Estimated effects of reductions in processed meat consumption and unprocessed red meat consumption on occurrences of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, colorectal cancer, and mortality in the USA: a microsimulation study.

BACKGROUND: High consumption of processed meat and unprocessed red meat is associated with increased risk of multiple chronic diseases, although there is substantial uncertainty regarding the relationship for unprocessed red meat. We developed a microsimulation model to estimate how reductions in processed meat and unprocessed red meat consumption could affect rates of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, colorectal cancer, and mortality in the US adult population. METHODS: We used data from two versions of the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, one conducted during 2015-16 and one conducted during 2017-18, to create a simulated US population. The starting cohort was restricted to respondents aged 18 years or older who were not pregnant and had 2 days of dietary-recall data. First, we used previously developed risk models to estimate the baseline disease risk of an individual. For type 2 diabetes we used a logistic-regression model and for cardiovascular disease and colorectal cancer we used Cox proportional-hazard models. We then multiplied baseline risk by relative risk associated with individual processed meat and unprocessed red meat consumption. Prevented occurrences of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, colorectal cancer, and mortality were computed by taking the difference between the incidence in the baseline and intervention scenarios. All stages were repeated for ten iterations to correspond to a 10-year time span. Scenarios were reductions of 5%, 10%, 30%, 50%, 75%, and 100% in grams consumed of processed meat, unprocessed red meat, or both. Each scenario was repeated 50 times for uncertainty analysis. FINDINGS: The total number of individual respondents included in the simulated population was 8665, representing 242 021 876 US adults. 4493 (51·9%) of 8665 individuals were female and 4172 (48·1%) were male; mean age was 49·54 years (SD 18·38). At baseline, weighted mean daily consumption of processed meat was 29·1 g, with a 30% reduction being 8·7 g per day, and of unprocessed red meat was 46·7 g, with a 30% reduction being 14·0 g per day. We estimated that a 30% reduction in processed meat intake alone could lead to 352 900 (95% uncertainty interval 345 500-359 900) fewer occurrences of type 2 diabetes, 92 500 (85 600-99 900) fewer occurrences of cardiovascular disease, 53 300 (51 400-55 000) fewer occurrences of colorectal cancer, and 16 700 (15 300-17 700) fewer all-cause deaths during the 10-year period. A 30% reduction in unprocessed red meat intake alone could lead to 732 600 (725 700-740 400) fewer occurrences of type 2 diabetes, 291 500 (283 900-298 800) fewer occurrences of cardiovascular disease, 32 200 (31 500-32 700) fewer occurrences of colorectal cancer, and 46 100 (45 300-47 200) fewer all-cause deaths during the 10-year period. A 30% reduction in both processed meat and unprocessed red meat intake could lead to 1 073 400 (1 060 100-1 084 700) fewer occurrences of type 2 diabetes, 382 400 (372 100-391 000) fewer occurrences of cardiovascular disease, 84 400 (82 100-86 200) fewer occurrences of colorectal cancer, and 62 200 (60 600-64 400) fewer all-cause deaths during the 10-year period. INTERPRETATION: Reductions in processed meat consumption could reduce the burden of some chronic diseases in the USA. However, more research is needed to increase certainty in the estimated effects of reducing unprocessed red meat consumption. FUNDING: The Wellcome Trust.

The association between major gastrointestinal cancers and red and processed meat and fish consumption: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the observational studies.

BACKGROUND: The association between red meat, fish, and processed meat consumption and the risk of developing gastrointestinal (GI) cancers remains inconclusive despite several investigations. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies to update the existing scientific evidence. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases until May 20, 2023. We analyzed observational studies that examined the associations between red and processed meat and fish consumption and GI cancers. We assessed between-study heterogeneity using the χ2 and τ2 tests, as well as I2 statistics. We explored the likelihood of publication bias using Begg's and Egger's tests and trim-and-fill analysis. We reported the overall effect sizes as odds ratios (ORs) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Of the 21,004 studies identified, 95 studies involving 5,794,219 participants were included in the meta-analysis. The consumption of high levels of red meat, as compared to low levels, was found to significantly increase the risk of developing esophageal, pancreatic, liver, colon, rectal, and colorectal cancers. Similarly, the consumption of high levels of processed meat, as compared to low levels, significantly increased the risk of pancreatic, colon, rectal, and colorectal cancers. In contrast, the consumption of high levels of fish, as compared to low levels, significantly reduced the risk of colon, rectal, and colorectal cancers. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis provides updated evidence on the association between red meat, processed meat, and fish consumption and the risk of developing five major types of GI cancers.

