Showing 1 – 20 of 126
Relevance | Newest | Oldest |
  • JAMA Internal Medicine October 28, 2013

    Figure 1: Components of the Alternative Healthy Eating Index 2010 Score (AHEI2010) Post-Myocardial Infarction (MI) and Changes From Pre- to Post-MI Period Among MI Survivors

    Scores were age-standardized. Higher score represents higher diet quality (ie, less consumption of red meat, sugar-sweetened beverages, trans fat, and sodium components). For changes in AHEI2010 from pre- to post-MI, a positive number represents improvement in diet quality; a negative number, a decrease in diet quality. DHA indicates dihydroxyacetone docosahexaenoic acid; EPA, eicosapentaenoic acid.
  • JAMA Internal Medicine July 22, 2013

    Figure: Hazard Ratios of Type 2 Diabetes According to Updated 4-Year Changes in Total Red Meat Intake

    Low intake level was defined as less than 2 servings per week; moderate intake, 2 to 6 servings per week; and high intake, 7 or more servings per week. The reference group (hazard ratio, 1.00) was the low intake level at both the initial and the 4-year follow-up visits. The results across the 3 cohorts were pooled using an inverse variance–weighted, fixed-effect meta-analysis. See the Statistical Analysis section for an explanation of the analysis.
  • Changes in Red Meat Consumption and Subsequent Risk of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Three Cohorts of US Men and Women

    Abstract Full Text
    free access
    JAMA Intern Med. 2013; 173(14):1328-1335. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.6633

    Pan et al evaluated the association between changes in red meat consumption during a 4-year period and subsequent 4-year risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus in US adults. See the invited commentary by Evans.

  • Oxygen-Carrying Proteins in Meat and Risk of Diabetes Mellitus

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA Intern Med. 2013; 173(14):1335-1336. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.7399
  • Additional Ways to Diminish the Deleterious Effects of Red Meat

    Abstract Full Text
    Arch Intern Med. 2012; 172(18):1424-1425. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2012.3638
  • Additional Ways to Diminish the Deleterious Effects of Red Meat—Reply

    Abstract Full Text
    Arch Intern Med. 2012; 172(18):1424-1425. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2012.4111
  • JAMA Internal Medicine April 9, 2012

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

    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.
  • JAMA Internal Medicine April 9, 2012

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

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

    Abstract Full Text
    free access
    Arch Intern Med. 2012; 172(7):555-563. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2011.2287
    Pan et al investigated the relationship between red meat consumption and mortality. Ornish comments on this large-scale prospective study.
  • Holy Cow! What's Good for You Is Good for Our Planet: Comment on “Red Meat Consumption and Mortality”

    Abstract Full Text
    Arch Intern Med. 2012; 172(7):563-564. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2012.174
  • JAMA Internal Medicine March 8, 2010

    Figure 2: Alcohol Consumption, Weight Gain, and Risk of Becoming Overweight in Middle-aged and Older Women

    Relative risks of becoming overweight or obese according to baseline alcohol intake in subgroups of women. A, Age. B, Smoking status. C, Physical activity level. D, Baseline body mass index (BMI; calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared). Model adjusted for age, race, baseline BMI, randomized treatment, nonalcohol energy intake, physical activity level, smoking status, postmenopausal status, postmenopausal hormone use, multivitamin use, history of hypercholesterolemia and hypertension, and intake of fruit and vegetables, whole grains, refined grains, red meats and poultry, low-fat dairy products, high-fat dairy products, energy-adjusted total fat, carbohydrates, and fiber. Models in subgroups of women by smoking status and physical activity level did not adjust for the respective stratifying factors. Interaction was examined using the Wald χ2 test. Asterisk indicates 1 [Reference].
  • JAMA Internal Medicine March 8, 2010

    Figure 1: Alcohol Consumption, Weight Gain, and Risk of Becoming Overweight in Middle-aged and Older Women

    Multivariate adjusted mean body weight change (in kilograms) during 12.9 years of follow-up according to baseline total alcohol intake, stratified by baseline age group. A, Participants younger than 50 years at baseline (n = 6430). B, Participants aged 50 to 59 years at baseline (n = 8792). C, Participants aged 60 years or older at baseline (n = 3998). Model adjusted for age, race, baseline weight, randomized treatment, total nonalcohol energy intake, physical activity level, smoking status, postmenopausal status, postmenopausal hormone use, multivitamin use, history of hypercholesterolemia and hypertension, and intake of fruit and vegetables, whole grains, refined grains, red meats and poultry, low-fat dairy products, high-fat dairy products, energy-adjusted total fat, carbohydrates, and fiber. P value for a linear trend of body weight change across levels of total alcohol intake was tested using the median value of each alcohol intake category as an ordinal variable. P for a linear trend of a smaller weight gain across increasing alcohol intake at the 12.9-y follow-up, <.001 for A and B and .02 for C.
  • Higher Red Meat Intake May Be a Marker of Risk, Not a Risk Factor Itself

