̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge - Rajiv Chowdhury

Long-term strategies to control COVID-19 pandemic must treat health and economy as equally important

cjb250 — Sun, 12 Jul 2020 23:50:36 +0000

̽��ֱ��team also say that strategies need to be based on local epidemic growth rate at the time, social and economic costs, existing health systems capabilities and detailed plans to implement and sustain the strategy.

̽��ֱ��COVID-19 pandemic has been responsible for over half a million deaths globally. Many LMICs responded to the pandemic by introducing a number of measures from physical distancing to strict social distancing.

These measures have proved relatively successful in containing the disease and limiting the number of deaths in places where the risk of transmission is high, public health systems and usage are suboptimal and awareness of disease prevention practices is low. However, they have often come with tremendous negative social, economic and psychological effects.

To prevent further negative impacts of lockdown, many countries are now looking to ‘reopen’, risking population health, especially given shortcomings in surveillance infrastructure and poor diagnostic capabilities.

In a paper published in the European Journal of Epidemiology, a team of epidemiologists from the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge, the ̽��ֱ�� of Bern, BRAC ̽��ֱ�� and the National Heart Foundation in Bangladesh, have examined three community-based exit strategies, and recommend their scopes, limitations and the appropriate application in the LMICs.

Dr Rajiv Chowdhury from the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge, lead author of the paper, said: “Successfully re-opening a country requires consideration of both the economic and social costs. Governments should approach these options with a mind-set that health and economy both are equally important to protect – reviving the economy should not take priority over preserving people’s health.”

̽��ֱ��three approaches considered are:

Sustained mitigation

Sustained ‘mitigation-only’ approaches such as those adopted in the United Kingdom, Switzerland and other European countries, involve basic prevention measures such as mask wearing, physical distancing and the isolation of positive cases after testing.

However, the researchers point out that the relative success and ease of implementation of these approaches in high-income settings was aided by a number of factors. For example, high-income countries have the capacity to implement mass testing, population surveillance and case isolation to contain the epidemic, in addition to a high number of trained contact tracers operating in a relatively small and sparse population and high levels of adherence to the measures, including home quarantine and hygiene advice.

By contrast, in LMICs, a sustained mitigation-only approach may be unfeasible due to poor or absent nationwide population surveillance, contact tracing, testing infrastructure and critical care. For example, LMICs generally have limited supply of ventilators (around 48,000 for India’s 1.3 billion people), personal protective equipment, trained healthcare personnel and safe working conditions, compromising the healthcare system’s effectiveness.

Zonal lockdowns

Zonal lockdowns involve identifying and ‘cordoning off’ new outbreak clusters with a high number of cases, keeping contact between zones low and containing the disease within a small geographic area.

However, the authors point out that any successful implementation of zonal lockdown requires regular data feedback operations in real time to identify hotspots, including information on newly confirmed cases, updated region-specific reproduction and growth rates, and deaths by age. This may be especially difficult to introduce in LMICs due to the absence of widespread population surveillance on random selections of the population and poor reporting and testing capabilities – for example, Pakistan conducts only 0.09 tests daily per 1,000 individuals compared to 0.52 in France.

Additionally, control of transmission within zones may be an enormous undertaking. In India, where this approach has been employed, the infection size within a cordoned zone can be as high as 100-200 times that outside the zone.

Countries seeking to introduce such measures should establish within the lockdown zone public health measures, including house-to-house surveillance and case-referral systems, and emergency services. They should also create buffer zones to reduce the rates of transmission from outside the zone. Such measures may only be effective when overall population transmission is relatively low and reducing.

Rolling lockdowns

Intermittent rolling lockdowns are now advocated by the World Health Organization in various LMICs. These involve implementing strict social distancing for a set number of days before a period of relaxation. Rolling lockdowns may be particularly useful in LMICs with dense populations, where this is a high potential for contact, weak health systems and poor contact tracing.

A modelling study published by the team in May showed that a system involving 50 days of strict lockdown followed by 30 days of relaxation, enabling the economy to ‘breathe’ and recuperate, could reduce the reproduction number to 0.5, reduce the strain on health systems and considerably reduce the number of deaths compared to a situation with no lockdown.

Professor Oscar Franco, of the ̽��ֱ�� of Bern and senior author of the paper, said: “Rolling lockdowns need be flexible and tailored to the specific country. ̽��ֱ��frequency and duration of the lockdowns or relaxed periods should be determined by the country based on local circumstances. They don’t necessarily need to be nationwide – they can also involve a large zone or province with very high incidence of COVID-19.”

