29
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Patterns of plant and animal protein intake are strongly associated with cardiovascular mortality: the Adventist Health Study-2 cohort

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          <div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="s1"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d2022761e176">Background</h5> <p id="d2022761e178">Current evidence suggests that plant and animal proteins are intimately associated with specific large nutrient clusters that may explain part of their complex relation with cardiovascular health. We aimed at evaluating the association between specific patterns of protein intake with cardiovascular mortality. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="s2"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d2022761e181">Methods</h5> <p id="d2022761e183">We selected 81 337 men and women from the Adventist Health Study-2. Diet was assessed between 2002 and 2007, by using a validated food frequency questionnaire. Dietary patterns based on the participants’ protein consumption were derived by factor analysis. Cox regression analysis was used to estimate multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) adjusted for sociodemographic and lifestyle factors and dietary components. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="s3"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d2022761e186">Results</h5> <p id="d2022761e188">There were 2276 cardiovascular deaths during a mean follow-up time of 9.4 years. The HRs for cardiovascular mortality were 1.61 [98.75% confidence interval (CI), 1.12 2.32; <i>P</i>-trend &lt; 0.001] for the ‘Meat’ protein factor and 0.60 (98.75% CI, 0.42 0.86; <i>P</i>-trend &lt; 0.001) for the ‘Nuts &amp; Seeds’ protein factor (highest vs lowest quintile of factor scores). No significant associations were found for the ‘Grains’, ‘Processed Foods’ and ‘Legumes, Fruits &amp; Vegetables’ protein factors. Additional adjustments for the participants’ vegetarian dietary pattern and nutrients related to cardiovascular disease outcomes did not change the results. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="s4"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d2022761e197">Conclusions</h5> <p id="d2022761e199">Associations between the ‘Meat’ and ‘Nuts &amp; Seeds’ protein factors and cardiovascular outcomes were strong and could not be ascribed to other associated nutrients considered to be important for cardiovascular health. Healthy diets can be advocated based on protein sources, preferring low contributions of protein from meat and higher intakes of plant protein from nuts and seeds. </p> </div>

          Related collections

          Most cited references29

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Plant-Based Dietary Patterns and Incidence of Type 2 Diabetes in US Men and Women: Results from Three Prospective Cohort Studies

          Background Plant-based diets have been recommended to reduce the risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, not all plant foods are necessarily beneficial. We examined the association of an overall plant-based diet and hypothesized healthful and unhealthful versions of a plant-based diet with T2D incidence in three prospective cohort studies in the US. Methods and Findings We included 69,949 women from the Nurses’ Health Study (1984–2012), 90,239 women from the Nurses’ Health Study 2 (1991–2011), and 40,539 men from the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study (1986–2010), free of chronic diseases at baseline. Dietary data were collected every 2–4 y using a semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire. Using these data, we created an overall plant-based diet index (PDI), where plant foods received positive scores, while animal foods (animal fats, dairy, eggs, fish/seafood, poultry/red meat, miscellaneous animal-based foods) received reverse scores. We also created a healthful plant-based diet index (hPDI), where healthy plant foods (whole grains, fruits, vegetables, nuts, legumes, vegetable oils, tea/coffee) received positive scores, while less healthy plant foods (fruit juices, sweetened beverages, refined grains, potatoes, sweets/desserts) and animal foods received reverse scores. Lastly, we created an unhealthful plant-based diet index (uPDI) by assigning positive scores to less healthy plant foods and reverse scores to healthy plant foods and animal foods. We documented 16,162 incident T2D cases during 4,102,369 person-years of follow-up. In pooled multivariable-adjusted analysis, both PDI and hPDI were inversely associated with T2D (PDI: hazard ratio [HR] for extreme deciles 0.51, 95% CI 0.47–0.55, p trend < 0.001; hPDI: HR for extreme deciles 0.55, 95% CI 0.51–0.59, p trend < 0.001). The association of T2D with PDI was considerably attenuated when we additionally adjusted for body mass index (BMI) categories (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.74–0.87, p trend < 0.001), while that with hPDI remained largely unchanged (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.61–0.72, p trend < 0.001). uPDI was positively associated with T2D even after BMI adjustment (HR for extreme deciles 1.16, 95% CI 1.08–1.25, p trend < 0.001). Limitations of the study include self-reported diet assessment, with the possibility of measurement error, and the potential for residual or unmeasured confounding given the observational nature of the study design. Conclusions Our study suggests that plant-based diets, especially when rich in high-quality plant foods, are associated with substantially lower risk of developing T2D. This supports current recommendations to shift to diets rich in healthy plant foods, with lower intake of less healthy plant and animal foods.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Health Benefits of Nut Consumption

            Emilio Ros (2010)
            Nuts (tree nuts and peanuts) are nutrient dense foods with complex matrices rich in unsaturated fatty and other bioactive compounds: high-quality vegetable protein, fiber, minerals, tocopherols, phytosterols, and phenolic compounds. By virtue of their unique composition, nuts are likely to beneficially impact health outcomes. Epidemiologic studies have associated nut consumption with a reduced incidence of coronary heart disease and gallstones in both genders and diabetes in women. Limited evidence also suggests beneficial effects on hypertension, cancer, and inflammation. Interventional studies consistently show that nut intake has a cholesterol-lowering effect, even in the context of healthy diets, and there is emerging evidence of beneficial effects on oxidative stress, inflammation, and vascular reactivity. Blood pressure, visceral adiposity and the metabolic syndrome also appear to be positively influenced by nut consumption. Thus it is clear that nuts have a beneficial impact on many cardiovascular risk factors. Contrary to expectations, epidemiologic studies and clinical trials suggest that regular nut consumption is unlikely to contribute to obesity and may even help in weight loss. Safety concerns are limited to the infrequent occurrence of nut allergy in children. In conclusion, nuts are nutrient rich foods with wide-ranging cardiovascular and metabolic benefits, which can be readily incorporated into healthy diets.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

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

              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.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                International Journal of Epidemiology
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                0300-5771
                1464-3685
                April 02 2018
                April 02 2018
                :
                :
                Article
                10.1093/ije/dyy030
                6658814
                29618018
                dda3d1d1-5a33-4108-adf1-51cdde3d9aaa
                © 2018

                https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/about_us/legal/notices

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article