Heterogeneity in Meat Food Groups Can Meaningfully Alter Population-Level Intake Estimates of Red Meat and Poultry

Pork Meat Composition and Health: A Review of the Evidence

Meat has been part of the human diet for centuries and it is a recognizable source of high-biologic-value protein and several micronutrients; however, its consumption has been associated with an increased risk of non-communicable diseases (e.g., cardiovascular diseases, cancer). These concerns are mostly related to red meat. However, meat composition is quite variable within species and meat cuts. The present study explores the composition of pork meat, and the differences among different pork meat cuts and it reviews the evidence on the influence of its consumption on health outcomes. Pork meat contributes to 30% of all meat consumed worldwide and it offers a distinct nutrient profile; it is rich in high-quality protein, B-complex vitamins, and essential minerals such as zinc and iron, though it contains moderate levels of saturated fat compared to beef. Additionally, research on sustainability points out advantages from pork meat consumption considering that it is a non-ruminant animal and is included in one of the five more sustainable dietary patterns. In what concerns the data on the influence of pork meat consumption on health outcomes, a few clinical studies have shown no harmful effects on cardiovascular risk factors, specifically blood lipids. Several arguments can justify that pork meat can be an option in a healthy and sustainable diet.

Consumption of beef sandwiches in the United States and contributions to intake of energy and select nutrients

Introduction

Sandwiches are commonly consumed in the United States. This study summarizes contributions of beef sandwiches to energy and select nutrient intakes.

Methods

Beef sandwiches were categorized as beef burger sandwiches (hamburgers or cheeseburgers) and non-burger beef sandwiches. Per capita and per user consumption of beef sandwiches (total and by type) and contributions to total nutrient intakes from beef and non-beef sandwich components were estimated for the population ages ≥2 years (n = 15,984) participating in WWEIA/NHANES, 2013-2016.

Results

On any given day, 21.4% of the population consumed a beef sandwich. Among all Americans, beef sandwiches provided 6.3% of mean energy intake and accounted for approximately 10% of the population's mean intake of vitamin B12 and saturated fat, 9% of protein and sodium, 7% of iron, 6% of choline, and 5% of potassium. Among beef sandwich consumers, beef sandwiches accounted for 26.2% of mean energy intake on a day of consumption. The beef component of sandwiches accounted for the majority of vitamin B12, choline, and protein, non-beef components accounted for the majority of sodium, iron, and potassium, and beef and non-beef components made similar contributions to saturated fat. Hamburgers provided consumers the lowest energy, sodium, and saturated fat intake, while non-burger sandwiches provided the highest intake of these nutrients.

Discussion

Beef sandwiches are an important source of energy, protein, vitamin B12, iron, and choline, and like other sandwiches, are also a source of sodium and saturated fat. Americans could enhance nutrient contributions from sandwiches by selecting lean meat and limiting use of saturated fat- or sodium-rich non-beef components.

Effects of red meat taxes and warning labels on food groups selected in a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

High consumption of red and processed meat contributes to both health and environmental harms. Warning labels and taxes for red meat reduce selection of red meat overall, but little is known about how these potential policies affect purchases of subcategories of red meat (e.g., processed versus unprocessed) or of non-red-meat foods (e.g., cheese, pulses) relevant to health and environmental outcomes. This study examined consumer responses to warning labels and taxes for red meat in a randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

In October 2021, we recruited 3,518 US adults to complete a shopping task in a naturalistic online grocery store. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four arms: control (no warning labels or tax), warning labels only (health and environmental warning labels appeared next to products containing red meat), tax only (prices of products containing red meat were increased 30%) or combined warning labels + tax. Participants selected items to hypothetically purchase, which we categorized into food groups based on the presence of animal- and plant-source ingredients (e.g., beef, eggs, pulses), meat processing level (e.g., processed pork versus unprocessed pork), and meat species (e.g., beef versus pork). We assessed the effects of the warning labels and tax on selections from each food group.

