Effects of a prudent diet containing either lean beef and mutton or fish and skinless chicken on the plasma lipoproteins and fatty acid composition of triacylglycerol and cholesteryl ester of hypercholesterolemic subjects11This study was sponsored by the Meat Board of South Africa

Red meat consumption and risk for dyslipidaemia and inflammation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Aim

The study (PROSPERO: CRD42021240905) aims to reveal the relationships among red meat, serum lipids and inflammatory biomarkers.

Methods and results

PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane databases were explored through December 2021 to identify 574 studies about red meat and serum lipids markers including total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), C-reactive protein (CRP) or hypersensitive-CRP (hs-CRP). Finally, 20 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 1001 people were included, red meat and serum lipid markers and their relevant information was extracted. The pooled standard mean difference (SMD) was obtained by applying a random-effects model, and subgroup analyses and meta-regression were employed to explain the heterogeneity. Compared with white meat or grain diets, the gross results showed that the consumption of red meat increased serum lipid concentrations like TG (0.29 mmol/L, 95% CI 0.14, 0.44,P<0.001), but did not significantly influence the TC (0.13 mmol/L, 95% CI −0.07, 0.33, P = 0.21), LDL-C (0.11 mmol/L, 95% CI −0.23, 0.45, P = 0.53), HDL-C (−0.07 mmol/L, 95% CI −0.31, 0.17, P = 0.57),CRP or hs-CRP (0.13 mmol/L, 95% CI −0.10, 0.37,P = 0.273).

Conclusion

Our study provided evidence to the fact that red meat consumption affected serum lipids levels like TG, but almost had no effect on TC, LDL-C, HDL-C and CRP or hs-CRP. Such diets with red meat should be taken seriously to avoid the problem of high lipid profiles.

Systematic review registration

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO], identifier [CRD42021240905].

Seafood intake and the development of obesity, insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes

We provide an overview of studies on seafood intake in relation to obesity, insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes. Overweight and obesity development is for most individuals the result of years of positive energy balance. Evidence from intervention trials and animal studies suggests that frequent intake of lean seafood, as compared with intake of terrestrial meats, reduces energy intake by 4–9 %, sufficient to prevent a positive energy balance and obesity. At equal energy intake, lean seafood reduces fasting and postprandial risk markers of insulin resistance, and improves insulin sensitivity in insulin-resistant adults. Energy restriction combined with intake of lean and fatty seafood seems to increase weight loss. Marine n-3 PUFA are probably of importance through n-3 PUFA-derived lipid mediators such as endocannabinoids and oxylipins, but other constituents of seafood such as the fish protein per se, trace elements or vitamins also seem to play a largely neglected role. A high intake of fatty seafood increases circulating levels of the insulin-sensitising hormone adiponectin. As compared with a high meat intake, high intake of seafood has been reported to reduce plasma levels of the hepatic acute-phase protein C-reactive protein level in some, but not all studies. More studies are needed to confirm the dietary effects on energy intake, obesity and insulin resistance. Future studies should be designed to elucidate the potential contribution of trace elements, vitamins and undesirables present in seafood, and we argue that stratification into responders and non-responders in randomised controlled trials may improve the understanding of health effects from intake of seafood.

Total red meat intake of ≥0.5 servings/d does not negatively influence cardiovascular disease risk factors: a systemically searched meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Observational associations between red meat intake and cardiovascular disease (CVD) are inconsistent. There are limited comprehensive analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigate the effects of red meat consumption on CVD risk factors.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this systematically searched meta-analysis was to assess the effects of consuming ≥0.5 or <0.5 servings of total red meat/d on CVD risk factors [blood total cholesterol (TC), LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, ratio of TC to HDL cholesterol (TC:HDL), and systolic and diastolic blood pressures (SBP and DBP, respectively)]. We hypothesized that the consumption of ≥0.5 servings of total red meat/d would have a negative effect on these CVD risk factors.

