scholarly journals Background Diet Influences TMAO Concentrations Associated with Red Meat Intake without Influencing Apparent Hepatic TMAO-Related Activity in a Porcine Model

Metabolites ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebekka Thøgersen ◽  
Martin Krøyer Rasmussen ◽  
Ulrik K. Sundekilde ◽  
Sophie A. Goethals ◽  
Thomas Van Hecke ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mrna Expression ◽  
Red Meat ◽  
Processed Meat ◽  
Related Activity ◽  
Cvd Risk ◽  
Meat Intake ◽  
Expression Of Genes ◽  
Background Diet ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Red And Processed Meat

Red meat has been associated with an increased cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, possibly through gut microbial-derived trimethylamine-N-oxide (TMAO). However, previous reports are conflicting, and influences from the background diet may modulate the impact of meat consumption. This study investigated the effect of red and white meat intake combined with two different background diets on urinary TMAO concentration and its association with the colon microbiome in addition to apparent hepatic TMAO-related activity. For 4 weeks, 32 pigs were fed chicken or red and processed meat combined with a prudent or western background diet. 1H NMR-based metabolomics analysis was conducted on urine samples and hepatic Mrna expression of TMAO-related genes determined. Lower urinary TMAO concentrations were observed after intake of red and processed meat when consumed with a prudent compared to a western background diet. In addition, correlation analyses between urinary TMAO concentrations and relative abundance of colon bacterial groups suggested an association between TMAO and specific bacterial taxa. Diet did not affect the hepatic Mrna expression of genes related to TMAO formation. The results suggest that meat-induced TMAO formation is regulated by mechanisms other than alterations at the hepatic gene expression level, possibly involving modulations of the gut microbiota.

scholarly journals Towards refining WCRF/AICR cancer prevention recommendations for red and processed meat intake: Insights from Alberta’s Tomorrow Project cohort

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-38
Author(s):  
Ala Al Rajabi ◽  
Geraldine Lo Siou ◽  
Alianu K. Akawung ◽  
Kathryn L McDonald ◽  
Tiffany R. Price ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Prevention ◽  
Proportional Hazards ◽  
Red Meat ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Processed Meat ◽  
Carcinogenic Effect ◽  
Meat Intake ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Red Meats ◽  
Red And Processed Meat

ABSTRACT Current cancer prevention recommendations advise limiting red meat intake to <500g/week and avoiding consumption of processed meat, but do not differentiate the source of processed meat. We examined the associations of processed meat derived from red vs. non-red meats with cancer risk in a prospective cohort of 26,218 adults who reported dietary intake using the Canadian Diet History Questionnaire. Incidence of cancer was obtained through data linkage with Alberta Cancer Registry with median (IQR) follow-up of 13.3 (5.1) years. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were adjusted for covariates and stratified by age and gender. The median (IQR) consumption (g/week) of red meat, processed meat from red meat and processed meat from non-red meat were 267.9 (269.9), 53.6 (83.3), and 11.9 (31.8), respectively. High intakes (4th Quartile) of processed meat from red meat was associated with increased risk of gastro-intestinal cancer Adjusted Hazard Ratio (AHR) (95% CI): 1.68 (1.09 – 2.57) and colorectal cancers AHR (95% CI): 1.90 (1.12 – 3.22), respectively in women. No statistically significant associations were observed for intakes of red meat or processed meat from non-red meat. Results suggests that the carcinogenic effect associated with processed meat intake may be limited to processed meat derived from red meats. The findings provide preliminary evidence toward refining cancer prevention recommendations for red and processed meat intake.

scholarly journals Excessive meat consumption in Brazil: diet quality and environmental impacts

2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. 1893-1899 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aline Martins de Carvalho ◽  
Chester Luiz Galvão César ◽  
Regina Mara Fisberg ◽  
Dirce Maria Lobo Marchioni
Keyword(s):  
Diet Quality ◽  
Meat Consumption ◽  
Healthy Eating Index ◽  
Processed Meat ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Meat Intake ◽  
Environmentally Sustainable ◽  
Sustainable Diet ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Red And Processed Meat

