Higher Meat Intake Is Associated with Higher Inflammatory Markers, Mostly Due to Adiposity: Results from UK Biobank

ABSTRACT Background High meat consumption might play a role in promoting low-grade systemic inflammation, but evidence is limited. Objectives We examined cross-sectional associations of habitual meat consumption with serum C-reactive protein (CRP) and total white blood cell count (WBCC) in British adults. Methods We included 403,886 men and women (aged 38–73 y) participating in the UK Biobank who provided information on meat intake (via touchscreen questionnaire) and a nonfasting blood sample at recruitment (2006–2010). For a subset of participants (∼5%), an additional blood sample was collected (median 4.4 y later). We used multivariable linear regression models to estimate associations of meat intake (total meat, unprocessed red meat, processed meat, and poultry) with logCRP and logWBCC. Results The difference in the serum CRP (mg/L) for each 50-g/d higher intake for total meat was 11.6% (95% CI: 11.1, 12.0%), for processed meat was 38.3% (95% CI: 36.0, 40.7%), for unprocessed red meat was 14.4% (95% CI: 13.6, 15.1%), and for poultry was 12.8% (95% CI: 12.0, 13.5%). The difference in the WBCC (×10–9L) for each 50 g/d higher intake of total meat was 1.5% (95% CI: 1.4, 1.6%), for processed meat was 6.5% (95% CI: 6.1, 6.9%), for unprocessed red meat was 1.6% (95% CI: 1.4, 1.7%), and for poultry was 1.6% (95% CI: 1.4, 1.7%). All associations were attenuated after adjustment for adiposity; by 67% with BMI (in kg/m2) and by 58% with waist circumference for total meat and CRP, and by 53% and 47%, respectively, for WBCC, although associations remained statistically significant. Findings of sensitivity analyses in 15,420 participants were similar prospectively, except there were no associations between unprocessed red meat and WBCC. Conclusions Higher meat consumption, particularly of processed meat, was positively associated with inflammatory markers in these British adults; however, the magnitudes of associations are small and predominantly due to higher adiposity.

Download Full-text

Meat consumption and risk of ischemic heart disease and stroke: results from the UK Biobank

Proceedings of The Nutrition Society ◽

10.1017/s0029665120004024 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 79 (OCE2) ◽

Author(s):

Keren Papier ◽

Georgina Fensom ◽

Anika Knuppel ◽

Timothy Key ◽

Aurora Perez-Cornago

Keyword(s):

Meat Consumption ◽

Haemorrhagic Stroke ◽

Red Meat ◽

Processed Meat ◽

Uk Biobank ◽

Meat Intake ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Total Meat ◽

Red And Processed Meat

AbstractIntroductionMeat consumption may be associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular diseases, but the evidence remains inconclusive. We prospectively examined the association between meat (total meat, red and processed meat, red meat, processed meat and poultry) intake and risk of ischemic heart disease (IHD) and stroke, including ischemic and haemorrhagic subtypes, in a large British cohort.Materials and methodsData were from UK Biobank participants who were free of IHD, stroke and cancer at recruitment (2006–2010), with available information on meat intake in the baseline touchscreen survey, and linked hospital admissions and death data for IHD, stroke, and stroke subtypes over follow-up (n = 441,700). We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards models to assess associations between meat consumption and risk of IHD, total stroke and ischemic and haemorrhagic stroke subtypes.ResultsOver a mean of 8.1 years of follow-up, 13,590 incident cases of IHD, 5,441 cases of total stroke, 2,258, cases of ischaemic stroke, and 949 cases of haemorrhagic stroke occurred. The risk of IHD was positively associated with intakes of total meat (Hazard ratio (HR) = 1.18, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.09, 1.27 per 100 g/day higher intake), red and processed meat (HR = 1.15, 95% CI 1.08, 1.24 per 70 g/day higher intake), red meat (HR = 1.15, 95%, CI 1.07–1.24 per 50 g/day higher intake), processed meat (HR = 1.11, 95% CI 1.05, 1.16 per 20 g/day higher intake), and poultry (HR = 1.07, 95% CI 1.01, 1.13 per 30 g/day higher intake). The risk of total stroke was positively associated with intakes of total meat (HR = 1.15, 95% CI 1.02–1.29 per 100 g/day higher intake) and red and processed meat (HR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.03–1.27 per 70 g/day higher intake). Meat intake was not associated with ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke.DiscussionThis large prospective study found that any meat consumption was associated with an increased risk of IHD and that red and processed meat consumption was associated with an increased risk of total stroke. Our findings for IHD and total stroke in relation to red and processed meat are in line with previous studies but our positive findings for poultry and IHD and null findings for red meat and ischaemic stroke are not, thus warranting further study.

