scholarly journals Association between total, processed, red and white meat consumption and all-cause, CVD and IHD mortality: a meta-analysis of cohort studies

2014 ◽  
Vol 112 (5) ◽  
pp. 762-775 ◽  
Author(s):  
Itziar Abete ◽  
Dora Romaguera ◽  
Ana Rita Vieira ◽  
Adolfo Lopez de Munain ◽  
Teresa Norat

An association between processed and red meat consumption and total mortality has been reported by epidemiological studies; however, there are many controversial reports regarding the association between meat consumption and CVD and IHD mortality. The present meta-analysis was carried out to summarise the evidence from prospective cohort studies on the association between consumption of meat (total, red, white and processed) and all-cause, CVD and IHD mortality. Cohort studies were identified by searching the PubMed and ISI Web of Knowledge databases. Risk estimates for the highest v. the lowest consumption category and dose–response meta-analysis were calculated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity among the studies was also evaluated. A total of thirteen cohort studies were identified (1 674 272 individuals). Subjects in the highest category of processed meat consumption had 22 and 18 % higher risk of mortality from any cause and CVD, respectively. Red meat consumption was found to be associated with a 16 % higher risk of CVD mortality, while no association was found for total and white meat consumption. In the dose–response meta-analysis, an increase of 50 g/d in processed meat intake was found to be positively associated with all-cause and CVD mortality, while an increase of 100 g/d in red meat intake was found to be positively associated with CVD mortality. No significant associations were observed between consumption of any type of meat and IHD mortality. The results of the present meta-analysis indicate that processed meat consumption could increase the risk of mortality from any cause and CVD, while red meat consumption is positively but weakly associated with CVD mortality. These results should be interpreted with caution due to the high heterogeneity observed in most of the analyses as well as the possibility of residual confounding.

2015 ◽  
Vol 75 (3) ◽  
pp. 233-241 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabine Rohrmann ◽  
Jakob Linseisen

Meat is a food rich in protein, minerals such as iron and zinc as well as a variety of vitamins, in particular B vitamins. However, the content of cholesterol and saturated fat is higher than in some other food groups. Processed meat is defined as products usually made of red meat that are cured, salted or smoked (e.g. ham or bacon) in order to improve the durability of the food and/or to improve colour and taste, and often contain a high amount of minced fatty tissue (e.g. sausages). Hence, high consumption of processed foods may lead to an increased intake of saturated fats, cholesterol, salt, nitrite, haem iron, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and, depending upon the chosen food preparation method, also heterocyclic amines. Several large cohort studies have shown that a high consumption of processed (red) meat is related to increased overall and cause-specific mortality. A meta-analysis of nine cohort studies observed a higher mortality among high consumers of processed red meat (relative risk (RR) = 1·23; 95 % CI 1·17, 1·28, top v. bottom consumption category), but not unprocessed red meat (RR = 1·10; 95 % CI 0·98, 1·22). Similar associations were reported in a second meta-analysis. All studies argue that plausible mechanisms are available linking processed meat consumption and risk of chronic diseases such as CVD, diabetes mellitus or some types of cancer. However, the results of meta-analyses do show some degree of heterogeneity between studies, and it has to be taken into account that individuals with low red or processed meat consumption tend to have a healthier lifestyle in general. Hence, substantial residual confounding cannot be excluded. Information from other types of studies in man is needed to support a causal role of processed meat in the aetiology of chronic diseases, e.g. studies using the Mendelian randomisation approach.


2015 ◽  
Vol 19 (5) ◽  
pp. 893-905 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xia Wang ◽  
Xinying Lin ◽  
Ying Y Ouyang ◽  
Jun Liu ◽  
Gang Zhao ◽  
...  

AbstractObjectiveTo examine and quantify the potential dose–response relationship between red and processed meat consumption and risk of all-cause, cardiovascular and cancer mortality.DesignWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, ISI Web of Knowledge, CINHAL, Scopus, the Cochrane library and reference lists of retrieved articles up to 30 November 2014 without language restrictions. We retrieved prospective cohort studies that reported risk estimates for all-cause, cardiovascular and cancer mortality by red and/or processed meat intake levels. The dose–response relationships were estimated using data from red and processed meat intake categories in each study. Random-effects models were used to calculate pooled relative risks and 95 % confidence intervals and to incorporate between-study variations.ResultsNine articles with seventeen prospective cohorts were eligible in this meta-analysis, including a total of 150 328 deaths. There was evidence of a non-linear association between processed meat consumption and risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, but not for cancer mortality. For processed meat, the pooled relative risk with an increase of one serving per day was 1·15 (95 % CI 1·11, 1·19) for all-cause mortality (five studies; P<0·001 for linear trend), 1·15 (95 % CI 1·07, 1·24) for cardiovascular mortality (six studies; P<0·001) and 1·08 (95 % CI 1·06, 1·11) for cancer mortality (five studies; P<0·001). Similar associations were found with total meat intake. The association between unprocessed red meat consumption and mortality risk was found in the US populations, but not in European or Asian populations.ConclusionsThe present meta-analysis indicates that higher consumption of total red meat and processed meat is associated with an increased risk of total, cardiovascular and cancer mortality.