Dr Shammi Luhar of the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge and co-author of the paper, added: “These three strategies should not be considered as one or the other. A country should further adapt and could combine them as needed.”

Reference
Chowdhury, R et al. Long-term strategies to control COVID-19 in low and middle-income countries: an options overview of non-pharmacological interventions; 13 July 2020

Strategies for the safe reopening of low and middle-income countries (LMICs) from months of strict social distancing in response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic must recognise that preserving people’s health is as important as reviving the economy, argue an international team of researchers.

Governments should approach these options with a mind-set that health and economy both are equally important to protect – reviving the economy should not take priority over preserving people’s health

Rajiv Chowdhury

Eneas De Troya

Sanitising a public space in Mexico

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright © ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified. All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution

Rolling 50/30 day cycle of lockdown and relaxation could be a useful option for managing COVID-19, model suggests

cjb250 — Tue, 19 May 2020 23:01:41 +0000

̽��ֱ��coronavirus pandemic has imposed an unprecedented challenge on global healthcare systems, societies and governments. ̽��ֱ��virus SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19 disease, has been detected in every country, with more than 4.6 million confirmed cases and a death toll of 312,000 worldwide to date.

There are currently no effective treatments for the disease and a widely-available vaccine is likely to be at least a year away. ̽��ֱ��principal strategy to control the disease globally has focused on measures that minimise person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 through social distancing; including isolating suspected infected individuals, shielding vulnerable groups, school closures, and lockdowns.

While such measures are effective at slowing disease spread and preventing health systems becoming overwhelmed, these measures can also lead to significant job losses, financial insecurity and social disruption. As such, there is a growing concern that these interventions may be unsustainable over the long term. An alternative approach may be to alternate stricter measures with intervals of relaxed social distancing (with measures of effective “test-contact trace-isolate” and shielding of the vulnerable kept in place).

However, it is unclear what the frequency and duration of such dynamic interventions should be and which strategy could be adapted globally across countries with diverse health and economic infrastructures.

To address these uncertainties, an international team of researchers from the Global Dynamic Interventions Strategies for COVID-19 Collaborative Group modelled three scenarios across sixteen countries, from Belgium to India, that vary in setting and income. Their results are published today in the European Journal of Epidemiology.

In particular, the researchers were interested in the difference in impact between strategies aimed at mitigation and those aimed at suppression. Mitigation measures reduce the number of new infections, but at a relatively slow rate. These might include a combination of measures, such as general social distancing, hygiene rules, case-based isolation, shielding of vulnerable groups, school closures or restricting of large public events. On the other hand, suppression measures lead to a faster reduction in the number of new infections by applying additional interventions such as strict physical distancing, including lockdown.

̽��ֱ��first scenario modelled the impact of imposing no measures. As might be expected, the number of patients requiring treatment in intensive care units (ICUs) would quickly exceed the available capacity significantly for every single country, resulting in a total of 7.8 million deaths across the 16 countries. Under this scenario, the duration of the epidemic would last nearly 200 days in the majority of the countries included.

̽��ֱ��second scenario modelled a rolling cycle of 50-day mitigation measures followed by a 30-day relaxing. Such a strategy would be likely to reduce the R number (the number of people each infected individual goes on to infect) to 0.8 in all countries. However, it would still be insufficient to keep the number of patients requiring ICU care below the available critical care capacity. While proving effective for the first three months for all the countries, after the first relaxation, the number of patients requiring ICU care would exceed the hospital capacity and would result in 3.5 million deaths across the 16 countries. In this scenario, the pandemic would last approximately 12 months in high-income countries, and about 18 months or longer in the other settings.

̽��ֱ��final scenario involved a rolling cycle of stricter, 50-day suppression measures followed by a 30-day relaxing. Such intermittent cycles would reduce the R number to 0.5 and keep ICU demand within national capacity in all countries. Since more individuals remain susceptible at the end of each cycle of suppression and relaxation, such an approach would result in a longer pandemic, lasting beyond 18 months in all countries. However, a significantly smaller number of people – just over 130,000 across the 16 countries modelled – would die during that period.

In comparison, the team found that after a continuous, three-month strategy of strict suppression measures, most countries would reduce new cases to near zero. Looser, mitigation strategies would require approximately 6.5 months to reach the same point. However, such prolonged lockdowns would be unsustainable in most countries due to potential knock-on impacts on economy and livelihood.