Download Full-text

Meat intake and cancer risk: prospective analyses in UK Biobank

10.1101/19003822 ◽

2019 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Anika Knuppel ◽

Keren Papier ◽

Georgina K. Fensom ◽

Paul N. Appleby ◽

Julie A. Schmidt ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Prostate Cancer ◽

Colorectal Cancer ◽

Cancer Risk ◽

Meat Consumption ◽

Red Meat ◽

Processed Meat ◽

Uk Biobank ◽

Meat Intake ◽

Incidence Trends ◽

Red And Processed Meat

AbstractBackgroundRed and processed meat has been consistently associated with risk for colorectal cancer, but evidence for other cancer sites is limited and few studies have examined the association between poultry intake and cancer risk. We examined associations between total meat, red meat, processed meat and poultry intake and incidence for 20 common cancer sites.Methods and FindingsWe analysed data from 475,023 participants (54% women) in UK Biobank. Participants were aged 37-73 years and cancer free at baseline. Information on meat consumption was based on a touchscreen questionnaire completed at baseline covering type and frequency of meat intake. Diet intake was re-measured a minimum of three times in a subsample (15%) using a web-based 24h dietary recall questionnaire. Multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine the association between baseline meat intake and cancer incidence. Trends in risk across baseline meat intake categories were calculated by assigning a mean value to each category using estimates from the re-measured meat intakes. During a mean follow-up of 6.9 years, 28,955 participants were diagnosed with a malignant cancer. Total, red and processed meat intakes were each positively associated with risk of colorectal cancer (e.g. hazard ratio (HR) per 70 g/day higher intake of red and processed meat combined 1.31, 95%-confidence interval (CI) 1.14-1.52).Red meat intake was positively associated with breast cancer (HR per 50 g/day higher intake 1.12, 1.01-1.24) and prostate cancer (1.15, 1.03-1.29). Poultry intake was positively associated with risk for cancers of the lymphatic and hematopoietic tissues (HR per 30g/day higher intake 1.16, 1.03-1.32). Only the associations with colorectal cancer were robust to Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons. Study limitations include unrepresentativeness of the study sample for the UK population, low case numbers for less common cancers and the possibility of residual confounding.ConclusionsHigher intakes of red and processed meat were associated with a higher risk of colorectal cancer. The observed positive associations of red meat consumption with breast and prostate cancer, and poultry intake with cancers of the lymphatic and hematopoietic tissues, require further investigation.

Download Full-text

Meat consumption and risk of 25 common conditions: outcome-wide analyses in 475,000 men and women in the UK Biobank study

BMC Medicine ◽

10.1186/s12916-021-01922-9 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 19 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Keren Papier ◽

Georgina K. Fensom ◽

Anika Knuppel ◽

Paul N. Appleby ◽

Tammy Y. N. Tong ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Diverticular Disease ◽

