OBJECTIVE: To characterize and evaluate the plant-based alternatives available on the market in Spain in comparison to animal products in terms of their nutritional composition and profile, and degree of processing.
METHODS: Nutritional information for PBAPs and homologs were obtained from the Spanish 'Veggie base', branded food composition database. Five PBAPs categories (cheese, dairy products, eggs, meat, and fish, n = 922) were compared to animal-based processed (n = 922) and unprocessed (n = 381) homologs, using the modified version of the Food Standard Agency Nutrient Profiling System (FSAm-NPS score) and NOVA classification criteria.
RESULTS: Compared to processed or unprocessed animal food, PBAPs contain significantly higher sugar, salt, and fiber. PBAPs for fish, seafood, and meat were lower in protein and saturated fatty acids. Overall, 68% of PBAPs, 43% of processed and 75% of unprocessed animal-homologs had Nutri-Score ratings of A or B (most healthy). About 17% of PBAPs, 35% of processed and 13% of unprocessed animal-based food were in Nutri-Score categories D or E (least healthy). Dairy, fish, and meat alternatives had lower FSAm-NPS scores (most healthy), while cheese alternatives scored higher (least healthy) than animal-based homologs. Unprocessed fish and meat were healthier than similar PBAPs based on FSAm-NPS criteria. Approximately 37% of PBAPs and 72% of processed animal-based products were ultra-processed food (NOVA group 4). Within the ultra-processed food group, Nutri-Score varied widely.
CONCLUSIONS: Most PBAPs had better nutrient profile than animal-based homologs. However, cheese, fish and meats PBAPs had poorer nutrient profile and were more processed. Given the high degree of processing and variable nutritional profile, PBAPs require a multi-dimensional evaluation of their health impact.
DESIGN: DP were derived from the MANS FFQ using principal component analysis. The cross-sectional association of the derived DP with prevalence of overweight was analysed.
SETTING: Malaysia.
PARTICIPANTS: Nationally representative sample of Malaysian adults from MANS (2003, n 6928; 2014, n 3000).
RESULTS: Three major DP were identified for both years. These were 'Traditional' (fish, eggs, local cakes), 'Western' (fast foods, meat, carbonated beverages) and 'Mixed' (ready-to-eat cereals, bread, vegetables). A fourth DP was generated in 2003, 'Flatbread & Beverages' (flatbread, creamer, malted beverages), and 2014, 'Noodles & Meat' (noodles, meat, eggs). These DP accounted for 25·6 and 26·6 % of DP variations in 2003 and 2014, respectively. For both years, Traditional DP was significantly associated with rural households, lower income, men and Malay ethnicity, while Western DP was associated with younger age and higher income. Mixed DP was positively associated with women and higher income. None of the DP showed positive association with overweight risk, except for reduced adjusted odds of overweight with adherence to Traditional DP in 2003.
CONCLUSIONS: Overweight could not be attributed to adherence to a single dietary pattern among Malaysian adults. This may be due to the constantly morphing dietary landscape in Malaysia, especially in urban areas, given the ease of availability and relative affordability of multi-ethnic and international foods. Timely surveys are recommended to monitor implications of these changes.
OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to assess the association of unprocessed red meat, poultry, and processed meat intake with mortality and major CVD.
METHODS: The Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) Study is a cohort of 134,297 individuals enrolled from 21 low-, middle-, and high-income countries. Food intake was recorded using country-specific validated FFQs. The primary outcomes were total mortality and major CVD. HRs were estimated using multivariable Cox frailty models with random intercepts.
RESULTS: In the PURE study, during 9.5 y of follow-up, we recorded 7789 deaths and 6976 CVD events. Higher unprocessed red meat intake (≥250 g/wk vs. <50 g/wk) was not significantly associated with total mortality (HR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.85, 1.02; P-trend = 0.14) or major CVD (HR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.92, 1.11; P-trend = 0.72). Similarly, no association was observed between poultry intake and health outcomes. Higher intake of processed meat (≥150 g/wk vs. 0 g/wk) was associated with higher risk of total mortality (HR: 1.51; 95% CI: 1.08, 2.10; P-trend = 0.009) and major CVD (HR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.08, 1.98; P-trend = 0.004).
CONCLUSIONS: In a large multinational prospective study, we did not find significant associations between unprocessed red meat and poultry intake and mortality or major CVD. Conversely, a higher intake of processed meat was associated with a higher risk of mortality and major CVD.