthy protein sources for red meat with total and cause-specific mortality.

We analyzed data from 2 prospective cohort studies: the HPFS (initiated in 1986, n = 51 529 men aged 40-75 years) and the NHS (started in 1976, n = 121 700 women aged 30-55 years). Detailed descriptions of the cohorts are provided elsewhere.7,8 Questionnaires were administered biennially to collect and update medical, lifestyle, and other health-related information, and the follow-up rates exceeded 90% in each 2-year cycle for both cohorts.

In the present analysis, we used 1986 for the HPFS and 1980 for the NHS as baseline, when we assessed diet using a validated food frequency questionnaire (FFQ); 49 934 men and 92 468 women returned the baseline FFQ. We excluded 5617 men and 5613 women who had a history of CVD or cancer at baseline and 6619 men and 3211 women who left more than 9 blank responses on the baseline FFQ, had missing information about meat intake, or reported implausible energy intake levels (<500 or >3500 kcal/d). After the exclusions, data from 37 698 men and 83 644 women were available for the analysis. The excluded participants and those who remained in the study were similar with respect to red meat intake and obesity status at baseline. The study protocol was approved by the institutional review boards of Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard School of Public Health.

In 1980, a 61-item FFQ was administered to the NHS participants to collect information about their usual intake of foods and beverages in the previous year. In 1984, 1986, 1990, 1994, 1998, 2002, and 2006, similar but expanded FFQs with 131 to 166 items were sent to these participants to update their diet. Using the expanded FFQ used in the NHS, dietary data were collected in 1986, 1990, 1994, 1998, 2002, and 2006 from the HPFS participants. In each FFQ, we asked the participants how often, on average, they consumed each food of a standard portion size. There were 9 possible responses, ranging from “never or less than once per month” to “6 or more times per day.” Questionnaire items about unprocessed red meat consumption included “beef, pork, or lamb as main dish” (pork was queried separately beginning in 1990), “hamburger,” and “beef, pork, or lamb as a sandwich or mixed dish.” The standard serving size was 85 g (3 oz) for unprocessed red meat. Processed red meat included “bacon” (2 slices, 13 g), “hot dogs” (one, 45 g), and “sausage, salami, bologna, and other processed red meats” (1 piece, 28 g). The reproducibility and validity of these FFQs have been described in detail elsewhere.9,10 The corrected correlation coefficients between the FFQ and multiple dietary records were 0.59 for unprocessed red meat and 0.52 for processed red meat in the HPFS,9 and similar correlations were found in the NHS.10

The ascertainment of death has been documented in previous studies.11 Briefly, deaths were identified by reports from next of kin, via postal authorities, or by searching the National Death Index, and at least 95% of deaths were identified.11 The cause of death was determined after review by physicians and were primarily based on medical records and death certificates. We used the International Classification of Diseases, Eighth Revision, which was widely used at the start of the cohorts, to distinguish deaths due to cancer (codes 140-207) and CVDs (codes 390-459 and 795).

In the biennial follow-up questionnaires, we inquired and updated information on medical, lifestyle, and other health-related factors, such as body weight; cigarette smoking status; physical activity level; medication or supplement use; family history of diabetes mellitus, myocardial infarction, and cancer; and history of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia. In NHS participants, we also ascertained menopausal status and postmenopausal hormone use.

We used time-dependent Cox proportional hazards regression models to assess the association of red meat consumption with cause-specific and total mortality risks during follow-up. We conducted analyses separately for each cohort. In multivariate analysis, we simultaneously controlled for intakes of total energy, whole grains, fruits, and vegetables (all in quintiles) and for other potential nondietary confounding variables with updated information at each 2- or 4-year questionnaire cycle. These variables included age; body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) (<23.0, 23.0-24.9, 25.0-29.9, 30.0-34.9, or ≥35.0); race (white or nonwhite); smoking status (never, past, or current [1-14, 15-24, or ≥25 cigarettes per day]); alcohol intake (0, 0.1-4.9, 5.0-14.9, or ≥15.0 g/d in women; 0, 0.1-4.9, 5.0-29.9, or ≥30.0 g/d in men); physical activity level (<3.0, 3.0-8.9, 9.0-17.9, 18.0-26.9, or ≥27.0 hours of metabolic equivalent tasks per week); multivitamin use (yes or no); aspirin use (yes or no); family history of diabetes mellitus, myocardial infarction, or cancer; and baseline history of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, or hypercholesterolemia. In women, we also adjusted for postmenopausal status and menopausal hormone use.

To better represent long-term diet and to minimize within-person variation, we created cumulative averages of food intake from baseline to death from the repeated FFQs.12 We replaced missing values in each follow-up FFQ with the cumulative averages before the missing values. We stopped updating the dietary variables when the participants reported a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus, stroke, coronary heart disease, angina, or cancer because these conditions might lead to changes in diet.

We conducted several sensitivity analyses to test the robustness of the results: (1) we further adjusted for intakes of other major dietary variables (fish, poultry, nuts, legumes, and dairy products, all in quintiles) or several nutrients or dietary components (glycemic load, cereal fiber, magnesium, and polyunsaturated and trans fatty acids, all in quintiles) instead of foods; (2) we corrected for measurement error13 in the assessment of red meat intake by using a regression calibration approach using data from validation studies conducted in the HPFS9 in 1986 and in the NHS10 in 1980 and 1986; (3) we repeated the analysis by using simply updated dietary methods (using the most recent dietary variables to predict mortality risk in the next 4 years)12 or continue to update a participant's diet even after he or she reported a diagnosis of major chronic disease or using only baseline dietary variables; and (4) we used the energy density of red meat intake (serving/1000 kcal × d−1) as the exposure instead of the crude intake. In addition, we used restricted cubic spline regressions with 4 knots to examine a dose-response relation between red meat intake and risk of total mortality.