DESIGN

Two researchers independently screened 945 studies from PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases and extracted data from 24 qualified RCTs. Inclusion criteria were 1) RCT, 2) subjects aged ≥19 y, 3) consumption of ≥0.5 or <0.5 total red meat servings/d [35 g (1.25 ounces)], and 4) reporting ≥1 CVD risk factor. We performed an adjusted 2-factor nested ANOVA mixed-effects model procedure on the postintervention values of TC, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, TC:HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, SBP, and DBP; calculated overall effect sizes of change values; and used a repeated-measures ANOVA to assess pre- to postintervention changes.

RESULTS

Red meat intake did not affect lipid-lipoprotein profiles or blood pressure values postintervention (P > 0.05) or changes over time [weighted mean difference (95% CI): -0.01 mmol/L (-0.08, 0.06 mmol/L), 0.02 mmol/L (-0.05, 0.08 mmol/L), 0.03 mmol/L (-0.01, 0.07 mmol/L), and 0.04 mmol/L (-0.02, 0.10 mmol/L); -0.08 mm Hg (-0.26, 0.11 mm Hg); and -1.0 mm Hg (-2.4, 0.78 mm Hg) and 0.1 mm Hg (-1.2, 1.5 mm Hg) for TC, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, TC:HDL cholesterol, SBP, and DBP, respectively]. Among all subjects, TC, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, TC:HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, and DBP, but not SBP, decreased over time (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The results from this systematically searched meta-analysis of RCTs support the idea that the consumption of ≥0.5 servings of total red meat/d does not influence blood lipids and lipoproteins or blood pressures.

Inclusion of red meat in healthful dietary patterns

Dietary patterns are an important concept in dietary recommendations. The Western pattern is most commonly defined as a diet characterized by high intakes of refined grains, sugar and red meat, and has been shown to be associated with increased risks for certain types of cancer, coronary heart disease, diabetes, and obesity. However, isolating the independent effects of individual foods on health outcomes is central to helping individuals choose foods to build healthier dietary patterns to which they can adhere. Red meat is a popular source of high quality protein and provides a variety of essential nutrients that improve overall diet quality. It is also a source of saturated fatty acids, which observational evidence suggests are associated with heart disease, although recent data challenge this. Several studies have shown that lean red meat can be successfully included in recommended heart-healthy dietary patterns without detriment to blood lipids. Furthermore, increased dietary protein has been shown to promote healthy body weight and composition, in part by increasing satiety, and to improve vitality and stamina.

Bison meat has a lower atherogenic risk than beef in healthy men

The rearing method of bison and the nutrient content of the meat may make bison a healthier alternative to beef. We hypothesized that the acute and chronic effects of bison consumption, in comparison to beef, will result in a less perturbed blood lipid panel and a reduced inflammatory and oxidative stress response which will minimize the detrimental effect on vascular function. A double-blind, cross-over randomized trial was employed to examine the consequence of a single 12 oz serving (n = 14) and 7 weeks of chronic consumption (n = 10) (12 oz/d, 6 d/wk) of each meat. Measurements included blood lipids, interleukin-6, plasminogen activator inhibitor 1, C-reactive protein, oxidized low-density lipoprotein, protein carbonyl, hydroperoxides, flow-mediated dilation (FMD) and FMD/shear rate. Following a single beef meal, triglycerides and oxidized low-density lipoprotein were elevated (67% ± 45% and 18% ± 17% respectively); there was a tendency for hydroperoxides to be elevated (24% ± 37%); and FMD/shear rate was reduced significantly (30% ± 38%). Following a single meal of bison: there was a smaller increase in triglycerides (30% ± 27%), and markers of inflammation and oxidative stress and FMD/shear rate were unchanged. Chronic consumption of either meat did not influence body weight, % body fat, or blood lipids. Protein carbonyl (24% ± 45%), plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (78% ± 126%), interleukin-6 (59% ± 76%) and C-reactive protein (72% ± 57%) were significantly elevated and FMD/shear rate was significantly reduced (19% ± 28%) following 7 weeks of beef consumption, but not bison consumption. Based on our findings, the data suggest that bison consumption results in a reduced atherogenic risk compared to beef.

