Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Oct 1;176(10):1453-1463.
doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.4182.

Association of Animal and Plant Protein Intake With All-Cause and Cause-Specific Mortality

Affiliations

Association of Animal and Plant Protein Intake With All-Cause and Cause-Specific Mortality

Mingyang Song et al. JAMA Intern Med. .

Erratum in

  • Correction of Abstract and Text.
    [No authors listed] [No authors listed] JAMA Intern Med. 2016 Nov 1;176(11):1728. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.6538. JAMA Intern Med. 2016. PMID: 27820638 No abstract available.

Abstract

Importance: Defining what represents a macronutritionally balanced diet remains an open question and a high priority in nutrition research. Although the amount of protein may have specific effects, from a broader dietary perspective, the choice of protein sources will inevitably influence other components of diet and may be a critical determinant for the health outcome.

Objective: To examine the associations of animal and plant protein intake with the risk for mortality.

Design, setting, and participants: This prospective cohort study of US health care professionals included 131 342 participants from the Nurses' Health Study (1980 to end of follow-up on June 1, 2012) and Health Professionals Follow-up Study (1986 to end of follow-up on January 31, 2012). Animal and plant protein intake was assessed by regularly updated validated food frequency questionnaires. Data were analyzed from June 20, 2014, to January 18, 2016.

Main outcomes and measures: Hazard ratios (HRs) for all-cause and cause-specific mortality.

Results: Of the 131 342 participants, 85 013 were women (64.7%) and 46 329 were men (35.3%) (mean [SD] age, 49 [9] years). The median protein intake, as assessed by percentage of energy, was 14% for animal protein (5th-95th percentile, 9%-22%) and 4% for plant protein (5th-95th percentile, 2%-6%). After adjusting for major lifestyle and dietary risk factors, animal protein intake was not associated with all-cause mortality (HR, 1.02 per 10% energy increment; 95% CI, 0.98-1.05; P for trend = .33) but was associated with higher cardiovascular mortality (HR, 1.08 per 10% energy increment; 95% CI, 1.01-1.16; P for trend = .04). Plant protein was associated with lower all-cause mortality (HR, 0.90 per 3% energy increment; 95% CI, 0.86-0.95; P for trend < .001) and cardiovascular mortality (HR, 0.88 per 3% energy increment; 95% CI, 0.80-0.97; P for trend = .007). These associations were confined to participants with at least 1 unhealthy lifestyle factor based on smoking, heavy alcohol intake, overweight or obesity, and physical inactivity, but not evident among those without any of these risk factors. Replacing animal protein of various origins with plant protein was associated with lower mortality. In particular, the HRs for all-cause mortality were 0.66 (95% CI, 0.59-0.75) when 3% of energy from plant protein was substituted for an equivalent amount of protein from processed red meat, 0.88 (95% CI, 0.84-0.92) from unprocessed red meat, and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.75-0.88) from egg.

Conclusions and relevance: High animal protein intake was positively associated with cardiovascular mortality and high plant protein intake was inversely associated with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, especially among individuals with at least 1 lifestyle risk factor. Substitution of plant protein for animal protein, especially that from processed red meat, was associated with lower mortality, suggesting the importance of protein source.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosures: None.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval for mortality associated with substitution of 3% energy from plant protein for various animal protein sources
Protein intake from plant sources and from all the animal food items considered in the figure were included in the multivariable model that was also adjusted for all the covariates as in Table 2.

References

    1. Simpson SJ, Raubenheimer D. Perspective: Tricks of the trade. Nature. 2014 Apr 17;508(7496):S66. - PubMed
    1. Solon-Biet SM, McMahon AC, Ballard JW, et al. The ratio of macronutrients, not caloric intake, dictates cardiometabolic health, aging, and longevity in ad libitum-fed mice. Cell Metab. 2014 Mar 4;19(3):418–430. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wycherley TP, Moran LJ, Clifton PM, Noakes M, Brinkworth GD. Effects of energy-restricted high-protein, low-fat compared with standard-protein, low-fat diets: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Clin Nutr. 2012 Dec;96(6):1281–1298. - PubMed
    1. Santesso N, Akl EA, Bianchi M, et al. Effects of higher-versus lower-protein diets on health outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2012 Jul;66(7):780–788. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tielemans SM, Altorf-van der Kuil W, Engberink MF, et al. Intake of total protein, plant protein and animal protein in relation to blood pressure: a meta-analysis of observational and intervention studies. J Hum Hypertens. 2013 Sep;27(9):564–571. - PubMed