Meat Consumption ◽

Red Meat ◽

Poultry Meat ◽

Mortality Data ◽

Processed Meat ◽

Colon Polyps ◽

Uk Biobank ◽

Meat Intake ◽

The Uk

Abstract Background There is limited prospective evidence on the association between meat consumption and many common, non-cancerous health outcomes. We examined associations of meat intake with risk of 25 common conditions (other than cancer). Methods We used data from 474,985 middle-aged adults recruited into the UK Biobank study between 2006 and 2010 and followed up until 2017 (mean follow-up 8.0 years) with available information on meat intake at baseline (collected via touchscreen questionnaire), and linked hospital admissions and mortality data. For a large sub-sample (~ 69,000), dietary intakes were re-measured three or more times using an online, 24-h recall questionnaire. Results On average, participants who reported consuming meat regularly (three or more times per week) had more adverse health behaviours and characteristics than participants who consumed meat less regularly, and most of the positive associations observed for meat consumption and health risks were substantially attenuated after adjustment for body mass index (BMI). In multi-variable adjusted (including BMI) Cox regression models corrected for multiple testing, higher consumption of unprocessed red and processed meat combined was associated with higher risks of ischaemic heart disease (hazard ratio (HRs) per 70 g/day higher intake 1.15, 95% confidence intervals (CIs) 1.07–1.23), pneumonia (1.31, 1.18–1.44), diverticular disease (1.19, 1.11–1.28), colon polyps (1.10, 1.06–1.15), and diabetes (1.30, 1.20–1.42); results were similar for unprocessed red meat and processed meat intakes separately. Higher consumption of unprocessed red meat alone was associated with a lower risk of iron deficiency anaemia (IDA: HR per 50 g/day higher intake 0.80, 95% CIs 0.72–0.90). Higher poultry meat intake was associated with higher risks of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (HR per 30 g/day higher intake 1.17, 95% CIs 1.09–1.26), gastritis and duodenitis (1.12, 1.05–1.18), diverticular disease (1.10, 1.04–1.17), gallbladder disease (1.11, 1.04–1.19), and diabetes (1.14, 1.07–1.21), and a lower IDA risk (0.83, 0.76–0.90). Conclusions Higher unprocessed red meat, processed meat, and poultry meat consumption was associated with higher risks of several common conditions; higher BMI accounted for a substantial proportion of these increased risks suggesting that residual confounding or mediation by adiposity might account for some of these remaining associations. Higher unprocessed red meat and poultry meat consumption was associated with lower IDA risk.

Download Full-text

Effects of Dietary Quality on Associations of Meat Consumption with Cardiometabolic Biomarkers in the Jackson Heart Study

Current Developments in Nutrition ◽

10.1093/cdn/nzaa061_085 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 4 (Supplement_2) ◽

pp. 1457-1457

Author(s):

Dustin Moore ◽

Sabrina Noel ◽

Xiyuan Zhang ◽

Sameera Talegawker ◽

Teresa Carithers ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Diet Quality ◽

Cardiometabolic Risk ◽

Meat Consumption ◽

Red Meat ◽

Dietary Quality ◽

Processed Meat ◽

Jackson Heart Study ◽

Meat Intake ◽

Heart Study ◽

Total Meat

Abstract Objectives Red and processed meat consumption is adversely related to cardiometabolic risk, but the impact of overall dietary quality on this association has not been systematically investigated. We examined the influence of dietary quality on associations of meat intake with biomarkers of cardiometabolic risk. Methods Data are from the Jackson Heart Study, a cohort of African Americans (baseline age 55 y, 66% female, 20% diabetes, 9% CVD). We analyzed those with biomarker data available at Visit 1 (2000–04) and at Visit 2 (2005–09) or 3 (2009–13). Diet was assessed by food frequency questionnaire (Visit 1). Total observations used were: Visit 1 (n = 3725), Visit 2 (n = 2736), and Visit 3 (n = 3319). Unprocessed red meat included beef and pork, and processed meat included sausage, lunch, and cured meats. Diet quality was measured by a modified Healthy Eating Index 2010 score (m-HEI) that excluded meat contributions. Modified HEI stratified and unstratified analyses were conducted using linear mixed modeling. Fasting HbA1c and CRP values were log transformed. Results Meat consumption was not associated with HbA1c in m-HEI stratified or unstratified analyses. A 1 oz/1000 kcal/wk increase in unprocessed red and total meat was associated with a 1.3% ± 0.5% (P = 0.02) and 1.1% ± 0.3% (P = 0.005) higher CRP in unstratified analyses, respectively. Unprocessed red meat was positively associated with CRP in m-HEI tertiles 1 (2.0% ± 0.8%, P = 0.01) and 3 (2.2% ± 0.8%, P = 0.008). Total meat was associated with CRP in m-HEI tertile 1 (2.0% ± 0.6%, P = 0.001) and trended in tertile 3 (1.1% ± 0.6%, P = 0.09); processed meat also approached significance in m-HEI tertile 1 (2.1% ± 1.2%, P = 0.08). There was evidence that m-HEI modified the associations between processed meat and CRP (P-interaction = 0.04), but not for other associations. Excluding those with diabetes or CVD did not alter these results. Conclusions Our results do not support that meat intake is associated with HbA1c, or that overall dietary quality modifies these associations. Unprocessed red and total meat intakes were associated with greater CRP in unstratified and subsets of stratified analyses. Associations of processed meat with CRP appeared stronger among those with the poorest diet quality. These data suggest that reduction in red meat intake could benefit inflammation among African American adults. Funding Sources The Beef Checkoff.