Lean beef contributes significant amounts of key nutrients to the diets of US adults: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2004

Consumption of lean meat is a valuable addition to a healthy diet because it provides complete protein and is a rich source of vitamin B(12), iron, and zinc. The objective of this study was to examine the nutritional contribution of total beef and lean beef (LB) to the American diet using the USDA definition of LB as defined in MyPyramid. Twenty-four-hour dietary recall data from adults 19 to 50 years of age (n = 7049) and 51+ years (n = 6243) participating in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2004 were assessed. Lean beef was defined as beef with <9.28 g fat per 100 g (excess was discretionary fat). Fifty percent of adults 19 to 50 years and 41% of adults 51+ years consumed beef on the day of the dietary recall. Total beef consumed among adults 19 to 50 and 51+ years was 49.3 +/- 1.4 g (1.74 oz/d) and 37.1 +/- 1.2 g (1.31 oz/d), respectively. In adults 19 to 50 and 51+ years, LB contributed 3.9% and 3.7% to total energy; 4.5% and 4.1% to total fat, 3.8% and 3.6% to saturated fatty acids; 13% and 11% to cholesterol intake; 15% and 14% to protein; 25% and 20% to vitamin B(12); 23% and 20% to zinc; and 8% and 7% to iron, respectively. Beef was also an important food source of many other nutrients, including niacin, vitamin B(6), phosphorus, and potassium. In addition, beef provided only 1% of total sodium intake. Consumption of beef contributed significantly to intake of protein and other key nutrients by US adults.

Nutrient contribution of total and lean beef in diets of US children and adolescents: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2004

This study examined the nutritional contribution of total beef and lean beef (LB) to the diet of US children and adolescents using the US Department of Agriculture definition of LB as defined in MyPyramid. Twenty-four hour dietary recall data from children 4-8 years of age [y] (n=2474), 9-13 y (n=3273), and adolescents 14-18 y (n=4044) participating in the NHANES 1999-2004 were assessed. LB was defined as beef with ≤9.28 grams [g] fat/100 g (excess was discretionary fat). Means and standard errors were determined using appropriate sample weights. Consumption of LB contributed significantly to intake of protein and many key nutrients such as vitamins B6 and B12, zinc, iron, niacin, phosphorus, and potassium by US children and adolescents without providing significantly to intakes of total fat, saturated fatty acids, or sodium.

Omega 3 fatty acids for prevention and treatment of cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

It has been suggested that omega 3 (W3, n-3 or omega-3) fats from oily fish and plants are beneficial to health.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether dietary or supplemental omega 3 fatty acids alter total mortality, cardiovascular events or cancers using both RCT and cohort studies.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Five databases including CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched to February 2002. No language restrictions were applied. Bibliographies were checked and authors contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs were included where omega 3 intake or advice was randomly allocated and unconfounded, and study duration was at least six months. Cohorts were included where a cohort was followed up for at least six months and omega 3 intake estimated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were assessed for inclusion, data extracted and quality assessed independently in duplicate. Random effects meta-analysis was performed separately for RCT and cohort data.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty eight randomised controlled trials (36,913 participants) and 41 cohort analyses were included. Pooled trial results did not show a reduction in the risk of total mortality or combined cardiovascular events in those taking additional omega 3 fats (with significant statistical heterogeneity). Sensitivity analysis, retaining only studies at low risk of bias, reduced heterogeneity and again suggested no significant effect of omega 3 fats. Restricting analysis to trials increasing fish-based omega 3 fats, or those increasing short chain omega 3s, did not suggest significant effects on mortality or cardiovascular events in either group. Subgroup analysis by dietary advice or supplementation, baseline risk of CVD or omega 3 dose suggested no clear effects of these factors on primary outcomes. Neither RCTs nor cohorts suggested increased relative risk of cancers with higher omega 3 intake but estimates were imprecise so a clinically important effect could not be excluded.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

It is not clear that dietary or supplemental omega 3 fats alter total mortality, combined cardiovascular events or cancers in people with, or at high risk of, cardiovascular disease or in the general population. There is no evidence we should advise people to stop taking rich sources of omega 3 fats, but further high quality trials are needed to confirm suggestions of a protective effect of omega 3 fats on cardiovascular health. There is no clear evidence that omega 3 fats differ in effectiveness according to fish or plant sources, dietary or supplemental sources, dose or presence of placebo.