Cited by 161Nutritional Studies and DietFatty Acid Research and HealthLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health

Effects of red meat, white meat, and nonmeat protein sources on atherogenic lipoprotein measures in the context of low compared with high saturated fat intake: a randomized controlled trial

Open access
Bergeron, Nathalie, Chiu, Sally, Williams, Paul T, M King, Sarah, Krauss, Ronald M·2019·The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

Background Dietary recommendations to limit red meat are based on observational studies linking intake to cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk together with the potential of its saturated fatty acid (SFA) content to raise low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. However, the relation of white meat to CVD risk, and the effects of dietary protein source on lipoprotein particle subfractions, have not been extensively evaluated. Objective We tested whether levels of atherogenic lipids and lipoproteins differed significantly following consumption of diets with high red meat content compared with diets with similar amounts of protein derived from white meat or nonmeat sources, and whether these effects were modified by concomitant intake of high compared with low SFAs. Methods Generally healthy men and women, 21-65 y, body mass index 20-35 kg/m2, were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 parallel arms (high or low SFA) and within each, allocated to red meat, white meat, and nonmeat protein diets consumed for 4 wk each in random order. The primary outcomes were LDL cholesterol, apolipoprotein B (apoB), small + medium LDL particles, and total/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Results Analysis included participants who completed all 3 dietary protein assignments (61 for high SFA; 52 for low SFA). LDL cholesterol and apoB were higher with red and white meat than with nonmeat, independent of SFA content (P < 0.0001 for all, except apoB: red meat compared with nonmeat [P = 0.0004]). This was due primarily to increases in large LDL particles, whereas small + medium LDL and total/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol were unaffected by protein source (P = 0.10 and P = 0.51, respectively). Primary outcomes did not differ significantly between red and white meat. Independent of protein source, high compared with low SFA increased LDL cholesterol (P = 0.0003), apoB (P = 0.0002), and large LDL (P = 0.0002). Conclusions The findings are in keeping with recommendations promoting diets with a high proportion of plant-based food but, based on lipid and lipoprotein effects, do not provide evidence for choosing white over red meat for reducing CVD risk. This trial was registered at Clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01427855.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ajcn/nqz035

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Institute of Medicine of the National Academies. Dietary Reference Intakes for Energy, Carbohydrates, Fiber, Fat, Protein and Amino Acids (Macronutrients). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2002/2005.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bergeron, N., Chiu, S., Williams, P. T., M King, S., & Krauss, R. M.
Affiliations
  • Touro University California (US)
  • Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US)
Corresponding author
Krauss, Ronald M
Venue
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-07
Volume
110
Issue
1
Pages
24-33
ISSN
0002-9165 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2948744545
Cited by
160
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 6
FWCI
16.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2019-09-01)
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • Touro Scholar (Touro College) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute
  • National Institutes of Health (R01HL106003)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
  • University of California
  • San Francisco Clinical & Translational Science Institute (UL1TR000004)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Fatty Acid Research and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Keywords
red meat, white meat, dietary protein source, saturated fatty acids, LDL cholesterol, apolipoprotein B, LDL particle size, atherogenic lipoproteins, cardiovascular risk, plant-based diet, dietary intervention, HDL cholesterol, small dense LDL, healthy adults, men, body mass index
MeSH terms
Red Meat, Adult, Apolipoproteins B, Dietary Fats, Dietary Proteins, Female, Humans, Lipoproteins, Cholesterol, LDL, Male, Meat, Middle Aged, Particle Size, Body Mass Index, Cross-Over Studies, Atherosclerosis

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