Funded in part by AHDB Beef and Lamb
Associations between red meat, processed red meat and total red and processed red meat consumption, nutritional adequacy and markers of health and cardio-metabolic diseases in British adults: a cross-sectional analysis using data from UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey
Hobbs-Grimmer DA, Givens DI, Lovegrove JA
European journal of nutrition · 23 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
- Cross-sectional study (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Health markers and function
- Intake measured by
- Food diaries or recalls
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Industry funded
- Industry group
- AHDB Beef and Lamb
- Authors
- At least one author declares a financial tie to industry
Based on 1 listed funder(s) and full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2021-02-07 · Eur J Nutr · vol. 60 · issue 6 · pp. 2979–2997
- Publisher
- Springer Science+Business Media
- Cited
- 29 citations · more than 89% of similar papers · 2.7× the field average
- References
- 35 works
- Access
- Open access (hybrid journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Meat and Animal Product Quality · Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact · Nutritional Studies and Diet
- Keywords
- Red meat, Medicine, Cross-sectional study, Body mass index, Internal medicine
- MeSH
- humans, metabolic diseases, diet, nutrition surveys, cross-sectional studies, eating, meat, adult, female, male, red meat, united kingdom
3 authors
From GB
- Ditte A. HobbsUniversity of Reading
- David Ian GivensUniversity of Reading
- Julie Anne Lovegrove · correspondingUniversity of Reading
Abstract
Purpose
To determine the association between red meat (RM), processed red meat (PRM) and total red and processed red meat (TRPRM) consumption on nutritional adequacy and markers of health and cardio-metabolic diseases in British adults.
Methods
In this cross-sectional study of adults (19-64 y) from the National Diet and Nutrition Survey (NDNS) (n = 1758), RM and PRM consumption were assessed from 4 day estimated food diaries. Anthropometric measures, blood pressure (BP), pulse pressure (PP), plasma glucose, HbA1c, C-reactive protein, TAG, TC, LDL-C and HDL-C from the NDNS were used.
Results
43% of adults (men 57% and women 31%) consumed more than the 70 g/d TRPRM guidelines. Fewer adults in the highest tertile of TRPRM intake were below lower reference nutrient intakes (LRNIs), particularly for zinc and iron, respectively. In model 3 (controlled for age, energy intake, socioeconomic classification, number of daily cigarettes, BMI, dietary factors), higher RM consumption was associated with being significantly taller (model 3: P-ANCOVA = 0.006; P-T3/T1 = 0.0004) in men and lower diastolic BP (model 3: P-ANCOVA = 0.004; P-T3/T2 = 0.002) in women. Higher PRM in men was associated with significantly higher plasma ferritin concentration (model 3: P-ANCOVA = 0.0001; P-T2/T1 = 0.0001), being taller (P-ANCOVA = 0.019; P-T1/T2 = 0.047, T1/T3 = 0.044), increased body weight (model 3: P-ANCOVA = 0.001; P-T1/T3 = 0.0001), BMI (model 3: P-ANCOVA = 0.007; P-T1/T3 = 0.006) and smaller hip circumference (model 3: P-ANCOVA = 0.006; P-T3/T1 = 0.024; P-T2/T1 = 0.013) and in women significantly higher TC (model 3: P-ANCOVA = 0.020; P-T3/T2 = 0.016), LDL-C (P-ANCOVA = 0.030; P-T3/T2 = 0.025), HbA1c (model 3: P-ANCOVA = 0.0001; P-T2/T1 = 0.001; P-T3/T2 = 0.001) and higher PP (model 3: P-ANCOVA = 0.022; P-T3/T1 = 0.021). Higher PRM consumption was associated with significantly higher BMI and hip circumference in men, and higher TC, LDL-C, HbA1c and PP in women, which was not observed for RM consumption.
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.