this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2025
3 points (80.0% liked)

!ketogenic@discuss.online

104 readers
1 users here now

Moved to !ketogenic@discuss.online

founded 6 months ago
 

This is just the abstract:

The study participants comprised 731 Japanese outpatients with type 2 diabetes and no evident cardiovascular disease history. Lifestyle habits, including diet, were assessed with questionnaires at baseline and at years 2 and/or 5, and their mean values were calculated using the average value of lifestyle factors from baseline to the date of onset of an event or the end of follow-up. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine the relationships between each lifestyle habit and the primary endpoint events, comprising cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality.

During the mean follow-up period of 7.5 ± 2.4 years, composite primary endpoint events occurred in 55 participants. Multivariate Cox models showed a significant positive association between the mean proportion of carbohydrate intake and the primary endpoint incidence (hazard ratio = 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02-1.10; P = .005); in addition, the mean total low-carbohydrate diet score, animal low-carbohydrate diet score, and mean proportion of saturated fatty acid intake showed significant inverse associations with the incidence of the primary endpoint.

Our data demonstrated that a higher proportion of carbohydrate intake, particularly with reduced consumption of animal-derived fat/protein, was correlated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality. These data underscore the need to consider dietary components in people with type 2 diabetes.

I'd love to find the full paper, but the normal sites don't have it.

https://doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgaf179

top 1 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jet@hackertalks.com 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Limitations:

  • Abstract only
  • Epidemiology is hypothesis generating and doesn't prove causation
  • Low hazard ratios mean this isn't significant enough to inform any treatment plan
  • This is suggestive and a good basis of future research.

I'm really just posting this as a counterweight to the tidal wave of anti-meat anti-keto epidemiology that comes out constantly.