jagomart
digital resources
picture1_Diet Questionnaire Pdf 148658 | Piis2542 5196(22)00243 1


 129x       Filetype PDF       File size 1.47 MB       Source: www.thelancet.com


File: Diet Questionnaire Pdf 148658 | Piis2542 5196(22)00243 1
articles health and environmental impacts of plant rich dietary patterns a us prospective cohort study aviva a musicus dong d wang marie janiszewski gidon eshel stacy a blondin walter willett ...

icon picture PDF Filetype PDF | Posted on 13 Jan 2023 | 2 years ago
Partial capture of text on file.
                                                                                                                                           Articles
           Health and environmental impacts of plant-rich dietary 
           patterns: a US prospective cohort study
           Aviva A Musicus*, Dong D Wang*, Marie Janiszewski, Gidon Eshel, Stacy A Blondin, Walter Willett, Meir J Stampfer
           Summary
           Background Diets that are rich in animal-based foods threaten planetary and human health, but plant-rich diets have  Lancet Planet Health 2022; 
           varied health and environmental effects. We aimed to characterise a healthy dietary index and three plant-based  6: e892–900
           indices by their environmental impacts and associations with risk of cardiovascular disease.                                  *Joint first authors
                                                                                                                                         Department of Nutrition 
           Methods In this prospective cohort study, we used data from a food-frequency questionnaire in the US-based Nurses’  (A A Musicus ScD, D D Wang MD, 
           Health Study II. Participants were categorised by quintiles of four dietary indices, including the alternative healthy  S A Blondin PhD, 
           eating index-2010 (AHEI), plant-based diet index (PDI), unhealthy PDI, and healthy PDI. We calculated environmental  Prof W Willett MD DrPH, 
                                                                                                                                         Prof M J Stampfer MD DrPH), 
           impacts (greenhouse gas emissions and irrigation water, nitrogenous fertiliser, and high-quality cropland needs), and  Department of Epidemiology 
           relative risks (RRs) of cardiovascular disease from 1991–2017, comparing quintiles.                                           (Prof W Willett, 
                                                                                                                                         Prof M J Stampfer), Harvard 
           Findings                                                                                                                      T H Chan School of Public 
                    We included 90 884 participants in the health-impact analysis and 65 625 participants in the environmental-          Health, Boston, MA, USA; 
           impact analysis. Comparing the top and bottom quintiles, higher AHEI scores were associated with a decreased  Channing Division for Network 
           cardiovascular disease risk (relative risk 0·77 [95% CI 0·66–0·89]); 30% lower greenhouse gas emissions  Medicine, Department of 
           (Q5 2·6 kg CO equivalent vs Q1 3·7 kg CO equivalent); and lower fertiliser, cropland, and water needs (all  Medicine, Brigham and 
                             2                                 2                                                                         Women’s Hospital and Harvard 
           ptrends<0·0001). Similarly, the highest healthy PDI and PDI quintiles were associated with a decreased cardiovascular  Medical School, Boston, MA, 
           disease risk (healthy PDI 0·71 [0·60–0·83] and PDI 0·74 [0·63–0·85]) and lower environmental impacts (PDI water  USA (D D Wang, 
           needs p    =0·0014; all other p    <0·0001). Conversely, the highest unhealthy PDI quintile had a higher cardiovascular  M Janiszewski BFA, 
                   trend                  trends                                                                                         Prof W Willett, 
           disease risk compared with the lowest unhealthy PDI quintile (1·15 [1·00–1·33]; p             =0·023) and required more 
                                                                                                      trend                              Prof M J Stampfer); Bard 
           cropland (p    <0·0001) and fertiliser (p   =0·0008).                                                                         College, Annandale-on-
                       trend                         trend
                                                                                                                                         Hudson, NY, USA 
           Interpretation Dietary patterns that are associated with better health had lower greenhouse gas emissions and  (Prof G Eshel PhD);
           nitrogenous fertiliser, cropland, and irrigation water needs. Not all plant-based diets conferred the same health and  Correspondence to: 
           environmental benefits. US dietary guidelines should include  nuanced consideration of environmental Dr Aviva A Musicus, Department 
                                                                                                                                         of Nutrition, Harvard T H Chan 
           sustainability.                                                                                                               School of Public Health, Boston, 
                                                                                                                                         MA 02115, USA 
           Funding US National Institutes of Health.                                                                                     aam231@mail.harvard.edu
           Copyright © 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license.
