Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine the association between fruit, vegetable, and fruit juice intake and development of type 2 diabetes. The worldwide burden of type 2 diabetes has increased rapidly in tandem with increases in obesity. The most recent estimate for the number of people with diabetes worldwide in 2000 was 171 million, and this number is projected to increase to at least 366 million by the year 2030.[1] Fruit and vegetable consumption has been associated with decreased incidence of and mortality from a variety of health outcomes including obesity, hypertension, and cardiovascular diseases in epidemiological studies.[2-4] However, few prospective studies have examined the relationship between fruit and vegetable intake and risk of diabetes, and the results are not entirely consistent.[5-10] Differences in the nutrient contents of fruits and vegetables by group could lead to differences in health effects. Furthermore, the role of fruit juices could be important and has not been well studied. Although fruit juices may have antioxidant activity,[11] they lack fiber, are less satiating, and tend to have high sugar content. To further explore the role of fruit and vegetable consumption in the development of diabetes, we examined the association between intake of all fruits and vegetables, specific groups of fruits and vegetables, and fruit juices among women enrolled in the Nurses' Health Study diet cohort. The Nurses' Health Study was established in 1976 with responses of 121,700 female registered nurses between the ages of 30 and 55 years from 11 different U.S. states to an initial mailed questionnaire regarding medical history, lifestyle, diet, and other health practices. Follow-up questionnaires were mailed every 2 years to update information on health-related behavior and determine incident disease, including diabetes and other chronic diseases. The diet cohort was established in 1980 with 98,462 participants. Of those, 81,757 completed the 1984 questionnaire, had a total energy intake that was between 600 and 3,500 kcal, and left fewer than 12 food items blank (n = 16,705 excluded). We also excluded women who died before the return of the 1984 questionnaire (n = 1); who had diagnosed cardiovascular disease (n = 2,681), cancer (n = 4,218), or diabetes (n = 2,116) at the assessment in 1984; and who were missing date of diagnosis of diabetes (n = 1,395). After these exclusions, a total of 71,346 women (72.5% of the diet cohort) contributed to the analysis, with follow-up completed in June of 2002. A semiquantitative food-frequency questionnaire (FFQ) was included with the general health questionnaire in 1980, 1984, 1986, 1990, 1994, and 1998. The 1980 FFQ contained 61 items, with 6 questions on fruit consumption, 11 on vegetable consumption, and 3 on potato consumption. In 1984, the FFQ was substantially expanded to include 16 questions on fruit consumption, 28 on vegetable consumption, and 3 on potato consumption. In this analysis, we considered 1984 as the baseline because the FFQ remained consistent afterward. Participants were asked to report the frequencies of their consumption of fruit and vegetable items during the previous year. For each fruit or vegetable, a standard unit or portion size was specified. Nine responses were possible, ranging from "never" to "six or more times per day".[12] The response to each food item was converted to average daily intakes and then summed to compute the total intake (fruit juices were not included in total fruit intake or total fruit and vegetable intake). Average daily intakes of foods in specific groups (green leafy vegetables, legumes, and fruit juices) were assessed. Green leafy vegetables included spinach, kale, and lettuces; legumes included tofu, peas, and beans; and fruit juices included apple, orange, grapefruit, and other fruit juices. These categories were modified from those used in a different cohort in an earlier report.[13] Potato differs from all other commonly consumed vegetables in energy density, nutrient density, glycemic index and load, and the likelihood of its presence in fast food. Therefore, we did not include potatoes in any vegetable category. The validity of the FFQ has been evaluated in previous studies.[14,15] Data on BMI, physical activity, smoking status, alcohol use, postmenopausal hormone therapy, family history of diabetes, and physician-diagnosed hypertension and high cholesterol were self-reported on biennial questionnaires. BMI (measured as weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters) was calculated by using updated weight information for each time period. The primary end point was development of type 2 diabetes. At each 2-year cycle, participants were asked whether they had a diagnosis of diabetes. For each self-reported diagnosis of diabetes, a supplemental questionnaire was sent, asking about diabetes symptoms, diagnostic tests, and treatments. A diagnosis of diabetes was accepted when any one of the following criteria was met: 1) one or more classic symptoms of diabetes and reported elevated plasma glucose levels (fasting plasma glucose ≥7.8 mmol/l [140 mg/dl] or randomly measured plasma glucose ≥11.1 mmol/l [200 mg/dl]), 2) reported elevated plasma glucose on at least two occasions in the absence of symptoms, or 3) treatment with oral hypoglycemic medication or insulin. These criteria for diagnosis of diabetes are consistent with those proposed by the National Diabetes Data Group[16] because most cases were diagnosed before 1997. For diagnoses of diabetes established after 1998, the American Diabetes Association criteria (reported fasting plasma glucose ≥7 mmol/l [126 mg/dl]) were used. We excluded women with type 1 diabetes or gestational diabetes mellitus. The diagnosis of type 2 diabetes by the use of the supplemental questionnaire has been validated in this cohort.