Red meat, poultry and fish consumption and risk of diabetes: a 9 year prospective cohort study of the China Kadoorie Biobank
Du H, Guo Y, Bennett DA, Bragg F, Bian Z, Chadni M, Yu C, Chen Y, Tan Y, Millwood IY, Gan W, Yang L, Yao P, Luo G, Li J, Qin Y, Lv J, Lin X, Key T, Chen J, Clarke R, Li L, Chen Z, China Kadoorie Biobank collaborative group
Diabetologia · 51 citations
Review labels
Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.
How it was studied
- Design
- Cohort study (classified by our AI screen)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Clinical events such as disease or death
- Intake measured by
- Food frequency questionnaire
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Independent funding
- Nonprofit
- Wellcome Trust
- Nonprofit
- Cancer Research UK
- Nonprofit
- British Heart Foundation
- University or hospital
- University of Oxford
- Government
- National Natural Science Foundation of China
- Government
- Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention
- University or hospital
- Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences
- Nonprofit
- BHF Centre of Research Excellence, Oxford
- Nonprofit
- Kadoorie Charitable Foundation
- Government
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
- Government
- Medical Research Council
- Government
- National Key Research and Development Program of China
- Government
- Chinese National Natural Science Foundation
- Grants
- Wellcome Trust (212946/Z/18/Z); Wellcome Trust (202922/Z/16/Z); Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00017/1); Wellcome Trust (088158/Z/09/Z); Wellcome Trust (104085/Z/14/Z); Wellcome Trust (205212/Z/16/Z); Cancer Research UK (29186)
Based on 13 listed funder(s) and full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2020-01-22 · Diabetologia · vol. 63 · issue 4 · pp. 767–779
- Publisher
- Springer Science+Business Media
- Cited
- 65 citations · more than 97% of similar papers · 6.5× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 42 works
- Access
- Open access (hybrid journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Nutritional Studies and Diet · Fatty Acid Research and Health · Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
- Keywords
- Red meat, Medicine, Diabetes mellitus, Environmental health, Prospective cohort study, Biobank, Population, Incidence (geometry), Demography, Cohort study, Lower risk, Internal medicine, Confidence interval, Biology, Endocrinology
- MeSH
- animals, poultry, fishes, humans, diabetes mellitus, nutrition surveys, risk factors, feeding behavior, adult, aged, middle aged, biological specimen banks, china, female, male, red meat
24 authors
From GB, CN
- on behalf of the China Kadoorie Biobank collaborative groupUniversity of Oxford
- Huaidong Du · correspondingChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College; University of Oxford
- Canqing Yu · correspondingChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College; University of Oxford
- Derrick BennettUniversity of Oxford
- Fiona BraggChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College; University of Oxford
- Zheng BianChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College; University of Oxford
Abstract
Aims/hypothesis
Previous evidence linking red meat consumption with diabetes risk mainly came from western countries, with little evidence from China, where patterns of meat consumption are different. Moreover, global evidence remains inconclusive about the associations of poultry and fish consumption with diabetes. Therefore we investigated the associations of red meat, poultry and fish intake with incidence of diabetes in a Chinese population.
Methods
The prospective China Kadoorie Biobank recruited ~512,000 adults (59% women, mean age 51 years) from ten rural and urban areas across China in 2004-2008. At the baseline survey, a validated interviewer-administered laptop-based questionnaire was used to collect information on the consumption frequency of major food groups including red meat, poultry, fish, fresh fruit and several others. During ~9 years of follow-up, 14,931 incidences of new-onset diabetes were recorded among 461,036 participants who had no prior diabetes, cardiovascular diseases or cancer at baseline. Cox regression analyses were performed to calculate adjusted HRs for incident diabetes associated with red meat, poultry and fish intake.
Results
At baseline, 47.0%, 1.3% and 8.9% of participants reported a regular consumption (i.e. ≥4 days/week) of red meat, poultry and fish, respectively. After adjusting for adiposity and other potential confounders, each 50 g/day increase in red meat and fish intake was associated with 11% (HR 1.11 [95% CI 1.04, 1.20]) and 6% (HR 1.06 [95% CI 1.00, 1.13]) higher risk of incident diabetes, respectively. For both, the associations were more pronounced among men and women from urban areas, with an HR (95% CI) of 1.42 (1.15, 1.74) and 1.18 (1.03, 1.36), respectively, per 50 g/day red meat intake and 1.15 (1.02, 1.30) and 1.11 (1.01, 1.23), respectively, per 50 g/day fish intake. There was no significant association between diabetes and poultry intake, either overall (HR 0.96 [95% CI 0.83, 1.12] per 50 g/day intake) or in specific population subgroups.
Conclusions/interpretation
In Chinese adults, both red meat and fish, but not poultry, intake were positively associated with diabetes risk, particularly among urban participants. Our findings add new evidence linking red meat and fish intake with cardiometabolic diseases.
Data availability
Details of how to access the China Kadoorie Biobank data and rules of China Kadoorie Biobank data release are available from www.ckbiobank.org/site/Data+Access.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY).
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.