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.

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 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.

Recent advances in heterocyclic aromatic amines: An update on food safety and hazardous control from food processing to dietary intake.

Heterocyclic aromatic amines (HAAs) as probable carcinogenic substances are mainly generated in meat products during thermal processing. Numerous studies have contributed to the analysis, formation, and mitigation of HAAs during food processing. However, few articles have comprehensively reviewed food safety aspects from both food processing and dietary intake regarding the formation, mitigation, metabolism, biomarkers for exposure, hazard control, and risk assessment of HAAs, and related food safety researches. Several factors may influence the generation of HAAs, including processing temperature, processing time, and chemical composition of the meat. Nonetheless, these mutagenic compounds are attenuated to different levels by the addition of natural or synthetic flavorings and antioxidant-rich marinades, as well as pretreatments using technique such as microwave heating. After dietary intake, different types of HAAs are metabolized in humans by several enzymes, including cytochrome P450s, peroxidases, N-acetyltransferases, sulfotransferases, uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferases, and glutathione S-transferases. Their primary metabolites are further conjugated with DNA or ultimately excreted in urine and feces. The 2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b]pyridine in hair as well as DNA, hemoglobin, and serum albumin adducts has been considered as biomarkers for exposure assessment. Dietary intake information obtained from questionnaires and the results of epidemiological investigations have shown a positive relationship between the intakes of red meat and processed meat and high risk of cancer incidence. As several cancers have been reported to be associated with HAAs, HAAs should be both effectively reduced during food processing and controlled from dietary intake to facilitate human health.

Association between meat intake and mortality due to all-cause and major causes of death in a Japanese population.

PURPOSE: We examined the association between meat intake and mortality due to all-cause and major causes of death using a population-based cohort study in Japan. METHODS: 87,507 Japanese aged between 45 and 74 years old at 5-year follow-up study were followed for 14.0 years on average. Associations between meat intake and mortality risk were assessed using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: A heavy intake of total meat was associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality relative to the lowest quartile intake in men (Q4: HR,1.18; 95%CIs, 1.06-1.31). A higher intake of total meat was associated with a lower risk of stroke mortality in women (Q2: HR, 0.70; 95%CIs, 0.51-0.94, Q3: HR, 0.68; 95%CIs, 0.50-0.95, Q4: HR, 0.66; 95%CIs, 0.44-0.99). A heavy intake of red meat was also associated with all-cause mortality (Q4: HR, 1.13; 95%CIs, 1.02-1.26) and heart disease mortality (Q4: HR, 1.51; 95%CIs, 1.11-2.06) in men but not in women. Heavy intake of chicken was inversely associated with cancer mortality in men. CONCLUSIONS: Heavy intakes of total and red meat were associated with an increase in all-cause and heart disease mortality in men, while total meat intake was associated with a lower risk of stroke mortality in women.

Dietary Intake of Red Meat, Processed Meat, and Poultry and Risk of Colorectal Cancer and All-Cause Mortality in the Context of Dietary Guideline Compliance.

Meat intake has been linked to increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) and mortality. However, diet composition may affect the risks. We aimed to estimate associations between red and processed meat and poultry intake and risk of CRC and all-cause mortality and if they are modified by dietary quality using Cox regression analyses. Baseline dietary data were obtained from three survey rounds of the Danish National Survey on Diet and Physical Activity. Data on CRC and all-cause mortality were extracted from national registers. The cohort was followed from date of survey interview-or for CRC, from age 50 years, whichever came last, until 31 December 2017. Meat intake was analysed categorically and continuously, and stratified by dietary quality for 15-75-year-old Danes at baseline, n 6282 for CRC and n 9848 for mortality analyses. We found no significant association between red and processed meat intake and CRC risk. For poultry, increased CRC risk for high versus low intake (HR 1.62; 95%CI 1.13-2.31) was found, but not when examining risk change per 100 g increased intake. We showed no association between meat intake and all-cause mortality. The association between meat intake and CRC or mortality risk was not modified by dietary quality.

Co-consumption of Vegetables and Fruit, Whole Grains, and Fiber Reduces the Cancer Risk of Red and Processed Meat in a Large Prospective Cohort of Adults from Alberta's Tomorrow Project.