RESULTS

Compared to control, all three interventions led participants to select fewer items with processed meat (driven by reductions in processed pork) and (for the tax and warning labels + tax interventions only) fewer items with unprocessed meat (driven by reductions in unprocessed beef). All three interventions also led participants to select more items containing cheese, while only the combined warning labels + tax intervention led participants to select more items containing processed poultry. Except for an increase in selection of pulses in the tax arm, the interventions did not affect selections of fish or seafood (processed or unprocessed), eggs, or plant-based items (pulses, nuts & seeds, tofu, meat mimics, grains & potatoes, vegetables).

CONCLUSIONS

Policies to reduce red meat consumption are also likely to affect consumption of other types of foods that are relevant to both health and environmental outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04716010 on www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov .

Dietary consumption of beef and red meat: a scoping review and evidence map on cognitive outcomes across the lifespan

OBJECTIVE

Mixed evidence exists on the impact of beef consumption on cognition. The goal was to create an evidence map capturing studies assessing beef consumption and cognition to reveal gaps and opportunities in the body of literature.

DESIGN

A scoping review was conducted to locate studies up to March 2022 using PubMed and backwards citation screening. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers with conflict resolution, and a database was created and made publicly available.

SETTING

Intervention and observational studies.

PARTICIPANTS

Humans of any age, sex and/or health status, without moderate to severe cognitive impairment and/or abnormalities.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were identified that quantified beef or red meat intake and assessed cognition. Six studies assessed beef intake, with the remaining studies describing intake of red meat that may or may not include beef. Nine articles described randomised controlled trials (RCT), mostly conducted in children. Thirteen described observational studies, primarily conducted on adults and seniors. The most common cognitive domains measured included intelligence and general cognition, and memory. The majority of controlled studies were rated with high risk of bias, with the majority of observational trials rated with serious or greater risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Red meat and beef intake and cognition is largely understudied. There is a significant lack of replication across study designs, populations, exposures and outcomes measured. The quality of the research would be considerably enhanced by focused assessments of beef intake (and not red meat in general) and specific cognitive domains, along with improved adherence to reporting standards.

Acoustic Characterization Study of Beef Loins Using Ultrasonic Transducers

The objective of this study was to non-destructively characterize samples of fresh beef loin by low-intensity ultrasound inspection at various frequencies and to correlate the acoustic parameters of these inspections with quality parameters. In this regard, ultrasonic parameters such as ultrasound pulse velocity (UPV) and variables related to attenuation and frequency components obtained from fast Fourier transform (FFT) were considered. For this, pulsed ultrasonic signal transducers with a frequency of 0.5 and 1.0 MHz were used. Acoustic parameters and those obtained through traditional instrumental analyses (physicochemical and texture) underwent a Pearson correlation analysis. The acoustic determinations revealed numerous significant correlations with the rest of the studied parameters. The results demonstrate that ultrasonic inspection has the ability to characterize samples with a non-destructive nature, and likewise, this methodology can be postulated as a promising predictive tool for determining quality parameters in beef loin samples.

Trends in Beef Intake in the United States: Analysis of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2001-2018

Evidence-based dietary advice regarding meats (including beef), requires accurate assessment of beef and other red meat intakes across life stages. Beef intake is subject to misclassification due to the use of broad categories such as "red and processed meat". In the current study, intake trends for total beef (i.e., any beef type) and specific beef types (fresh lean, ground, processed) among Americans participating in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2001-2018 (n = 74,461) were characterized and usual intake was assessed using NHANES 2011-2018 (n = 30,679). The usual intake amounts of beef were compared to those of relevant protein food subgroups modeled in the Healthy U.S.-Style Dietary Pattern (HDP) reported in the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA). Total per capita beef consumption declined an average of 12 g (p < 0.0001) for ages 2-18 years and 5.7 g (p = 0.0004) for ages 19-59 years per 2-yr NHANES cycle, over the 18-year timeframe, while remaining unchanged for Americans aged 60+ years. On a per capita basis, Americans aged 2 years and older consumed 42.2 g (1.5 ounces) of total beef per day. Fresh lean beef per capita consumption was 33.4 g (1.2 ounces) per day. Per capita intake was similar across all age groups and below the daily HDP modeled amount of 3.7 ounce equivalents for the "Meats, Poultry, Eggs" (MPE) subgroup, while approximately 75% of beef consumers' intakes of total beef was within HDP modeling. Evidence from intake trends suggests beef is not overconsumed by the majority of Americans but rather within the amounts for MPE and red meat modeled in the HDP of the DGA at the 2000-calorie level.