We estimated the associations of substituting 1 serving of an alternative food for red meat with mortality by including both as continuous variables in the same multivariate model, which also contained nondietary covariates and total energy intake. The difference in their β coefficients and in their own variances and covariance were used to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for the substitution associations.14 We calculated population-attributable risk (95% CI) to estimate the proportion of deaths in the 2 cohorts that would be prevented at the end of follow-up if all the participants were in the low-intake group.15 For these analyses, we compared participants in the low–red meat intake category (<0.5 servings daily, or 42 g/d) with the remaining participants in the cohorts.

The HRs from the final multivariate-adjusted models in each cohort were pooled to obtain a summary risk estimate with the use of an inverse variance–weighted meta-analysis by the random-effects model, which allowed for between-study heterogeneity. Data were analyzed using a commercially available software program (SAS, version 9.2; SAS Institute, Inc), and statistical significance was set at a 2-tailed α = .05.

In the HPFS, with up to 22 years of follow-up (758 524 person-years), we documented 8926 deaths, of which 2716 were CVD deaths and 3073 were cancer deaths. In the NHS, with up to 28 years of follow-up (2 199 892 person-years), we documented 15 000 deaths, of which 3194 were CVD deaths and 6391 were cancer deaths. For both cohorts combined, we documented 23 926 deaths (including 5910 CVD deaths and 9464 cancer deaths) during 2.96 million person-years of follow-up. Men and women with higher intake of red meat were less likely to be physically active and were more likely to be current smokers, to drink alcohol, and to have a higher body mass index (Table 1). In addition, a higher red meat intake was associated with a higher intake of total energy but lower intakes of whole grains, fruits, and vegetables. Unprocessed and processed red meat consumption was moderately correlated (r = 0.40 in the HPFS and 0.37 in the NHS). However, red meat consumption was less correlated with intakes of poultry and fish (Spearman correlation coefficients, r = −0.04 and −0.18 in the HPFS and r = 0.05 and −0.12 in the NHS, respectively). During follow-up, red meat intake declined in men and women (eFigure). For example, the mean daily intake of unprocessed red meat dropped from 0.75 to 0.63 servings from 1986 to 2006 in men and from 1.10 to 0.55 servings from 1980 to 2006 in women.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Baseline Age-Standardized Characteristics of Participants in the 2 Cohorts According to Quintiles of Total Red Meat Consumption

Unprocessed and processed red meat intakes were associated with an increased risk of total, CVD, and cancer mortality in men and women in the age-adjusted and fully adjusted models (Tables 2, 3, and 4). When treating red meat intake as a continuous variable, the elevated risk of total mortality in the pooled analysis for a 1-serving-per-day increase was 12% (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.09-1.15) for total red meat, 13% (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.07-1.20) for unprocessed red meat, and 20% (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.15-1.24) for processed red meat. The HRs (95% CIs) for CVD mortality were 1.16 (1.12-1.20) for total red meat, 1.18 (1.13-1.23) for unprocessed red meat, and 1.21 (1.13-1.31) for processed red meat. The HRs (95% CIs) for cancer mortality were 1.10 (1.07-1.13) for total red meat, 1.10 (1.06-1.14) for unprocessed red meat, and 1.16 (1.09-1.23) for processed red meat. We found no statistically significant differences among specific unprocessed red meat items or among specific processed red meat items for the associations with total mortality (eTable 1). However, bacon and hot dogs tended to be associated with a higher risk than other items. Spline regression analysis showed that the association between red meat intake and risk of total mortality was linear (P < .001 for linearity; Figure 1). Furthermore, no significant interaction was detected between red meat intake and body mass index or physical activity level (P > .10 for both tests).

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 1. Dose-response relationship between red meat intake and risk of all-cause mortality in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (A) and the Nurses' Health Study (B). The results were adjusted for age (continuous); body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) category (<23.0, 23.0-24.9, 25.0-29.9, 30.0-34.9, or ≥35); alcohol consumption (0, 0.1-4.9, 5.0-29.9, ≥30.0 g/d in men; 0, 0.1-4.9, 5.0-14.9, or ≥15.0 g/d in women); physical activity level (<3.0, 3.0-8.9, 9.0-17.9, 18.0-26.9, or ≥27.0 hours of metabolic equivalent tasks per week); smoking status (never, past, or current [1-14, 15-24, or ≥25 cigarettes per day]); race (white or nonwhite); menopausal status and hormone use in women (premenopausal, postmenopausal never users, postmenopausal past users, or postmenopausal current users); family history of diabetes mellitus, myocardial infarction, or cancer; history of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, or hypercholesterolemia; and intakes of total energy, whole grains, fruits, and vegetables, all in quintiles. Broken lines represent 95% CI.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. All-Cause Mortality According to Red Meat Intake in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study and the Nurses’ Health Study

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Cardiovascular Mortality According to Red Meat Intake in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study and the Nurses’ Health Study

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 4. Cancer Mortality According to Red Meat Intake in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study and the Nurses’ Health Study

Additional adjustment for other foods (fish, poultry, nuts, beans, and dairy products) or nutrients (glycemic load, cereal fiber, magnesium, and polyunsaturated and trans fatty acids) did not appreciably alter the results. Additional adjustment for saturated fat and cholesterol moderately attenuated the association between red meat intake and risk of CVD death, and the pooled HR (95% CI) dropped from 1.16 (1.12-1.20) to 1.12 (1.07-1.18). Similarly, additional adjustment for heme iron moderately attenuated the association, and the pooled HR (95% CI) dropped from 1.16 (1.12-1.20) to 1.11 (1.05-1.17). Additional adjustment for husband's educational level as a surrogate of socioeconomic status in women did not change the results.

