Thinking Nutrition

For the latest nutrition research and controversies

  • Home
  • About
  • Articles
    • Cancer
    • Diabetes
    • Gut Health
    • Mental Health
    • Women’s Health
    • Child Health
    • Heart Health
    • Eating Well
    • Managing Weight
    • Nutrition Supplements
    • Getting Active
    • Mythbusting
  • Podcast
  • In the Media
  • Services
  • Privacy
  • Contact
You are here: Home / Eating Well / The key dietary patterns for health

The key dietary patterns for health

January 23, 2015 by Tim Crowe 5 Comments

dietary patterns for health
Root Vegetables by Alex Lomas. CC BY 2.0

One of the largest ever scientific reviews looking at associations between food and beverages and the risk of diet-related disease has reinforced the fundamental nutrition keys and dietary patterns for good health.

Diet plays a big part in health. As the typical western diet moved to more overly refined and energy dense foods, rates of obesity and type 2 diabetes mirrored this change. Among all the competing voices on what foods and nutrients are best and worst for our health, there is some common ground that all camps can agree on. The need to eat more minimally processed plant-based foods, and less processed foods high in sugar is one such theme.

Taking a step back from the recent trend to demonise particular foods and nutrients as the cause of all of our health ills, a major scientific review has taken things back to basics to reinforce where the best health gains are to be found with diet.

A no small undertaking, the review looked at the diet and chronic disease links from 304 meta-analyses and systematic reviews published in the last 63 years. Type 2 diabetes, overweight and obesity, cancer and cardiovascular disease together accounted for most of the chronic disease links found.

The key dietary patterns

As for dietary patterns, the findings showed that plant-based foods were more protective against the risk of developing chronic disease compared to animal-based foods. Amongst plant foods, grain-based foods seemed to have a small edge over fruits and vegetables. So much for the anti-grain sentiment that is popular at the moment.

For animal-based foods, dairy products overall were considered neutral on health and fish was considered protective. Red and processed meats were linked to a higher disease risk.

For tea lovers, the research confirmed this popular drink as being the most protective against disease risk. On the other end of the spectrum, to no one’s surprise, soft drinks had few redeeming health benefits.

What it all means

The findings from this major review are close to a carbon copy of existing dietary guidelines that have changed little over decades. Eat more plant-based foods than animal foods, choose wholegrains over refined grains, limit red and processed meat and choose other beverages in preference to soft drink. Such recommendations may not get media attention, or help sell books in numbers like the latest fad diet, but they are the cornerstone of long-term health.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)

Filed Under: Eating Well Tagged With: dietary patterns, health, healthy eating, wholegrains

Comments

  1. Graeme says

    October 19, 2017 at 7:16 pm

    You know what else hasn’t changed in the last couple of decades…findings like this not getting media attention, or helping sell books in numbers like the latest fad diet.

    Thanks for the summary Tim.

    Reply
  2. Troy says

    August 24, 2015 at 6:54 pm

    Thanks Tim, this was a solid brief little summary of the study. Much appreciated.

    On the note of processed and industrial foods especially as they relate to sugar, is there any significant data to suggest otherwise that the Australian Paradox isn’t the case? My understanding is there has been some editing to the original article since it’s inception but that there’s also been no evidence to refute it with the exception of the flaws in the study itself (from what I could see, the primary one is actually trying to measure how much sugar we eat in foods that have it added and also how poor data is when it comes to self-reporting in things related to food).

    Your thoughts on this, as always, would really be appreciated.

    Reply
    • Tim Crowe says

      August 24, 2015 at 7:10 pm

      This was published only last month showing the same trends and also agrees with global data published last year. It isn’t really matter of proving either side ‘right or wrong’ as we can all agree we should eat less added sugar, but it is simplistic to blame it as the smoking gun for obesity problems http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26130298

      Reply
      • Troy says

        August 25, 2015 at 10:51 am

        Thanks Tim.

        Agreed with the idea that we’re constantly too quick to point the finger at a single macronutrient and not take things in their appropriate context when it comes to an issue as complex as obesity. Also thanks for the link to that paper.

        I find that many friends and to a lesser extent a few colleagues will ask me about sugar (and it’s become especially more palpable since That Sugar Film went public). My answers in response are that the truth is often found somewhere in the middle of the extremes.

        Reply

Trackbacks

  1. Dear Pete, I Don’t Hate You! | The Dietitian's Pantry says:
    February 12, 2015 at 5:58 pm

    […] read this recently published scientific paper. If you can’t access the full version you can read this wonderful summary. In a nutshell (I’m tempted to make a joke but won’t) plant-based foods were more […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sign up for updates

Loading
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter

Recent Posts

  • The weird way that body posture changes taste
  • Collagen supplements: the science behind the health benefits
  • Is adrenal fatigue a thing?
  • Can keto cure cancer?
  • Hypothyroidism and Hashimoto’s disease: what role for diet?

Most Popular Posts

  • Hypothyroidism and Hashimoto’s disease: what role for diet?
  • Broccoli is bad for you, like, really toxic bad
  • Coffee and its surprising health benefits
  • Are collagen supplements legit or just Insta influencer fairy dust?
  • How do the plant-based milks compare?

Get the Book

Understanding NutritionNow in its fourth edition, Understanding Nutrition is the leading text used in nutrition and dietetics courses in Australia and New Zealand. As one of the coauthors, I step you through core topics such as diet planning, macronutrients, vitamins and minerals and follow this with chapters on diet and health, sports nutrition, lifespan nutrition and food safety.

Work with me

If you have a project you would like to discuss be it website or newsletter content, blog or magazine articles, media copy or scientific writing (a career in medical research means I’m pretty handy in writing and reviewing papers and grants) then please get in touch with me.

Back to Top of Page ↑

Creative Commons Licence
All content on Thinking Nutrition by Dr Tim Crowe is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License and can be reused with attribution