Ischemic Heart Disease Risk in Vegetarians vs. Nonvegetarians

-

An article entitled “Risk of hospitalization or death from ischemic heart disease among British vegetarians and nonvegetarians: results from the EPIC-Oxford cohort study” was recently published in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.  The purpose of this study was to determine whether there were significant differences in ischemic heart disease risk between individuals consuming a vegetarian diet and those consuming a nonvegetarian diet.  The researchers conducted the study on a sample of 44,561 men and women from England and Scotland, 34% of whom were vegetarians.  Because previous studies have demonstrated that vegetarians have lower LDL-cholesterol concentrations, blood pressures, and diabetes risk, it was predicted that vegetarians would also have lower ischemic heart disease risk.  The average patient follow-up in this study was 11.6 years, and after this period, 1235 of the subjects had experienced ischemic heart disease (1066 hospitalizations and 169 deaths).  The vegetarian individuals examined in the study exhibited a 32% lower ischemic heart disease risk than nonvegetarians, and this is likely due to related factors including BMI, cholesterol levels, and blood pressure; overall, the vegetarian subjects had significantly lower BMIs, non-HDL cholesterol concentrations, and systolic blood pressure.  Granted, vegetarian diets have some risk attached to them due to the importance of consuming a complete complement of amino acids, but this study demonstrates that there may be benefits to consuming a lower concentration of meat products in regards to ischemic heart disease risk. 

-Ashley

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Are All Sugars Created Equal?

-
Image
Are All Sugars Created Equal?  I think one of the most confusing nutrition topics for people is sugar. With so many conflicting stories out there, it’s difficult to separate the facts from the fiction. Not to mention, the types of sugars are endless. How do we know what’s best for our bodies? White or brown sugar? Cane or raw? Should we just go with Stevia instead? Is it even okay to consume artificial sweeteners? Should we avoid foods with high amounts of natural sugar in them? Each answer only seems to lead to another question!  Let’s start off with distinguishing the purpose of sugar in the first place. Do our bodies even need it? The short answer is yes! Sugars are carbohydrates (what we commonly call “carbs”), one of the three main macronutrients that our bodies need for fuel to function and survive. One of the major ways to categorize sugar is by separating the “natural” sugars from the “added” sugars. Natural sugars are, well, naturally found in foods. They give us the energy th
Read more

Milk Mythbusters

-
Image
Just like with any nutrition topic, the facts about milk can become convoluted pretty quickly. Whether you drink milk for the protein, the nutrients, the flavor, or just like to switch it up, there are pros and cons to every kind. Here are some quick nutritional facts about each type to help you decide which is best for you. Animal-Based Milks  Whole Milk: The original diary drink. It gets a bad rap, but what whole milk has going for it, is that it’s in its proper nutritional form. Whole milk contains all of its original fat-soluble vitamins, A, E, D, & K, along with the fat to help you absorb them all. It also has the proper concentrations and ratio of polyunsaturated fatty acids, or your omega-3s and omega-6s, so that they are metabolized as they should be. The downside is that whole milk is calorically dense, meaning that a little goes a long way. You don’t need much to get what you need, so just don’t overdo it!  2% Milk: The fat content of 2% milk is about half of that in who
Read more