Objective: To assess the validity of self-reported height and weight by comparison with measured height and weight in a sample of middle-aged men and women, and to determine the extent of misclassification of body mass index (BMI) arising from differences between self-reported and measured values. Design: Analysis of self-reported and measured height and weight data from participants in the Oxford cohort of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC-Oxford). Subjects: Four thousand eight hundred and eight British men and women aged 35-76 years.Results: Spearman rank correlations between self-reported and measured height, weight and BMI were high (r . 0:9; P , 0:0001). Height was overestimated by a mean of 1.23 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-1.34) cm in men and 0.60 (0.51 -0.70) cm in women; the extent of overestimation was greater in older men and women, shorter men and heavier women. Weight was underestimated by a mean of 1.85 (1.72-1.99) kg in men and 1.40 (1.31-1.49) kg in women; the extent of underestimation was greater in heavier men and women, but did not vary with age or height. Using standard categories of BMI, 22.4% of men and 18.0% of women were classified incorrectly based on self-reported height and weight. After correcting the self-reported values using predictive equations derived from a 10% sample of subjects, misclassification decreased to 15.2% in men and 13.8% in women. Conclusions: Self-reported height and weight data are valid for identifying relationships in epidemiological studies. In analyses where anthropometric factors are the primary variables of interest, measurements in a representative sample of the study population can be used to improve the accuracy of estimates of height, weight and BMI.

Objective: To describe the lifestyle characteristics and nutrient intakes of the Oxford cohort of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC). Design: Cohort of men and women recruited through general practices or by post to include a high proportion of non meat-eaters. Dietary, anthropometric and lifestyle data were collected at baseline and four diet groups were defined. Setting: United Kingdom. Participants: In total, 65 429 men and women aged 20 to 97 years, comprising 33 883 meat-eaters, 10 110 fish-eaters, 18 840 lacto-ovo vegetarians and 2596 vegans. Results: Nutrient intakes and lifestyle factors differed across the diet groups, with striking differences between meat-eaters and vegans, and fish-eaters and vegetarians usually having intermediate values. Mean fat intake in each diet group was below the UK dietary reference value of 33% of total energy intake. The mean intake of saturated fatty acids in vegans was approximately 5% of energy, less than half the mean intake among meat-eaters (10-11%). Vegans had the highest intakes of fibre, vitamin B 1 , folate, vitamin C, vitamin E, magnesium and iron, and the lowest intakes of retinol, vitamin B 12 , vitamin D, calcium and zinc. Conclusions: The EPIC-Oxford cohort includes 31 546 non meat-eaters and is one of the largest studies of vegetarians in the world. The average nutrient intakes in the whole cohort are close to those currently recommended for good health. Comparisons of the diet groups show wide ranges in the intakes of major nutrients such as saturated fat and dietary fibre. Such variation should increase the ability of the study to detect associations of diet with major cancers and causes of death.

The European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC), which covers a large cohort of half a million men and women from 23 European centres in 10 Western European countries, was designed to study the relationship between diet and the risk of chronic diseases, particularly cancer. Information on usual individual dietary intake was assessed using different validated dietary assessment methods across participating countries. In order to adjust for possible systematic over-or underestimation in dietary intake measurements and correct for attenuation bias in relative risk estimates, a calibration approach was developed. This approach involved an additional dietary assessment common across study populations to re-express individual dietary intakes according to the same reference scale. A single 24-hour diet recall was therefore collected, as the EPIC reference calibration method, from a stratified random sample of 36 900 subjects from the entire EPIC cohort, using a software program (EPIC-SOFT) specifically designed to standardise the dietary measurements across study populations. This paper describes the design and populations of the calibration sub-studies set up in the EPIC centres. In addition, to assess whether the calibration sub-samples were representative of the entire group of EPIC cohorts, a series of subjects' characteristics known possibly to influence dietary intakes was compared in both population groups. This was the first time that calibration sub-studies had been set up in a large multi-centre European study. These studies showed that, despite certain inherent methodological and logistic constraints, a study design such as this one works relatively well in practice. The average response in the calibration study was 78.3% and ranged from 46.5% to 92.5%. The calibration population differed slightly from the overall cohort but the differences were small for most characteristics and centres. The overall results suggest that, after adjustment for age, dietary intakes estimated from calibration samples can reasonably be interpreted as representative of the main cohorts in most of the EPIC centres.

OBJECTIVE:To compare body mass index (BMI) in four diet groups (meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans) in the Oxford cohort of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC-Oxford) and to investigate lifestyle and dietary factors associated with any observed differences. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of self-reported dietary, anthropometric and lifestyle data. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 37 875 healthy men and women aged 20-97 y participating in EPIC-Oxford. RESULTS: Age-adjusted mean BMI was significantly different between the four diet groups, being highest in the meat-eaters (24.41 kg/m 2 in men, 23.52 kg/m 2 in women) and lowest in the vegans (22.49 kg/m 2 in men, 21.98 kg/m 2 in women). Fisheaters and vegetarians had similar, intermediate mean BMI. Differences in lifestyle factors including smoking, physical activity and education level accounted for less than 5% of the difference in mean age-adjusted BMI between meat-eaters and vegans, whereas differences in macronutrient intake accounted for about half of the difference. High protein (as percent energy) and low fibre intakes were the dietary factors most strongly and consistently associated with increasing BMI both between and within the diet groups. CONCLUSIONS: Fish-eaters, vegetarians and especially vegans had lower BMI than meat-eaters. Differences in macronutrient intakes accounted for about half the difference in mean BMI between vegans and meat-eaters. High protein and low fibre intakes were the factors most strongly associated with increasing BMI.

