Rice consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease: results from a pooled analysis of 3 U.S. cohorts1–4

Background: Health concerns have been raised about rice consump-tion, which may significantly contribute to arsenic exposure. How-ever, little is known regarding whether habitual rice consumption is associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Objective:We examined prospectively the association of white rice and brown rice consumption with CVD risk. Design: We followed a total of 207,556 women and men [73,228 women from the Nurses ’ Health Study (1984–2010), 92,158 women from the Nurses ’ Health Study II (1991–2011), and 42,170 men from the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study (1986–2010)] who were free of CVD and cancer at baseline. Validated semiquan-titative food-frequency questionnaires were used to assess consump-tion of white rice, brown rice, and other food items. Fatal and nonfatal CVD (coronary artery disease and stroke) was confirmed by medical records or self-reports. Results: During 4,393,130 person-years of follow-up, 12,391 cases of CVD were identified. After adjustment for major CVD risk factors, including demographics, lifestyle, and other dietary intakes, rice con-sumption was not associated with CVD risk. The multivariable-adjuted HR of developing CVD comparing $5 servings/wk with,1 serving/wk was 0.98 (95 % CI: 0.84, 1.14) for white rice, 1.01 (0.79, 1.28) for brown rice, and 0.99 (0.90, 1.08) for total rice. To minimize the potential impact of racial difference in rice consump-tion, we restricted the analyses to whites only and obtained similar results: the HRs of CVD for $5 servings/wk compared with,1 serving/wk were 1.04 (95 % CI: 0.88, 1.22) for white rice and 1.01 (0.78, 1.31) for brown rice. Conclusions: Greater habitual consumption of white rice or brown rice is not associated with CVD risk. These findings suggest that rice consumption may not pose a significant CVD risk among the U.S. population when consumed at current amounts. More prospective studies are needed to explore these associations in other popula-tions. Am J Clin Nutr 2015;101:164–72