This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (5)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related articles  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Oncology  • Cardiovascular System  • Diet  • Cardiovascular Disease/ Myocardial Infarction  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

A Prospective Study of Over Half a Million People

Rashmi Sinha, PhD; Amanda J. Cross, PhD; Barry I. Graubard, PhD; Michael F. Leitzmann, MD, DrPH; Arthur Schatzkin, MD, DrPH

Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(6):562-571.

Background  High intakes of red or processed meat may increase the risk of mortality. Our objective was to determine the relations of red, white, and processed meat intakes to risk for total and cause-specific mortality.

Methods  The study population included the National Institutes of Health–AARP (formerly known as the American Association of Retired Persons) Diet and Health Study cohort of half a million people aged 50 to 71 years at baseline. Meat intake was estimated from a food frequency questionnaire administered at baseline. Cox proportional hazards regression models estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) within quintiles of meat intake. The covariates included in the models were age, education, marital status, family history of cancer (yes/no) (cancer mortality only), race, body mass index, 31-level smoking history, physical activity, energy intake, alcohol intake, vitamin supplement use, fruit consumption, vegetable consumption, and menopausal hormone therapy among women. Main outcome measures included total mortality and deaths due to cancer, cardiovascular disease, injuries and sudden deaths, and all other causes.

Results  There were 47 976 male deaths and 23 276 female deaths during 10 years of follow-up. Men and women in the highest vs lowest quintile of red (HR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.27-1.35], and HR, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.30-1.43], respectively) and processed meat (HR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.12-1.20], and HR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.20-1.31], respectively) intakes had elevated risks for overall mortality. Regarding cause-specific mortality, men and women had elevated risks for cancer mortality for red (HR, 1.22 [95% CI, 1.16-1.29], and HR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.12-1.30], respectively) and processed meat (HR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.06-1.19], and HR, 1.11 [95% CI 1.04-1.19], respectively) intakes. Furthermore, cardiovascular disease risk was elevated for men and women in the highest quintile of red (HR, 1.27 [95% CI, 1.20-1.35], and HR, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.37-1.65], respectively) and processed meat (HR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.03-1.15], and HR, 1.38 [95% CI, 1.26-1.51], respectively) intakes. When comparing the highest with the lowest quintile of white meat intake, there was an inverse association for total mortality and cancer mortality, as well as all other deaths for both men and women.

Conclusion  Red and processed meat intakes were associated with modest increases in total mortality, cancer mortality, and cardiovascular disease mortality.

Author Affiliations: Nutritional Epidemiology Branch (Drs Sinha, Cross, Leitzmann, and Schatzkin) and Biostatistics Branch (Dr Graubard), Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, Maryland.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLES

In This Issue of Archives of Internal Medicine
Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(6):542.
FULL TEXT  

Reducing Meat Consumption Has Multiple Benefits for the World's Health
Barry M. Popkin
Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(6):543-545.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Meat Intake and Mortality: Evidence for Harm, No Effect, or Benefit?
Mozaffarian
Arch Intern Med 2009;169:1537-1538.
FULL TEXT  

Higher Red Meat Intake May Be a Marker of Risk, Not a Risk Factor Itself
Silva and Marcadenti
Arch Intern Med 2009;169:1538-1539.
FULL TEXT  

Higher Red Meat Intake May Be a Marker of Risk, Not a Risk Factor Itself--Reply
Sinha et al.
Arch Intern Med 2009;169:1539-1539.
FULL TEXT  

Commentary: Why diets need to change to avert harm from global warming
Powles
Int J Epidemiol 2009;38:1141-1142.
FULL TEXT  

Meat Consumption and Mortality
JWatch General 2009;2009:2-2.
FULL TEXT  

All you need to read in the other general journals
BMJ 2009;338:b1296-b1296.
FULL TEXT  

Reducing Meat Consumption Has Multiple Benefits for the World's Health
Popkin
Arch Intern Med 2009;169:543-545.
FULL TEXT