AbstractObjectiveTo evaluate red and processed meat intake, and the impact meat consumption has on diet quality and the environment.DesignA large cross-sectional health survey performed in São Paulo, Brazil.SettingDiet was assessed by two 24 h dietary recalls. Usual intakes were calculated using the Multiple Source Method. The World Cancer Research Fund recommendation of an average of 71·4 g/d was used as the cut-off point to estimate excessive red and processed meat consumption. To investigate the relationship between meat consumption and diet quality we used the Brazilian Healthy Eating Index Revised. The environmental impact was analysed according to estimates of CO2 equivalent emissions from meat consumption.SubjectsBrazilians (n 1677) aged 19 years and older were studied.ResultsThe mean red and processed meat intake was 138 g/d for men and 81 g/d for women. About 81 % of men and 58 % of women consumed more meat than recommended. Diet quality was inversely associated with excessive meat intake in men. In Brazil alone, greenhouse gas emissions from meat consumption, in 2003, were estimated at approximately 18 071 988 tonnes of CO2 equivalents, representing about 4 % of the total CO2 emitted by agriculture.ConclusionsThe excessive meat intake, associated with poorer diet quality observed, support initiatives and policies advising to reduce red and processed meat intake to within the recommended amounts, as part of a healthy and environmentally sustainable diet.

scholarly journals Meat intake and cancer risk: prospective analyses in UK Biobank

2019 ◽  
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.

scholarly journals Estimated Global, Regional, and National Cardiometabolic Disease Burdens Related to Red and Processed Meat Consumption: An Analysis from the Global Dietary Database (P10-073-19)

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dimitra Karageorgou ◽  
Victoria Miller ◽  
Frederick Cudhea ◽  
Jianyi Zhang ◽  
Peilin Shi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Meat Consumption ◽  
Assessment Model ◽  
Attributable Mortality ◽  
Cardiometabolic Disease ◽  
Processed Meat ◽  
Meat Intake ◽  
Diabetes Mortality ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Processed Meat Consumption ◽  
Red And Processed Meat

Abstract Objectives Red and processed meats are associated with cardiometabolic disease (CMD) risk; yet, corresponding global burdens are not well established. We aimed to quantify the impact of meat intake on coronary heart disease (CHD) and type 2 diabetes mortality by nation (n = 187), super-region (n = 9), age (20 + y), and sex using the largest standardized Global Dietary Database (GDD) available. Methods A comparative risk assessment model estimated the absolute and % CHD and diabetes mortality attributable to suboptimal unprocessed red and processed meat consumption, incorporating data and corresponding uncertainty on: intakes from the GDD, estimated by a Bayesian hierarchical imputation model using national and sub-national surveys worldwide (266 surveys; 1630,069 individuals; 113/187 countries; 82% of the world's population); etiologic effects of meat intake on CHD and diabetes mortality from meta-analyses of prospective cohorts; optimal population meat intakes based on observed intakes associated with lowest risk; and disease-specific deaths from the Global Burden of Diseases. Results In 2010, suboptimal red meat intake was associated with 43,987 (95% uncertainty interval: 42,243–45,635) diabetes deaths, accounting for 3.5% (3.4–3.6%) of global diabetes mortality. Highest proportional mortality was estimated in Central African Republic, United Arab Emirates, and Gabon (Figure 1). Similar attributable mortality was seen in men (4%) vs women (3%), and higher in younger (25–54 y; 5–7%) vs older (55–85 y; 1–4%) adults. Processed meat intake was linked to 510,214 (482,092–541,175) CHD and 86,923 (83,832–90,488) diabetes deaths, accounting for 7.3% (6.9–7.8%) of global CHD and 6.9% (6.7–7.2%) of diabetes mortality. CHD mortality was highest in Panama, Costa Rica, and Colombia, and diabetes mortality in Panama, Belarus, and El Salvador (Figure 2). Attributable mortality was higher in men vs women (CHD: 9 vs 6%; diabetes: 8 vs 6%), and in younger vs older adults (14–15% vs 4–11%; 12–15% vs 3–9%). Meat-related CMD burdens in 1990 and 2015 will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions Suboptimal processed meat intake contributed to substantial CMD mortality, greatly exceeding burdens attributed to unprocessed red meats. Such data highlight the need for strategies to reduce meat, particularly processed meat, consumption. Funding Sources Gates Foundation. Supporting Tables, Images and/or Graphs

scholarly journals Variation in Red Meat Categories Meaningfully Influences Red Meat Intake Estimates of the U.S. Population Aged 2 + Years

