Concept: White meat
Arsenicals (roxarsone and nitarsone) used in poultry production likely increase inorganic arsenic (iAs), monomethylarsonic acid (MMA), dimethylarsinic acid (DMA), and roxarsone or nitarsone concentrations in poultry meat. The association between poultry intake and exposure to these arsenic species, as reflected in elevated urinary arsenic concentrations, however, is unknown.
There is suggestive but limited evidence for a relationship between meat intake and breast cancer (BC) risk. Few studies included Hispanic women. We investigated the association between meats and fish intake and BC risk among Hispanic and NHW women.
Prostate cancer remains a significant public health concern among men in the U.S. and worldwide. Epidemiologic studies have generally produced inconclusive results for dietary risk factors for prostate cancer, including consumption of red and processed meats. We aimed to update a previous meta-analysis of prospective cohorts of red and processed meats and prostate cancer with the inclusion of new and updated cohort studies, as well as evaluate meat cooking methods, heme iron, and heterocyclic amine (HCA) intake exposure data. A comprehensive literature search was performed and 26 publications from 19 different cohort studies were included. Random effects models were used to calculate summary relative risk estimates (SRREs) for high vs. low exposure categories. Additionally, meta-regression analyses and stratified intake analyses were conducted to evaluate dose-response relationships. The SRREs for total prostate cancer and total red meat consumption, fresh red meat consumption, and processed meat consumption were 1.02 (95 % CI: 0.92-1.12), 1.06 (95 % CI: 0.97-1.16), and 1.05 (95 % CI: 1.01-1.10), respectively. Analyses were also conducted for the outcomes of non-advanced, advanced, and fatal prostate cancer when sufficient data were available, but these analyses did not produce significant results. No significant SRREs were observed for any of the meat cooking methods, HCA, or heme iron analyses. Dose-response analyses did not reveal significant patterns of associations between red or processed meat and prostate cancer. In conclusion, the results from our analyses do not support an association between red meat or processed consumption and prostate cancer, although we observed a weak positive summary estimate for processed meats.
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.
Is there a relationship between red or processed meat intake and obesity? A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies
- Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity
- Published over 6 years ago
A body of literature exists regarding the association of red and processed meats with obesity; however, the nature and extent of this relation has not been clearly established. The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the relationship between red and processed meat intake and obesity. We searched multiple electronic databases for observational studies on the relationship between red and processed meat intake and obesity published until July 2013. Odds ratios (ORs) and means for obesity-related indices and for variables that may contribute to heterogeneity were calculated. A systematic review and a meta-analysis were conducted with 21 and 18 studies, respectively (n = 1,135,661). The meta-analysis (n = 113,477) showed that consumption of higher quantities of red and processed meats was a risk factor for obesity (OR: 1.37; 95% CI: 1.14-1.64). Pooled mean body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference (WC) trends showed that in comparison to those in the lowest ntile, subjects in the highest ntile of red and processed meat consumption had higher BMI (mean difference: 1.37; 95% CI: 0.90-1.84 for red meat; mean difference: 1.32; 95% CI: 0.64-2.00 for processed meat) and WC (mean difference: 2.79; 95% CI: 1.86-3.70 for red meat; mean difference: 2.77; 95% CI: 1.87-2.66 for processed meat). The current analysis revealed that red and processed meat intake is directly associated with risk of obesity, and higher BMI and WC. However, the heterogeneity among studies is significant. These findings suggest a decrease in red and processed meat intake.
Most previous studies of meat intake and total or cause-specific mortality were conducted in North America, whereas studies in other areas have been limited and reported inconsistent results. This study investigated the association of red meat or poultry intake with risk of total and cause-specific mortality, including cancer and cardiovascular disease (CVD), in two large population-based prospective cohort studies of 134,290 Chinese adult women and men in Shanghai. Meat intakes were assessed through validated food frequency questionnaires administered in person at baseline. Vital status and dates and causes of deaths were ascertained through annual linkage to the Shanghai Vital Statistics Registry and Shanghai Cancer Registry databases and home visits every 2-3 years. Cox regression was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the risk of death associated with quintiles of meat intake. During 803,265 person-years of follow up for women and 334,281 person-years of follow up for men, a total of 4,210 deaths in women and 2,733 deaths in men accrued. The median intakes of red meat were 43 g/day among women and 54 g/day among men, and pork constituted at least 95% of total meat intake for both women and men. Red meat intake was associated with increased total mortality among men, but not among women; the HR (95% CI) comparing the highest with the lowest quintiles were 1.18 (1.02-1.35) and 0.92 (0.82-1.03), respectively. This sex difference was statistically significant ( = 0.01). Red meat intake was associated with increased risk of ischemic heart disease mortality (HR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.05-1.89) and with decreased risk of hemorrhagic stroke mortality (HR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.45-0.87). There were suggestive inverse associations of poultry intake with risk of total and all-CVD mortality among men, but not among women. Further investigations are needed to elucidate the sex-specific associations between red meat intake and mortality.
