SCIENTIFIC UPDATE
By Reed Mangels, PhD, RD
Health Professionals Demonstrate Limited Knowledge About Vegetarian and
Vegan Diets
Health professionals often provide nutrition advice but may not be knowledgeable
about vegetarian diets. Researchers in Italy asked more than 400 nurses, midwives,
and support workers about the definition of vegetarian and vegan diets, food sources
of nutrients, and the use of a vegetarian or vegan diet during pregnancy, infancy,
and childhood. Almost 80% of those surveyed had not taken a nutrition class in the
past five years; 5% were vegetarian. Only 2% correctly defined a vegetarian diet but
two-thirds correctly defined a vegan diet. Fewer than one-third correctly considered
a "planned vegetarian diet" to be adequate for children, while two-thirds
incorrectly thought that "planned vegetarian and vegan diets" during pregnancy were
associated with a higher risk of pregnancy difficulties.
In general, vegetarian health professionals were more knowledgeable about vegetarian and vegan nutrition. These results indicate a knowledge gap among many of the health professionals surveyed and point to the need for educating nurses and other health professionals about vegan and vegetarian diets.
Bettinelli ME, Bezze E, Morasca L, et al. Knowledge of health professionals regarding vegetarian diets from pregnancy to adolescence: an observational study. Nutrients. 2019; 11(5). pii: E1149.
Use of More Traditional Plant Foods Recommended for
Hispanics/Latinos
Rates of diabetes and obesity in Hispanics/Latinos in North America have increased
markedly over the past decade with rates of diabetes 60% higher in Hispanics/Latinos
compared to non-Hispanic whites. One factor in this increase may be the transition
from more traditional whole plant foods to a higher intake of meats and processed
foods. A recent study of 74 Southern California Seventh-day Adventists who identify
as Hispanic examined diet's role in obesity. Participants were classified as
non-vegetarian if they ate meat. Due to the small sample size, the category
"vegetarian" included fish-eaters, lacto-ovo vegetarians, and vegans.
The "vegetarian" group had a lower body mass index (BMI), lower waist circumference, and a lower body fat percentage. The researchers suggest that increasing use of traditional plant-based foods (beans, maize, and squash, for example) by Hispanics/Latinos could be a way to decrease the rates of obesity and diabetes.
Singh PN, Jaceldo-Siegl K, Shih W, et al. Plant-based diets are associated with lower adiposity levels among Hispanic/Latino adults in the Adventist Multi-Ethnic Nutrition (AMEN) Study. Front Nutr. 2019;6:34.
Comparing Adolescent Diets: Vegetarians vs. Non-Vegetarians
By Autumn Hengen, VRG intern
Some experts believe that vegetarian teens have more healthful diets than
non-vegetarian teens. A recent study used an online questionnaire to compare the
nutrient intake of 12-18 year olds. Many subjects were Seventh-day Adventists; all
were from Adventist and public schools near major Adventist universities in Michigan
and Southern California. Subjects were considered to be "vegetarian" if they ate
fewer than 3 ounces total of meat, poultry, and fish per week.
"Vegetarian" participants ate more fruits, vegetables, nuts/soy products, legumes, and cereals. They also had higher intakes of carbohydrates, vitamin C, calcium, iron, potassium, magnesium, sodium, and phosphorus than non-vegetarians. Along with a lower consumption of sugar-sweetened drinks, coffee, and teas, the "vegetarians" had lower intakes of fats and zinc. Both groups met at least 75% of recommended intakes for protein, vitamin B12, vitamin C, iron, and several other nutrients. All participants, on average, consumed less than 10% of the recommended intake for vitamin D, a nutrient required for bone health. The majority of participants greatly exceeded the recommended intake for sodium. Excessive sodium intake increases risk of elevated blood pressure and kidney disease later in life.
This study suggests that vegetarian adolescents have more healthful diets than non-vegetarians, though both groups should consume less sodium and more vitamin D. The results may not apply to all vegetarian adolescents, as many in the study were lacto-ovo vegetarians.
Both groups had more healthful diets when compared to U.S. adolescents in general, meeting the majority of dietary recommendations and eating more plant-based foods. Further investigations are recommended to continue dietary tracking from adolescence to adulthood to help determine the impact of adolescents' dietary intake on future health.
Segovia-Siapco G, Burkholder-Cooley N, Haddad Tabrizi H, et al., 2019. Beyond meat: a comparison of the dietary intakes of vegetarian and non-vegetarian adolescents. Front Nutr. 6:86.
For a Less Expensive, Nutrient-Rich Diet, Choose Vegetarian!
In the USDA's publication, Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2015-2020,
three healthy food patterns are identified, namely a "healthy vegetarian" food
pattern, a Mediterranean pattern, and a "U.S.-Style" pattern. Many Americans
struggle with food costs and may not be able to afford the nutritious foods called
for in these Dietary Guidelines. Researchers used food costs and
information from a large survey of Americans' eating practices to estimate diet
quality and cost. They then estimated the cost of menus based on the three healthy
food patterns.
The average daily food cost based on what people are currently eating was estimated at $5.82 for a 2,000-calorie diet. Changing to a "healthy vegetarian" diet would increase the cost per day by 8 cents to $5.90. The other two recommended patterns were markedly more expensive at $8.27 per day for the "U.S.-Style" pattern and $8.73 per day for the Mediterranean pattern. All three of the recommended patterns were more nutrient-rich than what Americans are currently eating, since the recommended patterns had more fiber, vitamins, and minerals and less saturated fat, added sugar, and sodium. Clearly the "healthy vegetarian" pattern is less expensive and as nutritious as the other patterns. Why isn't this pattern being promoted more by government agencies and other food programs as a less expensive choice?
Fulgoni V, Drewnowski A. An economic gap between the recommended healthy food patterns and existing diets of minority groups in the U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2013-14. Front Nutr. 2019;6:37.
Red Meat and Longevity?
By Kavitha Shankar, VRG volunteer
Researchers from Loma Linda University investigated the association of red and
processed meat intake with the overall death rate ("mortality") from all diseases,
from cardiovascular disease, and from cancer in more than 70,000 generally healthy
Seventh-day Adventists. The Adventists consumed varying amounts of red and processed
meat daily ranging from none, to low (0.14 ounces; less than 1 teaspoon) to moderate
(1.5 ounces, the size of about half a deck of playing cards).
This study concluded that even small quantities of red or processed meat were associated with a higher overall risk for death and for death due to heart diseases. Those who consumed as little as one serving (about 1.5 ounces) of unprocessed red meat had a 26% higher risk of dying from heart disease and 18% higher risk of overall mortality than those who did not consume meat. In contrast, there was no relationship between meat consumption and death rates from cancer, in this study.
However, three other studies in the United States have shown a relationship between the death rate from cancer and red meat consumption. This study suggests that completely avoiding red and processed meat may increase longevity and reduce risk of dying from cardiovascular disease, the number one cause of death in the United States.
Alshahrani SM, Fraser GE, Sabat? J, et al. Red and processed meat and mortality in a low meat intake population. Nutrients. 2019;11(3):622