The results were not materially changed when we continued to update dietary information even after the diagnosis of chronic diseases (eTable 2) or simply updated the dietary variables (eTable 3). Also, using the energy density of red meat intake as the exposure showed similar findings (eTable 4). In the sensitivity analysis that accounted for measurement error in diet, the associations became even stronger. For example, the HR was 1.25 (95% CI, 1.16-1.35) for a 1-serving-per-day increase in total red meat intake with mortality in the HPFS, and it was 1.83 (95% CI, 1.54-2.20) in the NHS. However, the associations were attenuated in analyses using only baseline dietary data (eTable 5).

In the substitution analyses, replacing 1 serving of total red meat with 1 serving of fish, poultry, nuts, legumes, low-fat dairy products, or whole grains daily was associated with a lower risk of total mortality: 7% (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.90-0.97) for fish, 14% (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.82-0.91) for poultry, 19% (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.77-0.86) for nuts, 10% (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86-0.94) for legumes, 10% (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86-0.94) for low-fat dairy products, and 14% (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.82-0.88) for whole grains (Figure 2). The corresponding substitution estimates were 5%, 13%, 18%, 8%, 9%, and 13% for replacement of unprocessed red meat and 10%, 17%, 22%, 13%, 13%, and 16% for replacement of processed red meat.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 2. Hazard ratios and 95% CIs (error bars) for total mortality associated with replacement of other food groups for red meat intake. Adjusted for age (continuous); body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) category (<23.0, 23.0-24.9, 25.0-29.9, 30.0-34.9, or ≥35.0); alcohol consumption (0, 0.1-4.9, 5.0-29.9, ≥30.0 g/d in men; 0, 0.1-4.9, 5.0-14.9, or ≥15.0 g/d in women); physical activity level (<3.0, 3.0-8.9, 9.0-17.9, 18.0-26.9, or ≥27.0 hours of metabolic equivalent tasks per week); smoking status (never, past, or current [1-14, 15-24, or ≥25 cigarettes per day]); race (white or nonwhite); menopausal status and hormone use in women (premenopausal, postmenopausal never users, postmenopausal past users, or postmenopausal current users); family history of diabetes mellitus, myocardial infarction, or cancer; history of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, or hypercholesterolemia; total energy intake; and the corresponding 2 dietary variables in the models.

We estimated that 9.3% (95% CI, 5.9%-12.7%) in men and 7.6% (95% CI, 3.5%-11.7%) in women of total deaths during follow-up could be prevented if all the participants consumed fewer than 0.5 servings per day of total red meat in these cohorts; the estimates were 8.6% (95% CI, 2.3%-14.7%) in men and 12.2% (95% CI, 3.3%-21.0%) in women for CVD deaths. However, only 22.8% of men and 9.6% of women were in the low-risk category of total red meat intake.

In these 2 large prospective cohorts of US men and women, we found that a higher intake of red meat was associated with a significantly elevated risk of total, CVD, and cancer mortality, and this association was observed for unprocessed and processed red meat, with a relatively greater risk for processed red meat. Substitution of fish, poultry, nuts, legumes, low-fat dairy products, and whole grains for red meat was associated with a significantly lower risk of mortality.

Red meat is a major food source of protein and fat, and its potential associations with risks of diabetes mellitus,1 CVD,2 cancer,3 and mortality46 have attracted much attention. Several studies4,5 have suggested that vegetarians have greater longevity compared with nonvegetarians, but this might not be ascribed to the absence of red meat only. Sinha et al6 showed in the National Institutes of Health–AARP (formerly known as the American Association of Retired Persons) study that higher intakes of red and processed meats were associated with an elevated risk of mortality. However, that study did not distinguish unprocessed and processed red meats and did not update dietary information during follow-up.

The strengths of the present study include a large sample size, high rates of long-term follow-up, and detailed and repeated assessments of diet and lifestyle. All the participants were health professionals, minimizing potential confounding by educational attainment or differential access to health care. In addition, the FFQs used in these studies were validated against multiple diet records.9,10 However, the measurement errors inherent in dietary assessments were inevitable, including misclassification of ham or cold cuts as unprocessed red meat and inaccurate assessment of red meat content in mixed dishes. Because of the prospective study design, any measurement errors of meat intake are independent of study outcome ascertainment and, therefore, are likely to attenuate the associations toward the null.16 In the sensitivity analysis accounting for measurement errors, the risk estimates became stronger. Moreover, we calculated cumulative averages for dietary variables to better represent a person's long-term diet pattern and to minimize the random measurement error caused by within-person variation. As expected, the analyses using baseline diet only yielded weaker associations. We also stopped updating the dietary information after a diagnosis of major chronic disease assuming that participants could have changed their diet after receiving the diagnosis. Finally, because the participants were predominantly non-Hispanic white health professionals, the generalizability of the observed associations may be limited to similar populations.