Dr Rajiv Chowdhury, a global health epidemiologist the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge, UK, and lead author on the paper, said: “Our models predict that dynamic cycles of 50-day suppression followed by a 30-day relaxation are effective at lowering the number of deaths significantly for all countries throughout the 18-month period.

“This intermittent combination of strict social distancing, and a relatively relaxed period, with efficient testing, case isolation, contact tracing and shielding the vulnerable, may allow populations and their national economies to ‘breathe’ at intervals – a potential that might make this solution more sustainable, especially in resource-poor regions.”

̽��ֱ��researchers say that the specific durations of these interventions would need to be defined by specific countries according to their needs and local facilities. ̽��ֱ��key is to identify a pattern that allows countries to protect the health of the population not only from COVID-19 but also from economic hardship and mental health issues.

Professor Oscar Franco from the ̽��ֱ�� of Bern, Switzerland, said: “Our study provides a strategic option that countries can use to help control COVID-19 and delay the peak rate of infections. This should allow them to buy valuable time to shore up their health systems and increase efforts to develop new treatments or vaccines.

“There’s no simple answer to the question of which strategy to choose. Countries – particularly low-income countries – will have to weigh up the dilemma of preventing COVID-19 related deaths and public health system failure with the long-term economic collapse and hardship.”

̽��ֱ��research was supported by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 programme.

Reference
Chowdhury, R, et al. Dynamic interventions to control COVID-19 pandemic: a multivariate prediction modelling study comparing 16 worldwide countries. European Journal of Epidemiology; 20 May 2020; DOI: 10.1007/s10654-020-00649-w

How you can support Cambridge’s COVID-19 research

An alternating cycle of 50 days of strict lockdown followed by 30 days of easing could be an effective strategy for reducing the number of COVID-19-related deaths and admissions to intensive care units, say an international team of researchers.

This intermittent combination of strict social distancing, and a relatively relaxed period, with efficient testing, case isolation, contact tracing and shielding the vulnerable, may allow populations and their national economies to ‘breathe’ at intervals – a potential that might make this solution more sustainable, especially in resource-poor regions

Rajiv Chowdhury

Tim Dennell

Police stopping traffic in UK lockdown

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution-Noncommerical

Experts warn of cardiovascular risk from heavy metal pollution

cjb250 — Wed, 29 Aug 2018 22:30:11 +0000

In recent decades, exposures to environmental toxic metals such as arsenic, copper, lead, cadmium and mercury, have become a global public health concern. Although often naturally occurring, these contaminants have made their way into water supplies and, via irrigation, into the food chain. For example, in Bangladesh, deep wells were introduced in the Ganges Delta to draw water clear of bacterial and viral pathogens, but this inadvertently led to exposure to toxic metals.

Concern has often focused on the toxicity or carcinogenic properties of the metals, particularly at high doses. However, there is increasing evidence to suggest that heavy metals may have other adverse effects on health – including cardiovascular disease such as heart disease and stroke – even at lower levels of exposure, which might be prevalent in many parts of the world, including the UK and the US.

To interpret the available evidence, a team led by researchers at Cambridge’s Department of Public Health and Primary Care carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies covering 350,000 unique participants from 37 countries.

̽��ֱ��results of the study showed that exposure to arsenic, lead, cadmium and copper – but not mercury – was associated with an increased risk of coronary heart disease and cardiovascular disease.

“It’s clear from our analysis that there’s a possible link between exposure to heavy metals or metalloids and risk of conditions such as heart disease, even at low doses – and the greater the exposure, the greater the risk,” says Dr Rajiv Chowdhury, the study’s first author. “While people shouldn’t be overly worried about any immediate health risk, it should send a message to policymakers that we need to take action to reduce people’s exposure.”

Worldwide, those at greatest exposure of arsenic, lead, cadmium and copper were around 30% to 80% more likely to develop cardiovascular disease than those at lowest exposure.

̽��ֱ��report is important, say the researchers, because it highlights the need to tackle this environmental and public health problem, one which disproportionately affects people in low and middle income countries, though may still affect those in higher income countries. Interventions need not be costly, they stress; for example, cheap, scalable technologies (e.g. environmentally-friendly water filters) or behavioural interventions (e.g. rinsing practices of rice and vegetables prior to cooking) are currently being tested to reduce exposures at the household level.