Consumption of red, white, and processed meat and odds of developing kidney damage and diabetic nephropathy (DN) in women: a case control study.

Diabetic nephropathy (DN) is one of the most prevalent and severe complications of diabetes mellitus (DM) and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. We aimed to investigate the associations between red, processed, and white meat consumption and the odds of developing kidney damage and DN in women. We enrolled 105 eligible women with DN and 105 controls (30-65 years). A validated and reliable food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) was used to evaluate the consumption of red, processed, and white meat. Biochemical variables and anthropometric measurements were assessed for all patients using pre-defined protocols. Binary logistic regression was conducted to examine possible associations. The results of the present study showed that there was a direct significant association between high consumption of red meat and processed meats and odds of microalbuminuria (red meat 2.30, 95% CI 1.25, 4.22; P-value = 0.007, processed meat: OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.18, 3.95; P-value = 0.01), severe albuminuria (red meat OR 3.25, 95% CI 1.38, 7.46; P-value = 0.007, processed meat: OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.01, 5.49; P-value = 0.04), BUN levels (red meat: OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.10, 5.93; P-value = 0.02, processed meat: OR 2.42, 95% CI 1.04, 5.62; P-value = 0.03), and DN (red meat 2.53, 95% CI 1.45, 4.42; P-value = 0.001, processed meat: OR 2.21; 95% CI 1.27, 3.85; P-value = 0.005). In summary, our study suggests that higher consumption of red and processed meat sources may be associated with microalbuminuria, severe albuminuria, higher BUN level, and higher odds of DN.

The association of red and processed meat with gestational diabetes mellitus: Results from 2 Canadian birth cohort studies.

OBJECTIVE: Red and processed meat is considered risk factors of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), but the evidence is inconclusive. We aimed to examine the association between red and processed meat intake and odds of GDM among South Asian and White European women living in Canada. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional analysis of pregnant women from two birth cohorts: SouTh Asian biRth cohorT (START; n = 976) and Family Atherosclerosis Monitoring In earLY life (FAMILY; n = 581). Dietary intake was assessed using a validated 169-item semi-quantitative food-frequency questionnaire (FFQ). Multivariate logistic regression models were used to examine the associations between gestational diabetes and: 1) total red and processed meat; 2) unprocessed red meat; 3) processed meat and GDM after adjustment for potential confounders. RESULTS: There were 241 GDM cases in START and 91 in FAMILY. The median total red and processed meat intake were 1.5 g/d (START) and 52.8 g/d (FAMILY). In START, the multivariable-adjusted odds ratio (OR) showed neither lower nor higher intakes of unprocessed red meat (p-trend = 0.68), processed meat (p-trend = 0.90), or total red and processed meat (p-trend = 0.44), were associated with increased odds of GDM, when compared with medium intake. Similar results were observed in FAMILY except for processed meat intake [OR = 0.94 (95% CI 0.47-1.91), for medium versus low and OR = 1.51 (95% CI 0.77-2.29) for medium versus high; p-trend = 0.18] after adjusting for additional dietary factors such as the diet quality score, total fiber, saturated fat and glycemic load. CONCLUSION: Medium compared with low or high red and processed meat intake is not associated with GDM in White Europeans and South Asians living in Canada.

Association between processed and unprocessed red meat consumption and risk of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis.

