Total, Fresh, Lean, and Fresh Lean Beef Consumption in Relation to Nutrient Intakes and Diet Quality among U.S. Adults, 2005⁻2016

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.

Beef Consumption Is Associated with Higher Intakes and Adequacy of Key Nutrients in Older Adults Age 60+ Years: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2011-2018 Analysis

Beef is an important source of high-quality protein and several micronutrients, including iron, zinc, and B vitamins. We determined beef intake and its relationship with intakes of nutrients and their adequacy using 24 h dietary recall data from 5868 older adults. Usual intakes from foods were determined using the National Cancer Institute method, and the percent of the population below the estimated average requirement or above adequate intake was estimated. A high percentage of older adults did not meet nutrient recommendations for vitamin D (96%), choline (96%), vitamin E (84%), potassium (70%), calcium (63%), magnesium (60%), vitamin C (46%), vitamin A (39%), zinc (21%), vitamin B6 (19%), and folate (15%). About 68% of older adults were beef consumers with a mean intake of 56 g/day. Beef consumers had higher (p < 0.05) intakes of energy, protein, calcium, iron, phosphorus, selenium, sodium, zinc, thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, vitamin B12, and choline, and a higher (p < 0.05) proportion met nutrient recommendations for protein, calcium, copper, zinc, thiamin, folate, and vitamin B12 than non-consumers. Consumers of fresh, ground, and processed beef also had generally higher intakes and lower inadequacies of many nutrients depending on the beef type. In conclusion, older adults generally had poor nutrient adequacy from their diets, while beef consumers had higher nutrient intakes and adequacy for certain key nutrients, which are inherently generally available from beef or from foods consumed with beef.

Contribution of Beef to Key Nutrient Intakes and Nutrient Adequacy in Pregnant and Lactating Women: NHANES 2011-2018 Analysis

Beef is an important source of high-quality protein and several micronutrients, including iron, zinc, and B-vitamins. The objective was to assess the association of beef intake with nutrient intake and adequacy among pregnant and lactating women using 24-h dietary recall data. Usual intakes from foods were determined with the National Cancer Institute (NCI) method and % population below Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) or above Adequate Intake (AI) were estimated. A high proportion of pregnant and lactating women had inadequate intakes for vitamin D (94%), vitamin E (82%), vitamin C (52%), and vitamin A (50%), magnesium (35%), folate (31%), zinc (25%), and vitamin B6 (22%); only 4% and 35% met AI for choline and potassium, respectively. About 67% of pregnant and lactating women were beef consumers, consuming 49 g beef/day. Beef consumers had higher intakes (p < 0.05) of energy, protein, calcium, iron, phosphorus, selenium, sodium, zinc, thiamin, riboflavin, and niacin, and a higher proportion (p < 0.05) met nutrient recommendations for protein, calcium, iron, zinc, thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, vitamin B6, and vitamin B12 compared to non-consumers. In conclusion, pregnant and lactating women generally have inadequate nutrient intakes from their diets. Beef consumers have higher intakes and adequacy for certain nutrients, many of which are inherently available in beef or in foods eaten with beef.

Demographic and Socioeconomic Correlates of Disproportionate Beef Consumption among US Adults in an Age of Global Warming

Concern for the environment when making dietary choices has grown as the contribution of the food sector to global greenhouse gas emissions becomes more widely known. Understanding the correlates of beef eating could assist in the targeting of campaigns to reduce the consumption of high-impact foods. The objective of this study was to identify the demographic, socioeconomic, and behavioral correlates of disproportionate beef consumption in the United States. We analyzed 24-h dietary recall data from adults (n = 10,248) in the 2015-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Disproportionate beef consumption was defined as an intake greater than four ounce-equivalents per 2200 kcal. Associations of this indicator variable with gender, age, race/ethnicity, education, family income, diet knowledge, and away-from-home meals were assessed using logistic regression, incorporating survey design and weighting. Disproportionate beef diets were consumed by 12% of individuals, but accounted for half of all beef consumed. Males were more likely than females (p < 0.001) to consume these diets. This relationship was seen in all bivariate and multivariable models. Older adults, college graduates, and those who looked up the MyPlate educational campaign online were less likely (p < 0.01) to consume a disproportionate beef diet. While almost one-third of reported consumption came from cuts of beef (e.g., steak or brisket), six of the top ten beef sources were mixed dishes: burgers, meat mixed dishes, burritos and tacos, frankfurters, soups, and pasta. Efforts to address climate change through diet modification could benefit from targeting campaigns to the highest consumers of beef, as their consumption accounts for half of all beef consumed.