[17] Person-time of follow up was contributed by each eligible participant from the date of return of the 1984 questionnaire to the date of diagnosis of type 2 diabetes, 1 June 2002, or death from other causes. To reduce within-person variation and best represent long-term usual diet, the cumulative average frequency was calculated from all available questionnaires up to the start of each 2 year follow-up period.[18] Participants were divided into quintiles by frequency of intake to avoid assumptions about the shape of the dose-response relationship. Cox proportional hazards models with time-dependent variables were used to adjust for potential confounders, including BMI, family history of diabetes, smoking, postmenopausal hormone use, alcohol intake, and physical activity. We also adjusted for dietary variables that have been related to diabetes in this cohort, including intakes of processed meats, potatoes, nuts, coffee, sodas, and whole grains.[19-24] The proportional hazards assumption was tested by modeling the interaction of time with fruit and vegetable intake. To assess the linearity of trends, median values of intake for quintiles were treated as continuous in Cox regression models. Statistical analyses were performed with SAS software (version 9.0; SAS Institute, Cary, NC). The baseline characteristics of the study participants by quintile of total fruit and vegetable intake are presented in Table 1 . Women who consumed more fruits and vegetables were older, were less likely to smoke cigarettes, and were more likely to exercise regularly and use hormone replacement therapy than their counterparts who did not consume fruits and vegetables as frequently. The median intake of fruit in this population throughout the follow-up period was 1.08 servings/day, whereas that for vegetables was 3.09 servings/day. Over the 18 years of follow-up (1,203,994 person-years) Multivariate- To further investigate the association between fruit juice consumption and development of type 2 diabetes, we subdivided fruit juices into apple, grapefruit, and orange juices and examined them individually in separate models. Among participants consuming >3 cups of apple juice/ month compared with those who consumed <1 cup of apple juice/month, the HR was 1.15 (95% CI 1.08-1.22; Ptrend < 0.001). The corresponding HR for grapefruit juice consumers was 1.14 (1.05-1.23; Ptrend = 0.001). Among participants consuming ≥1 cup of orange juice/day compared with those who consumed <1 cup of orange juice/month, the HR was 1.24 (1.10-1.39; Ptrend < 0.001). To situate our results for fruit juice intake in the context of results for other beverages, we also examined intake of colas (sugar-sweetened and low-calorie) We also examined whether the relationship between fruit juice intake and diabetes was affected by BMI and physical activity. In multivariate- In this large prospective cohort of middle-aged American women, overall fruit and vegetable intake was not associated with the development of type 2 diabetes. Intake of fruit juices was positively associated with incidence of type 2 diabetes, whereas intake of whole fruits and green leafy vegetables was inversely associated. These associations were independent of known risk factors for type 2 diabetes, including age, BMI, family history, smoking, postmenopausal hormone use, alcohol intake, physical activity, smoking, total energy intake, and consumption of whole grains, nuts, processed meats, coffee, and potatoes. This study is one of the first to prospectively examine fruit juice intake and the risk of type 2 diabetes. The positive association between fruit juice consumption and diabetes risk may relate to the relative lack of fiber and other phytochemicals, the liquid state, and the high sugar load. The rapid delivery of a large sugar load, without many other components that are a part of whole fruits, may be an important mechanism by which fruit juices could contribute to the development of diabetes. Fructose consumption has also been implicated in the development of many manifestations of the insulin resistance syndrome.[25,26] Frequent consumption of fruit juices may contribute to a higher dietary glycemic load, which has been positively associated with diabetes in this cohort.[27] Fruit and green leafy vegetables may contribute to a decreased incidence of type 2 diabetes through their low energy density, low glycemic load, and high fiber and micronutrient content.[28] In particular, green leafy vegetables may supply magnesium, which has been inversely linked to the development of type 2 diabetes in women.[8] We searched MEDLINE to January 2008 to identify prospective studies of fruit and vegetable intake and risk of type 2 diabetes. In all, we identified six studies that are summarized in Table 3 .