A team of scientists published a study on the relationship between the consumption of processed and unprocessed meat and the incidence of type 2 diabetes. The key findings: „Meat consumption, particularly processed and unprocessed red meat, is a risk factor for the development of type 2 diabetes across different populations. These findings highlight the importance of reducing meat consumption for public health and should be considered in dietary guidelines.

Global meat production has increased rapidly over the past 50 years. Meat consumption exceeds optimal dietary guidelines in many regions and is also correlated with an increased burden of non-communicable diseases, including type 2 diabetes. Type 2 diabetes affects over 500 million people worldwide, and it is estimated that by 2050, it will affect 1 billion people. Evidence from several meta-analyses of published prospective studies shows a positive association between the consumption of unprocessed red meat and processed meat and the risk of type 2 diabetes. However, some reviews have drawn conflicting conclusions regarding the certainty of the evidence in this field. Specifically, some studies concluded that current evidence is weak and uncertain when it comes to dietary guidelines aimed at limiting meat consumption. These conclusions were derived from similar data and results as other meta-analyses but were interpreted differently (e.g., without considering biological mechanisms) and through different approaches to evidence assessment (such as the burden of proof approach or the GRADE approach, which may be potentially influenced by epidemiological biases), and potential conflicts of interest cannot be ruled out. Poultry has often been considered a potentially healthier alternative to red and processed meat; however, the association between poultry consumption and the risk of type 2 diabetes has only been characterized in a few studies, with inconclusive results. Furthermore, published associations between meat consumption and the incidence of type 2 diabetes have been heterogeneous, likely due to variations in research methods (such as the extent of adjustment for potential confounders and baseline versus repeated dietary assessment) and differences in population-specific characteristics (such as cooking methods).”

This is yet another scientific study that highlights the need for dietary changes and the risks associated with consuming animal products.

Credit: unsplash