Oxfordshire's local veggie group RSS-Button

Article

Do Vegetarians Live Longer?

(These notes are from a talk given by Paul Appleby, Secretary of Oxford Vegetarians, to members of Oxford Green Party Students at the Friends Meeting House, Oxford, on Friday 1 March 2002, and at an Oxford Vegetarians speaker meeting at the same venue on Wednesday 20 March 2002.)

It is often claimed that vegetarians enjoy greater longevity than non-vegetarians. Is there any truth in this claim? If so, for how much longer do vegetarians live, on average, than non-vegetarians, and are the benefits attributable to diet alone, or to other lifestyle factors?

When studying longevity, one approach is to simply compare the average (or mean) age at death of one population with that of another. This approach works well when making international comparisons, but is not suitable for 'within-population' comparisons because governments do not generally record the diets of their citizens. A more common approach is to compare thedeath rates (mortality) of population groups. This approach involves studying a large group of people in what is called a prospective or cohort study. At the beginning of the study participants complete a questionnaire describing their diet and other aspects of their lifestyle. Participants are then 'followed-up' over a period of time and details of any deaths and their causes are recorded.

Statistical methods are then used to compare death rates (mortality) between the cohort as a whole and some reference population, or between different groups within the cohort, for example, between vegetarians and non-vegetarians. Relative mortality can then be expressed as a death rate ratio (DRR) for one group (e.g. vegetarians) compared with the reference group (e.g. non-vegetarians), together with its 95% confidence interval (95% CI - a measure of how accurately the DRR is estimated).

Several prospective studies have recruited large numbers of Western vegetarians (and comparable non-vegetarians), enabling estimates of the relative mortality of vegetarians to be made:

  • Adventist Mortality (California, 1959-60)
  • Health Food Shoppers (UK, 1973-79)
  • Adventist Health (California, 1976-80)
  • Heidelberg (Germany, 1978-81)
  • Oxford Vegetarian (UK, 1980-84)
  • EPIC-Oxford (UK, 1993-2001)

Mortality for the vegetarians in these studies may be compared with death rates in the population from which they were recruited by calculating a Standardised Mortality Ratio (SMR). For example, SMRs for vegetarians in the Health Food Shoppers study and the Oxford Vegetarian study are shown below:

Study Group SMR (95% CI)
Health Food Shoppers Veg 0.59 (0.55-0.63)
Oxford Vegetarian Veg 0.51 (0.47-0.56)

These results show that the vegetarians in these studies are dying at about half the rate of their contemporaries in England & Wales (the reference population) as a whole.

However, SMRs can be misleading because of the "healthy volunteer effect" (sick people do not usually volunteer for long-term studies of health) and because the cohort may not be representative of the reference population in many respects.  For example, vegetarians are less likely to smoke and are more likely to be from the middle classes than the 'average' Briton. Therefore, it is not surprising to find that the 'health-conscious' non-vegetarians in these studies have similarly low mortality, as we see when we add their SMRs to the table:

Study Group SMR (95% CI)
Health Food Shoppers Veg 0.59 (0.55-0.63)
Health Food Shoppers Non-veg 0.59 (0.56-0.62)
Oxford Vegetarian Veg 0.51 (0.47-0.56)
Oxford Vegetarian Non-veg 0.54 (0.49-0.58)

A better approach is to compare death rates for vegetarians and non-vegetarians within studies. Within-study comparisons have been made in several of the studies listed, with varying results.

Individual data from the first five studies listed above were pooled in a collaborative analysis of mortality in vegetarians and non-vegetarians. Data were available for 76,000 persons of whom nearly 28,000 were vegetarians. There were 8,330 deaths between the ages of 16 to 89 after an average of 10.6 years follow-up, allowing accurate estimates to be made of the DRR for several common causes of death, as well as for all causes combined.

Death rate ratios for vegetarians compared with non-vegetarians, adjusted for age, sex and smoking, were calculated for each of the 5 studies and then combined to give an 'all studies' DRR. The results for all-cause mortality were as follows:

Study No.of deaths DRR (95% CI)
Adventist Mortality

1635

0.83 (0.76-0.92)
Health Food Shoppers

2127

1.11 (1.02-1.21)
Adventist Health

3564

0.80 (0.74-0.87)
Heidelberg

185

1.17 (0.85-1.63)
Oxford Vegetarian

819

1.00 (0.87-1.15)
All studies

8330

0.95 (0.82-1.11)

The results of the collaborative analysis suggest that vegetarians may have a lower overall mortality than comparable non-vegetarians (by about 5%), perhaps enough to confer a slightly greater life expectancy.