[5-10] Many of these studies had small sample sizes, combined fruit juice intake with whole fruit intake, and did not include updated measures of dietary intake during the study. Other investigations have related the consumption of sugar-sweetened or nondiet colas, other sodas, and fruit punches to development of type 2 diabetes.[23] In the Nurses' Health Study II cohort, which comprised 91,249 women followed for 8 years from 1991-1999, women consuming at least 1 sugar-sweetened soft drink/day were 1.83 times more likely (95% CI 1.42-2.36; Ptrend < 0.001) to develop type 2 diabetes compared with those who consumed this type of beverage less than once per month, after adjustment for potential confounders. Consumption of fruit punches was also associated with increased diabetes risk (multivariate- The primary limitation of our study was the potential for bias due to measurement error. We attempted to reduce measurement error in assessing long-term diet by using the average of all available measurements of diet up to the start of each 2-year follow-up interval.[18] In addition, although our results for fruit juice consumption and type 2 diabetes are a relatively new finding, those for green leafy vegetable consumption have been replicated in at least one large study using different dietary assessment methods that should have differently structured measurement errors.[10] The possibility of unknown confounding, which cannot be ruled out in any observational study, must also be acknowledged. The FFQ used in this study does not distinguish between canned and fresh fruits, which have different nutrient profiles and may be associated with different food habits. Moreover, the food supply has changed significantly over the past decades, whereas our FFQ has not; nevertheless, the most common foods eaten in the U.S. population are encompassed in our instrument. There may be underestimation of type 2 diabetes by self-report; however, our population is highly educated about medical conditions, so self-report error should be substantially less than that in a general population. Fasting glucose criteria for diabetes were lowered in 1997, possibly contributing to underestimation in this study. Also, it is possible that women may have misreported fruit punches as juices. Fruit punches have been associated with an increased incidence of diabetes in U.S. women.[23] Because of the homogeneity of our population, generalizability of these results to women of other race and ethnicity bears further examination. Our findings of a positive association of fruit juice intake with hazard of diabetes suggest that caution should be observed in replacing some beverages with fruit juices in an effort to provide healthier options. Moreover, the same caution applies to the recommendation that 100% fruit juice be considered a serving of fruit as it is in the present national dietary guidelines.[30] In general, the observed associations between fruits and vegetables are weaker than those for cardiovascular disease.[31] However, if fruits and vegetables are used to replace refined grains and white potatoes, both of which have been shown to be associated with increased risk of diabetes,[20,32] the benefits of regular consumption of fruits and vegetables should be substantial. Data are % categorical or means ± SD of continuous population characteristics adjusted for total energy intake unless otherwise indicated. Total n = 71,346 women. * For vegetables, fruit, and fruit and vegetables combined, data for 3 servings/day increase are shown; for all other items, 1 serving/day increase is shown. F, female; FH, family history of diabetes; HTN, hypertension; IGT, impaired glucose tolerance; M, male; NHEFS, First National Health and Nutrition Examination Study Epidemiologic Follow-up Study; OGTT, oral glucose tolerance test; Q, quantile; SBP, systolic blood pressure; WHR, waist-to-hip ratio; WHS, Women's Health Study. The authors thank Drs. Walter C. Willett and JoAnn E. Manson for their help in the preparation of this manuscript. This study was supported by Grants DK58845 and CA87969 from the National Institutes of Health. L.A.B. was supported by a Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health Scholarship (K12 HD43451), which was cofunded by the Office of Research on Women's Health and Office of Dietary Supplements. The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact. Lydia A. Bazzano, lbazzano@tulane.
Abstract and Introduction
Abstract
Research Design And Methods: A total of 71,346 female nurses aged 38-63 years who were free of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and diabetes in 1984 were followed for 18 years, and dietary information was collected using a semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire every 4 years. Diagnosis of diabetes was self-reported.
Results: During follow-up, 4,529 cases of diabetes were documented, and the cumulative incidence of diabetes was 7.4%. An increase of three servings/day in total fruit and vegetable consumption was not associated with development of diabetes (multivariate-
Conclusions: Consumption of green leafy vegetables and fruit was associated with a lower hazard of diabetes, whereas consumption of fruit juices may be associated with an increased hazard among women.Introduction
Research Design and Methods
Dietary Assessment
Assessment of Nondietary Covariates
Ascertainment of Outcomes
Statistical Analysis
Results

Figure 1.