Consumption Patterns and the Nutritional Contribution of Total, Processed, Fresh, and Fresh-Lean Pork to the U.S. Diet

Pork has the potential to provide several macro and micronutrients to the diet, as it is a commonly consumed protein in the United States and across many cultures worldwide. There is an absence of clinical and observational studies that isolate the nutritional contribution of various types of pork intake from that of other red and/or processed meats. The objective of this study was to assess consumption patterns and the nutritional contribution of total, processed, fresh, and fresh-lean pork to the diets of participants aged 2+ years enrolled in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2007-2018 data cycles. The recent National Cancer Institute method was used to disaggregate fresh and processed pork intake from the USDA Food Patterns Equivalents Database. The mean intake of total pork among consumers was estimated to be 79.5 ± 0.82, 54.2 ± 0.69, 54.6 ± 0.93, and 45.9 ± 0.73, g/d for men, women, boys, and girls, respectively. Total pork consumption subtly increased intakes of total energy and several macro and micronutrients, decreased diet quality (HEI-2015) scores (adults only), and consumption of other "healthful" food groups. Only subtle but clinically insignificant effects of pork intake on biomarkers of nutritional status were shown. These trends were largely driven by processed pork consumption and the co-consumption of foods such as condiments. Increasing the availability and education around fresh-lean cuts may help to increase intake of protein and other key nutrients across certain subpopulations, without adversely affecting diet quality and biomarkers of health status.

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.

Meat Consumption and Gut Microbiota: a Scoping Review of Literature and Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials in Adults

Emerging research indicates the importance of gut microbiota in mediating the relationship between meat intake and human health outcomes. We aimed to assess the state of available scientific literature on meat intake and gut microbiota in humans (PROSPERO, International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, CRD42020135649). We first conducted a scoping review to identify observational and interventional studies on this topic. Searches were performed for English language articles using PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and CINAHL (Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) databases from inception to August 2021 and using keywords related to meat (inclusive of mammalian, avian, and aquatic subtypes) and gut microbiota. Of 14,680 records, 85 eligible articles were included in the scoping review, comprising 57 observational and 28 interventional studies. One prospective observational study and 13 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified in adults without diagnosed disease. We included the 13 RCTs, comprising 18 comparisons, in the systematic review to assess the effects of higher and lower intakes of total meat and meat subtypes on the gut microbiota composition. The bacterial composition was differentially affected by consuming diets with and without meat or with varied meat subtypes. For example, higher meat intake tended to decrease population sizes of genera Anerostipes and Faecalibacterium, but it increased the population size of Roseburia across studies. However, the magnitude and directionality of most microbial responses varied, with inconsistent patterns of responses across studies. The data were insufficient for comparison within or between meat subtypes. The paucity of research, especially among meat subtypes, and heterogeneity of findings underscore the need for more well-designed prospective studies and full-feeding RCTs to address the relationships between and effects of consuming total meat and meat subtypes on gut microbiota, respectively.

Fresh Beef and Lamb Consumption in Relation to Nutrient Intakes and Markers of Nutrition and Health Status among the Population Aged 5-90 Years in Ireland