Several mechanisms may explain the adverse effect of red meat intake on mortality risk. Regarding CVD mortality, we previously reported that red meat intake was associated with an increased risk of coronary heart disease,2,14 and saturated fat and cholesterol from red meat may partially explain this association.12 The association between red meat and CVD mortality was moderately attenuated after further adjustment for saturated fat and cholesterol, suggesting a mediating role for these nutrients. However, we could not assess whether lean meat has the same health risks as meat with higher fat content. Furthermore, dietary iron, particularly heme iron primarily from red meat, has been positively associated with myocardial infarction and fatal coronary heart disease.1720 The associations between red meat and CVD mortality were moderately attenuated after additional adjustment for heme iron. This finding suggests that heme iron intake may partially explain this association, although some studies using biomarkers of iron status found no association of ferritin and transferrin saturation levels with risk of total mortality.21 Unprocessed and processed meats contain similar amounts of saturated fat and heme iron; however, other constituents in processed meat, particularly sodium and nitrites, might explain the additional harm of processed meats. The high sodium content may increase CVD risk through its effect on blood pressure.22,23 Nitrites and nitrates are frequently used in the preservation of processed meats, and blood nitrite concentrations have been related to endothelial dysfunction24 and impaired insulin response in adults.25

Regarding cancer mortality, red meat intake has been associated with increased risks of colorectal cancer and several other cancers.26 Several compounds in red meat or created by high-temperature cooking, including N-nitroso compounds (nitrosamines or nitrosamides) converted from nitrites,27 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and heterocyclic amines,2830 are potential carcinogens. Heme iron and iron overload might also be associated with increased cancer risk through promotion of N-nitroso compound formation,31 increased colonic cytotoxicity and epithelial proliferation,32 increased oxidative stress, and iron-induced hypoxia signaling.33

In conclusion, we found that greater consumption of unprocessed and processed red meats is associated with higher mortality risk. Compared with red meat, other dietary components, such as fish, poultry, nuts, legumes, low-fat dairy products, and whole grains, were associated with lower risk. These results indicate that replacement of red meat with alternative healthy dietary components may lower the mortality risk.

Correspondence: Frank B. Hu, MD, PhD, Departments of Nutrition and Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, 655 Huntington Ave, Boston, MA 02115 (frank.hu@channing.harvard.edu).

Accepted for Publication: December 20, 2011.

Published Online: March 12, 2012. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2011.2287

Author Contributions: Drs Pan and Hu had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Study concept and design: Pan, Willett, and Hu. Acquisition of data: Manson, Stampfer, Willett, and Hu. Analysis and interpretation of data: Pan, Sun, Bernstein, Schulze, Manson, Stampfer, Willett, and Hu. Drafting of the manuscript: Pan. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Sun, Bernstein, Schulze, Manson, Stampfer, Willett, and Hu. Statistical analysis: Pan, Sun, and Hu. Obtained funding: Manson, Stampfer, Willett, and Hu. Administrative, technical, and material support: Manson, Stampfer, Willett, and Hu. Study supervision: Manson, Stampfer, Willett, and Hu.

Financial Disclosure: None reported.

Funding/Support: This study was supported by grants DK58845, CA55075, CA87969, HL34594, and 1U54CA155626-01 from the National Institutes of Health and by career development award K99HL098459 from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (Dr Sun).

Role of the Sponsors: The funding sources were not involved in the data collection, data analysis, manuscript writing, and publication.

Additional Contributions: We are indebted to the participants in the HPFS and the NHS for their continuing outstanding support and to colleagues working in these studies for their valuable help. In addition, we thank the following state cancer registries for their help: Alabama, Arizona, Arkanas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming.