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. 1071-1071
Author(s):  
Lauren O'Connor ◽  
Kirsten Herrick ◽  
Ruth Parsons ◽  
Jill Reedy
Keyword(s):  
Red Meat ◽  
Dietary Guidelines ◽  
Processed Meat ◽  
Pairwise Comparisons ◽  
Eating Patterns ◽  
Meat Intake ◽  
Lean Meat ◽  
Red Meat Intake ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Red And Processed Meat

Abstract Objectives Limitations in dietary assessment methodology lead to broad and inconsistent red meat intake categories. For example, red meat is often combined with processed meat, which includes processed poultry. Our objective was to quantitatively assess how these limitations influence red meat intake estimates of the U.S. population. Methods Three distinct red meat categories were identified from a series of systematic literature reviews. By systematically disaggregating and reaggregating meat variables (lean meat oz-eq) from the USDA's Food Pattern Equivalents Database, the following categories were created: 1) ‘unprocessed red meat’, 2) ‘total red meat’ [unprocessed red meat + processed red meat], and 3) ‘mixed red and processed meat’ [unprocessed red meat + total processed meat which includes processed poultry]. The 2015–16 and 2017–18 cycles of NHANES (n = 15,039) were combined to estimate and compare mean intakes across these three categories as well as the proportion of the population that exceeded age- and sex-specific red meat allotments in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommended eating patterns for those aged 2 + years. The two-part correlated model of the NCI Usual Intake method in SAS was used. Estimates were adjusted for age, sex, race, and ethnicity and pairwise comparisons were made across categories; P &lt; 0.05. Results Mean intake estimates (lean meat oz-eq/day) differed by red meat category (pairwise comparisons P &lt; 0.00,001): 1.5 ± 0.04 for unprocessed red meat, 2.2 ± 0.05 for total red meat, 2.4 ± 0.05 for mixed red and processed meat. The % of the population exceeding their respective age-sex red meat allotment in the DGA eating patterns also differed by category (pairwise comparisons P &lt; 0.00,001): 18.3 ± 1.9% for unprocessed red meat, 45.1 ± 1.8% for total red meat, 55.2 ± 1.8% for mixed red and processed meat. Conclusions Our results emphasize the importance of accurate and transparent red meat categories in nutrition epidemiology when estimating population intakes. Future research should examine how differences in these intake categories can influence associations between red meat intake and chronic disease. Funding Sources Not applicable.

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

Foods ◽  
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.

scholarly journals Meat intake and cancer risk: prospective analyses in UK Biobank

2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 1540-1552
Author(s):  
Anika Knuppel ◽  
Keren Papier ◽  
Georgina K Fensom ◽  
Paul N Appleby ◽  
Julie A Schmidt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Multiple Testing ◽  
Red Meat ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Risk ◽  
Processed Meat ◽  
Uk Biobank ◽  
Meat Intake ◽  
Incidence Trends ◽  
Red And Processed Meat

