Cited by 235Nutritional Studies and DietAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental ImpactNutrition, Health and Food Behavior

Weight gain over 5 years in 21 966 meat-eating, fish-eating, vegetarian, and vegan men and women in EPIC-Oxford

Rosell, M, Appleby, P, Spencer, E, Key, T·2006·International Journal of Obesity

Abstract

Background Cross-sectional studies have shown that vegetarians and vegans are leaner than omnivores. Longitudinal data on weight gain in these groups are sparse.Objective We investigated changes in weight and body mass index (BMI) over a 5-year period in meat-eating, fish-eating, vegetarian, and vegan men and women in the UK.Design Self-reported anthropometric, dietary and lifestyle data were collected at baseline in 1994-1999 and at follow-up in 2000-2003; the median duration of follow-up was 5.3 years.Subjects A total of 21,966 men and women participating in Oxford arm of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition aged 20-69 years at baseline.Results The mean annual weight gain was 389 (SD 884) g in men and 398 (SD 892) g in women. The differences between meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans in age-adjusted mean BMI at follow-up were similar to those seen at baseline. Multivariable-adjusted mean weight gain was somewhat smaller in vegans (284 g in men and 303 g in women, P<0.05 for both sexes) and fish-eaters (338 g, women only, P<0.001) compared with meat-eaters. Men and women who changed their diet in one or several steps in the direction meat-eater --> fish-eater --> vegetarian --> vegan showed the smallest mean annual weight gain of 242 (95% CI 133-351) and 301 (95% CI 238-365) g, respectively.Conclusion During 5 years follow-up, the mean annual weight gain in a health-conscious cohort in the UK was approximately 400 g. Small differences in weight gain were observed between meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans. Lowest weight gain was seen among those who, during follow-up, had changed to a diet containing fewer animal food.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/sj.ijo.0803305

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rosell, M., Appleby, P., Spencer, E., & Key, T.
Affiliations
Cancer Research UK (GB)
Corresponding author
Key, T
Venue
International Journal of Obesity
Published
2006-03-14
Volume
30
Issue
9
Pages
1389-1396
ISSN
  • 0307-0565 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5497
OpenAlex
W1984722965
Cited by
235
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 14
FWCI
6.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Obesity (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Cancer Research UK
  • Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
Keywords
weight gain, body mass index, dietary change, meat-eaters, vegetarians, vegans, animal-based diet, nutrition transition
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Diet, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Life Style, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Meat, Middle Aged, Diet, Vegetarian, Weight Gain, Exercise, Body Mass Index

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