Red Meat Consumption and Mortality: Results From 2 Prospective Cohort Studies
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Red meat consumption has been associated with an increased risk of chronic diseases. However, its relationship with mortality remains uncertain. METHODS: We prospectively observed 37 698 men from the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (1986-2008) and 83 644 women from the Nurses' Health Study (1980-2008) who were free of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer at baseline. Diet was assessed by validated food frequency questionnaires and updated every 4 years. RESULTS: We documented 23 926 deaths (including 5910 CVD and 9464 cancer deaths) during 2.96 million person-years of follow-up. After multivariate adjustment for major lifestyle and dietary risk factors, the pooled hazard ratio (HR) (95% CI) of total mortality for a 1-serving-per-day increase was 1.13 (1.07-1.20) for unprocessed red meat and 1.20 (1.15-1.24) for processed red meat. The corresponding HRs (95% CIs) were 1.18 (1.13-1.23) and 1.21 (1.13-1.31) for CVD mortality and 1.10 (1.06-1.14) and 1.16 (1.09-1.23) for cancer mortality. We estimated that substitutions of 1 serving per day of other foods (including fish, poultry, nuts, legumes, low-fat dairy, and whole grains) for 1 serving per day of red meat were associated with a 7% to 19% lower mortality risk. We also estimated that 9.3% of deaths in men and 7.6% in women in these cohorts could be prevented at the end of follow-up if all the individuals consumed fewer than 0.5 servings per day (approximately 42 g/d) of red meat. CONCLUSIONS: Red meat consumption is associated with an increased risk of total, CVD, and cancer mortality. Substitution of other healthy protein sources for red meat is associated with a lower mortality risk.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Substantial evidence from randomized trials and observational studies suggests that high consumption of red meat, especially processed red meat, is associated with an increased risk of mortality and major chronic diseases, including coronary heart disease.
“Substantial evidence from randomized trials and observational studies suggests that high consumption of red meat, especially processed red meat, is associated with an increased risk of mortality1 2 3 and major chronic diseases,4 5 6 7 8 9 including coronary heart disease (CHD).10 11 12”
From Red meat intake and risk of coronary heart disease among US men: prospective cohort study (2020) · cites this paper as [3]
This homogeneity can help reduce unmeasured confounding related to socioeconomic status.
“This homogeneity can, however, help reduce unmeasured confounding related to socioeconomic status.3”
From Red meat intake and risk of coronary heart disease among US men: prospective cohort study (2020) · cites this paper as [3]
The associations of red meat consumption with all cause, cardiovascular disease, and cancer mortality were also similar among participants of the Nurses' Health Study and Health Professionals Follow-Up Study.
“and the associations of red meat consumption with all cause, cardiovascular disease, and cancer mortality were also similar among participants of the Nurses’ Health Study and Health Professionals Follow-Up Study.3”
From Red meat intake and risk of coronary heart disease among US men: prospective cohort study (2020) · cites this paper as [3]
Numerous large-scale epidemiologic studies link red meat ingestion with heightened mortality and CVD risks, while the relationship between egg ingestion and cardiovascular risks shows conflicting results.
“While numerous large-scale epidemiologic studies have linked red meat ingestion with heightened mortality and CVD risks, the relationship between egg ingestion and cardiovascular risks has shown conflicting results (40-49).”
From The contributory role of gut microbiota in cardiovascular disease (2014) · cites this paper as [40]
Higher red and processed meat consumption has been consistently associated with increased premature death.
“Higher red and processed meat consumption have been consistently associated with increased premature death”
From Association Between Plant and Animal Protein Intake and Overall and Cause-Specific Mortality (2020) · cites this paper as [37]
In more recent analyses, red meats, particularly processed red meats, were associated with increased CVD, CHD, stroke, and cancer mortality, while poultry was not.
“In more recent analyses, red meats, particularly processed red meats, were associated with increased CVD, CHD, stroke, and cancer mortality, while poultry was not (170–172).”
From Food Consumption and its Impact on Cardiovascular Disease: Importance of Solutions Focused on the Globalized Food System (2015) · cites this paper as [171]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 32 · Cited by 763
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- [14]Hu FB Stampfer MJ Rimm E Dietary fat and coronary heart disease: a comparison of approaches for adjusting for total energy intake and modeling repeated dietary measurements Am J Epidemiol 1999 149 6 531 540 10084242
- [17]Willett WC Nutritional Epidemiology 2nd New York, NY Oxford University Press 1998
- Authors
- Sun, Q.
- Affiliations
- Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
- Corresponding author
- Sun, Qi
- ORCID
- Sun, Qi
- Venue
- Archives of Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2012-04-09
- Volume
- 172
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 555
- ISSN
- 0003-9926 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3712342
- OpenAlex
- W2125514205
- Cited by
- 763
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 64 · 2019: 67 · 2018: 58 · 2017: 63 · 2016: 54 · 2015: 62 · 2014: 76 · 2013: 58 · 2012: 29
- FWCI
- 69.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Archives of Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL060712, K99HL098459, HL34594, R01HL034594)
- National Cancer Institute (R01CA095589, CA-87969, CA-55075, P01CA087969, U54CA155626, P01CA055075)
- National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01DK058845, DK58845)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Meat and Animal Product Quality
- Keywords
- red meat consumption, processed red meat, unprocessed red meat, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, cancer mortality, dietary substitution, mortality prevention, Health Professionals Follow-up Study, Nurses' Health Study
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Animals, Cardiovascular Diseases, Cattle, Feeding Behavior, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Health Personnel, Humans, Male, Meat, Middle Aged, Mortality, Neoplasms, Nurses, Prospective Studies, Surveys and Questionnaires, United States, Cohort Studies, Multivariate Analysis, Odds Ratio
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
