Evidence Hub

Animal and plant protein intake and all-cause and cause-specific mortality: results from two prospective US cohort studies

M. Song, T. Fung, F. Hu, W. Willett, V. Longo, A. Chan, E. Giovannucci

JAMA Internal Medicine, 2016

85,013 participants · 665 citations

Abstract

Importance Defining what represents a macronutritionally balanced diet remains an open question and a high priority in nutrition research. Although the amount of protein may have specific effects, from a broader dietary perspective, the choice of protein sources will inevitably influence other components of diet and may be a critical determinant for the health outcome. Objective To examine the associations of animal and plant protein intake with risk of mortality Design Prospective cohort study Setting Health professionals in the United States Participants 85,013 women and 46,329 men from the Nurses’ Health Study (1980–2012) and Health Professionals Follow-up Study (1986–2012) Exposure Animal and plant protein intake as assessed by regularly updated validated food questionnaires Main outcomes and measures Hazard ratio (HR) of mortality Results The median intake, as assessed by percentage of energy, was 14% for animal protein (5th–95th percentile: 9–22%) and 4% for plant protein (2–6%). After adjusting for major lifestyle and dietary risk factors, animal protein intake was weakly associated with higher mortality, particularly cardiovascular mortality (HR=1.08 per 10%-energy increment, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01–1.16, Ptrend=0.04), whereas plant protein was associated with lower mortality (HR=0.90 per 3%-energy increment, 95% CI, 0.86–0.95, Ptrend<0.001). These associations were confined to participants with at least one of the unhealthy lifestyle factors based on…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 85,013 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free