The dietary role of meat is under scrutiny for health and environmental reasons, yet a growing body of evidence proposes that advice to limit red meat consumption is unnecessarily restrictive. The aim of this study was to investigate the role of 'fresh beef and lamb' in the diet of the population (5-90 years) in Ireland and its association with markers of nutrition and health status. Analyses are based on data from three nationally representative dietary surveys in the Republic of Ireland. Dietary intake data were estimated using food records, and nutrient intakes were estimated based on UK and Irish food composition tables. Biochemical samples were collected and analysed using standard procedures. 'Fresh beef and lamb' (defined as beef/lamb that had not undergone any preserving process other than chilling/freezing/quick-freezing) was consumed by 68-84% of the population and intakes ranged from 19 to 43 g/d across age groups. It made important contributions to intakes of protein, monounsaturated fat, vitamins D, B12, niacin, iron and zinc while also contributing relatively small proportions of total fat, saturated fat and salt. Higher consumption of 'fresh beef and lamb' was associated with higher intakes of protein, niacin, vitamins B6, B12, zinc and potassium (but also total fat) and lower intakes of carbohydrate and total sugars (but also dietary fibre). In adults, older adults and WCBA, higher consumption of 'fresh beef and lamb' was not associated with increased risk factors of cardio-metabolic diseases nor was it associated with better or poorer nutritional status for vitamins D, B12 or iron. This study adds to the evidence base on the contribution of 'fresh beef and lamb' in the diet and may be useful to policymakers updating guidance for healthy diets from sustainable food systems.

Beef intake and risk of rheumatoid arthritis: Insights from a cross-sectional study and two-sample Mendelian randomization

Background

Beef is common in daily diet, but its association with the risk of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) remains uncertain. The objective of this study is to explore the relationship between beef intake and the risk of RA.

Materials and methods

We investigated the association between beef intake and risk of RA by multivariate logistic regression, based on the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999–2016 involving 9,618 participants. The dose–response relationship between beef intake and RA was explored as well. Furthermore, we performed Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis to examine the causal effect of beef intake on RA. Genetic instruments for beef intake were selected from a genome-wide association study (GWAS) including 335,576 individuals from the UK Biobank study, and summary statistics relating to RA were obtained from a GWAS meta-analysis of 14,361 RA patients and 43,923 controls. The inverse-variance weighted (IVW) approach was used to estimate the causal association, and MR-Egger regression and Mendelian randomization pleiotropy residual sum and outlier (MR-PRESSO) test were applied to evaluate the pleiotropy and outliers.

Results

Compared with the lowest quintile (0 to ≤33.50 g/d), beef intake was found to be significantly associated with the risk of RA [odds ratio (OR): 1.94; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.20–3.12] in the third quintile (50.26 to ≤76.50 g/d). Moreover, a reversed “U” dose–response relationship between beef and RA (Pnon–linearity = 0.023) was found. In the MR analysis, beef intake was associated with an increased risk of RA (OR: 3.05; 95% CI: 1.11–8.35; P = 0.030) by the IVW method. The results from MR-Egger regression and MR-PRESSO test showed that there were no pleiotropic variations and outliers.

Conclusion

This study indicated that there is suggestive evidence to support the causal effect of beef intake on the risk of RA, while further studies are warranted to elucidate the exact association.

State-of-the-Art Review: Evidence on Red Meat Consumption and Hypertension Outcomes

Hypertension (HTN) is a well-established risk factor for cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), including ischemic heart disease, stroke, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation. The prevalence of HTN, as well as mortality rates attributable to HTN, continue to increase, particularly in the United States and among Black populations. The risk of HTN involves a complex interaction of genetics and modifiable risk factors, including dietary patterns. In this regard, there is accumulating evidence that links dietary intake of red meat with a higher risk of poorly controlled blood pressure and HTN. However, research on this topic contains significant methodological limitations, which are described in the review. The report provided below also summarizes the available research reports, with an emphasis on processed red meat consumption and how different dietary patterns among certain populations may contribute to HTN-related health disparities. Finally, this review outlines potential mechanisms and provides recommendations for providers to counsel patients with evidence-based nutritional approaches regarding red meat and the risk of HTN, as well as CVD morbidity and mortality.

Red meat consumption, incident CVD and the influence of dietary quality in the Jackson Heart Study

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the prospective associations between meat consumption and CVD and whether these relationships differ by dietary quality among African American (AA) adults.