Nutritional Effects of Removing a Serving of Meat or Poultry from Healthy Dietary Patterns—A Dietary Modeling Study

Meat and poultry are nutrient-dense sources of protein and typically are recommended as part of an overall healthy diet. The objective was to assess the nutritional impact of removing a serving of meat/poultry in Healthy Dietary Patterns (HDPs) using a similar approach to that used by the USDA for Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Composites of minimally processed and further processed meat and poultry were developed and their nutrient profiles were used to accomplish modeling by removing nutrients of each meat and poultry composite from the HDPs. The removal of a 3 oz (85 g) serving of meat or poultry resulted in decreases (10% or more from baseline) in protein and several key micronutrients including iron, phosphorus, potassium, zinc, selenium, thiamine, riboflavin, niacin, vitamin B6, vitamin B12, and choline as well as cholesterol and sodium in the HDPs, and the decreases were consistent for most nutrients with the removal of either minimally processed (fresh) or further processed meat or poultry and even after adjusting for changes in calories. In conclusion, the results of this dietary modeling study show that the removal of a meat and poultry serving from HDPs resulted in decreases in protein and several key nutrients.

Red and processed meat intakes and cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus: An umbrella systematic review and assessment of causal relations using Bradford Hill's criteria

Observational research suggests higher red and processed meat intakes predict greater risks of developing or dying from cardiovascular diseases (CVD) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), but this research limits causal inference. This systematic review of reviews utilizes both observational and experimental research findings to infer causality of these relations. Reviews from four databases were screened by two researchers. Reviews included unprocessed red meat (URM), processed meat (PM), or mixed URM + PM intake, and reported CVD or T2DM outcomes. Twenty-nine reviews were included, and causality was inferred using Bradford Hill's Criteria. Observational assessments of CVD outcomes and all meat types consistently reported weak associations while, T2DM outcomes and PM and Mixed URM + PM assessments consistently reported strong associations. Experimental assessments of Mixed URM + PM on CVD and T2DM risk factors were predominately not significant which lacked coherence with observational findings. For all meat types and outcomes, temporality and plausible mechanisms were established, but specificity and analogous relationships do not support causality. Evidence was insufficient for URM and T2DM. More experimental research is needed to strengthen these inferences. These results suggest that red and processed meat intakes are not likely causally related to CVD but there is potential for a causal relationship with T2DM.

Benefits and Risks Associated with Meat Consumption during Key Life Processes and in Relation to the Risk of Chronic Diseases

Red meat has been an important part of the diet throughout human evolution. Overall, when included as part of a healthy and varied diet, red meat can provide a rich source of bioavailable essential nutrients and high biological value protein. The present paper discusses the dietary role/impact of red and processed meat, with some reference to the relative effect of white meat, in a range of chronic conditions including iron-deficiency anaemia, cardiovascular diseases (CVD), cancer and dementia. The role of red meat in relation to key physiological conditions such as maintaining skeletal muscle and bone health and during pregnancy is also discussed. The inclusion of lean red meat in a healthy, varied diet may be beneficial during these critical conditions. There is however increasing evidence that red meat and especially processed meat are associated with increased risks of CVD, cancer and dementia whereas white meat is neutral or associated with a lower risk. There now seems little doubt that processed and unprocessed meat should have separate public dietary guidance.