Cohort studyindependent cross-checkfull text checked★ key study I-GRN-121 in-depth review

Chips and fries were the foods most linked to weight gain

Changes in diet and lifestyle and long-term weight gain in women and men.

Overview

Mozaffarian D et al.. N Engl J Med 2011 · PMID 21696306 · DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa1014296

In 120,877 US adults, each extra daily serving of potato chips was linked to 0.8 kg and French fries to 1.5 kg more weight gain over 4 years.

Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate

Original publication

Plain-language summary

Study explained simply
What did the researchers want to find out?

Find foods linked to weight gain.

How was the study done?

Three cohorts, change analysis.

How many people, animals or samples were studied?

120,877 adults.

What was actually found?

Chips, potatoes, sugary drinks, meats linked to gain.

How large was the observed effect?

Chips +1.69 lb/4 y per daily serving.

What do the results mean in everyday life?

Chips and fries are not neutral foods.

What are the study's limitations?

Self-report.

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Contradicts unrestricted chips and fries; supports a small refined-grain effect.

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

Moderate.

What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

Cannot prove causation.

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
Mozaffarian D et al.
Journal
N Engl J Med
Year
2011
Identifier
PMID 21696306 DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa1014296 · PMC3151731
Verification
verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-26; Crossref works API 2026-10-26
Retracted
no
Corrections
none
Extent checked
full text
Conflicts of interest and funding

NIH grants and Searle Scholars Program; first author reported consulting/lecture fees from food companies (full text).

2. Research question

Which dietary and lifestyle changes are associated with long-term weight gain?

3. Study design and population

Study design
Cohort study – Three prospective cohorts, change-on-change analysis with inverse-variance pooling
Population

US women and men free of chronic disease and not obese at baseline

Country

USA

Period

1986-2006

Sample size

120,877

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Free of chronic disease, not obese

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

Changes in intake of specific foods per 4-year period

Comparator

No change

Endpoints

Weight change per 4 years

Statistical methods

Multivariable linear regression, pooled

5. Actual results

Results

Average gain 3.35 lb per 4 years. Per increased daily serving: potato chips +1.69 lb, potatoes +1.28 lb (French fries +3.35 lb; boiled/baked/mashed +0.57 lb), refined grains +0.39 lb, whole grains -0.37 lb, fruits -0.49 lb, nuts -0.57 lb, yogurt -0.82 lb (full text table).

Absolute risks

not reported

Authors' conclusion

Specific dietary and lifestyle factors are independently associated with long-term weight gain.

6. Strengths

  • Very large, repeated measures
  • Within-person change analysis reduces confounding

7. Weaknesses

  • Self-reported weight and diet
  • Observational
  • Portion sizes not fully captured (authors)

8. Risk of bias

Orienting tool
ROBINS-E
Type of assessment
simplified assessment (abstract only)
Full formal assessment
no
Overall risk of bias
some concerns
Rationale

Measurement error and residual confounding.

9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation

Chips +0.77 kg, French fries +1.52 kg, refined grains +0.18 kg per 4 years per extra daily serving (stats/C-GRN-07).

10. Relevance to the specific claim

Potato chips and French fries were among the foods most strongly associated with weight gain; refined grains modestly.

11. Independent contrary findings

Associations; small per-serving effects.

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

Moderate.

13. Overall methodological judgement

Influential cohort evidence.

Multidimensional assessment
Multidimensional assessment
Authenticity of the sourceverified
Methodological qualitymoderate
Risk of biassome concerns
Precision of resultshigh
Directnessdirect
Reproducibilitypartly replicated
Consistency with the overall evidenceconsistent
Regional transferabilitymoderate
Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)not applicable

14. Open questions

Causality.

15. Linked fact checks