Vegans have lower death rates than meat-eaters: Study

Every three percent increase in calories from plant protein was found to reduce risk of death by 10 percent.

By: ANI | London | Published:August 7, 2016 10:17 pm
vegan, death rate, vegan death rate, non vegetatrian, vegan death, news, latest news, health, world news, international news, health news Every three percent increase in calories from plant protein was found to reduce risk of death by 10 percent.

A study finds out that not having any kind of animal products may lower the death rates. The study, published in the JAMA Internal Medicine Journal, reignites the debate around increasingly popular vegan diets amid conflicting medical advice and evidence over their impact of proponents’ health, reports the Independent. The research was undertaken by scientists at Massachusetts General Hospital, who monitored health and diet records of more than 130,000 people over the course of thirty years.

They found that every three percent increase in calories from plant protein was found to reduce risk of death by 10 percent. The figure rises to 12 percent for risk of dying from heart disease. By contrast, raising the share of animal protein in one’s diet by 10 percent led to a two percent higher risk of death from all causes. This increased to an eight percent higher chance of dying from heart disease. Substituting eggs for plant protein led to a 19 percent reduction in death risk and eliminating unprocessed red meat saw a drop of 12 percent.

As would be expected, the risk was found to be most pronounced among people who also engaged in other unhealthy activities, including having a history of smoking, drinking heavily or being obese. However, caution should be exercised when interpreting the results, as other more complex social and environment factors could affect the results rather than being solely related to diet.

Lead scientist Mingyang Song said, ‘Overall, our findings support the importance of the sources of dietary protein for long-term health outcomes. While previous studies have primarily focused on the overall amount of protein intake – which is important – from a broad dietary perspective, the particular foods people consume to get protein are equally important.”

“Our findings suggest people should consider eating more plant proteins than animal proteins, and when they do choose among sources of animal protein, fish and chicken are probably better choices,” he added.

For all the latest Lifestyle News, download Indian Express App

  1. Z
    Zoltan Sandor
    Aug 9, 2016 at 1:42 pm
    On the end of the abstract ( in Conclusions and relevance:) I see: lt;br/gt;"Subsution of plant protein for animal protein, especially that from processed red meat, was ociated with lower mortality, SUGGESTING THE IMPORTANCE OF PROTEIN SOURCE."lt;br/gt;But in the article (in JAMA Internal Medicine, page 10.) is written:lt;br/gt; "These results UNDERSCORE THE IMPORTANCE of protein sources FOR RISK ESSMENT AND SUGGEST THAT OTHER COMPONENTS in protein-rich foods (eg, SODIUM [45], NITRATES, and NITRITES [46] in processed red meat), in addition to protein per se, MAY HAVE A CRITICAL HEALTH EFFECT." lt;br/gt;(The capitalised highlighting is mine.)lt;br/gt;And in the press release of the Machusetts General Hospital:lt;br/gt;lt;br/gt;And on scientific media - for example:lt;br/gt;lt;br/gt;And here also, nothing about the critical health effect of added sodium (NaCl), nitrates and nitrites. Why? Since, the real conclusion is that not the protein source (animal or plant) is important and have health risks, but the added sodium salts have health risks (critical health effect). That is not public? The danger of the sodium-induced disorder is a taboo? lt;br/gt;lt;br/gt;Some important references:lt;br/gt;Sodium-Induced Disorder Syndrome. Where have all the sciences gone?lt;br/gt; BMJ Online (13 April 2016)lt;br/gt; lt;br/gt;lt;br/gt; Zoltan Sandorlt;br/gt;Research Centre for Natural Sciences,lt;br/gt;Hungarian Academy of Sciences
    Reply