Objective: To evaluate under-and overreporting and their determinants in the EPIC 24-hour diet recall (24-HDR) measurements collected in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC). Design: Cross-sectional analysis. 24-HDR measurements were obtained by means of a standardised computerised interview program (EPIC-SOFT). The ratio of reported energy intake (El) to estimated basal metabolic rate (BMR) was used to ascertain the magnitude, impact and determinants of misreporting. Goldberg's cut-off points were used to identify participants with physiologically extreme low or high energy intake. At the aggregate level the value of 1.55 for physical activity level (PAL) was chosen as reference. At the individual level we used multivariate statistical techniques to identify factors that could explain EI/BMR variability. Analyses were performed by adjusting for weight, height, age at recall, special diet, smoking status, day of recall (weekday vs. weekend day) and physical activity. Setting: Twenty-seven redefined centres in the 10 countries participating in the EPIC project. Subjects: In total, 35955 men and women, aged 35-74 years, participating in the nested EPIC calibration sub-studies. Results: While overreporting has only a minor impact, the percentage of subjects identified as extreme underreporters was 13.8% and 10.3% in women and men, respectively. Mean EI/BMR values in men and women were 1.44 and 1.36 including all subjects, and 1.50 and 1.44 after exclusion of misreporters. After exclusion of misreporters, adjusted EI/BMR means were consistently less than 10% different from the expected value of 1.55 for PAL (except for women in Greece and in the UK), with overall differences equal to 4.0% and 7.4% for men and women, respectively. We modelled the probability of being an underreporter in association with several individual characteristics. After adjustment for age, height, special diet, smoking status, day of recall and physical activity at work, logistic regression analyses resulted in an odds ratio (OR) of being an underreporter for the highest vs. the lowest quartile of body mass index (BMI) of 3-52 (95% confidence interval (CD 2.91-4.26) in men and 4.80 (95% CI 4.11-5.6l) in women, indicating that overweight subjects are significantly more likely to underestimate energy intake than subjects in the bottom BMI category. Older people 'Corresponding

Summary We interviewed 328 men diagnosed with prostate cancer before the age of 75 years and 328 age-matched population controls. The principal hypotheses were that risk would increase with a high intake of total or saturated fat and would decrease with a high intake of carotene (P-carotene equivalents) or lycopene. We also examined the associations of other nutrients and foods with risk. There was no evidence for an association between fat intake and risk, although the average fat intake was high and the range of fat intakes was narrow (medians of lower and upper thirds of percentage of energy from fat among controls were 34.3% and 42.9% respectively). Risk was lower in subjects with higher carotene intake: odds ratios 0.65 (95% Cl 0.45-0.94) and 0.76 (0.53-1.10) in the middle and upper thirds of carotene intake respectively (Pfor trend = 0.150). Lycopene was not associated with risk. Among 13 other nutrients examined, the odds ratios in the top third of intake were below 0.

Objective: To compare the prevalence of self-reported hypertension and mean systolic and diastolic blood pressures in four diet groups (meat eaters, fish eaters, vegetarians and vegans) and to investigate dietary and other lifestyle factors that might account for any differences observed between the groups. Design: Analysis of cross-sectional data from participants in the Oxford cohort of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC -Oxford). Setting: United Kingdom. Subjects: Eleven thousand and four British men and women aged 20 -78 years at blood pressure measurement. Results: The age-adjusted prevalence of self-reported hypertension was significantly different between the four diet groups, ranging from 15.0% in male meat eaters to 5.8% in male vegans, and from 12.1% in female meat eaters to 7.7% in female vegans, with fish eaters and vegetarians having similar and intermediate prevalences. Mean systolic and diastolic blood pressures were significantly different between the four diet groups, with meat eaters having the highest values and vegans the lowest values. The differences in age-adjusted mean blood pressure between meat eaters and vegans among participants with no self-reported hypertension were 4.2 and 2.6 mmHg systolic and 2.8 and 1.7 mmHg diastolic for men and women, respectively. Much of the variation was attributable to differences in body mass index between the diet groups. Conclusions: Non-meat eaters, especially vegans, have a lower prevalence of hypertension and lower systolic and diastolic blood pressures than meat eaters, largely because of differences in body mass index.

Compared with non-vegetarians, Western vegetarians have a lower mean BMI (by about 1 kg/m2), a lower mean plasma total cholesterol concentration (by about 0.5 mmol/l), and a lower mortality from IHD (by about 25 %). They may also have a lower risk for some other diseases such as constipation, diverticular disease, gallstones and appendicitis. No differences in mortality from common cancers have been established. There is no evidence of adverse effects on mortality. Much more information is needed, particularly on other causes of death, other morbidity including osteoporosis, and long-term health in vegans. The evidence available suggests that widespread adoption of a vegetarian diet could prevent approximately 40 000 deaths from IHD in Britain each year.