           Introduction                                                    varied associations with health. Dietary indices can be 
           The global food system has enormous impacts on  used to differentiate plant-based dietary patterns and 
           freshwater and land use, nitrogen cycles, and climate  quantify their associations with health across graded 
           change.1                                                        differences in diets. For instance, the overall plant-based 
                     The food-supply chain is responsible for 
           approximately 25% of all human-generated greenhouse  diet index (PDI) emphasises consumption of all plant-
           gas emissions, and uses approximately 70% of the planet’s       based foods regardless of nutritional value, and higher 
           consumptive freshwater withdrawals and nearly 40% of  PDI scores have been associated with lower risks of 
           global land.2                                                   several chronic diseases, including coronary heart 
                         Food systems’ detrimental impacts are not 
                                                                                   3,4
           limited to the environment. An increase in unhealthy  disease.  The unhealthy PDI emphasises consumption 
           diets that are rich in heavily processed and animal-based       of plant-based foods that are rich in refined grains and 
           foods (eg, red meat) is threatening both planetary and  added sugars; diets with higher unhealthy PDI scores 
           human health, contributing to increased rates of obesity,       are associated with a higher risk of coronary heart 
           type 2 diabetes, and other non-communicable diseases  disease compared with plant-based diets that are rich in 
           worldwide. Because adverse associations between diets  whole grains, legumes, nuts, fruits, and vegetables, 
                                                                                                                             4
           that are rich in animal-based foods and human and  which have higher scores on the healthy PDI. Another 
           environmental health are well established,1
                                                           widespread  diet index that emphasises plant-based foods is the 
           adoption of healthier plant-rich diets has the potential to     alternative healthy eating index (AHEI), which provides 
           reduce disease risk and environmental degradation.              higher scores for healthy plant-based foods, and also for 
             Dietary patterns that are rich in plant-based foods  some animal-sourced foods such as fish. Diets with 
           differ in the types of foods they include and the extent to     higher AHEI scores are associated with a lower risk of 
                                                                                                   5,6
           which they exclude animal-based foods, and thus have  major chronic disease.
           www.thelancet.com/planetary-health   Vol 6   November 2022                                                                                       e892
                 Articles
                                        Research in context
                                        Evidence before this study                                           environmental impact and health effects with multiple diet 
                                        We did not do a formal literature review before undertaking this     indices in the same longitudinal cohort. We found that 
                                        research. Previous research has documented heterogeneous             participants in the highest AHEI and healthy PDI score 
                                        health effects of different plant-based dietary patterns.            quintiles had a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease; reduced 
                                        Prospective cohort studies have found that the alternative           greenhouse gas emissions; and reduced use of cropland, 
                                        healthy eating index-2010 (AHEI), plant-based diet index (PDI),      irrigation water, and nitrogenous fertiliser. Participants in the 
                                        and healthy PDI are all associated with a reduced risk of chronic    highest unhealthy PDI score quintile had an increased risk of 
                                        disease, whereas the unhealthy PDI is associated with an             cardiovascular disease, and their diets required more cropland 
                                        increased risk of chronic disease. Other studies have modelled       and fertiliser, compared with those in the lowest unhealthy 
                                        the environmental impacts of various dietary patterns that are       PDI score quintile.
                                        rich in plant-based foods, such as vegetarian diets, but research    Implications of all the available evidence
                                        that simultaneously examines environmental and health                Plant-based dietary patterns that are associated with better 
                                        impacts of plant-rich diets is scarce.                               human health are also associated with better environmental 
                                        Added value of this study                                            health. Future US dietary guidelines should include 
                                        We characterised the health and environmental impacts                consideration of environmental sustainability and recognise 
                                        associated with high versus low scores on various plant-rich         the human and environmental health co-benefits of more 
                                        dietary indices in a US cohort. To our knowledge, this is the        sustainable diets, but also that not all plant-based diets confer 
                                        first study to directly link multiple indicators of                  the same health and environmental benefits.
