Dietary fat intake as a risk factor for the development of diabetes. Multinational, multicenter study of the Mediterranean Group for the Study of Diabetes (MGDS)

In the context of the Multinational MGSD Nutrition Study, three groups of subjects were studied: 204 subjects with recently diagnosed diabetes(RDM),42subjectswithundiagnoseddiabetes(UDM)(AmericanDiabetesAssociation criteria—fasting plasma glucose [FPG] 126 mg/dl), and 55 subjects with impaired fasting glucose(IFG)(FPG 110and126mg/dl).Eachgroupwascomparedwithacontrolgroupof nondiabetic subjects, matched one by one for center, sex, age, and BMI. Nutritional habits were evaluated by a dietary history method, validated against the 3-day diet diary. In RDM, the questionnaire referred to the nutritional habits before the diagnosis of diabetes. Demographic data were collected, and anthropometrical and biochemical measurements were taken. RESULTS— Compared with control subjects, RDM more frequently had a family history of diabetes(49.0vs.14.2%;P0.001),exercisedless(exerciseindex53.5vs.64.4;P0.01),and more frequently had sedentary professions (47.5 vs. 27.4%; P 0.001). Carbohydrates contributed less to their energy intake (53.5 vs. 55.1%; P 0.05), whereas total fat (30.2 0.5 vs. 27.8 0.5%; P 0.001) and animal fat (12.2 0.3 vs. 10.8 0.3%; P 0.01) contributed moreandtheplant-to-animalfatratiowaslower(1.50.1vs.1.80.1;P0.01).UDMmore frequentlyhadafamilyhistoryofdiabetes(38.1vs.19.0%;P0.05)andsedentaryprofessions (58.5vs.34.1%;P0.05),carbohydratescontributedlesstotheirenergyintake(47.61.7vs. 52.81.4%;P0.05),totalfat(34.71.5vs.30.41.2%;P0.05)andanimalfat(14.2 0.9 vs. 10.6 0.7%; P 0.05) contributed more, and the plant-to-animal fat ratio was lower (1.6 0.2 vs. 2.3 0.4; P 0.05). IFG differed only in the prevalence of family history of diabetes (32.7 vs. 16.4%; P 0.05). CONCLUSIONS— Our data support the view that increased animal fat intake is associated with the presence of diabetes.