Fig 1. Adjusted hazard ratios for incident diabetes and all-cause mortality among those with diabetes at baseline, by fresh fruit consumption.(A) Incident diabetes; (B) all-cause mortality among those with diabetes at baseline. Analyses were stratified by age at risk, sex, and region and were adjusted for education, income, alcohol intake, smoking, physical activity, survey season, BMI, family history of diabetes, and intakes of dairy products, meat, and preserved vegetables. The black boxes represent the hazard ratios (HRs), with the size inversely proportional to the variance of the log HRs, and the vertical lines represent the 95% confidence intervals. The values above the vertical lines are the point estimates of the HRs, and the values below them are the numbers of cases.
Fig 2. Adjusted hazard ratios for selected cause-specific mortality by fresh fruit consumption among 30,300 participants with diabetes at baseline.Mortality from (A) diabetes, (B) cardiovascular disease, and (C) other causes. Conventions as in Fig 1. Baseline status for cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and anti-diabetic treatment were also adjusted for. HR, hazard ratio.
结果校正了“potential confounders such as age, sex, region, socio-economic status, other lifestyle factors, body mass index, and family history of diabetes.”
2004-2008年期间,研究人员在全国十个不同地区招募了超过50万名中国人。参与者完成了详细的问卷调查面试,接受了身体测量和血液检查,随后跟踪健康情况七年。
在研究开始时没有糖尿病的人中,与从未或很少消费新鲜水果的人相比,日常消费新鲜水果的人患糖尿病的相对风险降低了12%。
在研究开始之前已经患有糖尿病的人中,每星期吃新鲜水果超过三天比少于一天的人总的死亡风险降低了17%,发生糖尿病并发症的风险降低了13%-28%。 这个研究结果表明摄入新鲜水果可能有益于预防糖尿病。对于糖尿病人,不应鼓励限制吃新鲜水果。 研究文章:
Fresh fruit consumption in relation to incident diabetes and diabetic vascular complications: A 7-y prospective study of 0.5 million Chinese adults.
Fig 1. Adjusted hazard ratios for incident diabetes and all-cause mortality among those with diabetes at baseline, by fresh fruit consumption.(A) Incident diabetes; (B) all-cause mortality among those with diabetes at baseline. Analyses were stratified by age at risk, sex, and region and were adjusted for education, income, alcohol intake, smoking, physical activity, survey season, BMI, family history of diabetes, and intakes of dairy products, meat, and preserved vegetables. The black boxes represent the hazard ratios (HRs), with the size inversely proportional to the variance of the log HRs, and the vertical lines represent the 95% confidence intervals. The values above the vertical lines are the point estimates of the HRs, and the values below them are the numbers of cases.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002279.g001
Fig 2. Adjusted hazard ratios for selected cause-specific mortality by fresh fruit consumption among 30,300 participants with diabetes at baseline.Mortality from (A) diabetes, (B) cardiovascular disease, and (C) other causes. Conventions as in Fig 1. Baseline status for cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and anti-diabetic treatment were also adjusted for. HR, hazard ratio.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002279.g002
7年把死亡率差别都分辨出来了?
除了水果,地域和其它的饮食习惯还有一个很重的家族基因都被滤掉太可笑了
结果校正了“potential confounders such as age, sex, region, socio-economic status, other lifestyle factors, body mass index, and family history of diabetes.”
皮,黄瓜,冬瓜,等等
油墨:)
在美国的科学统计数据,可能对华裔不一定准确;
有的癌症化疗统计已经发现对美国人灵,对亚裔不灵的现象。
几乎可以断定他们的食物问答卷并没问这个问题。
总热量似乎也没统计。
他们查了肉,奶,新鲜和保存的水果,没有列出总能量的摄取。很有可能吃水果的人饭就吃得少了,无论机制如何,吃水果总体上看是有好处的。
完全校正。
如果不是调查基数大,绝对看不出显著性。即便是显著的,也没有实际意义
皮:)
既然有对运动量的校正,何以不对总热卡也做校正
效果十分微弱的因素,才需要这么大的样本
所以这个观察性的相关性结论看看可以,但不适合用来指导饮食实践
当然也不是越多越好。