Download Full-text

Meat intake and cancer risk: prospective analyses in UK Biobank

Proceedings of The Nutrition Society ◽

10.1017/s0029665120000634 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 79 (OCE2) ◽

Author(s):

Anika Knuppel ◽

Keren Papier ◽

Paul N. Appleby ◽

Timothy J. Key ◽

Aurora Perez-Cornago

Keyword(s):

Prostate Cancer ◽

Colorectal Cancer ◽

Cancer Risk ◽

Meat Consumption ◽

Red Meat ◽

Processed Meat ◽

Uk Biobank ◽

Meat Intake ◽

Red And Processed Meat

AbstractIntroductionMeat intake is thought to play a role in the risk of cancer. The Third Expert Report of the World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research concluded that red meat was a probable cause and processed meat a convincing cause of colorectal cancer. However, evidence for associations between red and processed meat intake and other cancer sites is limited. Furthermore, few studies have investigated the association between poultry intake and cancer risk. Therefore, this study aimed to examine the associations between red, processed meat and poultry intake and incidence for 20 common cancer sites.Material and methodsWe analysed data from 475,264 participants (54 % women) in UK Biobank. Participants were aged 37–73 years and cancer free at baseline. Cancer diagnosis and death due to cancer without prior diagnosis during follow-up were determined using data-linkage with cancer and death registries (with follow-up until 31 March 2016 for England and Wales and until 31 October 2015 for Scotland, respectively). Information on meat consumption was based on a touchscreen questionnaire completed at baseline covering type and frequency of meat intake. We used multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models to determine the association between baseline meat intake and cancer incidence. Analyses of lung cancer risk were restricted to never smokers. All analyses were adjusted for socio-demographic, lifestyle and women-specific factors.ResultsOver a mean 6.9 (SD 1.3) years of follow-up, 28,431 participants were diagnosed with any type of cancer. Red meat intake was positively associated with risk for colorectal cancer (n cases = 3,164; Hazard ratio (HR) per 50 g/day higher intake 1.22, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.05–1.41), breast cancer (n cases = 5,536; 1.12, 1.01–1.24) and prostate cancer (n cases = 5,807; 1.16, 1.03–1.30). Processed meat intake was positively associated with risk for colorectal cancer (n cases = 3,189; HR per 20 g/day higher intake 1.17, 95% CI 1.06–1.30). Poultry intake was positively associated with risk for cancers of the lymphatic and hematopoietic tissues (n cases = 2,431; HR per 30g/day increment in intake 1.16, 95%-CI 1.03, 1.32).DiscussionIn summary, higher intakes of red and processed meat were associated with a higher risk of colorectal cancer. Red meat consumption was also positively associated with risk of breast and prostate cancer, but these associations are not supported by most previous prospective studies. The positive association of poultry intake with cancers of the lymphatic and hematopoietic tissues requires further investigation.