Background: The nature of the relationship between red meat consumption and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) remains unclear. Through this meta-analysis, we aimed to determine the association and dose-response relationship between red meat consumption (both processed and unprocessed) and the risk of NAFLD. Methods: We systematically searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Scopus from inception to February 2022 for observational studies in which the exposure of interest was red meat consumption; the outcome of interest was the risk of NAFLD; and where odds ratios (ORs) or risk ratios were provided or could be calculated. We used random-effects meta-analyses to pool the effect sizes and performed analyses to estimate the linearity of the dose-response relationships between red meat intake and NAFLD risk. Results: We included 10 studies in this review. The meta-analysis showed a significant association between the intake of red meat (OR = 1.27; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.07-1.50, P = 0.000, I2 = 81%), processed red meat (OR = 1.20; 95% CI = 1.04-1.3, P = 0.162, I2 = 34.9%) or unprocessed red meat (OR = 1.28; 95% CI = 1.05-1.55, P = 0.001, I2 = 76.2%) and the risk of NAFLD. We also found a significant linear dose-response association between processed red meat intake and NAFLD, with each 25-g increment of processed red meat intake per day was associated with an 11.1% higher risk of NAFLD (OR = 1.11; 95% CI = 1.01-1.22, P = 0.029), and a nonlinear association between unprocessed meat intake and NAFLD (P = 0.003 for nonlinearity). Conclusions: Our findings indicate a potential positive association between red meat consumption (both processed and unprocessed) and NAFLD risk, especially in relation to increased intake of processed red meat compared to unprocessed red meat. However, caution is advised in interpreting these results; further research could establish a clearer understanding of the relationship between red meat consumption and NAFLD risk. Registration: PROSPERO: CRD42022332839.

Observational Dose-Response Meta-Analysis Methods May Bias Risk Estimates at Low Consumption Levels: The Case of Meat and Colorectal Cancer.

Observational studies of foods and health are susceptible to bias, particularly from confounding between diet and other lifestyle factors. Common methods for deriving dose-response meta-analysis (DRMA) may contribute to biased or overly certain risk estimates. We used DRMA models to evaluate the empirical evidence for colorectal cancer (CRC) association with unprocessed red meat (RM) and processed meats (PM), and the consistency of this association for low and high consumers under different modeling assumptions. Using the Global Burden of Disease project's systematic reviews as a start, we compiled a data set of studies of PM with 29 cohorts contributing 23,522,676 person-years and of 23 cohorts for RM totaling 17,259,839 person-years. We fitted DRMA models to lower consumers only [consumption < United States median of PM (21 g/d) or RM (56 g/d)] and compared them with DRMA models using all consumers. To investigate impacts of model selection, we compared classical DRMA models against an empirical model for both lower consumers only and for all consumers. Finally, we assessed if the type of reference consumer (nonconsumer or mixed consumer/nonconsumer) influenced a meta-analysis of the lowest consumption arm. We found no significant association with consumption of 50 g/d RM using an empirical fit with lower consumption (relative risk [RR] 0.93 (0.8-1.02) or all consumption levels (1.04 (0.99-1.10)), while classical models showed RRs as high as 1.09 (1.00-1.18) at 50g/day. PM consumption of 20 g/d was not associated with CRC (1.01 (0.87-1.18)) when using lower consumer data, regardless of model choice. Using all consumption data resulted in association with CRC at 20g/day of PM for the empirical models (1.07 (1.02-1.12)) and with as little as 1g/day for classical models. The empirical DRMA showed nonlinear, nonmonotonic relationships for PM and RM. Nonconsumer reference groups did not affect RM (P = 0.056) or PM (P = 0.937) association with CRC in lowest consumption arms. In conclusion, classical DRMA model assumptions and inclusion of higher consumption levels influence the association between CRC and low RM and PM consumption. Furthermore, a no-risk limit of 0 g/d consumption of RM and PM is inconsistent with the evidence.