We examined whether co-consumption of red and processed meat with key foods items and food constituents recommended for cancer prevention (vegetables and fruit, whole grains, and fiber) mitigates cancer incidence. In a prospective cohort of 26,218 adults aged 35-69 years at baseline, dietary intake was collected through 124-item past-year food frequency questionnaire. Incidence of all-cause and 15 cancers previously linked to red and processed meat intake was obtained through data linkage with a cancer registry (average follow-up 13.5 years). Competing risk Cox Proportional Hazard models estimated cancer risk and Accelerated Failure Time models estimated time-to-cancer occurrence for different combinations of intake levels while considering mortality from vital statistics and established confounders. Co-consumption of low vegetables and fruit intake with high processed meat was associated with higher incidence of all-cause and 15 cancers (men: HR = 1.85, 1.91; women: HR = 1.44, 1.49) and accelerated time-to-cancer occurrence (men: 6.5 and 7.1 years and women: 5.6 and 6.3 years, respectively), compared to high vegetables and fruit with low processed meat intake. Less pronounced and less consistent associations were observed for whole grains and fiber and for red meat. The findings provide initial evidence toward refining existing cancer prevention recommendations to optimize the intake and combination of foods in the general adult population.

Síndrome urémico hemolítico y yogur: entre la creencia popular y la evidencia científica / Hemolytic uremic syndrome and yoghurt: popular belief and scientific evidence

Algunos profesionales de la salud desaconsejan el consumo del yogur por el riesgo de provocar Síndrome Urémico Hemolítico, una enfermedad grave causada por cepas de E. coli productor de toxina Shiga (STEC por sus siglas en inglés). Estas bacterias pueden pasar del intestino del ganado vacuno a la carne o a la leche en condiciones inadecuadas de trabajo en frigoríficos o establecimientos productores de leche, respectivamente, siendo las hamburguesas insuficientemente cocidas el principal vector de la enfermedad y la leche cruda sin pasteurizar o los productos lácteos elaborados con ésta, otro factor de riesgo. En la industria láctea, el yogur se elabora con leche que es sometida a un doble tratamiento térmico. En la bibliografía moderna reportes de la presencia de STEC en yogures industriales, y los trabajos de revisión y meta-análisis no incluyen al yogur, pero sí a la leche sin pasteurizar, como vectores de trasmisión de STEC. En este contexto, y dada la evidencia científica disponible actualmente en relación a E. coli productor de toxina Shiga, el SUH y el yogur, parecería que estamos ante la presencia de una correlación espuria, la asociación de dos hechos que no tienen relación causal entre sí, más que a un hecho científico del cual uno (el yogur) es el responsable del otro (SUH).

Some health professionals discourage yogurt because of the risk of Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome (HUS), a serious disease caused by strains of Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC). These bacteria can pass from the intestine of cattle to meat or milk under inadequate working conditions in slaughterhouses or milking plants. Undercooked hamburgers the main is vector of disease and unpasteurized raw milk or dairy products made with it, are another risk factors. In the dairy industry, yoghurt is made from milk that undergoes a double heat treatment. There are no reports of the presence of STEC in industrial yogurts in the modern bibliography, and reviews and meta-analysis do not point to yogurt as a risk factor for STEC, but rather unpasteurized milk. In this context, and given the scientific evidence currently available regarding STEC, HUS and yogurt, it would seem that we are in the presence of a spurious correlation, the association between two facts that have no causal relationship between them, rather than a scientific fact for which one (yogurt) may be responsible for the other (HUS).

Red meat and processed red meat consumption behaviour of healthcare professionals: do they participate in the World Health Organization's view of red meat carcasses and red meat carcinogens?

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the consumption behaviours of healthcare professionals in relation to red meat and processed red meat products. DESIGN: This study included a questionnaire conducted through face-to-face interviews with 149 health professionals. The purpose of the questionnaire was to determine the extent to which health professionals agreed with the WHO classification of red meat and processed red meat on their list of carcinogenic products. SETTING: This research was carried out in Izmir, which is Turkey's third largest city. The survey was conducted in 2016 by holding face to face interviews with forty-three specialist doctors, sixteen doctors, twelve dentists, sixty-four nurses and fourteen pharmacists. SUBJECTS: Nationally representative sample of healthcare professionals in Turkey. RESULTS: People educated in healthcare are especially cautious about the consumption of processed red meat products. The results of the research revealed the importance of processing and cooking patterns in red meat consumption preferences. CONCLUSIONS: The consequences of the research, in terms of breaking down prejudices and overcoming the anxieties of those with health concerns who do not consume red meat, are important. In fact, the results show that healthcare professionals consume red meat, but they are more careful in their consumption of processed red meat products. This result is in line with the WHO report.

Meat intake and risk of gastric cancer in the Stomach cancer Pooling (StoP) project.