In the same analysis, vegetarians were found to have a significantly lower mortality for ischaemic heart disease (heart attack), but not for other common causes of death, as shown below:

Cause of death No.of deaths DRR (95% CI)
Ischaemic heart disease

2264

0.76 (0.62-0.94)
Cerebrovascular disease (stroke)

909

0.93 (0.74-1.17)
Colorectal cancer

278

0.99 (0.77-1.27)
Breast cancer

210

0.95 (0.55-1.63)
Lung cancer

203

0.84 (0.59-1.18)
Prostate cancer

137

0.91 (0.60-1.39)
Stomach cancer

107

1.02 (0.64-1.62)
All other causes combined

4222

1.06 (0.90-1.24)

A recent re-analysis of mortality data from the two British studies found no differences in overall death rates between vegetarian and non-vegetarian participants. The researchers concluded that the low mortality of British vegetarians compared with the general population "may be attributed to non-dietary lifestyle factors such as a low prevalence of smoking and a generally high socio-economic status, or to aspects of the diet other than the avoidance of meat and fish".

A more positive outcome for vegetarians was found in a recent analysis of data from the Adventist Health Study which predicted life expectancy in Seventh-day Adventists following different behaviour patterns. The researchers found that a combination of different lifestyle choices could influence life expectancy by as much as 10 years. Among the lifestyle choices investigated, a vegetarian diet was estimated to confer an extra 1½ to 2 years of life. The researchers concluded that "the life expectancies of California Adventist men and women are higher than those of any other well-described natural population" at 78.5 years for men and 82.3 years for women. The estimated life expectancies of vegetarian California Adventists were 80.2 years for men and 84.8 years for women. Other beneficial lifestyle choices included high nut consumption and a high level of exercise.

In conclusion

  • vegetarians have low mortality compared with the general population
  • much of this benefit is attributable to non-dietary lifestyle factors such as the avoidance of smoking and a high socio-economic status
  • vegetarians have similar mortality to comparable non-vegetarians, although a vegetarian diet may confer an additional 1-2 years of life (at least among US Adventists).

Of course, life expectancy is not the only measure of health status, and other studies have suggested that vegetarians may enjoy a number of health benefits including being generally slimmer and having lower blood cholesterol levels than non-vegetarians.

So, should you be a vegetarian for health reasons? When asked this question, the Nobel-prize winning author Isaac Bashevis Singer replied: "Yes, for the health of the chicken! "

References:

  • Key et al. Mortality in vegetarians and non-vegetarians:detailed findings from a collaborative analysis of 5 prospective studies. Am J Clin Nutr 1999; 70(suppl): 516S-24S.
  • Key et al. Health benefits of a vegetarian diet. Proc Nutr Soc 1999; 58: 271-5.
  • Fraser & Shavlik. Ten years of life - is it a matter of choice? Arch Intern Med 2001; 161: 1645-52.
  • Appleby et al. Mortality in British vegetarians. Public Health Nutr 2002; 5: 29-36.

Paul Appleby

Author: Paul Appleby

Bookmark and Share

Comments

Peter J Chapman, United Kingdom on 25th Jun 2011 19:03

  • Rating 3/5

we all have a duty to be responsible to humanity and if consuming animal products is killing us we need to be more transparent

Report this comment.

Joe Espinosa, Chicago, IL, USA on 10th Jun 2011 18:54

Causing others to suffer and die for our pleasure is a pretty selfish thing to do. We can live quite well without doing this to others.

Report this comment.

anon on 12th Feb 2011 19:39

I happened upon your website so that I could educate myself on vegan/vegetarian diet. But your colors are so painful that I can't look at the type long enough to read it! You lost a reader...

Report this comment.

annabelle kerswell, shropshire on 18th Dec 2010 15:48

normally non veges eat aload of processed meat made from the anus of a dead pig, nowonder they die younger as well as being diet cola swigging couch potatoes. i am not vegetarian ecause i cant survive on a diet of methyllparaben soakedsoya bean tvp sorry my dad breeds soay sheep and kills thamale lambs each year he cant use for imbreeding wit thier mothers and when on thet deit at home i was exellent at sport now i eat fish oil.

Report this comment.

Add your comment

 Comment    Ratings and comments 

login or ...

If you supply an email your are less likely to be marked as spam. We will not sell or give away your email address.

If you supply an email address we can inform you of when your suggestion has been added and you can be the first to review it.

Security code. To prove you are human please enter the words shown:

Audit

Story posted by on 2008-11-03 21:25:06.

Story last updated by on 2008-11-18 15:56:03.

Login

Sign in or register

Create your own free veggie campaigning web site on The ActiVeg Network.