Partial substitution of red meat or processed meat with plant-based foods and the risk of colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Shifting from animal-based to plant-based diets could reduce colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence. Currently, the impacts of these dietary shifts on CRC risk are ill-defined. Therefore, we examined partial substitutions of red or processed meat with whole grains, vegetables, fruits or a combination of these in relation to CRC risk in Finnish adults. METHODS: We pooled five Finnish cohorts, resulting in 43 788 participants aged ≥ 25 years (79% men). Diet was assessed by validated food frequency questionnaires at study enrolment. We modelled partial substitutions of red (100 g/week) or processed meat (50 g/week) with corresponding amounts of plant-based foods. Cohort-specific hazard ratios (HR) for CRC were calculated using Cox proportional hazards models and pooled together using random-effects models. Adjustments included age, sex, energy intake and other relevant confounders. RESULTS: During the median follow-up of 28.8 years, 1124 CRCs were diagnosed. We observed small risk reductions when red meat was substituted with vegetables (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.95 - 0.99), fruits (0.97, 0.94 - 0.99), or whole grains, vegetables and fruits combined (0.97, 0.95 - 0.99). For processed meat, these substitutions yielded 1% risk reductions. Substituting red or processed meat with whole grains was associated with a decreased CRC risk only in participants with < median whole grain intake (0.92, 0.86 - 0.98; 0.96, 0.93 - 0.99, respectively; pinteraction=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Even small, easily implemented substitutions of red or processed meat with whole grains, vegetables or fruits could lower CRC risk in a population with high meat consumption. These findings broaden our insight into dietary modifications that could foster CRC primary prevention.

How to Keep the Balance between Red and Processed Meat Intake and Physical Activity Regarding Mortality: A Dose-Response Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Non-communicable diseases have become a major threat to public health, with cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and cancer being the top two causes of death each year. OBJECTIVE: Our objective is to evaluate the balanced association between the effect of red and processed meat intake on the risk of death and the effect of physical activity on the risk of mortality, where the risk of death includes all causes, CVDs, and cancers. METHODS: We searched electronic databases, including PubMed, ISI Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, for prospective studies reporting risk estimates for the association between the intake of red and processed meat, walking, and muscle-strengthening activity (MSA) and the risk of mortality from all causes, CVDs, and cancer. We extracted fully adjusted effect estimates from original studies and performed a summary analysis using the fixed and random-effect models. RESULTS: A conventional meta-analysis showed that red meat and processed meat were positively associated with the risk of mortality, and daily steps and MSA were negatively associated with the risk of death. Further analysis of the dose-response relationship showed that a risk reduction (20%) from 39.5 min/week of MSA or 4100 steps/d was equivalent to an increased risk of all-cause mortality from a daily intake of 103.4 g/d of red meat or 50 g/d of processed meat. The risk was further decreased as the number of steps per day increased, but the risk reversed when the MSA exceeded the threshold (39.5 min/week). CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to physical activity is an effective way to reduce the risk of mortality due to meat intake. However, the total intake of red meat and processed meat should be controlled, especially the latter. Walking is recommended as the main daily physical activity of choice, while MSAs are preferred when time is limited, but it should be noted that longer MSAs do not provide additional benefits.

The association between red, processed and white meat consumption and risk of pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies.

PURPOSE: The association between meat consumption and the risk of pancreatic cancer has not been comprehensively investigated by different types of meat. The current study was conducted to evaluate this association. METHODS: PubMed and Web of Science databases were used to search for prospective cohort studies on meat consumption and pancreatic cancer risk through May 2022. A meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models to combine study-specific relative risks (RR). The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. RESULTS: Twenty prospective cohort studies including 3,934,909 participants and 11,315 pancreatic cancer cases were identified. The pooled RR of pancreatic cancer for the highest versus lowest white meat intake category was 1.14 (95% CI: 1.03-1.27). There was no significant association between consumption of red meat and processed meat and pancreatic cancer risk in the highest versus lowest analysis. In dose-response analyses, pooled RRs were 1.14 (95% CI: 1.01-1.28) for an increase in red meat consumption of 120 g per day and 1.26 (95% CI: 1.08-1.47) for an increase in white meat consumption of 100 g per day, respectively. Processed meat consumption showed neither a linear nor a non-linear association with pancreatic cancer risk. CONCLUSION: Findings from this meta-analysis suggested that high consumption of red meat and white meat is associated with an increased risk of pancreatic cancer. Future prospective studies are warranted to confirm the association between meat consumption and the risk of pancreatic cancer.