Pan A, Sun Q, Bernstein AM,  et al.  Red meat consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes: 3 cohorts of US adults and an updated meta-analysis.  Am J Clin Nutr. 2011;94(4):1088-1096
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Micha R, Wallace SK, Mozaffarian D. Red and processed meat consumption and risk of incident coronary heart disease, stroke, and diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.  Circulation. 2010;121(21):2271-2283
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Zheng W, Lee SA. Well-done meat intake, heterocyclic amine exposure, and cancer risk.  Nutr Cancer. 2009;61(4):437-446
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fraser GE. Associations between diet and cancer, ischemic heart disease, and all-cause mortality in non-Hispanic white California Seventh-day Adventists.  Am J Clin Nutr. 1999;70(3):(suppl)  532S-538S
PubMed
Key TJ, Fraser GE, Thorogood M,  et al.  Mortality in vegetarians and nonvegetarians: detailed findings from a collaborative analysis of 5 prospective studies.  Am J Clin Nutr. 1999;70(3):(suppl)  516S-524S
PubMed
Sinha R, Cross AJ, Graubard BI, Leitzmann MF, Schatzkin A. Meat intake and mortality: a prospective study of over half a million people.  Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(6):562-571
PubMed   |  Link to Article
van Dam RM, Willett WC, Rimm EB, Stampfer MJ, Hu FB. Dietary fat and meat intake in relation to risk of type 2 diabetes in men.  Diabetes Care. 2002;25(3):417-424
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fung TT, Schulze M, Manson JE, Willett WC, Hu FB. Dietary patterns, meat intake, and the risk of type 2 diabetes in women.  Arch Intern Med. 2004;164(20):2235-2240
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hu FB, Rimm E, Smith-Warner SA,  et al.  Reproducibility and validity of dietary patterns assessed with a food-frequency questionnaire.  Am J Clin Nutr. 1999;69(2):243-249
PubMed
Salvini S, Hunter DJ, Sampson L,  et al.  Food-based validation of a dietary questionnaire: the effects of week-to-week variation in food consumption.  Int J Epidemiol. 1989;18(4):858-867
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Rich-Edwards JW, Corsano KA, Stampfer MJ. Test of the National Death Index and Equifax Nationwide Death Search.  Am J Epidemiol. 1994;140(11):1016-1019
PubMed
Hu FB, Stampfer MJ, Rimm E,  et al.  Dietary fat and coronary heart disease: a comparison of approaches for adjusting for total energy intake and modeling repeated dietary measurements.  Am J Epidemiol. 1999;149(6):531-540
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Qiu W, Rosner B. Measurement error correction for the cumulative average model in the survival analysis of nutritional data: application to Nurses' Health Study.  Lifetime Data Anal. 2010;16(1):136-153
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Bernstein AM, Sun Q, Hu FB, Stampfer MJ, Manson JE, Willett WC. Major dietary protein sources and risk of coronary heart disease in women.  Circulation. 2010;122(9):876-883
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Spiegelman D, Hertzmark E, Wand HC. Point and interval estimates of partial population attributable risks in cohort studies: examples and software.  Cancer Causes Control. 2007;18(5):571-579
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Willett WC. Nutritional Epidemiology. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1998
Ascherio A, Willett WC, Rimm EB, Giovannucci EL, Stampfer MJ. Dietary iron intake and risk of coronary disease among men.  Circulation. 1994;89(3):969-974
PubMed
Klipstein-Grobusch K, Grobbee DE, den Breeijen JH, Boeing H, Hofman A, Witteman JC. Dietary iron and risk of myocardial infarction in the Rotterdam Study.  Am J Epidemiol. 1999;149(5):421-428
PubMed   |  Link to Article
van der A DL, Peeters PH, Grobbee DE, Marx JJ, van der Schouw YT. Dietary haem iron and coronary heart disease in women.  Eur Heart J. 2005;26(3):257-262
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Qi L, van Dam RM, Rexrode K, Hu FB. Heme iron from diet as a risk factor for coronary heart disease in women with type 2 diabetes.  Diabetes Care. 2007;30(1):101-106
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Menke A, Muntner P, Fernández-Real JM, Guallar E. The association of biomarkers of iron status with mortality in US adults [published online ahead of print February 15, 2011].  Nutr Metab Cardiovasc DisLink to Article
Bibbins-Domingo K, Chertow GM, Coxson PG,  et al.  Projected effect of dietary salt reductions on future cardiovascular disease.  N Engl J Med. 2010;362(7):590-599
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Smith-Spangler CM, Juusola JL, Enns EA, Owens DK, Garber AM. Population strategies to decrease sodium intake and the burden of cardiovascular disease: a cost-effectiveness analysis.  Ann Intern Med. 2010;152(8):481-487, W170-W173
PubMed
Kleinbongard P, Dejam A, Lauer T,  et al.  Plasma nitrite concentrations reflect the degree of endothelial dysfunction in humans.  Free Radic Biol Med. 2006;40(2):295-302
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pereira EC, Ferderbar S, Bertolami MC,  et al.  Biomarkers of oxidative stress and endothelial dysfunction in glucose intolerance and diabetes mellitus.  Clin Biochem. 2008;41(18):1454-1460
PubMed   |  Link to Article
World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research.  Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity, and the Prevention of Cancer: A Global Perspective. Washington, DC: American Institute for Cancer Research; 2007
Hughes R, Cross AJ, Pollock JRA, Bingham S. Dose-dependent effect of dietary meat on endogenous colonic N-nitrosation.  Carcinogenesis. 2001;22(1):199-202
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Skog K, Steineck G, Augustsson K, Jägerstad M. Effect of cooking temperature on the formation of heterocyclic amines in fried meat products and pan residues.  Carcinogenesis. 1995;16(4):861-867
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sinha R, Rothman N, Salmon CP,  et al.  Heterocyclic amine content in beef cooked by different methods to varying degrees of doneness and gravy made from meat drippings.  Food Chem Toxicol. 1998;36(4):279-287
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Cross AJ, Sinha R. Meat-related mutagens/carcinogens in the etiology of colorectal cancer.  Environ Mol Mutagen. 2004;44(1):44-55
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Cross AJ, Pollock JR, Bingham SA. Haem, not protein or inorganic iron, is responsible for endogenous intestinal N-nitrosation arising from red meat.  Cancer Res. 2003;63(10):2358-2360
PubMed
Sesink AL, Termont DS, Kleibeuker JH, Van der Meer R. Red meat and colon cancer: the cytotoxic and hyperproliferative effects of dietary heme.  Cancer Res. 1999;59(22):5704-5709
PubMed
Huang X. Iron overload and its association with cancer risk in humans: evidence for iron as a carcinogenic metal.  Mutat Res. 2003;533(1-2):153-171
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Figures