Conclusions
![]()
Table 1. Characteristics of the Study Population by Quintile of Total Intake of Fruit and Vegetables in 1984
Total intake of fruit and vegetables in 1984 Quintile 1 Quintile 2 Quintile 3 Quintile 4 Quintile 5 n 14,573 14,408 14,337 14,118 13,910 Median intake fruits and vegetables (servings/day) 2.1 3.2 4.2 5.3 7.5 Median intake fruit (servings/day) 0.5 0.9 1.2 1.7 2.5 Median intake vegetables (servings/day) 1.5 2.3 3.0 3.7 5.2 Median intake fruit juices (servings/day) 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 Age (years) 48.5 ± 7.1 49.4 ± 7.2 50.2 ± 7.1 50.8 ± 7.1 51.8 ± 7.0 BMI (kg/m2) 23.5 ± 7.1 23.6 ± 7.0 23.6 ± 6.9 23.7 ± 6.9 23.6 ± 7.0 Alcohol (g) 7.4 ± 12.7 7.2 ± 11.6 7.1 ± 11.0 6.9 ± 10.6 6.6 ± 10.5 Physical activity (h/week) 2.1 ± 2.0 2.2 ± 2.1 2.4 ± 2.1 2.5 ± 2.2 2.8 ± 2.3 Current smoker (%) 34 27 23 20 17 Hypertension (%) 19 20 19 20 21 Hypercholesterolemi 7 7 7 8 8 Current use of hormone replacement (%) 22 23 24 26 26 Premenopausal (%) 47 47 47 46 45 Family history of diabetes (%) 25 25 25 25 26 Dietary intake Total energy (kcal) 1,457 ± 465 1,621 ± 474 1,744 ± 486 1,859 ± 501 2,061 ± 537 Carbohydrate (g) 176 ± 35 181 ± 31 184 ± 30 187 ± 29 195 ± 31 Glycemic load (g) 98 ± 22 98 ± 20 98 ± 19 99 ± 18 101 ± 19 Protein (g) 67 ± 13 69 ± 12 71 ± 12 73 ± 12 76 ± 14 Polyunsaturated fat (g) 11.7 ± 3.3 11.9 ± 3.1 11.9 ± 3.0 11.8 ± 3.0 11.6 ± 3.2 Monounsaturated fat (g) 24.0 ± 4.6 23.3 ± 4.1 22.7 ± 3.9 21.8 ± 3.8 20.3 ± 4.0 Saturated fat (g) 23.9 ± 5.0 23.0 ± 4.4 22.3 ± 4.2 21.5 ± 4.0 20.0 ± 4.2 Trans-unsaturated fat (g) 3.8 ± 1.2 3.6 ± 1.1 3.4 ± 1.0 3.2 ± 1.0 2.9 ± 0.9 Cholesterol (mg) 284 ± 108 286 ± 94 287 ± 90 287 ± 90 281 ± 95 Fiber (g) 12.1 ± 3.2 14.4 ± 3.1 16.0 ± 3.3 17.8 ± 3.6 21.3 ± 4.9
* Neither fruits nor fruit and vegetables include fruit juices.