                                        Although the health effects of different plant-based  Boards of the Brigham and Women’s Hospital and the 
                                      dietary patterns have been widely studied, less research               Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health.
                                      has addressed the environmental impacts of these                         Starting in 1991, diet was assessed every 4 years using 
                                      dietary patterns. Previous studies have modelled  a previously validated semi-quantitative food-frequency 
                                      the environmental impacts of various dietary patterns  questionnaire.11–13
                                                                                                                                  For each of approximately 150 listed 
                                                                                                         7
                                      that are rich in plant-based foods (eg, vegetarian diets),             food items, participants reported their usual intake of 
                                      and some work has addressed specific protective  a standard portion of each food item during the previous 
                                      or deleterious dietary components, such as red meat.8                  year. These responses were translated to daily nutrient 
                                      But, to our knowledge, no study has directly linked  intake using the Harvard Food Composition Database 
                                      multiple metrics of environmental impacts of multiple                  derived from US Department of Agriculture (USDA) 
                                      dietary patterns with long-term health outcomes in  nutrient data. The reproducibility and validity of nutrient, 
                                      the same cohort of participants. We aimed to char-                     food, and dietary pattern measurements using the food-
                                      acterise the health and environmental impacts of  frequency questionnaire in the Nurses’ Health Study 
                                                                                                                                                                14
                                      various plant-rich dietary patterns within a longitudinal              have been described previously in detail.  We did the 
                                      US cohort. For enviromental outcomes, we primarily  health-impact analysis using longitudinally collected data 
                                      measured greenhouse gas emissions, but also mea-                       from the baseline (1991) until 2017 in the Nurses’ Health 
                                      sured irrigation water use, nitrogenous fertiliser use,  Study II, based on our previously published work.6 We 
                                      and high-quality cropland use, all of which have  excluded participants with a cancer diagnosis at baseline 
                                                                                   9
                                      substantial environmental impacts  but are more  and cardiovascular disease, and those who reported 
                                      dependent on local circumstances than greenhouse gas                   implausible calorie intakes of below 500 kcal/day or 
                                      emissions are.                                                         greater than 3500 kcal/day. The environmental-impact 
                                                                                                             analysis was further restricted to participants within the 
                                      Methods                                                                health-impact-analysis population who completed the 
                                      Study population and dietary assessment                                2011 food-frequency questionnaire, which we used 
                                      In this prospective cohort study, we used data from the                because it was the most detailed food-frequency 
                                      Nurses’ Health Study II, which began in 1989 when  questionnaire and showed  recent dietary information 
                                      116 430 US female nurses aged 25–42 years completed  available from that cohort.
                                      a posted questionnaire regarding their medical history                   The AHEI-2010 was developed as a measure of diet 
                                                                 10                                          quality, with higher index scores associated with lower risk 
                                      and lifestyle practices.  This cohort has been followed 
                                                                                                             of major chronic diseases.5
                                      up via self-administered questionnaires to update                                                       This index scores individuals 
                                      information on lifestyle and medical history and  on the basis of their intake of 11 food groups related to 
                                      ascertain clinical outcomes every 2 years, with  health outcomes, with scores ranging from 0 to 10 for each 
                                      a follow-up rate of approximately 90% per cycle. The  item. We excluded alcoholic beverages from the indices 
                                      study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review                because epidemiological evidence has found alcohol 
         e893                                                                                                             www.thelancet.com/planetary-health   Vol 6   November 2022
                                                                                                                                                      Articles
           consumption to be associated both positively and  assessments that represent key producing areas. For 
           negatively with several health outcomes, depending on  water use when no lifecycle assessment results were 
           intake level. Higher intake of vegetables, fruits, whole  available, we used the USDA and other sources, including  For the USDA data see https://
           grains, nuts and legumes, long chain n-3 fats, and  supplementary text and data files from Eshel and  quickstats.nass.usda.gov/
           polyunsaturated fats are scored positively, whereas sugary         colleagues.8,20,21
                                                                                               Additionally, when environmental impact 
           beverages, red and processed meat, trans fat, and sodium           estimates were unavailable for a particular food, we used 
           are scored negatively. The total score for an individual  data for similar food items with similar agricultural 
           could range from 0 (worst diet) to 100 (best diet).                resource use. For example, “other carbonated beverage” 
             The overall PDI and its healthy and unhealthy  was equated to Coca-Cola, and parsley to spinach; we also 
           sub-indices were calculated using methods described  used the same values for regular and decaffeinated 
                       3,4
           previously.  Briefly, the PDI scores dietary patterns using        coffee. Additionally, the environmental impacts for some 
           18 food groups on the basis of nutrient and culinary  foods were calculated on the basis of the conversion of 
           similarities. These groups are seven healthy plant food            one constituent ingredient to another (eg, corn oil, corn 
           groups (whole grains, fruits, vegetables, nuts, legumes,           syrup, or popcorn were derived from the environ-
           vegetable oils, and tea and coffee), five unhealthy plant          mental attributes of corn, accounting for corn mass used 
           food groups (fruit juices, sugar-sweetened beverages,  derived from fat content, augmented for intermediate 
           refined grains, potatoes, and sweets and desserts), and            processing).