DESIGN

Baseline diet was assessed with a regionally specific FFQ. Unprocessed red meat included beef and pork (120 g/serving); processed meat included sausage, luncheon meats and cured meat products (50 g/serving). Incident total CVD, CHD, stroke and heart failure were assessed annually over 9·8 years of follow-up. We characterised dietary quality using a modified Healthy Eating Index-2010 score (m-HEI), excluding meat contributions.

SETTING

Jackson, MS, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

AA adults (n 3242, aged 55 y, 66 % female).

RESULTS

Mean total, unprocessed red and processed meat intakes were 5·7 ± 3·5, 2·3 ± 1·8 and 3·3 ± 2·7 servings/week, respectively. Mostly, null associations were observed between meat categories and CVD or subtypes. However, greater intake of unprocessed red meat (three servings/week) was associated with significantly elevated risk of stroke (hazard ratio = 1·43 (CI: 1·07,1·90)). With the exception of a more positive association between unprocessed meat consumption and stroke among individuals in m-HEI Tertile 2, the strength of associations between meat consumption categories and CVD outcomes did not differ by m-HEI tertile. In formal tests, m-HEI did not significantly modify meat-CVD associations.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort of AA adults, total and processed meat were not associated with CVD outcomes, with the exception that unprocessed red meat was related to greater stroke risk. Dietary quality did not modfiy these associations. Research is needed in similar cohorts with longer follow-up and greater meat consumption to replicate these findings.

Nitrate Is Nitrate: The Status Quo of Using Nitrate through Vegetable Extracts in Meat Products

Nitrate and nitrites are used to give the characteristic color to cured meat products and to preserve them. According to the scientific knowledge available at the moment, these compounds are approved as food additives based on a detailed ponderation between the potential risks and benefits. The controversy over nitrites has increased with the release of an IARC Monograph suggesting an association between colorectal cancer and dietary nitrite in processed meats. The trend in “clean label” products reinforced the concern of consumers about nitrates and nitrites in meat products. This review aims to explain the role of nitrates and nitrites used in meat products. The potential chemical hazards and health risks linked to the consumption of cured meat products are described. Different strategies aiming to replace synthetic nitrate and nitrite and obtain green-label meat products are summarized, discussing their impact on various potential hazards. In the light of the present knowledge, the use or not of nitrite is highly dependent on the ponderation of two main risks—the eventual formation of nitrosamines or the eventual out-growth of severe pathogens. It is evident that synthetic nitrite and nitrate alternatives must be researched, but always considering the equilibrium that is the safety of a meat product.

High Consumption of Red Meat Is Associated with Excess Mortality Among African-American Women

BACKGROUND

Red meat is a rich source of nutrients but is typically high in saturated fats. Carcinogenic chemicals can be formed during cooking and processing. Little is known about the relation of red meat consumption to mortality in African Americans (AAs), a group with excess mortality and high consumption of red meat relative to whites.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to assess the association between red meat consumption and mortality in AA women.

METHODS

The Black Women's Health Study (BWHS) is a prospective cohort study of AA women across the USA who completed health questionnaires at enrollment in 1995 (median age 38 y, median BMI 27.9 kg/m2) and every 2 y thereafter. The analyses included 56,314 women who completed a validated FFQ and were free of cardiovascular disease and cancer at baseline in 1995. Exposures were total red meat, processed red meat, and unprocessed red meat consumption. Outcomes were all-cause and cause-specific mortality. Cox proportional hazards models with control for age, socioeconomic status, lifestyle factors, medical history, and dietary factors were used to estimate HRs with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

During 22 y of follow-up through to 2017, we identified 5054 deaths, which included 1354 cardiovascular deaths and 1801 cancer deaths. The HR for all-cause mortality was 1.47 (95% CI: 1.33, 1.62) for the highest quintile of total red meat consumption relative to the lowest. Each 1 serving/d increase in red meat consumption was associated with a 7% (95% CI: 5%, 9%) increased risk of all-cause mortality. Red meat consumption was also associated with increased cardiovascular mortality, but not with cancer mortality. Results were similar for the consumption of processed and unprocessed red meat.

CONCLUSIONS

Red meat consumption is associated with increased all-cause and cardiovascular mortality among AA women.