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 1. Dose-response relationship between red meat intake and risk of all-cause mortality in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (A) and the Nurses' Health Study (B). The results were adjusted for age (continuous); body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) category (<23.0, 23.0-24.9, 25.0-29.9, 30.0-34.9, or ≥35); alcohol consumption (0, 0.1-4.9, 5.0-29.9, ≥30.0 g/d in men; 0, 0.1-4.9, 5.0-14.9, or ≥15.0 g/d in women); physical activity level (<3.0, 3.0-8.9, 9.0-17.9, 18.0-26.9, or ≥27.0 hours of metabolic equivalent tasks per week); smoking status (never, past, or current [1-14, 15-24, or ≥25 cigarettes per day]); race (white or nonwhite); menopausal status and hormone use in women (premenopausal, postmenopausal never users, postmenopausal past users, or postmenopausal current users); family history of diabetes mellitus, myocardial infarction, or cancer; history of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, or hypercholesterolemia; and intakes of total energy, whole grains, fruits, and vegetables, all in quintiles. Broken lines represent 95% CI.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 2. Hazard ratios and 95% CIs (error bars) for total mortality associated with replacement of other food groups for red meat intake. Adjusted for age (continuous); body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) category (<23.0, 23.0-24.9, 25.0-29.9, 30.0-34.9, or ≥35.0); alcohol consumption (0, 0.1-4.9, 5.0-29.9, ≥30.0 g/d in men; 0, 0.1-4.9, 5.0-14.9, or ≥15.0 g/d in women); physical activity level (<3.0, 3.0-8.9, 9.0-17.9, 18.0-26.9, or ≥27.0 hours of metabolic equivalent tasks per week); smoking status (never, past, or current [1-14, 15-24, or ≥25 cigarettes per day]); race (white or nonwhite); menopausal status and hormone use in women (premenopausal, postmenopausal never users, postmenopausal past users, or postmenopausal current users); family history of diabetes mellitus, myocardial infarction, or cancer; history of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, or hypercholesterolemia; total energy intake; and the corresponding 2 dietary variables in the models.

Tables

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Baseline Age-Standardized Characteristics of Participants in the 2 Cohorts According to Quintiles of Total Red Meat Consumption
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. All-Cause Mortality According to Red Meat Intake in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study and the Nurses’ Health Study
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Cardiovascular Mortality According to Red Meat Intake in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study and the Nurses’ Health Study
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 4. Cancer Mortality According to Red Meat Intake in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study and the Nurses’ Health Study

References

Pan A, Sun Q, Bernstein AM,  et al.  Red meat consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes: 3 cohorts of US adults and an updated meta-analysis.  Am J Clin Nutr. 2011;94(4):1088-1096
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Micha R, Wallace SK, Mozaffarian D. Red and processed meat consumption and risk of incident coronary heart disease, stroke, and diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.  Circulation. 2010;121(21):2271-2283
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Zheng W, Lee SA. Well-done meat intake, heterocyclic amine exposure, and cancer risk.  Nutr Cancer. 2009;61(4):437-446
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fraser GE. Associations between diet and cancer, ischemic heart disease, and all-cause mortality in non-Hispanic white California Seventh-day Adventists.  Am J Clin Nutr. 1999;70(3):(suppl)  532S-538S
PubMed
Key TJ, Fraser GE, Thorogood M,  et al.  Mortality in vegetarians and nonvegetarians: detailed findings from a collaborative analysis of 5 prospective studies.  Am J Clin Nutr. 1999;70(3):(suppl)  516S-524S
PubMed
Sinha R, Cross AJ, Graubard BI, Leitzmann MF, Schatzkin A. Meat intake and mortality: a prospective study of over half a million people.  Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(6):562-571
PubMed   |  Link to Article
van Dam RM, Willett WC, Rimm EB, Stampfer MJ, Hu FB. Dietary fat and meat intake in relation to risk of type 2 diabetes in men.  Diabetes Care. 2002;25(3):417-424
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fung TT, Schulze M, Manson JE, Willett WC, Hu FB. Dietary patterns, meat intake, and the risk of type 2 diabetes in women.  Arch Intern Med. 2004;164(20):2235-2240
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hu FB, Rimm E, Smith-Warner SA,  et al.  Reproducibility and validity of dietary patterns assessed with a food-frequency questionnaire.  Am J Clin Nutr. 1999;69(2):243-249
PubMed
Salvini S, Hunter DJ, Sampson L,  et al.  Food-based validation of a dietary questionnaire: the effects of week-to-week variation in food consumption.  Int J Epidemiol. 1989;18(4):858-867
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Rich-Edwards JW, Corsano KA, Stampfer MJ. Test of the National Death Index and Equifax Nationwide Death Search.  Am J Epidemiol. 1994;140(11):1016-1019
PubMed
Hu FB, Stampfer MJ, Rimm E,  et al.  Dietary fat and coronary heart disease: a comparison of approaches for adjusting for total energy intake and modeling repeated dietary measurements.  Am J Epidemiol. 1999;149(6):531-540
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Qiu W, Rosner B. Measurement error correction for the cumulative average model in the survival analysis of nutritional data: application to Nurses' Health Study.  Lifetime Data Anal. 2010;16(1):136-153
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Bernstein AM, Sun Q, Hu FB, Stampfer MJ, Manson JE, Willett WC. Major dietary protein sources and risk of coronary heart disease in women.  Circulation. 2010;122(9):876-883
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Spiegelman D, Hertzmark E, Wand HC. Point and interval estimates of partial population attributable risks in cohort studies: examples and software.  Cancer Causes Control. 2007;18(5):571-579
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Willett WC. Nutritional Epidemiology. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1998
Ascherio A, Willett WC, Rimm EB, Giovannucci EL, Stampfer MJ. Dietary iron intake and risk of coronary disease among men.  Circulation. 1994;89(3):969-974
PubMed
Klipstein-Grobusch K, Grobbee DE, den Breeijen JH, Boeing H, Hofman A, Witteman JC. Dietary iron and risk of myocardial infarction in the Rotterdam Study.  Am J Epidemiol. 1999;149(5):421-428
PubMed   |  Link to Article
van der A DL, Peeters PH, Grobbee DE, Marx JJ, van der Schouw YT. Dietary haem iron and coronary heart disease in women.  Eur Heart J. 2005;26(3):257-262
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Qi L, van Dam RM, Rexrode K, Hu FB. Heme iron from diet as a risk factor for coronary heart disease in women with type 2 diabetes.  Diabetes Care. 2007;30(1):101-106
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Menke A, Muntner P, Fernández-Real JM, Guallar E. The association of biomarkers of iron status with mortality in US adults [published online ahead of print February 15, 2011].  Nutr Metab Cardiovasc DisLink to Article
Bibbins-Domingo K, Chertow GM, Coxson PG,  et al.  Projected effect of dietary salt reductions on future cardiovascular disease.  N Engl J Med. 2010;362(7):590-599
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Smith-Spangler CM, Juusola JL, Enns EA, Owens DK, Garber AM. Population strategies to decrease sodium intake and the burden of cardiovascular disease: a cost-effectiveness analysis.  Ann Intern Med. 2010;152(8):481-487, W170-W173
PubMed
Kleinbongard P, Dejam A, Lauer T,  et al.  Plasma nitrite concentrations reflect the degree of endothelial dysfunction in humans.  Free Radic Biol Med. 2006;40(2):295-302
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pereira EC, Ferderbar S, Bertolami MC,  et al.  Biomarkers of oxidative stress and endothelial dysfunction in glucose intolerance and diabetes mellitus.  Clin Biochem. 2008;41(18):1454-1460
PubMed   |  Link to Article
World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research.  Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity, and the Prevention of Cancer: A Global Perspective. Washington, DC: American Institute for Cancer Research; 2007
Hughes R, Cross AJ, Pollock JRA, Bingham S. Dose-dependent effect of dietary meat on endogenous colonic N-nitrosation.  Carcinogenesis. 2001;22(1):199-202
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Skog K, Steineck G, Augustsson K, Jägerstad M. Effect of cooking temperature on the formation of heterocyclic amines in fried meat products and pan residues.  Carcinogenesis. 1995;16(4):861-867
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sinha R, Rothman N, Salmon CP,  et al.  Heterocyclic amine content in beef cooked by different methods to varying degrees of doneness and gravy made from meat drippings.  Food Chem Toxicol. 1998;36(4):279-287
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Cross AJ, Sinha R. Meat-related mutagens/carcinogens in the etiology of colorectal cancer.  Environ Mol Mutagen. 2004;44(1):44-55
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Cross AJ, Pollock JR, Bingham SA. Haem, not protein or inorganic iron, is responsible for endogenous intestinal N-nitrosation arising from red meat.  Cancer Res. 2003;63(10):2358-2360
PubMed
Sesink AL, Termont DS, Kleibeuker JH, Van der Meer R. Red meat and colon cancer: the cytotoxic and hyperproliferative effects of dietary heme.  Cancer Res. 1999;59(22):5704-5709
PubMed
Huang X. Iron overload and its association with cancer risk in humans: evidence for iron as a carcinogenic metal.  Mutat Res. 2003;533(1-2):153-171
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Correspondence