2005 ◽  
Vol 93 (6) ◽  
pp. 933-942 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meadhbh Cosgrove ◽  
Albert Flynn ◽  
Máiréad Kiely

The aim of the present study was to examine the association of red meat, white meat and processed meat consumption in Irish adults with dietary quality. A cross-sectional study of subjects, randomly selected using the electoral register, estimated habitual food intakes using a 7 d food diary in a nationally representative sample of 662 men and 717 women (not pregnant or lactating) aged 18–64 years. Consumers were classified into thirds, based on the distribution of mean daily intakes for red meat, white meat and processed meat. The mean intakes of red meat, white meat and processed meat were 51, 33 and 26 g/d respectively, and men consumed significantly more (P<0·001) than women for all meat types. In men, red meat consumption was associated with lower (P<0·001) prevalence of inadequacy for Zn, riboflavin and vitamin C intakes. Increasing processed meat intake was associated with a lower (P<0·01) level of compliance with dietary recommendations for fat, carbohydrate and fibre in men. Increasing processed meat consumption was associated with lower (P<0·01) wholemeal bread, vegetables, fruit and fish intakes in men and women. Managerial occupations were associated with lower processed meat intakes. It is important to distinguish between meat groups, as there was a large variation between the dietary quality in consumers of red meat, white meat and processed meat. Processed meat consumption is negatively associated with dietary quality and might therefore be a dietary indicator of poor dietary quality. This has important implications in nutritional epidemiological studies and for the development of food-based dietary guidelines.


Foods ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 2182
Author(s):  
Victoria Howatt ◽  
Anna Prokop-Dorner ◽  
Claudia Valli ◽  
Joanna Zajac ◽  
Malgorzata Bala ◽  
...  

Introduction: Over the last decade, the possible impact of meat intake on overall cancer incidence and mortality has received considerable attention, and authorities have recommended decreasing consumption; however, the benefits of reducing meat consumption are small and uncertain. As such, individual decisions to reduce consumption are value- and preference-sensitive. Consequently, we undertook a pilot cross-sectional study to explore people’s values and preferences towards meat consumption in the face of cancer risk. Methods and analysis: The mixed-method pilot study included a quantitative questionnaire followed by qualitative evaluation to explore the dietary habits of 32 meat eaters, their reasons for eating meat, and willingness to change their meat consumption when faced with a potential risk reduction of cancer over a lifetime based on a systematic review and dose–response meta-analysis. We recruited a convenience sample of participants from two Canadian provinces: Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island. This project was approved by the Research Ethics Board for Health Sciences research at Dalhousie University, Canada. Results: The average weekly consumption of red meat was 3.4 servings and the average weekly consumption of processed meat was 3 servings. The determinants that influenced meat intake were similar for both red and processed meat. Taste, cost, and family preferences were the three most commonly cited factors impacting red meat intake. Taste, cost, and (lack of) cooking time were the three most commonly cited factors impacting processed meat intake. None of the participants were willing to eliminate red or processed meat from their diet. About half of participants were willing to potentially reduce their meat consumption, with one third definitely willing to reduce their consumption. Strengths and limitations: This study is the first that we are aware of to share data with participants on the association of red meat and processed meat consumption and the risk of cancer mortality and cancer incidence, including the certainty of evidence for the risk reduction. The limitations of this study include its small sample size and its limited geographic sampling. Conclusions: When presented explicit information about the small uncertain cancer risk associated with red and processed meat consumption, study participants were unwilling to eliminate meat, while about one-third were willing to reduce their meat intake.


Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 676
Author(s):  
Roberta Lupoli ◽  
Marilena Vitale ◽  
Ilaria Calabrese ◽  
Annalisa Giosuè ◽  
Gabriele Riccardi ◽  
...  

The association of meat consumption with mortality and morbidity for non-communicable diseases has been extensively studied. However, the relation of white meat consumption with health outcomes remains controversial. The present meta-analysis was conducted to comprehensively analyze the available evidence on the consistency and strength of the association between the consumption of white meat, death from any cause and incidence of fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular (CV) events. PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and Embase databases were searched for articles published up to April 30, 2020. We included prospective cohort studies reporting relative risks and pertinent 95% confidence intervals (CI) for all-cause mortality and/or CV events (fatal or non-fatal). A total of 22 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Eleven studies (14 data sets) reported data on all-cause mortality, 10 studies (15 datasets) on cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality and 10 studies (11 datasets) on non-fatal CV events. When comparing the highest versus the lowest consumption of white meat, the pooled OR and pertinent 95% CI were 0.94 (0.90, 0.97, p < 0.001) for all-cause mortality, 0.95 (0.89, 1.01, p = 0.13) for CV mortality, and 0.99 (0.95, 1.02, p = 0.48) for non-fatal CV events. In conclusion, the study shows for the first time a robust and inverse association between white meat consumption and all-cause mortality and a neutral association with CV mortality and morbidity. This highlights the importance of differentiating the meat types for what concerns their health effects and suggests that white meat might be a healthier alternative to read and processed meat consumption.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document