    Abstract Full Text
    Arch Intern Med. 2009; 169(16):1538-1539. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2009.278
  • Higher Red Meat Intake May Be a Marker of Risk, Not a Risk Factor Itself—Reply

    Abstract Full Text
    Arch Intern Med. 2009; 169(16):1539-1539. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2009.279
  • Meat Intake and Mortality: A Prospective Study of Over Half a Million People

    Abstract Full Text
    free access
    Arch Intern Med. 2009; 169(6):562-571. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2009.6
  • Reducing Meat Consumption Has Multiple Benefits for the World's Health

    Abstract Full Text
    Arch Intern Med. 2009; 169(6):543-545. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2009.2
  • JAMA Internal Medicine February 23, 2009

    Figure 1: Dairy Food, Calcium, and Risk of Cancer in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study

    Nonparametric regression curve for the association between total calcium intake and risk of all cancers for men (A) and women (B). Both models were adjusted for race/ethnicity, education, marital status, body mass index, family history of cancer, vigorous physical activity, smoking status, time since quitting smoking, smoking dose, antacid use, personal history of diabetes and hypertension, alcohol consumption, and intakes of fat, red meat, fruits and vegetables, whole grains, protein, beverages, folate, tomatoes, α-linolenic acid, selenium, and total energy. The model for men was also adjusted for prostate-specific antigen test, and the model for women was also adjusted for age at menopause, parity, oral contraceptive use, menopausal hormone therapy use, and duration of menopausal hormone therapy use.
  • JAMA Internal Medicine February 23, 2009

    Figure 2: Dairy Food, Calcium, and Risk of Cancer in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study

    Multivariate relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals of cancers by anatomical area comparing the highest quintile of total calcium intake with the lowest. The multivariate RR was adjusted for race/ethnicity, education, marital status, body mass index, family history of cancer, vigorous physical activity, alcohol consumption, and intakes of red meat and total energy plus the additional variables that are listed in each footnote. The squares and horizontal lines correspond with the multivariate RR and the 95% confidence intervals. *Adjusted for the variables listed for the multivariate RR plus smoking status, time since quitting smoking, smoking dose, intake of fruits and vegetables, and menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) use in women. †Adjusted for the variables listed for the multivariate RR plus smoking status, time since quitting smoking, smoking dose, MHT use in women, antacid use, and intakes of fruits and vegetables, whole grains, and folate. ‡Adjusted for the variables listed for the multivariate RR plus smoking status, time since quitting smoking, smoking dose, and MHT use in women. §Adjusted for the variables listed for the multivariate RR plus smoking, personal history of diabetes, prostate-specific antigen test, and intakes of tomatoes, α-linolenic acid, and selenium in men as well as for smoking, MHT use, parity, oral contraceptive use, personal history of oophorectomy and hysterectomy, and intake of fat in women.∥Adjusted for variables listed for the multivariate RR plus smoking status, time since quitting smoking, smoking dose, personal history of diabetes and hypertension, parity, MHT and oral contraceptive use in women, as well as for intakes of fruits and vegetables, total beverages, and protein.
  • Red Meat Intake and Risk of Breast Cancer Among Premenopausal Women

    Abstract Full Text
    free access
    Arch Intern Med. 2006; 166(20):2253-2259. doi: 10.1001/archinte.166.20.2253
  • JAMA Internal Medicine June 28, 1999

    Figure 1: Comparison of the Effects of Lean Red Meat vs Lean White Meat on Serum Lipid Levels Among Free-living Persons With Hypercholesterolemia: A Long-term, Randomized Clinical Trial

    Mean±SEM low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol concentrations from screening to the end of the 36-week treatment period. Results represent all subjects included in the intent-to-treat analyses. Sample sizes for the lean red meat (LRM) group at weeks −2, −1, 0, 4, 12, 20, 28, and 36 were 88, 11, 88, 88, 79, 77, 76, and 75 subjects, respectively. Sample sizes for the lean white meat (LWM) group at each time point were 103, 8, 103, 103, 94, 90, 87, and 83 subjects. Week −1 represents results from only those subjects who required an additional lipid eligibiity measurement.