Additionally, in a letter published at the end of June, Dr Chowdhury and colleagues expressed their disappointment that the earlier WHO report by the Independent High-Level Commission on non-communicable diseases published in June did not include exposure to heavy metals as a key contributing factor. Writing in the Lancet, the authors said: “Unfortunately, this globally important report had a major omission: recognising the detrimental role of environmental risk factors, beyond the conventional behavioural factors (tobacco and alcohol use, physical inactivity, and unhealthy diet), in enhancing global NCD burden and health inequality.”

Dr Chowdhury and colleagues recently also received £8.1 million from the UK Research Councils’ Global Challenges Research Fund to set up a long-term programme (called CAPABLE) to further investigate environmental factors of cardiovascular diseases and to help inform preventative strategies.

Reference
1) Chowdhury, R et al. Environmental toxic metal contaminants and cardiovascular risk: a systematic review 1 and meta-analysis of observational studies. BMJ; 30 Aug 2018; DOI:10.1136/bmj.k3310

2) Chowdhury R, et al. Reducing NCDs globally: the under-recognised role of environmental risk factors. ̽��ֱ��Lancet; 28 June 2018; DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31473-9

Even low doses of toxic chemicals in the environment pose a significant risk to cardiovascular health, according to a report in today’s edition of ̽��ֱ��BMJ, led by researchers at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge. ̽��ֱ��researchers have also challenged the omission of environmental risk factors such as toxic metal contaminants in water and foods from the recent World Health Organization report on non-communicable diseases (NCDs).

It’s clear from our analysis that there’s a possible link between exposure to heavy metals or metalloids and risk of conditions such as heart disease, even at low doses – and the greater the exposure, the greater the risk

Rajiv Chowdhury

geograph.org.uk

Filter bed beside Afon Rheidol Water draining from an adjacent disused silver-lead mine is passed through these filter beds so as to allow the toxic heavy metals to settle out, thereby reducing pollution of the river.

Researcher profile: Dr Rajiv Chowdhury

2006 was a year of “life-changing events” for Dr Rajiv Chowdhury: not only did he receive a Commonwealth scholarship to study for a masters at Cambridge, but his wife also gave birth to their baby daughter.

Rajiv grew up in Bangladesh, where he studied medicine before moving to Cambridge for his masters. This made him acutely aware of the challenges facing low-income countries. “I could see for myself the massive inequalities, the huge burden of disease, the poor infrastructure, lack of resources…” he says. But it was his encounter with non-communicable diseases (NCDs) – conditions such as heart disease, cancer and type 2 diseases – that was to have particular relevance to his current work.

Following his masters, Rajiv went on to receive a Gates Cambridge scholarship to support his PhD in epidemiology – the first Gates Cambridge scholar from Bangladesh. He now studies the role played by both environmental factors (such as toxic metals, diet, etc.) and genetic factors in influencing the risk of chronic NCDs.

Rajiv’s particular interest involves working closely with researchers in low-income countries such as Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Malaysia – as well as being the principal investigator on several international research projects, he is also Scientific Director for CAPABLE (Cambridge Programme to Assist Bangladesh in Lifestyle and Environmental risk reduction), funded through the Global Challenges Research Fund.

“I hope that our work will lead to the establishment of the largest NCD scientific cohort study in Bangladesh,” he says. “We’re aiming for it to recruit over 150,000 participants. This should help us generate some effective solutions to reduce the impact of environmental risk factors which affect many hundreds of millions of people worldwide.”

Rajiv says he has learned a lot from both his mentors and peers during his time at Cambridge. “Cambridge offers one of the most intellectually stimulating environments in the world for scientific endeavours,” he says. “I have come across some of the brightest minds in biomedical science here who have changed my life and the way I perceive research.”

Image: Dr Chowdhury checking survey forms filled in by our local community health workers in Bangladesh

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution-ShareAlike

Cambridge-led collaborations aim to tackle global food security and public health challenges

cjb250 — Fri, 21 Jul 2017 10:00:46 +0000

̽��ֱ��two collaborations are focused on food security in India and public health in Bangladesh and will see researchers from the UK and developing countries working together as equal partners.

̽��ֱ��awards are part of the Global Challenges Research Fund, which aims to build upon research knowledge in the UK, and strengthen capacity overseas, to help address challenges, informed by expressed need in the developing countries.

Jo Johnson, Minister for Universities and Science, said: “From healthcare to green energy, the successful projects receiving funding today highlight the strength of the UK’s research base and our leadership in helping developing countries tackle some of the greatest global issues of our time.