Download Full-text

Meat consumption in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohorts: results from 24-hour dietary recalls

Public Health Nutrition ◽

10.1079/phn2002402 ◽

2002 ◽

Vol 5 (6b) ◽

pp. 1243-1258 ◽

Cited By ~ 93

Author(s):

J Linseisen ◽

E Kesse ◽

N Slimani ◽

HB Bueno-de-Mesquita ◽

MC Ocké ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Meat Consumption ◽

Consumption Patterns ◽

Computer Assisted ◽

Processed Meat ◽

Meat Intake ◽

The North ◽

Northern European ◽

Total Meat ◽

The Uk ◽

Prospective Investigation

AbstractObjective:To evaluate meat intake patterns in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohorts.Design and setting:24-Hour dietary recalls were assessed within the framework of a prospective cohort study in 27 centres across 10 European countries by means of standardised computer-assisted interviews.Subjects:In total, 22 924 women and 13 031 men aged 35–74 years.Results:Mean total meat intake was lowest in the ‘health-conscious’ cohort in the UK (15 and 21 g day−1 in women and men, respectively) and highest in the north of Spain, especially in San Sebastian (124 and 234 g day−1, respectively). In the southern Spanish centres and in Naples (Italy), meat consumption was distinctly lower than in the north of these countries. Central and northern European centres/countries showed rather similar meat consumption patterns, except for the British and French cohorts. Differences in the intake of meat sub-groups (e.g. red meat, processed meat) across EPIC were even higher than found for total meat intake. With a few exceptions, the Mediterranean EPIC centres revealed a higher proportion of beef/veal and poultry and less pork or processed meat than observed in central or northern European centres. The highest sausage consumption was observed for the German EPIC participants, followed by the Norwegians, Swedish, Danish and Dutch.Conclusions:The results demonstrate distinct differences in meat consumption patterns between EPIC centres across Europe. This is an important prerequisite for obtaining further insight into the relationship between meat intake and the development of chronic diseases.

Download Full-text

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

British Journal Of Nutrition ◽

10.1017/s000711451400124x ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 112 (5) ◽

pp. 762-775 ◽

Cited By ~ 179

Author(s):

Itziar Abete ◽

Dora Romaguera ◽

Ana Rita Vieira ◽

Adolfo Lopez de Munain ◽

Teresa Norat

Keyword(s):

Cohort Studies ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Meat Consumption ◽

Red Meat ◽

Processed Meat ◽

White Meat ◽

Meat Intake ◽

Risk Of Mortality ◽

Processed Meat Consumption ◽

Cvd Mortality

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.

Download Full-text

Meat consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes: the Multiethnic Cohort

Public Health Nutrition ◽

10.1017/s1368980010002004 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 14 (4) ◽

pp. 568-574 ◽

Cited By ~ 43

Author(s):

A Steinbrecher ◽

E Erber ◽

A Grandinetti ◽

LN Kolonel ◽

G Maskarinec

Keyword(s):

