Moderate Consumption of Red Meat, Compared to Soy or Non-Soy Legume, Has No Adverse Effect on Cardio-Metabolic Factors in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Abstract

Background Recently, it has been proposed that red meat consumption could enhance risk of diabetes and worsen lipid profile and glycemic status, in comparison with soy or non-soy legume, but the results of clinical trials are controversial. Objectives This study aimed to compare the effect of red meat, soy bean, and non-soy legume consumption on cardio-metabolic factors in patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods This was a randomized controlled clinical trial which included 75 patients with diabetes, aged 40–65 years. Participants were randomly allocated to receive two servings of red meat (control group), soy bean, or non-soy legume, 3 days a week for 8 weeks. All groups also received a balanced-macronutrients weight maintenance diet. Body composition and cardio-metabolic factors including fasting blood glucose (FBG), fasting insulin, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), serum lipids, and blood pressure were measured at baseline and endpoint of the study. Quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (QUICKI) score and Framingham risk score (FRS) were also computed. Results We found no significant differences in changes of FBG, fasting insulin, HbA1c, QUICKI score, serum lipids, FRS, and systolic and diastolic blood pressure among the 3 groups. Within group analysis showed that FRS reduced significantly in all groups (P<0.05). In addition, systolic (P=0.01) and diastolic (P=0.03) blood pressure reduced within red meat group. Conclusions Compared to soy bean or non-soy legume, moderate consumption of red meat had no adverse effect on cardio-metabolic factors including FBG, fasting insulin, HbA1C, QUICKI score, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein , high-density lipoprotein , and blood pressure in adults with type 2 diabetes.

The Effects of Legume Consumption on Markers of Glycaemic Control in Individuals with and without Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Literature Review of Randomised Controlled Trials

“…Dietary fibre intakes in intervention arms were in line with the adequate intake (AI) as per the Australian nutrient reference values (25 g for women, 30 g for men) [30,32,[34][35][36]39,44], with the exception of four study interventions, which were not [23,33,41]. Simpson et al [27] reported an extreme 96 g/day dietary fibre intake, which would not be sustainable among free-living individuals in the longer term.…”

“…Two studies (T2DM n = 2) reported a statistically significant between-group effect on FBI in favour of the legume intervention [ 23 , 24 ]; however, one of these also reported a statistically significant between-group difference at baseline (p = 0.02) [ 23 ]. Three studies (T2DM n = 3) observed a statistically significant between-group reduction in HbA1c in favour of legume intervention, with reported reductions ranging from 0.10−0.50% [ 23 , 25 , 27 ], however, one study also reported a statistically significant between-group difference at baseline ( p = 0.04) [ 23 ]. One study, comprising of two comparisons (T2DM n = 1, T1DM n = 1), reported statistically significant between-group effects for 2-h PPG in favour of legume interventions; however, raw baseline data was not reported and therefore the absolute change is unknown [ 27 ].…”

“…Three studies (T2DM n = 3) observed a statistically significant between-group effect on FBG in favour of the legume intervention, with reductions ranging from 0.13−1.59 mmol/L, p < 0.05 [24][25][26]. Two studies (T2DM n = 2) reported a statistically significant between-group effect on FBI in favour of the legume intervention [23,24]; however, one of these also reported a statistically significant between-group difference at baseline (p = 0.02) [23]. Three studies (T2DM n = 3) observed a statistically significant between-group reduction in HbA1c in favour of legume intervention, with reported reductions ranging from 0.10−0.50% [23,25,27], however, one study also reported a statistically significant between-group difference at baseline (p = 0.04) [23].…”

Pulse consumption improves indices of glycemic control in adults with and without type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of acute and long-term randomized controlled trials

“…6 ). Sensitivity analysis revealed that independent removal of one trial in estimation of ES of HbA 1c reduced the heterogeneity significantly [ 77 ], and removal of two RCTs changed the interpretation from significant to non-significant when estimating the ES of HOMA-IR [ 5 , 85 ]. However, reduction in fasting blood insulin in T2DM adults was not significant ( n = 8 RCTs, ES – 1.18; 95% CI – 2.54, – 0.08; p > 0.05; I 2 = 63%).…”

Effect of legumes in energy reduced dietary approaches to stop hypertension (DASH) diet on blood pressure among overweight and obese type 2 diabetic patients: a randomized controlled trial

“…However, it is unclear whether replacing red meat with legumes is associated with a reduced risk of hypertension [ 16 , 17 ]. In addition, the majority of previous studies were conducted among healthy individuals or participants with hyperlipidemia or hypertension, and few studies investigated the effect of legumes on blood pressure among participants with type 2 diabetes; these studies showed that an 8-week consumption of legumes, 4–6 servings per week, did not have a significant effect on blood pressure among type 2 diabetes patients or individuals at risk of type 2 diabetes [ 18 – 20 ]. The low consumption rate of legumes compared to the recommended amount [ 17 ], as well as the small sample size, and the short follow-up period prevented the possible beneficial effect of legumes on blood pressure in these populations [ 18 – 20 ].…”