“At a time when the pace of scientific discovery and innovation is quickening, we are placing science and research at the heart of our Industrial Strategy to build on our strengths and maintain our status as science powerhouse.”

Andrew Thompson, GCRF Champion at Research Councils UK, said: “ ̽��ֱ��37 projects announced today build research capacity both here in the UK and in developing countries to address systemic development challenges, from African agriculture to sustainable cities, clean oceans, and green energy, to improved healthcare, food security, and gender equality.”

TIGR²ESS (Transforming India’s Green Revolution by Research and Empowerment for Sustainable food Supplies)

Lead: Professor Howard Griffiths (Department of Plant Sciences)

Talk of a second Green Revolution has been around for a while. ̽��ֱ��first – in India and other developing countries, in the 1960s – brought a massive increase in crop production that sustained the country’s mushrooming population. But now there are new pressures – not just the need to produce even more food, but to reduce the damage done by excessive use of pesticides, fertiliser and water in the face of climate change.

TIGR²ESS, a collaboration between UK and Indian scientists, seeks to frame the big question – how to bring about a second Green revolution – in all its breadth and depth. India is developing fast– agriculture needs to take account of urbanisation, for example, which has drawn so many away from the land. Smallholder farmers- particularly women- need smart technologies to sustain crop yields, and improve health and nutrition.

̽��ֱ��TIGR²ESS programme will assess these options, as well as supporting basic research programmes, and providing advice to local communities. There will be many opportunities for academic exchanges, mentoring and career development for scientists from both countries. Links with the relevant government ministries in India, plus industrial connections built into the programme, will hopefully turn the best recommendations into reality.

“We are extremely pleased that the TIGR²ESS programme will help to deliver our vision for partnerships with institutions in India to improve crop science and food security,” says Professor Howard Griffiths, Co-Chair of the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge’s Strategic Initiative in Global Food Security.

“Agriculture is feminizing. We need to ensure that state resources and services, and knowledge resources, are equally accessible to women farmers,” adds Dr V Selvam, MS Swaminathan Research Foundation, India, one of the collaborators.

CAPABLE (Cambridge Programme to Assist Bangladesh in Lifestyle and Environmental risk reduction)

Lead: Professor John Danesh (Department of Public Health and Primary Care)

Gathering a big group of people and studying their health in the long term can uncover game-changing facts. ̽��ֱ��British Doctors’ Study, for example, which began in 1951, revealed that smoking causes lung cancer. Imagine if the same could be done in a country facing a perfect storm of chronic health problems.

Bangladesh is admired worldwide for its success in cutting child mortality and fertility rate, yet it faces an onslaught of chronic diseases that arise from an interplay of factors ranging from arsenic-contaminated drinking water to iron-deficient foods and from air pollution to the rise of the western lifestyle.

CAPABLE has the ambitious goal of recruiting 100,000 people from landscapes ranging from the green paddy fields of rural Bangladesh to the slums of the densest city in the world – Dhaka. From their data, engineers, sociologists, health researchers and a host of other disciplines will try to understand how the risk factors interact – and build a model that can be used to test interventions before they are implemented.

“We aim to help develop simple, scalable and effective solutions to control major environmental and lifestyle risk factors in Bangladesh,” says Scientific Director of the CAPABLE programme Dr Rajiv Chowdhury from the Department of Public Health and Primary Care at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge.

Two major research collaborations led by the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge have been awarded almost £15 million in funding, the Minister of State for Universities and Science, Jo Johnson MP, announced today during a visit to Cambridge’s Sainsbury Laboratory.

CIAT

NP India burning 60

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. For image use please see separate credits above.

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution-ShareAlike

New evidence raises questions about the link between fatty acids and heart disease

jfp40 — Tue, 18 Mar 2014 09:31:29 +0000

A new study raises questions about current guidelines which generally restrict the consumption of saturated fats and encourage consumption of polyunsaturated fats to prevent heart disease. ̽��ֱ��research was published today, 18 March, in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine.

An international research collaboration led by the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge analysed existing cohort studies and randomised trials on coronary risk and fatty acid intake. They showed that current evidence does not support guidelines which restrict the consumption of saturated fats in order to prevent heart disease. ̽��ֱ��researchers also found insufficient support for guidelines which advocate the high consumption of polyunsaturated fats (such as omega 3 and omega 6) to reduce the risk of coronary disease.