Cox Regression ◽

Meat Consumption ◽

Red Meat ◽

Diabetes Risk ◽

Processed Meat ◽

Japanese American ◽

Meat Intake ◽

Multiethnic Cohort ◽

Incident Cases ◽

Processed Red Meat

AbstractObjectiveTo examine the association of meat consumption with diabetes risk in the Hawaii component of the Multiethnic Cohort and to assess effect modification by ethnicity.DesignA prospective cohort study. Baseline information on diet and lifestyle was assessed by questionnaire. The cohort was followed up for incident cases of diabetes, which were identified through self-reports, medication questionnaires, or health plan linkages. Cox regression was used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) and 95 % confidence intervals for diabetes associated with quintile of meat consumption.SettingHawaii, USA.SubjectsA total of 29 759 Caucasian, 35 244 Japanese-American and 10 509 Native Hawaiian men and women, aged 45–75 years at baseline.ResultsDuring a mean follow-up time of 14 years, 8587 incident diabetes cases were identified. Intake of red meat was positively associated with diabetes risk in men (fifth v. first quintile: HR = 1·43; 95 % CI 1·29, 1·59) and women (fifth v. first quintile: HR = 1·30; 95 % CI 1·17, 1·45) in adjusted models. The respective HR for processed red meat intake were 1·57 (95 % CI 1·42, 1·75) and 1·45 (95 % CI 1·30, 1·62). The association for processed poultry was weaker than for processed red meat, and fresh poultry intake was not associated with diabetes risk. For men only, we observed significant interactions of ethnicity with the red and processed red meat associations, with Caucasians experiencing slightly higher risks than Japanese-Americans.ConclusionsOur findings support the growing evidence that red and processed meat intake increase risk for diabetes irrespective of ethnicity and level of BMI.

Download Full-text

A U-shape trend between total and red meat consumption and depressive symptomatology in apparently healthy women: highlights from the ATTICA prospective (2002–2012) study

European Heart Journal ◽

10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.2860 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽

Author(s):

M Kouvari ◽

D.B Panagiotakos ◽

C Chrysohoou ◽

M Yannakoulia ◽

E.N Georgousopoulou ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Depressive Symptomatology ◽

Depression Scale ◽

Meat Consumption ◽

Red Meat ◽

Processed Meat ◽

Funding Source ◽

Primary Analysis ◽

Total Meat ◽

Adjusted Logistic Regression ◽

Apparently Healthy

Abstract Background/Introduction Increasing amount of evidence currently suggests that in the context of vegetarianism, where meat is completely excluded from daily diet, the risk to develop depression-related symptoms is impressively high. Purpose The aim of the present work was to evaluate the association of meat consumption with prevalent depressive symptomatology in apparently healthy individuals. Methods ATTICA study was conducted during 2001–2012 including n=1,514 men and n=1,528 women (aged >18 years old) from the greater of our region in Greece. At baseline, depressive symptomatology through Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale (range 20–80) and meat consumption (total meat, red, white and processed meat) through validated semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire were assessed. Follow-up (2011–2012) was achieved in n=2,020 participants (n=317 cases); n=845 participants with complete psychological metrics were used for the primary analysis. Results Ranking from 1st to 3rd total meat consumption (low to high) tertiles, participants assigned in 2nd tertile had the lowest depressive-symptomatology scoring (p<0.001). This trend was retained in multi-adjusted logistic regression analysis; participants reporting moderate total and red meat consumption had ∼20% lower likelihood to be depressed (i.e. Zung scale<45) compared with their 1st tertile counterparts (Odds Ratio (OR)total meat 0.82, 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) (0.60, 0.97) and ORred meat 0.79 95% CI (0.45, 0.96)). Non-linear associations were revealed; 2–3 serving/week total meat and 1–2 servings/week red meat presented the lowest odds of depressive symptomatology (all ps<0.05). All aforementioned associations were more evident in women (all ps for sex-related interaction<0.05). Conclusions The present findings generate the hypothesis that moderate total meat consumption and impressively, red meat may be more beneficial to prevent depressed mood and probably in turn hard CVD endpoints. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Other. Main funding source(s): This work was supported by a research grant from Hellenic Atherosclerosis Society. The ATTICA study is supported by research grants from the Hellenic Cardiology Society [HCS2002] and the Hellenic Atherosclerosis Society [HAS2003].

Download Full-text

Values and Preferences Related to Cancer Risk among Red and Processed Meat Eaters: A Pilot Cross-Sectional Study with Semi-Structured Interviews

Foods ◽

10.3390/foods10092182 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 10 (9) ◽

pp. 2182

Author(s):

Victoria Howatt ◽

Anna Prokop-Dorner ◽

Claudia Valli ◽

Joanna Zajac ◽

Malgorzata Bala ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Cancer Risk ◽

Meat Consumption ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Red Meat ◽

Processed Meat ◽

Sectional Study ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Meat Intake ◽

Processed Meat Consumption ◽

Red And Processed Meat

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.

Download Full-text