Growing evidence suggests that effects of red meat consumption on coronary heart disease (CHD) and type 2 diabetes could vary depending on processing. We reviewed the evidence for effects of unprocessed (fresh/frozen) red and processed (using sodium/other preservatives) meat consumption on CHD and diabetes. In meta-analyses of prospective cohorts, higher risk of CHD is seen with processed meat consumption (RR per 50 g: 1.42, 95 %CI = 1.07–1.89), but a smaller increase or no risk is seen with unprocessed meat consumption. Differences in sodium content (~400 % higher in processed meat) appear to account for about two-thirds of this risk difference. In similar analyses, both unprocessed red and processed meat consumption are associated with incident diabetes, with higher risk per g of processed (RR per 50 g: 1.51, 95 %CI = 1.25–1.83) versus unprocessed (RR per 100 g: 1.19, 95 % CI = 1.04–1.37) meats. Contents of heme iron and dietary cholesterol may partly account for these associations. The overall findings suggest that neither unprocessed red nor processed meat consumption is beneficial for cardiometabolic health, and that clinical and public health guidance should especially prioritize reducing processed meat consumption.

No abstract

Sugar intake has been associated with increased prevalence of childhood overweight/obesity; however, results remain controversial. The aim of this study was to examine the probability of overweight/obesity with higher sugar intakes, accounting for other dietary intakes. Data from 1165 children and adolescents aged ≥2–18 years (66.8% males) enrolled in the Hellenic National Nutrition and Health Survey (HNNHS) were used; specifically, 781 children aged 2–11 years and 384 adolescents 12–18 years. Total and added sugar intake were assessed using two 24 h recalls (24 hR). Foods were categorized into specific food groups to evaluate the main foods contributing to intakes. A significant proportion of children (18.7%) and adolescents (24.5%) exceeded the recommended cut-off of 10% of total energy intake from added sugars. Sweets (29.8%) and processed/refined grains and cereals (19.1%) were the main sources of added sugars in both age groups, while in adolescents, the third main contributor was sugar-sweetened beverages (20.6%). Being overweight or obese was 2.57 (p = 0.002) and 1.77 (p = 0.047) times more likely for intakes ≥10% of total energy from added sugars compared to less <10%, when accounting for food groups and macronutrient intakes, respectively. The predicted probability of becoming obese was also significant with higher total and added-sugar consumption. We conclude that high consumption of added sugars increased the probability for overweight/obesity among youth, irrespectively of other dietary or macronutrient intakes.

Dietary guidelines emphasize selecting lean (low-fat) meats to reduce saturated fat and cholesterol, but growing evidence suggests that health effects may relate to other ingredients, such as sodium, heme iron, or L-carnitine. Understanding how meats influence health, and on which nutrients this relationship depends, is essential to advise consumer choices, set guidelines, and inform food reformulations. A recent study published in BMC Medicine involving 448,568 participants in 10 European countries, provides important evidence in this regard. After multivariate adjustment, intake of unprocessed red meat was not significantly associated with total or cause-specific mortality; conversely, intake of processed meat was associated with a 30% higher rate of cardiovascular disease (CVD) (per 50 g/day, relative risk 1.30, 95% confidence interval 1.17 to 1.45) and also higher cancer mortality. These findings are consistent with our previous meta-analysis, based on smaller studies, showing strong associations of processed meats, but not unprocessed meats, with CVD. Preservatives are the notable difference; the calculated blood-pressure effects of sodium differences (around 400% higher in processed meats) explain most of the observed higher risk. Although unprocessed red meats seem to be relatively neutral for CVD, healthier choices are available, including fish, nuts, legumes, fruits, and vegetables. Public-health guidance should prioritize avoidance of processed meats, including the low-fat deli meats currently marketed as healthy choices, and the food industry should substantially reduce sodium and other preservatives in processed meats.See related research article here http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/11/63.

BackgroundIt has been suggested that coffee may affect the gut-brain axis with conflicting outcomes. Moreover, there is insufficient evidence to determine whether the type or temperature of coffee consumed will have a different impact on the gut-brain axis. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of acute coffee consumption on the following: 1. self-reported GI symptoms and salivary gastrin, 2. stress indices [salivary cortisol and alpha-amylase (sAA)] and psychometric measures, and 3. blood pressure (BP), in healthy, daily coffee consuming individuals in non-stressful conditions.MethodsThis was a randomized, double blind, crossover clinical trial, in which 40 healthy individuals (20 men, 20 women), 20–55 years of age, randomly consumed four 200 ml coffee beverages containing 160 mg caffeine (hot and cold instant coffee, cold espresso, hot filtered coffee), 1 week apart. Salivary samples and psychometric questionnaires were collected at baseline and post-coffee consumption at 15,30, and 60 min for salivary gastrin and sAA measurements and at 60,120, and 180 min for cortisol measurements. BP was measured at beginning and end of each intervention. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02253628 ResultsCoffee consumption significantly increased sAA activity (P = 0.041), with significant differences only between cold instant and filter coffee at 15 and 30 min post-consumption (P < 0.05). Coffee temporarily increased salivary gastrin, without differences between coffee types. Coffee did not affect salivary cortisol or self-reported anxiety levels. Coffee consumption significantly increased BP, within the healthy physiological levels, in a gender specific manner at the end of the experimental periods, without differences between coffee types.ConclusionAcute coffee consumption in non-stressful conditions activated sAA and BP but not salivary cortisol, indicating activation of the sympathetic nervous system. Post-coffee sAA increase without a concomitant cortisol increase may also indicate that coffee may have some anti-stress properties.