CME
Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).
Submit a Comment
IMPORTANT VARIABLES MISSING IN RED MEAT STUDY
Posted on March 15, 2012
Ronald N. Kostoff, Ph.D.
Georgia Institute of Technology
Conflict of Interest: None Declared
A recently posted document [1] described prevention and remediation measures for chronic and infectious diseases. Two of the findings are directly relevant to this article on effects of dietary red meat. First, as part of the study [1], I identified 140 major diseases. I then selected twenty of the most prominent, and examined their core literatures for the presence of AGEs articles. Every one of these twenty major disease literatures contained one or more (some very many more) articles associating the presence of large amounts of AGEs to the disease. One can conclude that control of excessive AGEs in body tissues is a foundational requirement for health/healing.
AGEs are contained in different foods in different amounts, they are increased by high-temperature food processing, and they are produced endogenously by, e.g., reactions of proteins with glucose and ascorbates. In particular, they tend to be increased dramatically with high- temperature food processing, and since red meat tends to be cooked at high temperatures, one would expect adverse impacts on health from increased AGEs alone.
Second, I showed examples where many clinical trials do not report variables central to the study. In the present case, 'red meat' covers a wide variety of substances. In the USA, most red meat comes from corn/grain-fed cattle, confined in relatively close quarters, and filled with antibiotics and growth hormones. How much of the adverse impacts reported come from the 'red meat' and how much come from the type of feed and additives? How would the results differ if the cattle were free-range grass-fed and not flooded with antibiotics and hormones? Without addressing these missing variables, the results of the study could be misleading.
While the authors do show that consumption of standard red meat is harmful, and is exacerbated by other harmful substances/practices ((1) sedentary; (2) smoking; (3) drink; (4) obesity; (5) consumption of empty calories; and (6) consuming less fruits, vegetables, and whole grains.)], they do not separate the effects of intrinsic red meat from the effects of processing, additives, and cattle environmental and dietary factors.
References
Kostoff RN. Literature-Related Discovery and Innovation - Update. Technological Forecasting and Social Change (2012). doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2012.02.002.
*Pre-print full text version can be accessed at (http://stip.gatech.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/LRD- UPDATE_TFSC_7_REV.pdf).
*Journal posting access (http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.02.002).