Associations of the consumption of unprocessed red meat and processed meat with the incidence of cardiovascular disease and mortality, and the dose-response relationship: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine the associations of unprocessed red meat and processed meat consumption with cardiovascular disease (CVD) incidence and mortality, and the dose-response relationship. METHODS: Published literature was retrieved through a structured search of 10 electronic databases: MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, SciELO, LILACS, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane (CENTRAL), WHOLIS, PAHO and Embase, without language or year of publication restrictions. In addition, we searched the references of published studies. This systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes: The PRISMA Statement. RESULTS: Twenty-one prospective cohort studies were included in the systematic review. The CVDs evaluated in the inserted studies were stroke, heart failure (HF) and coronary heart disease (CHD). Considering the heterogeneity found in the studies, for the meta-analysis, 9 articles were included. The results presented in the meta-analysis of the association of consumption of unprocessed red meat and CVD indicated that there was a significant association with total stroke incidence (RR 1.10; 95%; CI 1.01 to 1.19; p = 0.02). There was no association with Ischemic stroke incidence, nor CHD Mortality with consumption of unprocessed red meat. However, for Hemorrhagic Stroke Mortality the assessment in the consumption of unprocessed red meat showed an association of protection for women (RR 0.64; 95%; CI 0.45 to 0.91; p = 0.01). As for the results of the meta-analysis of the association between consumption of processed meat and CVD, they indicated that there was a significant association with total stroke incidence (RR 1.17; 95%; CI 1.08 to 1.26; p < 0.0001). There was no association with Ischemic stroke, nor with CHD Mortality with consumption of processed meat. Some studies that showed no association of risk, presented a significant linear trend dose response for the association of the consumption of unprocessed red meat (Bernstein et al. 2010; Nagao et al. 2012) or processed meat (Bernstein et al. 2012) and CVD. CONCLUSION: According to the results found in the meta-analysis, the consumption of unprocessed red meat and processed meat are associated with the incidence of stroke, however, no positive association was observed in relation to mortality from CVD. This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol was registered on the PROSPERO (number: CRD42019100914).

Red/processed meat consumption and non-cancer-related outcomes in humans: umbrella review.

The associations of red/processed meat consumption and cancer-related health outcomes have been well discussed. The umbrella review aimed to summarise the associations of red/processed meat consumption and various non-cancer-related outcomes in humans. We systematically searched the systematic reviews and meta-analyses of associations between red/processed meat intake and health outcomes from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library databases. The umbrella review has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD 42021218568). A total of 40 meta-analyses were included. High consumption of red meat, particularly processed meat, was associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality, CVD and metabolic outcomes. Dose-response analysis revealed that an additional 100 g/d red meat intake was positively associated with a 17 % increased risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), 15 % increased risk of CHD, 14 % of hypertension and 12 % of stroke. The highest dose-response/50 g increase in processed meat consumption at 95 % confident levels was 1·37, 95 % CI (1·22, 1·55) for T2DM, 1·27, 95 % CI (1·09, 1·49) for CHD, 1·17, 95 % CI (1·02, 1·34) for stroke, 1·15, 95 % CI (1·11, 1·19) for all-cause mortality and 1·08, 95 % CI (1·02, 1·14) for heart failure. In addition, red/processed meat intake was associated with several other health-related outcomes. Red and processed meat consumption seems to be more harmful than beneficial to human health in this umbrella review. It is necessary to take the impacts of red/processed meat consumption on non-cancer-related outcomes into consideration when developing new dietary guidelines, which will be of great public health importance. However, more additional randomised controlled trials are warranted to clarify the causality.

Heterocyclic amines in cooked meat products, shortcomings during evaluation, factors influencing formation, risk assessment and mitigation strategies.

At this point in time, the evidence of a link between well-done meat intake and the incidence of cancer is stronger than it was 20 years ago. Several cohort and case-control studies have confirmed this evidence, and have shown a higher odd ratio and increased exposure to heterocyclic amines (HCAs) among those who frequently consume red meat. However, in most epidemiological studies, dietary assessment, combined with analytical data, is used to estimate the intake of HCAs, which has many inconsistencies. In addition, there is a lack of findings indicating a substantial correlation between various factors, like types of raw meat, types of meat products, and cooking methods that directly or indirectly influence the occurrence of cancer. Although numerous mitigation strategies have been developed to reduce HCAs levels in meat, there is still a high prevalence of carcinogenesis caused by HCAs in humans. The aim of this review is to summarise conflicting reports, address shortcomings and identify emerging trends of cutting-edge research related to HCAs.

