Researchers at Cambridge University found that eating just two slices of ham a day increases the risk of type 2 diabetes by 15%.
Europe's €330 billion meat industry will see this as a new attack on its sector, but the report highlights that more than 500 million people worldwide suffer from type 2 diabetes, with that number predicted to rise to 1 billion by 2050.
The researchers conducted a meta-analysis of approximately 1.97 million people across 20 European countries, the Americas, the Mediterranean, Southeast Asia and the Western Pacific. The Lancet Journal of Diabetes and Endocrinology concluded that people should limit their intake of processed and red meat.
“Our study provides the most comprehensive evidence to date of an association between consumption of processed and unprocessed red meat and an increased risk of future type 2 diabetes,” said Professor Nita Forouhi, from the University of Cambridge. “This study supports recommendations to limit intake of processed and unprocessed red meat to reduce type 2 diabetes cases in the population.”
How does processed meat cause diabetes?
Data analysed from 31 research groups through the EU-funded type 2 diabetes project Interconnect found that eating 50g of processed meat – about two slices of ham – every day is associated with a 15% higher risk of type 2 diabetes over 10 years.
Total consumption of unprocessed red meat, processed meat, and poultry was calculated to determine the three main exposure variables. Two definitions of type 2 diabetes were used, one as the primary outcome and one as a secondary outcome.
Although more research is needed on chicken consumption, the study showed that consuming 100g of chicken per day increased the risk of type 2 diabetes by 8%. [and type 2 diabetes] “There is still uncertainty and further investigation is needed,” Forouhi added.
As a result, the researchers recommended that chicken could be a healthier alternative to unprocessed red meat and processed meat, but aimed to address the hypothesis.
However, the study found geographic imbalances, as most of the studies analysed were from US and European populations, with few studies from Asia and other regions, “highlighting the need for evaluation in diverse populations,” the researchers said.
Chicken reduces risk of type 2 diabetes
Meat industry representatives criticised the report. Kate Arthur, head of nutrition and health at Agriculture and Horticulture UK, told Food Navigator that the study highlighted possible associations with eating more than 100g of red meat and more than 50g of processed meat a day. “This reinforces government recommendations and is in line with the EatWell Guide, which recommends up to 500g of red and processed meat per week, or 70g (cooked weight) a day,” Arthur said.
Arthur went on to argue that anyone who eats more than 90g of processed or red meat each day should aim to reduce their intake to 70g or less, highlighting that the majority of UK adults eat, on average, less than 70g of red or processed meat per day.
A spokesman for the British Meat Processors Association (BMPA) said they believe everyone has the right to choose whether or not to eat meat: “But that choice should be based on reliable information and sound science – which is all too often not the case. It is instructive to contrast the warnings contained in this study with the health claims confidently made in the media. The two paint different pictures which only confuse consumers and make it harder to make healthy choices.”
The spokesperson stressed that the Cambridge study itself acknowledged that “the underlying mechanisms linking meat consumption and the development of type 2 diabetes are not fully understood,” adding that the trial was only able to assess the short-term effects of meat consumption on blood sugar profiles, not the longer-term effects on disease risk.
Source: The Lancet, Diabetes & Endocrinology
Release date: August 21, 2024
Source: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8587(24)00179-7/fulltext
Author: Chunxiao Li PhD. Tom RP Bishop, ME. Fumiaki Imamura, PhD. Stephen J Sharp, MSc. Matthew Pearce, PhD. Soren Brage, PhD.