Conflict of Interest: None declared
Does red meat reduce cholesterol levels?
Posted on May 2, 2012
Margaret Moss
Nutrition and Allergy Clinic
Conflict of Interest: None Declared
I ask my patients to consume lower purine lighter meats, salmon and white fish rather than high purine red meat, sardines, mackerel and beer. This is to reduce chronic gut symptoms. I ask them to reduce their fructose intake. Fructose and purines both increase uric acid production, which is associated with mortality. [1] Fish provides useful omega three fatty acids and iodine. Wild or grass-fed meat may well be healthier than intensively reared meat, exposed to growth hormone, antibiotics, and genetically modified feed. Food frequency questionnaires (FFQ) are inaccurate. The correlation between food intake and food diaries was only between 0.5 and 0.6. The participants were asked to give the frequency with which they ate 85g of unprocessed or 45g of processed meat. Did some use raw and others cooked weights? How did the authors distinguish between a large steak and a small turkey sandwich, using only frequency information? Sugars, like galactose and fructose, are involved in glycation. They are hidden in processed foods, and intake is impossible to assess by FFQ. Glycation of LDL leads to oxidation and deposits in artery walls. [2] Fructose makes DNA available, to enlarge tumours or for metastasis. [3] The figures were not controlled for intake of these key sugars. Data for dairy products does not distinguish between low sugar hard cheese and butter, and high sugar fresh and dried milk. Nor were the figures controlled for intake of harmful trans fats or healthy omega three fats. Table 1 shows that the more red meat is consumed, the less fish is eaten. Professionals in the study may have an excessive iron intake from large steaks. An impoverished menstruating woman may benefit from having a little beef rather than a small amount of chicken. L-carnitine can be synthesised in the body, but we might wish to use red meat to increase L- carnitine levels, for example in diabetes. [4] Beef provides much, while chicken and fish provide little. The authors suggest that higher cholesterol may contribute to their findings. Yet Table 1 shows that the percentage with high cholesterol decreases, the more often red meat is consumed. The correlation of percentage with high cholesterol with quintile is –0.94 for the HPFS study and –0.92 for the NHS study. These are surprisingly high correlations for data from FFQs. The data for unprocessed meat was not corrected for processed meat consumption. Do those who consume large amounts of unprocessed meat also consume large amounts of processed meat? Also high temperature methods, like barbecuing, frying and grilling, that cause browning on the surface, are thought to be less safe than making stews or casseroles. Juices from barbecued meat fall onto the heat source, converting to carcinogens, and rise to be deposited on the meat. Red meat consumption is associated with an increased risk of mortality, in these professional Americans. However, substituting other protein sources for red meat may not reduce the risk, depending whether they choose gently cooked fish, or fried chicken and chips, made with hydrogenated oil. References. 1. Heras M, Fernández-Reyes MJ, Sánchez R, Molina A, Rodríguez A, Alvarez- Ude F. Serum uric acid as a marker of all-cause mortality in an elderly patient cohort. Nefrologia 2012; 32(1):67-72. 2. Moss M, Freed D. The cow and the coronary: epidemiology, biochemistry and immunology. Int J Cardiol 2003; 87:203-216. 3. Liu H, Heaney AP. Refined fructose and cancer. Expert Opin Ther Targets 2011; 15(9): 1049-59. 4. Malaguarnera M, Vacante M, Avitabile T, Malaguarnera M, Cammalleri L, Motta M. L-carnitine supplementation reduces oxidised LDL cholesterol in patients with diabetes. Am J Clin Nutr 2009; 89(1): 71-6.
High content of AGEs and the unhealthy effects of red meats.
Posted on August 3, 2013
Jaime Uribarri
Professor of Medicine The Mount Sinai School of Medicine New York NY
Conflict of Interest: None Declared
This is an interesting epidemiological work, which suggests a relationship between increased consumption of red meats and higher risk of development of type 2 diabetes in human populations.There is extensive in vitro and animal data that support an important causative role for dietary advanced glycation end products (AGEs) in diabetes mellitus (1). An association between circulating levels of AGEs and HOMA-IR, an index of insulin resistance, has been demonstrated in humans (2). More importantly, our group has demonstrated that a low AGE diet was able to reduce HOMA-IR in a group of type 2 diabetic patients with insulin resistance (3). The AGE content in highest in foods of animal origin, especially meats prepared under conditions of dry heat cooking such as grilling and barbecuing. The content of AGE markedly decreases with culinary techniques that apply lower heat and plenty of water such as stewing and poaching (4).Based on the above data, I strongly believe that the association between increased consumption of red meats and the development of type 2 diabetes is mediated by the increased content of AGEs in red meats, as commonly cooked. Simple changes in meat cooking methods might make meat intake healthier.References1) Cai W et al. Oral advanced glycation endproducts (AGEs) promote insulin resistance and diabetes by depleting the antioxidant defenses AGE receptor-1 and sirtuin 1. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012; 109:15888-932) Uribarri J et al. Circulating glycotoxins and dietary advanced glycation endproducts: two links to inflammatory response, oxidative stress, and aging. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2007; 62:427-333) Uribarri J et al. Restriction of advanced glycation end products improves insulin resistance in human type 2 diabetes: potential role of AGER1 and SIRT1. Diabetes Care. 2011; 34:1610-64) Uribarri J et al. Advanced glycation end products in foods and a practical guide to their reduction in the diet. J Am Diet Assoc. 2010; 110:911-16
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Web of Science® Times Cited: 55

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Topics
PubMed Articles
JAMAevidence.com

The Rational Clinical Examination
Make the Diagnosis: Cancer, Family History

The Rational Clinical Examination
Original Article: Does This Patient Have a Family History of Cancer?