Abstract Background Red and processed meat have been consistently associated with colorectal cancer risk, but evidence for other cancer sites and for poultry intake is limited. We therefore examined associations between total, red and processed meat and poultry intake and incidence for 20 common cancers. Methods We analyzed data from 474 996 participants (54% women) in UK Biobank. Participants were aged 37–73 years and cancer-free at baseline (2006–10). Multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine associations between baseline meat intake and cancer incidence. Trends in risk across the baseline categories were calculated, assigning re-measured intakes from a subsample. Results During a mean follow-up of 6.9 years, 28 955 participants were diagnosed with malignant cancer. After correction for multiple testing, red and processed meat combined, and processed meat, were each positively associated with colorectal cancer risk [hazard ratio (HR) per 70 g/day higher intake of red and processed meat 1.32, 95% confidence interval 1.14–1.53; HR per 20 g/day higher intake of processed meat 1.18, 1.03–1.31] and red meat was associated with colon cancer risk (HR per 50 g/day higher intake of red meat 1.36, 1.13–1.64). Positive associations of red meat intake with colorectal and prostate cancer, processed meat intake with rectal cancer and poultry intake with cancers of the lymphatic and haematopoietic tissues did not survive multiple testing. Conclusions Higher intake of red and processed meat was specifically associated with a higher risk of colorectal cancer; there was little evidence that meat intake was associated with risk of other cancers.

Abstract MP55: Red And Processed Meat And Alternative Protein Sources In Relation To Risk Of Fatal Coronary Heart Disease: A Pooled Analysis Of 16 Prospective Cohort Studies

Circulation ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 143 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Laila Al-Shaar ◽  
Molin Wang ◽  
Walter Willett ◽  
Stephanie Smith-Warner
Keyword(s):  
Dairy Products ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
Red Meat ◽  
Processed Meat ◽  
Meat Intake ◽  
Protein Sources ◽  
Fatal Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Alternative Protein ◽  
Plant Protein Sources ◽  
Red And Processed Meat

Background: Red and processed meat intake have been associated with higher risk of fatal coronary heart disease (CHD). However, very few studies have evaluated substitution of alternative protein sources for red and processed meat in relation to fatal CHD risk. Objective: We estimated the associations of substituting other animal and plant protein sources for total red meat, unprocessed red meat, and processed meat in relation to risk of fatal CHD. Methods: This pooled analysis was conducted within the Pooling Project of Prospective Studies of Diet and Cancer and included participants with no prior self-reported history of cardiovascular diseases or cancer. Diet was assessed by cohort-specific food frequency questionnaires collected at baseline. Total red meat included processed meat and unprocessed red meat. Animal protein sources included seafood, poultry, eggs, and low- and high-fat dairy products; plant protein sources included nuts and beans. After adjusting for dietary and non-dietary factors, study-specific relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using Cox proportional hazard models and then pooled using a random effects model. Isocaloric dietary substitution was evaluated by differences in coefficients in models including red meat and all alternative protein sources described above as continuous variables. Results: In preliminary analyses of 16 prospective cohorts including 1,364,211 participants (40% men and mean age of 57 ± 10 years) followed for a maximum of 32 years across studies, we identified 51,176 fatal CHD cases. A 100g/day increment in total red meat intake was associated with a 7% higher risk of fatal CHD, RR=1.07 (95% CI 1.04, 1.10). Substitutions of 200 kcal/day from nuts, low- and high-fat dairy products, and poultry for 200 kcal/d from total red meat were associated with 6-14% lower risks of fatal CHD. These associations were stronger when substituting the alternative protein sources for processed meat, especially among women (n=14,888 cases, 17-24% lower risk). Substituting 200 kcal/day from eggs for 200 kcal/day from total red meat and unprocessed red meat was associated with 8 and 14% higher risk of fatal CHD, respectively; this substitution for processed meat was weaker and not significant (4%). Results were similar after excluding the first 4 years of follow-up. Conclusions: Preliminary results from this international pooled analysis of 16 cohort studies provide more evidence about the risks of red and processed meat consumption. Replacement of red and processed meat with nuts, dairy products, or poultry may reduce the risk of fatal CHD.

scholarly journals Informing Health and Environmental Policies to Reduce Red and Processed Meat Intake in North America: Sociodemographic Predictors of Consumption in the US, Canada, and Mexico

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. 1400-1400
Author(s):  
Sarah Frank ◽  
Carolina Batis ◽  
Lana Vanderlee ◽  
Lindsay M Jaacks ◽  
Lindsey Smith Taillie
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
College Education ◽  
Red Meat ◽  
Processed Meat ◽  
Meat Intake ◽  
Health And Nutrition ◽  
The Us ◽  
Sociodemographic Predictors ◽  
Sociodemographic Correlates ◽  
Red And Processed Meat