The consumption of processed meat has been associated with noncardia gastric cancer, but evidence regarding a possible role of red meat is more limited. Our study aims to quantify the association between meat consumption, namely white, red and processed meat, and the risk of gastric cancer, through individual participant data meta-analysis of studies participating in the "Stomach cancer Pooling (StoP) Project". Data from 22 studies, including 11,443 cases and 28,029 controls, were used. Study-specific odds ratios (ORs) were pooled through a two-stage approach based on random-effects models. An exposure-response relationship was modeled, using one and two-order fractional polynomials, to evaluate the possible nonlinear association between meat intake and gastric cancer. An increased risk of gastric cancer was observed for the consumption of all types of meat (highest vs. lowest tertile), which was statistically significant for red (OR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.00-1.53), processed (OR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.06-1.43) and total meat (OR: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.09-1.55). Exposure-response analyses showed an increasing risk of gastric cancer with increasing consumption of both processed and red meat, with the highest OR being observed for an intake of 150 g/day of red meat (OR: 1.85; 95% CI: 1.56-2.20). This work provides robust evidence on the relation between the consumption of different types of meat and gastric cancer. Adherence to dietary recommendations to reduce meat consumption may contribute to a reduction in the burden of gastric cancer.

Association between processed meat intake and asthma symptoms in the French NutriNet-Santé cohort.

PURPOSE: Processed meat intake may adversely affect lung health, but data on asthma remains sparse. The magnitude of the processed meat-asthma association may also depend on other unhealthy behaviors. We investigated the association between processed meat intake and the asthma symptom score, and the combined role of unhealthy weight, smoking, low diet quality, and high processed meat intake on the asthma score. METHODS: In 2017, 35,380 participants to the NutriNet-Santé cohort answered a detailed respiratory web-questionnaire. Asthma was defined by the asthma symptom score (sum of 5 questions; continuous variable). Based on repeated 24-h dietary records collected on a dedicated website, processed meat consumption was classified as 0, < 2, 2-5, > 5 servings/week. We examined the combined role of body mass index (BMI) (< 25 vs. ≥ 25 kg/m2), smoking (never vs. ever), diet quality score (highest vs. lowest), and processed meat (≤ 5 vs. > 5 servings/week) on the asthma symptom score. RESULTS: Participants were aged 54 on average (women: 75%, smokers: 49%, BMI ≥ 25: 32%, ≥ 1 asthma symptoms: 27%). After adjustment for confounders, processed meat intake was positively and significantly associated with asthma symptom score: odds ratios (ORs) (95% CI) for > 5 vs. 0 servings/week were 1.15 (1.04-1.27) in women; 1.23 (1.01-1.50) in men. Compared to participants with 0 unhealthy behaviors, ORs for the asthma symptom score among participants with the 4 combined unhealthy behaviors were 2.18 (1.91-2.48) in women; 2.70 (2.10-3.45) in men. CONCLUSION: High processed meat consumption was associated with higher asthma symptoms, and combining overweight/obesity, smoking, low diet quality, with high processed meat intake was strongly associated with asthma symptoms.

Red and processed meat consumption and esophageal cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The associations between red and processed meat consumption and esophageal cancer risk remain inconclusive. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to analyze these associations. METHODS: We searched PubMed and EMBASE to identify studies published between the databases' dates of inception and May 2019. RESULTS: We ultimately selected 33 eligible studies for analysis. We found that the summary relative risks for the associations between meat consumption and esophageal cancer risk were positive for the case-control studies (P < 0.05), but negative for the cohort studies included in the analysis (P > 0.05). Subtype analysis indicated that red and processed meat consumption was not associated with the risks of esophageal adenocarcinoma (P > 0.05) and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (P > 0.05) in the cohort studies. CONCLUSIONS: We found case-control but not cohort studies to associate consumption of red and processed meat with the risk of esophageal cancer. Further large prospective studies are needed to validate these findings.

Cost Effectiveness of Nutrition Policies on Processed Meat: Implications for Cancer Burden in the U.S.

