Background The relation between body weight and mortality among persons with type 2 diabetes remains unresolved, with some studies suggesting decreased mortality among overweight or obese persons as compared with normal-weight persons (an “obesity paradox”). Methods We studied participants with incident diabetes from the Nurses’ Health Study (8970 participants) and Health Professionals Follow-up Study (2457 participants) who were free of cardiovascular disease and cancer at the time of a diagnosis of diabetes. Body weight shortly before diagnosis and height were used to calculate the body-mass index (BMI, the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters). Multivariable Cox models were used to estimate the hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for mortality across BMI categories. Results There were 3083 deaths during a mean period of 15.8 years of follow-up. A J-shaped association was observed across BMI categories (18.5 to 22.4, 22.5 to 24.9 [reference], 25.0 to 27.4, 27.5 to 29.9, 30.0 to 34.9, and ≥35.0) for all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.29 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.05 to 1.59]; 1.00; 1.12 [95% CI, 0.98 to 1.29]; 1.09 [95% CI, 0.94 to 1.26]; 1.24 [95% CI, 1.08 to 1.42]; and 1.33 [95% CI, 1.14 to 1.55], respectively). This relationship was linear among participants who had never smoked (hazard ratios across BMI categories: 1.12, 1.00, 1.16, 1.21, 1.36, and 1.56, respectively) but was nonlinear among participants who had ever smoked (hazard ratios across BMI categories: 1.32, 1.00, 1.09, 1.04, 1.14, and 1.21) (P = 0.04 for interaction). A direct linear trend was observed among participants younger than 65 years of age at the time of a diabetes diagnosis but not among those 65 years of age or older at the time of diagnosis (P<0.001 for interaction). Conclusions We observed a J-shaped association between BMI and mortality among all participants and among those who had ever smoked and a direct linear relationship among those who had never smoked. We found no evidence of lower mortality among patients with diabetes who were overweight or obese at diagnosis, as compared with their normal-weight counterparts, or of an obesity paradox. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and the American Diabetes Association.)

OBJECTIVEGestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is one of the most common complications of pregnancy and is associated with a substantially elevated risk of adverse health outcomes for both mothers and offspring. Physical activity may contribute to the prevention of GDM and thus is crucial for dissecting the vicious circle involving GDM, childhood obesity, and adulthood obesity, and diabetes. Therefore, we aimed to systematically review and synthesize the current evidence on the relation between physical activity and the development of GDM.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSMedline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Reviews were searched from inception to 31 March 2010. Studies assessing the relationship between physical activity and subsequent development of GDM were included. Characteristics including study design, country, GDM diagnostic criteria, ascertainment of physical activity, timing of exposure (prepregnancy or early pregnancy), adjusted relative risks, CIs, and statistical methods were extracted independently by two reviewers.RESULTSOur search identified seven prepregnancy and five early pregnancy studies, including five prospective cohorts, two retrospective case-control studies, and two cross-sectional study designs. Prepregnancy physical activity was assessed in 34,929 total participants, which included 2,813 cases of GDM, giving a pooled odds ratio (OR) of 0.45 (95% CI 0.28–0.75) when the highest versus lowest categories were compared. Exercise in early pregnancy was assessed in 4,401 total participants, which included 361 cases of GDM, and was also significantly protective (0.76 [95% CI 0.70–0.83]).CONCLUSIONSHigher levels of physical activity before pregnancy or in early pregnancy are associated with a significantly lower risk of developing GDM.

The updated analyses from our 3 cohorts and meta-analyses provide further evidence that higher dietary GI and GL are associated with increased risk of T2D.

BackgroundThe effectiveness of low-fat diets for long-term weight loss has been debated for decades, with dozens of randomized trials (RCTs) and recent reviews giving mixed results.MethodsWe conducted a random effects meta-analysis of RCTs to estimate the long-term effect of low-fat vs. higher fat dietary interventions on weight loss. Our search included RCTs conducted in adult populations reporting weight change outcomes at ≥1 year, comparing low-fat with higher fat interventions, published through July 2014. The primary outcome measure was mean difference in weight change between interventions.FindingsFifty-three studies met inclusion criteria representing 68,128 participants. In the setting of weight loss trials, low-carbohydrate interventions led to significantly greater weight loss than low-fat interventions (n comparisons=18; weighted mean difference [WMD]=1.15 kg, 95% CI=0.52 to 1.79; I2=10%). Low-fat did not lead to differences in weight change compared with other moderate fat weight loss interventions (n=19; WMD=0.36, 95% CI=-0.66 to 1.37; I2=82%), and were superior only when compared with “usual diet” (n=8; WMD=-5.41, 95% CI=-7.29 to −3.54; I2=68%). Similarly, non-weight loss trials and weight maintenance trials, for which there were no low-carbohydrate comparisons, had similar effects for low-fat vs moderate fat interventions, and were superior compared with “usual diet”. Weight loss trials achieving a greater difference in fat intake at follow-up significantly favored the higher fat dietary interventions, as indicated by difference of ≥5% of calories from fat (n=18; WMD=1.04, 95% CI=0.06 to 2.03; I2=78%) or by difference in change serum triglycerides of ≥5 mg/dL (n=17; WMD=1.38, 95% CI=0.50 to 2.25; I2=62%).InterpretationThese findings suggest that the long-term effect of low-fat diets on body weight depends on the intensity of intervention in the comparison group. When compared to dietary interventions of similar intensity, evidence from RCTs does not support low-fat diets over other dietary interventions.