Cross-sectional studycited by the Tayebat archiveabstract only checked★ key study A-WHT-09 in-depth review
Grains and belly fat
Whole- and refined-grain intakes are differentially associated with abdominal visceral and subcutaneous adiposity in healthy adults: the Framingham Heart Study.
Overview
McKeown NM et al.. Am J Clin Nutr 2010 · PMID 20881074 · DOI 10.3945/ajcn.2009.29106
More refined grains, more visceral fat; more whole grains, less.
Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate
Plain-language summary
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Grains and fat depots
- How was the study done?
Cross-sectional CT study
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
2834 adults
- What was actually found?
Refined grains with more VAT
- How large was the observed effect?
1928 vs 1727 cm3
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Possible link only
- What are the study's limitations?
Single time point
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Weak support
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Moderate
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Cause
Scientific in-depth review
1. Full reference
- Authors
- McKeown NM, Troy LM, Jacques PF, Hoffmann U, O'Donnell CJ, Fox CS
- Journal
- Am J Clin Nutr
- Year
- 2010
- Identifier
- PMID 20881074 DOI 10.3945/ajcn.2009.29106 · PMC2954448
- Verification
- verified – PubMed E-utilities efetch, 2026-10-25
- Retracted
- no
- Corrections
- none
- Extent checked
- abstract only
- Conflicts of interest and funding
None stated; NIH/NHLBI.
2. Research question
Grain intake and SAT/VAT
3. Study design and population
- Study design
- Cross-sectional study – Cross-sectional (Framingham)
- Population
2834 adults 32-83 y
- Country
USA
- Period
not stated in abstract
- Sample size
2834
4. Methods and endpoints
- Exposure / intervention
Whole and refined grain (FFQ)
- Comparator
Lowest quintile
- Endpoints
CT-measured SAT and VAT
- Statistical methods
Multivariable
5. Actual results
- Results
Whole grain: VAT 1883 vs 1563 cm3 (P trend <0.001). Refined grain: SAT 2748 vs 2934 cm3 (P 0.01), VAT 1727 vs 1928 cm3 (P trend <0.001). VAT associations remained when SAT and VAT evaluated jointly.
- Absolute risks
not applicable
- Authors' conclusion
Whole grain associated with lower VAT; refined grains with higher VAT; mechanisms need research.
6. Strengths
- CT measurement
7. Weaknesses
- Cross-sectional
- FFQ
8. Risk of bias
- Orienting tool
- ROBINS-E
- Type of assessment
- simplified assessment (abstract only)
- Full formal assessment
- no
- Overall risk of bias
- high
- Rationale
Cross-sectional; reverse causation and confounding.
9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation
Group means; no causal inference.
10. Relevance to the specific claim
Supports C-WHT-06 weakly.
11. Independent contrary findings
12. Transferability to Germany and Europe
Moderate.
13. Overall methodological judgement
Cross-sectional association.
| Multidimensional assessment | |
|---|---|
| Authenticity of the source | verified |
| Methodological quality | moderate |
| Risk of bias | high |
| Precision of results | moderate |
| Directness | direct |
| Reproducibility | partly replicated |
| Consistency with the overall evidence | mixed |
| Regional transferability | moderate |
| Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive) | partly correct but over-interpreted |
14. Open questions
15. Linked fact checks
- Refined-grain eaters carry more visceral fat and are more prone to obesity and metabolic syndrome. – Studies supporting the claim
Use by the Tayebat archive
Note: according to the archive, the studies were compiled by the archive operators. Whether Dr. Elawady himself cited this study is not established.
- What the archive says about the study
Refined-grain eaters carry more visceral fat, the most dangerous depot.
- A. What was actually studied?
Cross-sectional association.
- B. What did the authors find?
As results.
- C. What conclusions do the authors themselves draw?
Further research needed.
- D. What does the archive derive from it?
Presents as effect.
- E. Is this derivation scientifically justified?
Partly: cross-sectional design does not allow 'refined grains cause visceral fat'.
- Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)
- partly correct but over-interpreted