Dietary fat intake as risk factor for the development of diabetes: multinational, multicenter study of the Mediterranean Group for the Study of Diabetes (MGSD).

OBJECTIVE To investigate the role of dietary factors in the development of type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In the context of the Multinational MGSD Nutrition Study, three groups of subjects were studied: 204 subjects with recently diagnosed diabetes (RDM), 42 subjects with undiagnosed diabetes (UDM) (American Diabetes Association criteria-fasting plasma glucose [FPG] > or =126 mg/dl), and 55 subjects with impaired fasting glucose (IFG) (FPG > or =110 and <126 mg/dl). Each group was compared with a control group of 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 (49.0 vs. 14.2%; P < 0.001), exercised less (exercise index 53.5 vs. 64.4; P < 0.01), 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 more and the plant-to-animal fat ratio was lower (1.5 +/- 0.1 vs. 1.8 +/- 0.1; P < 0.01). UDM more frequently had a family history of diabetes (38.1 vs. 19.0%; P < 0.05) and sedentary professions (58.5 vs. 34.1%; P < 0.05), carbohydrates contributed less to their energy intake (47.6 +/- 1.7 vs. 52.8 +/- 1.4%; P < 0.05), total fat (34.7 +/- 1.5 vs. 30.4 +/- 1.2%; P < 0.05) and animal fat (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.