INTRODUCTION: Processed meats are associated with increased risk of colorectal and stomach cancers, but health and economic impacts of policies to discourage processed meats are not well established. This paper aims to evaluate the cost effectiveness of implementing tax and warning labels on processed meats. METHODS: A probabilistic cohort-state transition model was developed in 2018, including lifetime and short-term horizons, healthcare, and societal perspectives, and 3% discount rates for costs and health outcomes. The model simulated 32 subgroups by age, gender, and race/ethnicity from the U.S. adult population and integrated nationally representative 2011-2014 data on processed meat consumption, with etiologic effects of processed meat consumption on cancer incidence, medical and indirect societal costs, and policy costs. RESULTS: Over a lifetime, the 10% excise tax would prevent 77,000 cases of colorectal cancer (95% uncertainty interval=56,800, 107,000) and 12,500 cases of stomach cancer (95% uncertainty interval=6,880, 23,900), add 593,000 quality-adjusted life years (95% uncertainty interval=419,000, 827,000), and generate net savings of $2.7 billion from a societal perspective, including $1.1 billion healthcare costs saved. The warning label policy would avert 85,400 cases of colorectal cancer (95% uncertainty interval=56,600, 141,000) and 15,000 cases of stomach cancer (95% uncertainty interval=6,860, 34,500), and add 660,000 quality-adjusted life years (95% uncertainty interval=418,000, 1,070,000), with net savings of $4.5 billion from a societal perspective, including $1.3 billion healthcare costs saved. In subgroup analyses, greater health and economic benefits accrued to (1) younger subpopulations, (2) subpopulations with greater cancer risk, and (3) those with higher baseline processed meat consumption. CONCLUSIONS: The model shows that implementing tax or warning labels on processed meats would be a cost-saving strategy with substantial health and economic benefits. The findings should encourage policy makers to consider nutrition-related policies to reduce cancer burden.

Reduction of Red and Processed Meat Intake and Cancer Mortality and Incidence: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Cohort Studies.

This article has been corrected. The original version (PDF) is appended to this article as a Supplement. Background: Cancer incidence has continuously increased over the past few centuries and represents a major health burden worldwide. Purpose: To evaluate the possible causal relationship between intake of red and processed meat and cancer mortality and incidence. Data Sources: Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, CINAHL, and ProQuest from inception until July 2018 and MEDLINE from inception until April 2019 without language restrictions. Study Selection: Cohort studies that included more than 1000 adults and reported the association between consumption of unprocessed red and processed meat and cancer mortality and incidence. Data Extraction: Teams of 2 reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias; 1 reviewer evaluated the certainty of evidence, which was confirmed or revised by the senior reviewer. Data Synthesis: Of 118 articles (56 cohorts) with more than 6 million participants, 73 articles were eligible for the dose-response meta-analyses, 30 addressed cancer mortality, and 80 reported cancer incidence. Low-certainty evidence suggested that an intake reduction of 3 servings of unprocessed meat per week was associated with a very small reduction in overall cancer mortality over a lifetime. Evidence of low to very low certainty suggested that each intake reduction of 3 servings of processed meat per week was associated with very small decreases in overall cancer mortality over a lifetime; prostate cancer mortality; and incidence of esophageal, colorectal, and breast cancer. Limitation: Limited causal inferences due to residual confounding in observational studies, risk of bias due to limitations in diet assessment and adjustment for confounders, recall bias in dietary assessment, and insufficient data for planned subgroup analyses. Conclusion: The possible absolute effects of red and processed meat consumption on cancer mortality and incidence are very small, and the certainty of evidence is low to very low. Primary Funding Source: None. (PROSPERO: CRD42017074074).

Patterns of Red and Processed Meat Consumption and Risk for Cardiometabolic and Cancer Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Cohort Studies.

This article has been corrected. The original version (PDF) is appended to this article as a Supplement. Background: Studying dietary patterns may provide insights into the potential effects of red and processed meat on health outcomes. Purpose: To evaluate the effect of dietary patterns, including different amounts of red or processed meat, on all-cause mortality, cardiometabolic outcomes, and cancer incidence and mortality. Data Sources: Systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, Web of Science, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global from inception to April 2019 with no restrictions on year or language. Study Selection: Teams of 2 reviewers independently screened search results and included prospective cohort studies with 1000 or more participants that reported on the association between dietary patterns and health outcomes. Data Extraction: Two reviewers independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and evaluated the certainty of evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria. Data Synthesis: Eligible studies that followed patients for 2 to 34 years revealed low- to very-low-certainty evidence that dietary patterns lower in red and processed meat intake result in very small or possibly small decreases in all-cause mortality, cancer mortality and incidence, cardiovascular mortality, nonfatal coronary heart disease, fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction, and type 2 diabetes. For all-cause, cancer, and cardiovascular mortality and incidence of some types of cancer, the total sample included more than 400 000 patients; for other outcomes, total samples included 4000 to more than 300 000 patients. Limitation: Observational studies are prone to residual confounding, and these studies provide low- or very-low-certainty evidence according to the GRADE criteria. Conclusion: Low- or very-low-certainty evidence suggests that dietary patterns with less red and processed meat intake may result in very small reductions in adverse cardiometabolic and cancer outcomes. Primary Funding Source: None. (PROSPERO: CRD42017074074).