           six animal food groups (animal fats, dairy, eggs, fish and           The food-frequency questionnaire included 88 com-
           seafood, meat including poultry and red and processed              pound foods made of two or more food items 
           meat, and miscellaneous other animal-based foods). We              (eg, sweetened yogurt or mixed dried fruit). Environmental 
           summed intakes of these 18 food groups, scored as  attributes of each compound food were estimated on the 
           quintiles, to obtain overall scores, with a possible range         basis of each food’s individual constituent components, 
           of 18–90. For the overall PDI, intake of healthy and  with the relative amounts of the components of the 
           unhealthy plant foods increases the index score, whereas           compound foods weighted on the basis of US 
           intake of animal foods reduces the score. For the healthy          consumption patterns at that time. Nutrient profiles and 
           PDI, only the intake of healthy plant foods increases the          recipes for food-frequency questionnaire food items were 
           score, whereas for the unhealthy PDI, only the intake of           derived from USDA data and product label information.
           unhealthy plant foods increases the score; intake of the 
           other two food groups in each index reduces each score.            Statistical analysis
           For all three plant-based diet indices, higher scores  We calculated the environmental impact per person for 
           reflect lower animal-based food intake. We excluded  each food-frequency questionnaire item by multiplying 
           margarine because of the changes in trans-fat content  each individual’s serving intake level  by the 
           over time. However, we adjusted for alcoholic beverages            environmental impact associated with a one-serving 
           and margarine consumption as covariates in the  increment in the intake of that food-frequency 
           analyses.                                                          questionnaire item. We then summed those environ-
                                                                              mental impacts across all food-frequency questionnaire 
           Assessment of environmental impact                                 items for each individual, obtaining cropland, reactive 
           We estimated greenhouse gas emissions and use of high-             nitrogen, and irrigation water use, and greenhouse gas 
           quality cropland (as distinct from rangeland or grassland),        emissions per person per day. To calculate the 
           reactive nitrogen (from fertiliser) and irrigation water  environmental impacts attributable to a specific food 
           from field to farm gate  (impact of food production  group, we summed the environmental impacts within 
           measured until the food is ready for consumption, but  each food group and calculated the percentage 
           before it is transported or consumed) for each of the  contribution to each environmental impact metric by 
           156 items included in the 2011 Nurses’ Health Study II             each food group. To quantify the associations of diet 
           food-frequency questionnaire. Our analysis excluded  healthiness with environmental attributes, we first 
           post-farm-gate environmental impacts (eg, transportation           categorised participants by index score quintiles for each 
           and waste). Our full food-frequency questionnaire envi-            of the four dietary indices (AHEI, PDI, unhealthy PDI, 
           ronmental database provides detailed background, data,             and healthy PDI). We then applied general linear models 
           assumptions, and citations regarding all food items’  with environmental attributes as dependent variables 
                                      15                                      and quintiles of dietary indices and total energy intake as 
           environmental impacts.