Table 2. Age and Multivariate-
Cumulative averaged intake of fruit and vegetables Ptrend 3 servings/day and 1 serving/day increase in intake* Median intake (quintile 1, 5) servings/day† Quintile 1 Quintile 2 Quintile 3 Quintile 4 Quintile 5 Vegetables n 845 877 930 976 901 Person-years 233,945 247,049 249,343 246,076 227,581 Age-adjusted 1.00 0.96 (0.88-1.06) 1.00 (0.91-1.10) 1.05 (0.96-1.15) 1.04 (0.95-1.15) 0.13 1.06 (0.98-1.13) 3.09 (1.61, 5.40) Model 1‡ 1.00 0.98 (0.89-1.08) 0.98 (0.89-1.08) 1.03 (0.93-1.13) 0.98 (0.88-1.09) 0.92 1.00 (0.92-1.08) Model 2§ 1.00 1.00 (0.91-1.10) 1.02 (0.93-1.12) 1.08 (0.98-1.19) 1.05 (0.94-1.16) 0.22 1.04 (0.97-1.13) Fruit|| n 862 988 948 914 817 Person-years 237,964 249,649 247,769 241,595 227,017 Age-adjusted 1.00 1.06 (0.97-1.16) 1.00 (0.91-1.10) 0.97 (0.88-1.06) 0.90 (0.82-0.99) 0.003 0.84 (0.74-0.94) 1.08 (0.46, 2.64) Model 1‡ 1.00 1.01 (0.92-1.11) 0.94 (0.86-1.04) 0.89 (0.81-0.98) 0.81 (0.73-0.91) <0.001 0.74 (0.65-0.84) Model 2§ 1.00 1.04 (0.94-1.14) 0.99 (0.90-1.09) 0.96 (0.86-1.06) 0.90 (0.80-1.00) 0.008 0.82 (0.72-0.94) Fruit and vegetables|| n 870 900 945 924 890 Person-years 237,727 248,219 247,926 244,157 225,964 Age-adjusted 1.00 0.96 (0.88-1.06) 0.99 (0.90-1.09) 0.97 (0.88-1.07) 1.00 (0.91-1.10) 0.91 1.00 (0.96-1.05) 4.47 (2.35, 7.66) Model 1‡ 1.00 0.98 (0.89-1.07) 0.95 (0.87-1.05) 0.92 (0.84-1.02) 0.92 (0.82-1.02) 0.06 0.95 (0.90-1.00) Model 2§ 1.00 1.01 (0.92-1.11) 1.00 (0.91-1.10) 0.99 (0.89-1.09) 1.01 (0.90-1.12) 0.99 0.99 (0.94-1.05) Fruit juices n 749 946 1032 920 882 Person-years 239,408 241,268 250,260 241,633 231,425 Age-adjusted 1.00 1.21 (1.10-1.34) 1.28 (1.17-1.41) 1.17 (1.06-1.28) 1.17 (1.06-1.29) 0.10 1.05 (0.99-1.12) 0.54 (0.04, 1.33) Model 1‡ 1.00 1.20 (1.09-1.32) 1.28 (1.16-1.40) 1.25 (1.13-1.38) 1.33 (1.20-1.48) <0.001 1.17 (1.10-1.25) Model 2§ 1.00 1.21 (1.10-1.33) 1.29 (1.17-1.42) 1.25 (1.14-1.38) 1.35 (1.22-1.50) <0.001 1.18 (1.10-1.26) Legumes n 825 874 951 968 911 Person-years 248,849 216,815 248,202 259,566 230,563 Age-adjusted 1.00 1.12 (1.02-1.23) 1.09 (0.99-1.20) 1.08 (0.99-1.19) 1.12 (1.02-1.23) 0.11 1.20 (0.96, 1.50) 0.17 (0.07, 0.45) Model 1‡ 1.00 1.13 (1.03-1.25) 1.10 (1.00-1.21) 1.10 (1.00-1.21) 1.09 (0.99-1.21) 0.40 1.11 (0.87-1.40) Model 2§ 1.00 1.14 (1.03-1.25) 1.12 (1.02-1.23) 1.13 (1.02-1.24) 1.14 (1.03-1.25) 0.09 1.23 (0.97-1.56) Green leafy vegetables n 921 957 995 837 819 Person-years 223,958 239,419 256,196 241,036 243,385 Age-adjusted 1.00 0.96 (0.88-1.05) 0.92 (0.84-1.00) 0.81 (0.74-0.89) 0.78 (0.71-0.86) <0.001 0.80 (0.75-0.86) 0.72 (0.25, 1.48) Model 1‡ 1.00 0.99 (0.90-1.08) 0.99 (0.90-1.09) 0.90 (0.82-0.99) 0.87 (0.78-0.96) <0.001 0.88 (0.82-0.95) Model 2§ 1.00 1.00 (0.91-1.10) 1.02 (0.93-1.11) 0.93 (0.85-1.03) 0.90 (0.82-1.00) 0.010 0.91 (0.84-0.98)
† Shown is overall median intake for the entire category and, in parentheses, the median intakes for the lowest and highest quintiles, data are in servings/day distribution based on the cumulative average of median values from questionnaires from 1984, 1986, 1990, 1994, and 1998.
‡ Additionally adjusted for BMI, physical activity, family history of diabetes, postmenopausal hormone use, alcohol use, smoking, and total energy intake.
§ Adjusted for all variables in model 1 and additionally for whole grains, nuts, processed meats, coffee, potatoes, and sugar-sweetened soft drinks.
|| Neither fruit nor fruit and vegetables include fruit juices.
