ArticleDiabetes care2020
Red and Processed Meats and Health Risks: How Strong Is the Evidence?
Article in Diabetes care, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 71 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
71 citing papers in PubMed, 141 citations in OpenAlex.
- Improvement of glycemic indices by a hypocaloric legume-based DASH diet in adults with type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial.European journal of nutrition · 2022Trial
- Developing health and environmental warning messages about red meat: An online experiment.PloS one · 2022Trial
- The Gut Microbiome as a Mechanistic Link Between the Planetary Health Diet and Healthy Aging.Nutrients · 2026Review
- The Hidden Burden of Water-Binding Additives in Meat Products: Biochemical, Clinical, and Psychosocial Implications.Molecular nutrition & food research · 2026Review
- Review
- Article
- Processed meat in the diet: general nutritional profile-protein quality and micronutrients.Animal frontiers : the review magazine of animal agriculture · 2026Article
- Dietary exposure to N-nitrosamines and their precursors: an age-stratified assessment.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Integration of food and nutrition into oncology care: Proceedings of the Food is Medicine in Oncology Care Symposium.Cancer · 2026Article
- The beef terroir: moving from a commodity and its role in human evolution to a new paradigm of health, epigenetics, and sustainability: a review.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Review
- Article
- Optimizing Nutritional Balance: Integrating the Mediterranean Diet into Low-FODMAP Nutrition.Microorganisms · 2025Review
- Food Preservatives and the Rising Tide of Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer: Mechanisms, Controversies, and Emerging Innovations.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Unhealthy Ultra-Processed Food, Diet Quality and Adherence to the Mediterranean Diet in Children and Adolescents: The DELICIOUS Project.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Review
- Perceived motivators and barriers to consuming a plant-based diet: a qualitative research study.BMC nutrition · 2025Article
- Informatics for Food Processing.ArXiv · 2025Article
- Gender-specific insights into adherence to Mediterranean diet and lifestyle: analysis of 4,000 responses from the MEDIET4ALL project.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- How much do opinions regarding cultivated meat vary within the same country? The cases of São Paulo and Salvador, Brazil.PloS one · 2025Article
- Gender-specific effects of meat consumption on type 2 diabetes: a narrative review of prospective cohort studies.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Review
11 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Prevailing dietary guidelines have widely recommended diets relatively low in red and processed meats and high in minimally processed plant foods for the prevention of chronic diseases. However, an ad hoc research group called the Nutritional Recommendations (NutriRECS) consortium recently issued "new dietary guidelines" encouraging individuals to continue their current meat consumption habits due to "low certainty" of the evidence, difficulty of altering meat eaters' habits and preferences, and the lack of need to consider environmental impacts of red meat consumption. These recommendations are not justified, in large part because of the flawed methodologies used to review and grade nutritional evidence. The evidence evaluation was largely based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria, which are primarily designed to grade the strength of evidence for clinical interventions especially pharmacotherapy. However, the infeasibility for conducting large, long-term randomized clinical trials on most dietary, lifestyle, and environmental exposures makes the criteria inappropriate in these areas. A separate research group proposed a modified and validated system for rating the meta-evidence on nutritional studies (NutriGRADE) to address several limitations of the GRADE criteria. Applying NutriGRADE, the evidence on the positive association between red and processed meats and type 2 diabetes was rated to be of "high quality," while the evidence on the association between red and processed meats and mortality was rated to be of "moderate quality." Another important limitation is that inadequate attention was paid to what might be replacing red meat, be it plant-based proteins, refined carbohydrates, or other foods. In summary, the red/processed meat recommendations by NutriRECS suffer from important methodological limitations and involve misinterpretations of nutritional evidence. To improve human and planetary health, dietary guidelines should continue to emphasize dietary patterns low in red and processed meats and high in minimally processed plant foods such as fruits and vegetables, whole grains, nuts, and legumes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.