TABLE 3.
β-Coefficients (95% CIs) of the associations between dietary protein intake in 10-g/d increments and insulin resistance in the AHS-2 calibration substudy total population and stratified by waist circumference1
| Regression calibration | Multiple linear regression | |
|---|---|---|
| Total (n = 548) | ||
| Total protein | 0.11 (0.02, 0. 21) | 0.07 (0.01, 0.12) |
| Animal protein | 0.11 (0.01, 0.20) | 0.08 (0.03, 0.14) |
| Plant protein | 0.00 (−0.19, 0.19) | 0.00 (−0.07, 0.08) |
| AP intake ratio | 1.82 (0.80, 2.84) | 1.30 (0.65, 1.95) |
| Normal waist circumference (n = 314) | ||
| Total protein | 0.10 (−0.03, 0.23) | 0.07 (−0.001, 0.14) |
| Animal protein | 0.09 (−0.03, 0.23) | 0.08 (0.01, 0.16) |
| Plant protein | −0.06 (−0.33, 0.19) | −0.01(−0.12, 0.09) |
| AP intake ratio | 2.52 (0.93, 4.11) | 1.70 (0.80, 2.60) |
| High waist circumference (n = 234) | ||
| Total protein | 0.13 (−0.01, 0.27) | 0.07 (−0.008, 0.15) |
| Animal protein | 0.12 (−0.02, 0.26) | 0.08 (0.00, 0.15) |
| Plant protein | 0.06 (−0.24, 0.37) | 0.01 (−0.10, 0.13) |
| AP intake ratio | 1.27 (−0.06, 2.62) | 0.90 (0.04, 1.85) |
1
Values for animal and plant protein were adjusted for age, sex, waist circumference, ethnicity, physical activity, dietary PUFA to SFA ratio, dietary glycemic load, type of dietary protein, and energy. AHS-2, Adventist Health Study 2; AP, animal-to-plant protein.