Search

Background: Meats are high in energy and fat content, and thus may be associated with higher risk of obesity. Many controversies remain regarding the association between meat consumption (MC) and obesity., Objectives: The aim of this study was to analyze the associations between MC and obesity assessed using body mass index (BMI > or = 30) and waist circumference (> or = 102 cm in men and > or = 88 cm in women) among US adults., Methods: Nationally representative data collected in the 1999-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) were used. Linear and logistic regression analyses were conducted to test the associations between MC and adiposity measures controlling for potential confounders., Results: Considerable differences existed in MC across sociodemographic groups among US adults. Those who consumed more meat had a much higher daily total energy intake, for example, those in the upper vs bottom quintiles consumed around 700 more kcal day(-1) (P<0.05). Regression models showed consistent positive associations between MC and BMI, waist circumference, obesity and central obesity, respectively. Using quintile 1 (low MC) as the reference, the association (odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI)) between total MC quintiles and obesity were 1.03 (0.88; 1.21; 2nd quintile), 1.17 (1.00; 1.38), 1.27 (1.08; 1.51) and 1.27 (1.08; 1.49; upper quintile), respectively; whereas that with central obesity was 1.13 (0.96-1.33), 1.31 (1.10; 1.54), 1.36 (1.17-1.60) and 1.33 (1.13; 1.55), respectively., Conclusions: These US national cross-sectional data show positive associations between MC and risk for obesity and central obesity.

Background: Socio-economic factors may affect diet quality, perhaps differentially across gender and ethnicity. The mechanism of this association is still largely unknown., Objectives: We examined the independent effects of socio-economic status (SES), perceived barrier of food price (PBFP) and perceived benefit of diet quality (PBDQ) on diet quality indicators and indices (DQI(j,k)), across gender and ethnicity. Additionally, we estimated the mediation proportion of the effect of SES on DQI(j,k) through PBFP and PBDQ., Methods: Data from two cross-sectional surveys, the Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII) and Diet and Health Knowledge Survey (DHKS) 1994-96 were used. Our sample consisted of 4356 US adults aged 20-65 years. With principal components analysis, SES (an index) was measured using household income per capita and education, and PBDQ was measured using an 11-item scale. PBFP was defined as the ratio of importance of food price score relative to nutrition. DQI(j,k) were assessed by a set of indicators and two indices including the Healthy Eating Index., Results: The associations between SES, PBFP, PBDQ and DQI(j,k) varied significantly across gender and ethnic groups. PBFP acted as a mediator in the association between SES and selected DQI(j) indicators, namely energy, fat intake, sodium and simple sugar consumption (mediation proportion >10%), but not PBDQ., Conclusions: SES, PBFP and PBDQ all affect dietary intake, and vary by ethnicity and gender. Positive effect of SES on DQI(j,k) may be mediated by PBFP but not PBDQ which is an independent protective factor. Nutrition education is important to promote healthy eating.

Objectives Parents are believed to have a strong influence on children's eating behaviours. However, previous findings on child–parent resemblance in dietary intakes are mixed. We systematically reviewed and meta-analysed the association (correlations) based on published studies. Methods We searched related studies published since 1980 and found 24 studies meeting inclusion criteria for review and 15 for meta-regression analysis. We compared the associations between parent–child pairs, nutrients, over time and by dietary assessment method. Results Most studies were based on small samples. Overall, they suggest a moderate or weak association, but findings varied remarkably. Our meta-analysis showed that average Fisher's transformed correlations were 0.20 (95% CI 0.13 to 0.28) for fat (% energy); for energy, 0.21 (0.18 to 0.24). The correlations varied by parent–child pairs, dietary assessment and countries. Food frequency questionnaires or mixed approaches yielded lower correlation than 24-h recalls or food records. Child self-reported intakes showed weaker correlation and better methodology quality showed stronger correlation in fat intake (% energy), which also became weaker over time. Conclusions Overall, the resemblance is weak, and it varied considerably across studies, nutrients, foods and parent–child pairs. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: Studies uncovering factors beyond socio-economic status (SES) that would explain racial and ethnic disparities in mortality are scarce.Methods: Using prospective cohort data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III), we examined all-cause and cause-specific mortality disparities by race, mediation through key factors and moderation by age (20-49 vs. 50+), sex and poverty status. Cox proportional hazards, discrete-time hazards and competing risk regression models were conducted (N = 16,573 participants, n = 4207 deaths, Median time = 170 months (1-217 months)).Results: Age, sex and poverty income ratio-adjusted hazard rates were higher among Non-Hispanic Blacks (NHBs) vs. Non-Hispanic Whites (NHW). Within the above-poverty young men stratum where this association was the strongest, the socio-demographic-adjusted HR = 2.59, p < 0.001 was only partially attenuated by SES and other factors (full model HR = 2.08, p = 0.003). Income, education, diet quality, allostatic load and self-rated health, were among key mediators explaining NHB vs. NHW disparity in mortality. The Hispanic paradox was observed consistently among women above poverty (young and old). NHBs had higher CVD-related mortality risk compared to NHW which was explained by factors beyond SES. Those factors did not explain excess risk among NHB for neoplasm-related death (fully adjusted HR = 1.41, 95 % CI: 1.02-2.75, p = 0.044). Moreover, those factors explained the lower risk of neoplasm-related death among MA compared to NHW, while CVD-related mortality risk became lower among MA compared to NHW upon multivariate adjustment.Conclusions: In sum, racial/ethnic disparities in all-cause and cause-specific mortality (particularly cardiovascular and neoplasms) were partly explained by socio-demographic, SES, health-related and dietary factors, and differentially by age, sex and poverty strata. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]