Processed Meat Consumption and the Risk of Cancer: A Critical Evaluation of the Constraints of Current Evidence from Epidemiological Studies.

Based on a large volume of observational scientific studies and many summary papers, a high consumption of meat and processed meat products has been suggested to have a harmful effect on human health. These results have led guideline panels worldwide to recommend to the general population a reduced consumption of processed meat and meat products, with the overarching aim of lowering disease risk, especially of cancer. We revisited and updated the evidence base, evaluating the methodological quality and the certainty of estimates in the published systematic reviews and meta-analyses that examined the association between processed meat consumption and the risk of cancer at different sites across the body, as well as the overall risk of cancer mortality. We further explored if discrepancies in study designs and risks of bias could explain the heterogeneity observed in meta-analyses. In summary, there are severe methodological limitations to the majority of the previously published systematic reviews and meta-analyses that examined the consumption of processed meat and the risk of cancer. Many lacked the proper assessment of the methodological quality of the primary studies they included, or the literature searches did not fulfill the methodological standards needed in order to be systematic and transparent. The primary studies included in the reviews had a potential risk for the misclassification of exposure, a serious risk of bias due to confounding, a moderate to serious risk of bias due to missing data, and/or a moderate to serious risk of selection of the reported results. All these factors may have potentially led to the overestimation of the risk related to processed meat intake across all cancer outcomes. Thus, with the aim of lowering the risk of cancer, the recommendation to reduce the consumption of processed meat and meat products in the general population seems to be based on evidence that is not methodologically strong.

Consumo de embutidos en mujeres costarricenses: efecto del nivel socioeconómico / Intake of processed meats by Costa Rican women: effect of socioeconomic status

Resumen Introducción: El consumo de embutidos se ha asociado con serios problemas de salud que son comunes entre la población femenina. En el 2015 la Agencia Internacional para la Investigación en Cáncer clasificó los embutidos, como carcinógenos para los seres humanos ya que su ingesta está relacionada con el cáncer colorrectal. El aumento en el consumo de embutidos, los cuales son un alimento fuente de proteína de bajo costo, es diferencial según nivel socioeconómico y puede tener un impacto en la incidencia de enfermedades crónicas en la población. Objetivo: Examinar la asociación entre el consumo de embutidos y (a) la ingesta total de proteína, (b) la ingesta inadecuada de proteína, según NSE. Métodos: Se seleccionó una muestra (N = 135) de mujeres de 25 a 45 años, con 1 a 4 hijos, pertenecientes a tres diferentes niveles socioeconómicos, residentes de dos cantones del Gran Área Metropolitana de San José, Costa Rica, entre junio 2014 y marzo 2015. Mediante el uso de fotografías se indagó la percepción de las mujeres en cuanto al costo y su preferencia de consumo de 12 distintos alimentos, entre los cuales se incluyó los embutidos. Por medio de recordatorios alimentarios de 24 horas recolectados en tres visitas diferentes, y el uso de la base de datos de composición de alimentos ValorNut, se midió el consumo de proteína total en gramos y se determinó la cantidad promedio de veces por día que las mujeres consumen embutidos. A partir del peso de cada participante se determinó su requerimiento de proteína. La ingesta inadecuada de proteína se estimó como la diferencia entre el requerimiento y la ingesta observada. Mediante un modelo de regresión lineal se determinó la asociación entre el consumo total de proteína medido en gramos y la cantidad de veces por día que se ingiere embutidos. Mediante un modelo de regresión logística se estimó la asociación entre la ingesta inadecuada de proteína y la cantidad de veces por día que se ingiere embutidos. Resultados: Los embutidos son percibidos como la fuente de proteína menos apetecible, sin embargo, fue la tercera fuente de proteína más consumida. El consumo de embutidos difiere según NSE (P < 0.01), en el alto NSE es donde se consumen con menor frecuencia. Los embutidos más comúnmente consumidos fueron mortadela (bajo NSE), salchichón (NSE medio), y jamón de pavo (alto NSE). El consumo de embutidos se asocia significativamente con un incremento en la ingesta de proteína. Se encontró una asociación inversa entre el NSE y la ingesta inadecuada de proteína. Conclusiones: El consumo de embutidos está asociado con el nivel socioeconómico. Es probable que las mujeres consuman embutidos porque los perciben como un alimento fuente de proteína de bajo costo. Se requiere establecer estrategias educativas que ayuden a las mujeres a identificar sus necesidades alimentarias de proteína y a conciliar estas necesidades con la adquisición de alimentos saludables a un costo aceptable.

