Animal versus plant protein and adult bone health: A systematic review and meta-analysis from the National Osteoporosis Foundation

Marissa M Shams-White, Mei Chung, Zhuxuan Fu, Karl L Insogna, Micaela C Karlsen, Meryl S LeBoff, Sue A Shapses, Joachim Sackey, Jian Shi, Taylor C Wallace and Connie M Weaver

PLOS ONE, 2018, vol. 13, issue 2, 1-24

Abstract: Background: Protein may have both beneficial and detrimental effects on bone health depending on a variety of factors, including protein source. Objective: The aim was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the effects of animal versus plant protein intake on bone mineral density (BMD), bone mineral content (BMC) and select bone biomarkers in healthy adults. Methods: Searches across five databases were conducted through 10/31/16 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies in healthy adults that examined the effects of animal versus plant protein intake on 1) total body (TB), total hip (TH), lumbar spine (LS) or femoral neck (FN) BMD or TB BMC for at least one year, or 2) select bone formation and resorption biomarkers for at least six months. Strength of evidence (SOE) was assessed and random effect meta-analyses were performed. Results: Seven RCTs examining animal vs. isoflavone-rich soy (Soy+) protein intake in 633 healthy peri-menopausal (n = 1) and post-menopausal (n = 6) women were included. Overall risk of bias was medium. Limited SOE suggests no significant difference between Soy+ vs. animal protein on LS, TH, FN and TB BMD, TB BMC, and bone turnover markers BSAP and NTX. Meta-analysis results showed on average, the differences between Soy+ and animal protein groups were close to zero and not significant for BMD outcomes (LS: n = 4, pooled net % change: 0.24%, 95% CI: -0.80%, 1.28%; TB: n = 3, -0.24%, 95% CI: -0.81%, 0.33%; FN: n = 3, 0.13%, 95% CI: -0.94%, 1.21%). All meta-analyses had no statistical heterogeneity. Conclusions: These results do not support soy protein consumption as more advantageous than animal protein, or vice versa. Future studies are needed examining the effects of different protein sources in different populations on BMD, BMC, and fracture.

Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0192459 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 92459&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0192459

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192459

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().