Abstract Objectives Close economic ties have encouraged production and trade of meat between the US, Canada, and Mexico. Understanding the sociodemographic correlates of red and processed meat intake in North America may inform policies designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and non-communicable diseases. Methods Data were from one day of 24-hour dietary recall in the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2013–2016), Mexico National Health and Nutrition Survey (2016), and Canadian Community Health Survey (2015). Adult participants were classified as consumers or non-consumers of the following three categories: red meat (mammalian muscle and organ meat); processed meat (all meats processed for preservation and flavor); and any meat (red and/or processed meat). Negative binomial regression accounting for complex survey design was used to model sociodemographic correlates (sex, ten-year age categories, wealth, and education) of being a consumer of red, processed, and any meat. Results The overall prevalence of any meat consumption in a given day was higher in the US (74%) than in Canada (66%) or Mexico (63%). Age was not associated with meat intake. In the US and Canada, females were less likely to consume all three categories of meat (all P &lt; 0.001). In Mexico, females were less likely to be in the any meat consumer category (P &lt; 0.001). Compared to high school or lower, those with college education or higher were less likely to consume processed (all P &lt; 0.05) and any meat (all P &lt; 0.05). In the US only, college education or higher was associated with a lower likelihood of eating red meat (P &lt; 0.001). There was no association between education and meat intake in Mexico. Compared to the lowest wealth tertile, in Canada and Mexico, individuals in the highest wealth tertile were more likely to consume processed (all P &lt; 0.01) or any (all P &lt; 0.01) meat. In Mexico only, those with greater wealth were more likely to eat red meat (P &lt; 0.05). There was no association between wealth and meat intake in the US. Conclusions Overall consumption of red and processed meat remains high in North America. Although the sociodemographic predictors vary across country, population-based approaches to reduce meat intake are appropriate for all three settings. Funding Sources Carolina Population Center; Wellcome Trust.

scholarly journals A metabolomic study of red and processed meat intake and acylcarnitine concentrations in human urine and blood

2020 ◽  
Vol 112 (2) ◽  
pp. 381-388
Author(s):  
Roland Wedekind ◽  
Agneta Kiss ◽  
Pekka Keski-Rahkonen ◽  
Vivian Viallon ◽  
Joseph A Rothwell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intervention Study ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Red Meat ◽  
Processed Meat ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Meat Intake ◽  
Red Meat Intake ◽  
Red And Processed Meat

ABSTRACT Background Acylcarnitines (ACs) play a major role in fatty acid metabolism and are potential markers of metabolic dysfunction with higher blood concentrations reported in obese and diabetic individuals. Diet, and in particular red and processed meat intake, has been shown to influence AC concentrations but data on the effect of meat consumption on AC concentrations is limited. Objectives To investigate the effect of red and processed meat intake on AC concentrations in plasma and urine using a randomized controlled trial with replication in an observational cohort. Methods In the randomized crossover trial, 12 volunteers successively consumed 2 different diets containing either pork or tofu for 3 d each. A panel of 44 ACs including several oxidized ACs was analyzed by LC-MS in plasma and urine samples collected after the 3-d period. ACs that were associated with pork intake were then measured in urine (n = 474) and serum samples (n = 451) from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and nutrition (EPIC) study and tested for associations with habitual red and processed meat intake derived from dietary questionnaires. Results In urine samples from the intervention study, pork intake was positively associated with concentrations of 18 short- and medium-chain ACs. Eleven of these were also positively associated with habitual red and processed meat intake in the EPIC cross-sectional study. In blood, C18:0 was positively associated with red meat intake in both the intervention study (q = 0.004, Student's t-test) and the cross-sectional study (q = 0.033, linear regression). Conclusions AC concentrations in urine and blood were associated with red meat intake in both a highly controlled intervention study and in subjects of a cross-sectional study. Our data on the role of meat intake on this important pathway of fatty acid and energy metabolism may help understanding the role of red meat consumption in the etiology of some chronic diseases. This trial was registered at Clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03354130.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document