             Environmental impacts were primarily derived from  independent variables to calculate the energy-adjusted 
           previously reported values that were based on lifecycle  mean environmental impact in each quintile of dietary 
                                   8                                          indices and standardised the mean values to a total 
           assessment studies  and supplemented by other 
                              16,17                                           energy intake of 2000 kcal daily.
           published values.      For the five key livestock categories—
           beef, dairy, poultry, pork, and eggs—we relied on analyses           We estimated relative risks (RRs) for incidence of 
                                                                   18,19      cardiovascular disease (the leading cause of death in the 
           of national consumption and production statistics.          For 
                                                                                    6
           most other items, we mostly relied on several lifecycle  USA)  across quintiles of dietary indices using Cox 
           www.thelancet.com/planetary-health   Vol 6   November 2022                                                                                             e894
                     Articles
                                                 proportional hazards models adjusted for age, race and                                       cohorts have been described in detail.4,6,22,23 To estimate 
                                                 ethnicity, marriage status, living status (living alone or                                   the uncertainty (95% CI) of the RRs, we used Monte-
                                                 not), family history of myocardial infarction, meno-                                         Carlo simulations to take 1000 draws from the 
                                                 pausal status, oral contraceptive use, multivitamin use,                                     distribution of differences in dietary index and the RRs 
                                                 aspirin use, total energy intake, smoking status, alcohol                                    simultaneously, propagating the uncertainty in the 
                                                 drinking, physical activity, and body-mass index (BMI)  dietary index and RRs into the final estimates. We did all 
                                                 in the Nurses’ Health Study II (1991–2017). We calculated                                    analyses at a two-tailed α of 0·05, using SAS (version 9.4) 
                                                 cumulative means to the start of each 2-year follow-up                                       and R (version 4.0.3).
                                                 interval to best represent long-term dietary patterns and 
                                                 reduce  within-person variation; we then included the  Role of the funding source
                                                 cumulative means as main exposures in the Cox  The funder of the study had no role in study design, data 
                                                 proportional hazards models. We calculated person-                                           collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of 
                                                 years of follow-up from baseline to the earliest of time of                                  the report.
                                                 death, cardiovascular disease, loss to or unavailability for 
                                                 follow-up, or the end of follow-up. In secondary analyses,                                   Results
                                                 we estimated RRs for incidence of and mortality from  The health outcomes analysis included 90 884 partic-
                                                 cancer, coronary heart disease (non-fatal myocardial  ipants, and the environmental impact analysis included 
                                                 infarction plus death due to coronary heart disease),  65 625 participants. Participants with diets in the highest 
                                                 stroke, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease (excluding                                   quintiles of greenhouse gas emissions, land use, fertiliser 
                                                 coronary heart disease), respiratory and neurodegener-                                       inputs, and water use generally had higher BMIs 
                                                 ative diseases, and total mortality. We calculated RRs by                                    (28·5–29·4 kg/m²) and lower levels of physical activity 
                                                                                                                                              (16·4–18·
                                                 multiplying across-quintile differences in AHEI by                                                         4 metabolic equivalents (METs) × h per week) 
                                                 multivariable-adjusted RRs associated with a one-unit  than those in the lowest quintiles (BMI 25·4–26·8 kg/m²; 
                                                 increment in the dietary index. These multivariable-                                         physical activity 21·2–24·7 METs × h per week; table 1). 