Table 3. Prospective Cohort Studies Reporting Measures of Association Between Intake of Fruits and Vegetables and Diabetes
Author, year (reference) Population n Age (years), sex Exposure measure Adjustments Follow-up (years) Case ascertainment Events Association (95% CI) Notes Colditz et al., 1992 (5) U.S. nurses 84,360 34-59, F 61-item FFQ Age, BMI, weight change, alcohol energy 6 Follow-up questionnaire 702 diabetes HR Q5/1 0.76 (0.50-1.16) vegetable intake Q5/1: ≥2.9 serving/day of vegetables vs. <1.2 Feskens et al., 1995 (6) Finnish and Dutch 338 70-89, M Cross-check diet history Age, cohort, BMI, past BMI, past energy intake 30 OGTT 71 IGT, 26 diabetes Inverse association of 2-h postload glucose and intake of vegetables and legumes Multivariate regression predicting 2-h postload glucose Meyer et al., 2000 (7) Postmenopausal Iowa women 35,988 55-69, F 127-item FFQ Age, smoking, total energy, BMI, alcohol, WHR, education, physical activity 6 Iowa death register, biennial questionnaire, and NDI 1,141 diabetes HR Q5/1 fruit + vegetables 1.05 (0.84-1.31), HR vegetables 1.07 (0.86-1.32), HR fruit 1.14 (0.93-1.39) Q5/1: >51 servings/week fruit + vegetables vs. <23, Q5/1: >33.5 servings/week vegetable vs. <14, Q 5/1: >19 servings/week fruit vs. <6.25 Ford and Mokdad, 2001 (9) NHEFS 9,665 25-74, M + F Single 24-h dietary recall Age, race, sex, smoking, BMI, alcohol, SBP, lipids, HTN, physical activity 19 Follow-up questionnaire, hospital records, death certificates 1,018 diabetes HR fruit + vegetable intake 0.73 (0.54-0.98) ≥5 times/day vs. 0 times/day, no portion size included; also identified a sex interaction Liu et al., 2004 (9) WHS 38,018 ≥45, F 131-item FFQ Age, smoking, total energy, alcohol, BMI, physical activity, HTN, hyperlipidemia, FH 8.8 Follow-up questionnaire 1,614 diabetes HR Q5/1 fruit + vegetables 1.04 (0.87-1.25), HR fruit 0.97 (0.82-1.23), HR vegetables 1.03 (0.86-1.23) Q5/1: median 10.1 servings/day fruit + vegetables vs. 2.5, Q5/1: median 3.9 servings/day fruit vs. 0.62 Montonen et al., 2005 (10) Finnish 4,304 40-69, M + F Diet history Age, sex, smoking, total energy, BMI, FH, geographic area 23 Finnish Social Insurance Institution' 383 diabetes HR Q4/1 vegetables 0.77 (0.57-1.03), HR green vegetables 0.69 (0.50-0.93), HR fruit 0.82 (0.61-1.11), HR berries 0.63 (0.47-0.85) Q4/1: >130 g/day vegetables vs. <42, Q4/1: >43 g/day green vegetables vs. <11, Q4/1: >138 g/day fruit vs. <20
![]()
References
![]()
1 Department of Epidemiology, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana
2 Department of Nutrition, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
3 Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, the University of Puerto Rico, Medical Sciences Campus, School of Dentistry, San Juan, Puerto Rico, and the Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts
4 Departments of Nutrition and Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, and the Channing Laboratory, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
http://www.medscape
Nelson Vergel
Director
Program for Wellness Restoration
powerusa dot org
It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here.
If you received this email from someone who forwarded it to you and would like to join this group, send a blank email to PozHealth-subscribe@yahoogroups.com and you will get an email with instructions to follow.
You can chose to receive single emails or a daily digest (collection of emails). You can post pictures, images, attach files and search by keyword old postings in the group.
For those of you who are members already and want to switch from single emails to digest or vice versa, visit www.yahoogroups.com, click on PozHealth, then on "edit my membership" and go down to your selection. The list administrator does not process any requests, so this is a do-it-yourself easy process ! :)
Thanks for joining. You will learn and share a lot in this group!
NOTE: I moderate, approve or disapprove emails before they are posted. Please follow the guidelines shown in the homepage. I will not allow rudeness, sexually explicit material, attacks, and anyone who does not follow the rules. If you are not OK with this, please do not join the group.
Forward this email to anyone who may benefit from this information! Thanks!
In Health,
Nelson Vergel (PoWeRTX@aol.com)
List Founder and Moderator
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
0 komentar:
Post a Comment