Furthermore, when specific fatty acid subtypes (such as different types of omega 3) were examined, the effects of the fatty acids on cardiovascular risk varied even within the same broad ‘family’ – questioning the existing dietary guidelines that focus principally on the total amount of fat from saturated or unsaturated rather than the food sources of the fatty acid subtypes.

Gates Cambridge Scholar Dr Rajiv Chowdhury, the lead author of the research at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge, said: “These are interesting results that potentially stimulate new lines of scientific inquiry and encourage careful reappraisal of our current nutritional guidelines.

“Cardiovascular disease, in which the principal manifestation is coronary heart disease, remains the single leading cause of death and disability worldwide. In 2008, more than 17 million people died from a cardiovascular cause globally. With so many affected by this illness, it is critical to have appropriate prevention guidelines which are informed by the best available scientific evidence.”

For the meta-analysis, the researchers analysed data from 72 unique studies with over 600,000 participants from 18 nations. ̽��ֱ��investigators found that total saturated fatty acid, whether measured in the diet or in the bloodstream as a biomarker, was not associated with coronary disease risk in the observational studies. Similarly, when analysing the studies that involved assessments of the consumption of total monounsaturated fatty acids, long-chain omega-3 and omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids, there were no significant associations between consumption and cardiovascular risk.

Interestingly, the investigators found that different subtypes of circulating long-chain omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids had different associations with coronary risk, with some evidence that circulating levels of eicosapentaenoic and docosahexaenoic acids (two main types of long-chain omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids), and arachidonic acid (an omega-6 fat) are each associated with lower coronary risk.

Similarly, within saturated fatty acid, the researchers found weak positive associations between circulating palmitic and stearic acids (found largely in palm oil and animal fats, respectively) and cardiovascular disease, whereas circulating margaric acid (a dairy fat) significantly reduced the risk of cardiovascular disease.

Additionally, when the authors investigated the effects of omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acid supplementations on reducing coronary disease in the randomised controlled trials, they did not find any significant effects – indicating a lack of benefit from these nutrients.

Commenting on how these findings relate to the consumption of red meat, Chowdhury added: “Last year, two seminal papers very convincingly showed that the harm observed in red meat for heart disease risk can, in fact, be attributed to another harmful chemical (L-carnitine) abundant in red meat rather than the long-supposed saturated fat. Unless we have more evidence, higher consumption of red meat should still be considered harmful, but it’s just that the saturates may not be the principal explanation, as is traditionally perceived, for the harmful cardiovascular effects of red meat.”

Professor Jeremy Pearson, Associate Medical Director at the British Heart Foundation, which helped fund the study, said: “This analysis of existing data suggests there isn’t enough evidence to say that a diet rich in polyunsaturated fats but low in saturated fats reduces the risk of cardiovascular disease. But large scale clinical studies are needed, as these researchers recommend, before making a conclusive judgement.

“Alongside taking any necessary medication, the best way to stay heart healthy is to stop smoking, stay active, and ensure our whole diet is healthy – and this means considering not only the fats in our diet but also our intake of salt, sugar and fruit and vegetables.”

Study finds that the current level of evidence does not clearly support guidelines restricting saturated fatty acid consumption to reduce coronary risk nor does it support high consumption of polyunsaturated fats – such as omega 3 or omega 6 – to reduce coronary heart disease.

In 2008, more than 17 million people died from a cardiovascular cause globally. With so many affected by this illness, it is critical to have appropriate prevention guidelines which are informed by the best available scientific evidence.

Dr Rajiv Chowdhury

Jepster

Heart-shaped French toast

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Licence. If you use this content on your site please link back to this page.

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike

̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge - Rajiv Chowdhury

Long-term strategies to control COVID-19 pandemic must treat health and economy as equally important

Sustained mitigation

Zonal lockdowns

Rolling lockdowns

Rolling 50/30 day cycle of lockdown and relaxation could be a useful option for managing COVID-19, model suggests

Experts warn of cardiovascular risk from heavy metal pollution

Cambridge-led collaborations aim to tackle global food security and public health challenges

TIGR2ESS (Transforming India’s Green Revolution by Research and Empowerment for Sustainable food Supplies)

Lead: Professor Howard Griffiths (Department of Plant Sciences)

CAPABLE (Cambridge Programme to Assist Bangladesh in Lifestyle and Environmental risk reduction)

Lead: Professor John Danesh (Department of Public Health and Primary Care)

New evidence raises questions about the link between fatty acids and heart disease

TIGR²ESS (Transforming India’s Green Revolution by Research and Empowerment for Sustainable food Supplies)