                                                 adjusted RRs were estimated from the Nurses’ Health  Furthermore, those in the highest quintiles of all 
                                                 Study and Health Professionals Follow-Up Study and  four environmental attributes were more likely to be 
                                                                                   4,22,23
                                                 previously published.                   The methods for follow-up and                        current smokers (7·5–9·4%) and have hypertension 
                                                 docu mentation of disease and mortality outcomes in the                                      (33·8–35·6%) and type 2 diabetes (8·4–10·2%) compared 
                                                  Quintiles of greenhouse gas                Quintiles of cropland needs                  Quintiles of fertiliser needs                  Quintiles of irrigation water needs
                                                  emission
                                                  Q1           Q3             Q5             Q1            Q3             Q5              Q1             Q3             Q5               Q1            Q3             Q5
                Environmental attribute*                 1·7         2·5            3·9            9·7          19·6          40·5            51·5           69·2            97·6             0·4            0·6           0·9
                Age, years†                            56·7         56·5          56·5            56·9          56·5          56·4            56·8           56·4            56·4            56·8          56·5           56·3
                BMI, kg/m²                             25·9         27·6          28·9            25·4          27·6          29·4            26·1           27·5            29·0            26·8          27·4           28·5
                Ethnicity‡
                  White                            12 367      12 550         12 456          12 319       12 599         12 474          12 552         12 514         12 337           12 536        12 532         12 335 
                                                  (94·2%)      (95·6%)        (94·9%)        (93·9%)       (96·0%)        (95·0%)         (95·6%)        (95·3%)        (94·0%)          (95·5%)       (95·5%)        (94·0%)
                Married                             8886        9648           9394            8780          9691          9519            9010           9626            9349            8682          9609           9569 
                                                  (67·7%)      (73·5%)        (71·6%)        (66·9%)       (73·8%)        (72·5%)         (68·6%)        (73·3%)        (71·2%)          (66·2%)       (73·2%)        (72·9%)
                Current smoker                       446          638          1094              367          697          1048              357            610           1230              590           632           984  
                                                  (3·4%)       (4·9%)         (8·3%)         (2·8%)        (5·3%)         (8·0%)          (2·7%)         (4·6%)         (9·4%)           (4·5%)        (4·8%)         (7·5%)
                Physical activity, metabolic           22·9         20·1          17·7            24·7          19·7          16·4            23·2           20·4            16·8            21·2          20·6           18·4
                equivalents × h per week
                Energy intake, kcal/day             1718         1720          1740            1705          1707           1751            1717           1710           1728            1698           1722           1721
                Multivitamin use                    5450         5361          5698            5204          5380          5927             5321          5400            5823            5308          5442           5759 
                                                  (41·5%)      (40·8%)        (43·4%)        (39·7%)       (41·0%)        (45·2%)         (40·5%)        (41·1%)        (44·4%)          (40·4%)       (41·5%)        (43·9%)
                Hypertension                        3062         3936          4655            2894          3895          4669             3127          3857            4585            3372          3840           4442 
                                                  (23·3%)      (30·0%)        (35·5%)        (22·0%)       (29·7%)        (35·6%)         (23·8%)        (29·4%)        (34·9%)          (25·7%)       (29·3%)        (33·8%)
                Hypercholesterolaemia               4534         4857          5066            4257          4784           5213           4398           4845            5202            4617          4821           5015 
                                                  (34·5%)      (37·0%)        (38
                                                                                 ·6%)        (32·4%)       (36·4%)        (39·7%)         (33·5%)        (36·9%)        (39·6%)          (35·2%)       (36·7%)        (38·2%)
                Type 2 diabetes                       585         801          1186              471          796           1336             593            803           1186              708           824          1100 
                                                  (4·5%)       (6·1%)         (9·0%)         (3·6%)        (6·1%)         (10·2%)         (4·5%)         (6·1%)         (9·0%)           (5·4%)        (6·3%)         (8·4%)
               Data are means for continuous variables and n (%) for categorical variables. Quintiles were calculated on the basis of energy residuals of environmental variables. *Values are mean daily CO equivalent of 
                                                                                                                                                                                                           2 
               greenhouse gas emitted (kg), high-quality cropland required (m²), nitrogenous fertiliser (g), and irrigation water (m³). †Not age-adjusted values. ‡Further disaggregated race and ethnicity data were not 
               available. 
               Table 1: Age-adjusted characteristics of study population included in the environmental impact analysis (n=65 625)
            e895                                                                                                                                               www.thelancet.com/planetary-health   Vol 6   November 2022
The words contained in this file might help you see if this file matches what you are looking for:

...Articles health and environmental impacts of plant rich dietary patterns a us prospective cohort study aviva musicus dong d wang marie janiszewski gidon eshel stacy blondin walter willett meir j stampfer summary background diets that are in animal based foods threaten planetary human but have lancet planet varied effects we aimed to characterise healthy index three e indices by their associations with risk cardiovascular disease joint first authors department nutrition methods this used data from food frequency questionnaire the nurses scd md ii participants were categorised quintiles four including alternative s phd eating ahei diet pdi unhealthy calculated prof w drph m greenhouse gas emissions irrigation water nitrogenous fertiliser high quality cropland needs epidemiology relative risks rrs comparing harvard findings t h chan school public included impact analysis boston ma usa top bottom higher scores associated decreased channing division for network lower medicine q kg co equiva...

no reviews yet
Please Login to review.