Skip to main content

#BrainHealth: you are what you eat?

If you take #BrainHealth seriously you need to focus on diet.

Do you buy into 'you are what you eat'? This ambitious systematic literature review has identified 10 foods and 7 nutrients with evidence for causal cardio-metabolic effects. Any intervention that reduces your vascular risk burden should reduce all-cause dementia and improve your Brain Health. 

The foods that were found to have protective effects:
  1. fruits
  2. vegetables
  3. beans/legumes
  4. nuts/seeds
  5. whole grains
  6. fish
  7. yogurt
  8. fibre
  9. seafood omega-3s
  10. polyunsaturated fats
  11. potassium
The food found to have harmful effects: 
  1. unprocessed red meats
  2. processed meats
  3. sugar-sweetened beverages
  4. glycemic load (sugar or carbohydrates)
  5. trans-fats
  6. sodium/salt. 
There is nothing new here and most of this should be obvious to you and is currently included in mots dietary guidelines. The elephant in the room is economics; in modern economies people eat what they can afford. Modifying the nation's diet is going to need a rethink about how we encourage a healthy diet. Could this be another example of the need for policy? How about a tax on the harmful foodstuffs to subsidise a healthy diet for the poor? 

 Micha et al. Etiologic effects and optimal intakes of foods and nutrients for risk of cardiovascular diseases and diabetes: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses from the Nutrition and Chronic Diseases Expert Group (NutriCoDE).  PLoS One. 2017 Apr 27;12(4):e0175149.

 BACKGROUND: Dietary habits are major contributors to coronary heart disease, stroke, and diabetes. However, comprehensive evaluation of etiologic effects of dietary factors on cardiometabolic outcomes, their quantitative effects, and corresponding optimal intakes are not well-established.

 OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the evidence for effects of dietary factors on cardiometabolic diseases, including comprehensively assess evidence for causality; estimate magnitudes of etiologic effects; evaluate heterogeneity and potential for bias in these etiologic effects; and determine optimal population intake levels.

 METHODS: We utilized Bradford-Hill criteria to assess probable or convincing evidence for causal effects of multiple diet-cardiometabolic disease relationships. Etiologic effects were quantified from published or de novo meta-analyses of prospective studies or randomized clinical trials, incorporating standardized units, dose-response estimates, and heterogeneity by age and other characteristics. Potential for bias was assessed in validity analyses. Optimal intakes were determined by levels associated with lowest disease risk.

 RESULTS: We identified 10 foods and 7 nutrients with evidence for causal cardiometabolic effects, including protective effects of fruits, vegetables, beans/legumes, nuts/seeds, whole grains, fish, yogurt, fiber, seafood omega-3s, polyunsaturated fats, and potassium; and harms of unprocessed red meats, processed meats, sugar-sweetened beverages, glycemic load, trans-fats, and sodium. Proportional etiologic effects declined with age, but did not generally vary by sex. Established optimal population intakes were generally consistent with observed national intakes and major dietary guidelines. In validity analyses, the identified effects of individual dietary components were similar to quantified effects of dietary patterns on cardiovascular risk factors and hard endpoints.

 CONCLUSIONS: These novel findings provide a comprehensive summary of causal evidence, quantitative etiologic effects, heterogeneity, and optimal intakes of major dietary factors for cardiometabolic diseases, informing disease impact estimation and policy planning and priorities.
Labels:

Comments

  1. Anonymous1 May 2017 at 09:39

    I agree the solution to a healthy diet at a population level needs to be political. It is a pity these authors' didn't look at vitamins, in particular vitamin D.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Gavin Giovannoni10 May 2017 at 00:20

    Re: "Vitamin D"

    The problem with vD is the evidence is all over the place and my colleagues in the Wolfson think the association of low vD levels and disease may all be explained by reverse causation. When I get time I will post on this.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Are you ready for an EBV vaccine to prevent MS?

"Professor Giovannoni, you tell me that my daughter has a 1 in 40 chance of developing multiple sclerosis and that MS has reached epidemic proportions in parts of the world? Is there anything I can do to reduce her chances of getting MS? Is there anything we can do to stop other people from getting MS?" Although multiple sclerosis (MS) is a complex disease due to the interaction of genetic and environmental factors data on the occurrence of MS at the population level (epidemiology) supports the Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) as being necessary, but not sufficient, for someone to develop MS. In other words, EBV is probably the cause of MS. Of all the putative causative agents that have been proposed to be associated with MS, EBV is the only one where the risk of getting MS if you are EBV negative is close to zero or zero if you limit the analyses to those studies which use a technique called immunofluorescence microscopy as the gold-standard assay to detect anti-EBV antibodies. EBV ...
7 comments
Read more

Smoking: a major preventable MS risk factor

I have been complaining about my low productivity levels since I have gotten back to work after my accident. However, last night with a single one hour webinar we have managed to set-up a new international collaboration to study and address the social determinants of health (SDoH) and their impact on MS. Our focus is going to be on which SDoH can we modify and hence improve the outcome for people with MS (pwMS)? Smoking is one such modifiable factor and needs to be addressed at a (1) population level with policy and legislation, (2) at a local or community level, (3) with the family and (4) at an individual level target the people with MS (pwMS). We know that pwMS who smoke have a worse outcome than people who don’t smoke. The effect of smoking is equivalent to negating the treatment effect of being on an injectable therapy such as interferon beta. Put simply smokers with MS start using a walking stick (EDSS = 6.0) about 6 years earlier than pwMS who don’t smoke. Getting pwMS to stop s...
7 comments
Read more

Corpulence and poverty

Since stating my intention to join the  #BackTo21  campaign to get my BMI back to what it was when I was 21 years of age, I have had several emails and direct messages on social media questioning the wisdom of my intention.  Photo by NeONBRAND on Unsplash It is clear that despite BMI being a relatively poor metric of health there is overwhelming evidence that at a population level it predicts poor health outcomes. Importantly there is new data that indicates the target BMI for the prevention of type 2 diabetes and the metabolic syndrome depends on your ethnicity. For people of South Asian origin, there is a call to reset the BMI cutoff to 23.9, which for most people is within the normal range. At the same time, there is a call to classify obesity as an important social determinant of health. Arnaud Chiolero argues below for using BMI as a socioeconomic indicator. Do you agree? Isn’t it quite amazing that in a previous era corpulence was a sign of affluence, whereas in th...
4 comments
Read more