Abstract Introduction: Intake of processed meats has been associated with serious health problems that are common among women. In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified processed meats as human carcinogens, associated specifically with colon cancer. The increase in intake of processed meats, which are a low-cost source of dietary protein, varies by socioeconomic status (SES) and can impact chronic disease incidence. Objective: Examine the association between processed meats intake and (a) total protein intake, (b) inadequate protein intake, by SES. Methods: This study included a representative sample (N = 135) of women age 25 to 45 years, with one to four children, from three different socioeconomic groups who were residents of two counties from the Greater Metropolitan Area of San José, Costa Rica between June 2014 and March 2015. Using photographs, we examined women's perceptions of the cost and perceived desirability of 12 different foods, including processed meats. Using 24-hour dietary recalls collected on three different days, and the ValorNut food composition database, we estimated total protein intake, in grams, and determined the intake frequency (times/day) of processed meat. Each women's dietary protein requirement was estimated based on her bodyweight. Inadequate protein intake was calculated as the difference between protein requirement and actual intake. A linear regression model was used to determine the association between total protein intake in grams and intake frequency (times/day) of processed meat. A logistic regression model was used to estimate the association between low protein intake and intake frequency (times/day) of processed meat. Results: Processed meats were perceived as the least preferred protein source but were the third most commonly consumed protein source. Consumption of processed meats differed by SES and was lower in the higher SES group (P < 0.01). The most commonly consumed processed meats by SES were "mortadella" (low-SES), sausages (middle-SES), and sliced turkey/ham (high-SES). Processed meat intake was significantly associated with an increase in protein intake. There was an inverse association between SES and inadequate protein intake. Conclusions: Processed meat intake is associated with SES. Women may consume processed meats because they are perceived to be a low-cost protein source. Educational strategies are needed to help women identify their protein needs and meet those needs with healthier and affordable dietary alternatives.

Red meat and processed meat consumption and the risk of dyslipidemia in Korean adults: A prospective cohort study based on the Health Examinees (HEXA) study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There has been conflicting results on the effect of red meat and processed meat intake on the dyslipidemia risk. Moreover, studies in Asian population with lower meat intake than the Western population are lacking. In this study, we aimed to investigate the association between red and processed meat consumption and the dyslipidemia risk by sex among Koreans. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 20,407 participants from a prospective cohort were divided into quintiles according to their red meat consumption and tertiles according to their processed meat consumption based on the validated semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire. The Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to estimate the relative risk and 95% confidence interval of dyslipidemia according to red and processed meat consumption. Higher red meat consumption was associated with a 34% and 10% increased risk of hypercholesterolemia in both men and women, and further, a 58% and 17% increased risk of hyper-low-density lipoprotein cholesterolemia and dyslipidemia, in men, compared to the lowest consumption group. Higher processed meat consumption was associated with a 38% and 9% increased risk of hypercholesterolemia, 29% and 18% increased risk of hypertriglyceridemia, and 32% and 10% increased risk of dyslipidemia in both men and women, respectively, compared to the lowest consumption group. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study can provide compelling evidence on Asian population that red and processed meat consumption can lead to a higher risk of dyslipidemia.

Red and processed meat consumption and cancer outcomes: Umbrella review.