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES:Epidemiological evidence is suggestive, but inconclusive, for an association between consumption of red and processed meat and risk of stroke. We aimed to assess this association by conducting a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies.SUBJECTS/METHODS:We performed a literature search on PubMed database through June 2012 to indentify prospective cohort studies of red and processed meat intake in relation to risk of stroke. Reference lists of the retrieved articles were also reviewed. Both fixed-effects and random-effects model were assumed to compute the summary risk estimates.RESULTS:Five large independent prospective cohort studies were identified. These studies contained a total of 2 39 251 subjects and 9593 stroke events. Comparing the highest category of consumption with lowest category, the pooled relative risks (RRs) of total stroke were 1.15 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.05-1.25) for total meat (red and processed meat combined) (n=4), 1.09 (95% CI, 1.01-1.18) for red meat (n=5) and 1.14 (95% CI, 1.05-1.25) for processed meat (n=5); the corresponding RRs of ischemic stroke (highest vs lowest quintile) were 1.15 (95% CI, 1.04-1.28), 1.13(95% CI, 1.01-1.25) and 1.19 (95% CI, 1.08-1.31). Consumption of red and/or processed meat was not associated with hemorrhagic stroke. In the dose-response analysis, the risk of stroke increased significantly by 10% and 13% for each 100 g per day increment in total and red meat consumption, respectively, and by 11% for each 50 g per day increment in processed meat consumption.CONCLUSION:Findings from this meta-analysis indicate that consumption of red and/or processed meat increase risk of stroke, in particular, ischemic stroke.European Journal of Clinical Nutrition advance online publication, 21 November 2012; doi:10.1038/ejcn.2012.180.
Few studies have assessed the association between consumption of red meat (RM) and processed red meats (PRM) and the incidence of metabolic syndrome (MetS) and results have been inconsistent. We investigated associations between total consumption of meat and its subtypes and incident MetS and estimated the effect of substituting RM or PRM for alternative protein-rich foods.
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to summarize the evidence on the relation of the intakes of 12 major food groups, including whole grains, refined grains, vegetables, fruits, nuts, legumes, eggs, dairy, fish, red meat, processed meat, and sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) with the risk of hypertension. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched systematically until June 2017 for prospective studies having quantitatively investigated the above-mentioned foods. We conducted meta-analysis on the highest compared with the lowest intake categories and linear and nonlinear dose-response meta-analyses to analyze the association. Summary RRs and 95% CIs were estimated by using a random-effects model. Overall, 28 reports were included in the meta-analysis. An inverse association for the risk of hypertension was observed for 30 g whole grains/d (RR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.87, 0.98), 100 g fruits/d (RR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.96, 0.99), 28 g nuts/d (RR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.45, 1.08), and 200 g dairy/d (RR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.94, 0.97), whereas a positive association for 100 g red meat/d (RR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.02, 1.28), 50 g processed meat/d (RR: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.26), and 250 mL SSB/d (RR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.10) was seen in the linear dose-response meta-analysis. Indication for nonlinear relations of the intakes of whole grains, fruits, fish, and processed meats with the risk of hypertension was detected. In summary, this comprehensive dose-response meta-analysis of 28 reports identified optimal intakes of whole grains, fruits, nuts, legumes, dairy, red and processed meats, and SSBs related to the risk of hypertension. These findings need to be seen under the light of very-low to low quality of meta-evidence. However, the findings support the current dietary guidelines in the prevention of hypertension.
Are meat and heme iron intake associated with pancreatic cancer? Results from the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Cohort
- International journal of cancer. Journal international du cancer
- Published almost 5 years ago
Several studies on pancreatic cancer have reported significant positive associations for intake of red meat but null associations for heme iron. We assessed total, red, white, and processed meat intake, meat cooking methods and doneness, and heme iron and mutagen intake in relation to pancreatic cancer in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study cohort. 322,846 participants (187,265 men; 135,581 women) successfully completed and returned the food frequency questionnaire between 1995-1996. After a mean follow-up of 9.2 years (up to 10.17 years), 1,417 individuals (895 men, 522 women) developed exocrine pancreatic cancer. Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), and trends were calculated using the median value of each quantile. Models incorporated age as the time metric and were adjusted for smoking history, BMI, self-reported diabetes, and energy-adjusted saturated fat. Pancreatic cancer risk significantly increased with intake of total meat (Q5 vs. Q1 HR=1.20, 95% CI 1.02-1.42, p-trend=0.03), red meat (HR=1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.48, p-trend=0.02), high-temperature cooked meat (HR=1.21, 95% CI 1.00-1.45, p-trend=0.02), grilled/barbequed meat (HR=1.24, 95% CI 1.03-1.50, p-trend=0.007), well/very well done meat (HR=1.32, 95% CI 1.10-1.58, p-trend = 0.005), and heme iron from red meat (Q4 vs. Q1 HR=1.21, 95% CI 1.01-1.45, p-trend=0.04). When stratified by sex, these associations remained significant in men but not women except for white meat intake in women (HR = 1.33, 95% CI 1.02-1.74, p-trend = 0.04). Additional studies should confirm our findings that consuming heme iron from red meat increases pancreatic cancer risk. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.