The purpose of this umbrella review was to evaluate the quality of evidence, validity and biases of the associations between red and processed meat consumption and multiple cancer outcomes according to existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The umbrella review identified 72 meta-analyses with 20 unique outcomes for red meat and 19 unique outcomes for processed meat. Red meat consumption was associated with increased risk of overall cancer mortality, non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), bladder, breast, colorectal, endometrial, esophageal, gastric, lung and nasopharyngeal cancer. Processed meat consumption might increase the risk of overall cancer mortality, NHL, bladder, breast, colorectal, esophageal, gastric, nasopharyngeal, oral cavity and oropharynx and prostate cancer. Dose-response analyses revealed that 100 g/d increment of red meat and 50 g/d increment of processed meat consumption were associated with 11%-51% and 8%-72% higher risk of multiple cancer outcomes, respectively, and seemed to be not correlated with any benefit.

Habitual fish intake negatively correlates with prevalence of frailty among patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Frailty is a geriatric syndrome characterized by anabolic-catabolic imbalance and multisystem dysregulation resulting in increased adverse health outcomes, and is closely related with dietary habits in the general population. Although chronic inflammatory diseases are thought to accelerate development of frailty, correlations between rheumatoid arthritis (RA), frailty and dietary habits have not been examined. We performed a cross-sectional study using our cohort database (KURAMA cohort), and classified 306 participants into three groups (robust, prefrail and frail) according to the Study of Osteoporotic Fracture (SOF) criteria. Multivariate logistic analysis revealed that the presence of frailty/prefrailty was significantly correlated with the disease activity score (DAS28-ESR) (OR 1.70 (1.30-2.22), p < 0.0001). Additional analyses of frailty and food intake showed that 5 foods (fish, meat, milk, vegetables and fruits) of 20 groups on the questionnaire were inversely associated with the prevalence of frail/prefrail categories. In multivariate analysis with the five nutrients, fish intake (> two times a week) was an independent covariate negatively correlated with frailty/prefrailty (OR 0.35 (0.19-0.63), p = 0.00060). In conclusion, habitual fish intake may play a key role in nutritional intervention to prevent progression of frailty and RA.

Meat lipids, NaCl and carnitine: Do they unveil the conundrum of the association between red and processed meat intake and cardiovascular diseases?_Invited Review.

The assessment of the actual contribution of red or processed meat to increasing the risk of suffering cardiovascular diseases (CVD) requires identification of specific harmful components and their underlying pathological mechanisms. In regards to CVD, meat lipids and their oxidation products have been recurrently studied due to their implications on lipid metabolism, hypercholesterolemia, obesity, and risk of suffering vascular events such as stroke. The impact of excess NaCl intake on increasing blood pressure is well-established and processed meat products have been recognized as a major contributor to dietary sodium in developed countries. Recent evidence has also suggested carnitine from red meat, as a precursor for trimethylamine-N-oxide, which has been shown to cause atherosclerosis, may increase the risk of suffering CVD in experimental animals. The present review aims to provide an updated overview, including evidence, controversies and unresolved questions on both the epidemiology and mechanisms relating red and processed meat consumption to CVD.

Negligible Oleandrin Content of Hot Dogs Cooked on Nerium oleander Skewers.

INTRODUCTION: The Nerium oleander plant contains cardenolides that may cause human poisoning when ingested. A long-standing belief holds that it is possible to be poisoned by eating hot dogs or other foods cooked on Nerium oleander branch skewers. Oleandrin levels in frankfurters cooked on fresh and dry Nerium oleander skewers were measured. METHODS: Hot dogs were cooked separately on either dried or fresh oleander branch skewers using a disposable charcoal grill. The hot dogs were then frozen and transported to an analytical laboratory where oleandrin content was measured via liquid chromatography/mass spectroscopy (LC/MS). RESULTS: The oleandrin content of hot dogs cooked on dried and fresh skewers did not exceed 343 ng and 701 ng, respectively. CONCLUSION: Hot dogs cooked on Nerium oleander skewers contain a negligible amount of oleandrin with respect to that sufficient to cause human poisoning. Reports of poisonings occurring in this manner are most likely the result of an urban myth.