Our findings showed that higher dietary acid load indices (PRAL and NEAP) are associated with higher odds of depression in women. Furthermore, we observed that participants in the highest quartile of dietary acid load compared to the lowest quartile, had a significantly higher intake of red meat and refined grains. Also, fruit and vegetable consumption were significantly lower in the highest quartile of dietary acid load versus the lowest quartile.
Few studies have investigated the relationship between dietary acid load and depression. A cross-sectional study on women in the age range of 20–50, showed that individuals who had higher dietary acid load scores had greater odds for stress, anxiety, and depression compared to lower scores (21). Results from Ausimmune longitudinal study (AusLong study) with a 10-year follow-up indicated that a higher dietary acid load in multiple sclerosis patients increased depression levels but not anxiety (34). Wu et al. in a longitudinal study among breast cancer survivors demonstrated that women in the highest quartile of PRAL had a greater risk of depression versus women in the lowest quartile (35). Findings from a study on 4378 persons (1909 male and 2469 female) reported that subjects in the highest category of the dietary acid load had a higher risk of anxiety and depression compared to those in the lowest (36). However, some other research did not show a significant relationship between acidic foods intake and the risk of depression (37). The results from a cohort study demonstrated that adherence to a high-protein diet might be a protective factor against depression in men while having a detrimental role in women (38). It was might that these disagreement results related to differences in the sources of consumed proteins. It is suggested that a higher intake of animal proteins, contrary to herbal sources of proteins, is a main cause of psychological disorders, like depression (39).
Our results demonstrated that women in the highest quartile of dietary acid load versus the lowest quartile, had a significantly higher intake of red meat and refined grains. In a cross-sectional study on 3172 adults (18–55 years old), women in the highest quartile of refined grains intake compared with the first quartile, had higher odds of anxiety and depression (40). In a study by Mofrad et al. women in the highest quartile of red meat consumption compared with those in the lowest quartile had a highest prevalence of depressive symptoms, anxiety and stress (41). In contrast, the results of a study published in 2021, showed no any association between red meat consumption and mental disorders in women (42). Moreover, Chi et al. in a prospective study, did not find any relationship between red meat and poultry consumption with the risk of depression in postmenopausal women (43). Also, we observed that fruit and vegetable consumption were significantly lower in the highest quartile of dietary acid load compared to the lowest quartile. Findings from the Taiwan Longitudinal Survey on Aging (TLSA) showed that fruit and vegetable consumption combined with physical activity was inversely related to the risk of depression (44). Grases et al. in an observational retrospective study indicated, no consumption of legumes and low intake of fruit and vegetable, were significantly correlated with depression (45). Results of ALSWH study (Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health) by 15 years follow up showed that a higher consumption of fruit (≥ 4 servings) and vegetable (≥ 5 servings) was associated with lower odds of depression symptoms (46). The Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle Study (AusDiab study) after 12 years follow up, demonstrated that a diet rich in fruits and vegetables, especially yellow/orange/red and leafy green vegetables, lowered the odds of depressive symptoms (47). Moreover, other cross-sectional studies on Finnish population and on university students from 16 countries found no association between fruit and vegetable intake and depression (48, 49). Different findings might be due to diversity in the study population, using different measurement tools for the evaluation of psychopathy, and don’t adjust some special dietary intakes (such as fiber and omega-3) as confounders (50, 51).
Several pathways have been suggested to describe the positive association between dietary acid load and psychopathy: First, there is an acid-sensing ion channel-1a (ASIC1a) expresses in the nervous system, especially in the amygdala, which has a central role in the regulation of mood (52, 53). Overexpression of ASIC1a in mice caused the fear condition, while ASIC1a inhibition had anti-anxiety and anti-depressant effects (54). Therefore, a high dietary acid load produces high PH might motivate ASIC1a and result in psychological disorders. Second, metabolic acidosis can elevate the secretion of cortisol (55, 56). A large number of researches supported a direct relationship between cortisol and psychological disorders (57–59). In addition, metabolic acidosis can increase the inflammatory parameters level (60), so oxidative stress might result in higher risk of psychological disorders (61).
Consumption of refined grains augments the risk of inflammation, as a risk factor for psychopathy (62). Moreover, refined grains lead to postprandial hyperglycemia and hyperinsulinemia (63, 64) and this might reduce blood glucose concentrations to a level that is a threshold for the release of autonomic hormones such as cortisol, adrenaline, growth hormone and glucagon (65). Red meat contains a high amount of dietary fat which has contributed to causing depression in animals. In one study that was conducted on rats, those who had a high-fat diet were more likely to have depression (66). Arachidonic acid (AA) which is abundant in red meat, produces the inflammatory mediators named eicosanoids. In contrast, eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) are known due to their anti-inflammatory effects. Therefore, the level of inflammation ascertains through the balance between AA and DHA or EPA. High consumption of red meat by changing the balance toward AA results in inflammation and finally depression (67). In addition, animal protein consumption caused an increase in some gut microbiota like Bacteroides entero, which are deemed to have a role in developing depression via the link between the gut and brain (68).
The existing findings are focused on the particular nutrients within fruit and vegetables, which affect psychological health (69). B vitamins have effects on single-carbon metabolism and synthesis of neurotransmitters, including serotonin, catecholamines and other monoamine neurotransmitters (70, 71). Moreover, the vital role of B vitamins in brain function is ascertained via a number of neuropsychiatric signs related to deficiencies in each of the B vitamins, like folate and vitamin B12 (8, 71). A recent investigation showed that the association between dietary patterns and depression is mediated by folate and vitamin B12 serum concentrations. This study reported that an increase in serum folate and vitamin B12 in healthy dietary pattern and a decrease in these two vitamins in unhealthy dietary pattern were associated with depression (72). Also, fruits and vegetables are rich in antioxidants components and have a promising relationship with psychological well-being (73). They lead to decrease oxidative stress and inflammation, potentially via the activation of transcription factors, including nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 (Nrf2) or nuclear factor κB (NFκB) (74).
Although this was the first case-control study that examined the relation of dietary acid load scores (PRAL and NEAP) among women and results were adjusted for energy intake, physical activity, history of depression, smoking status, periods of unemployment, job and BMI; however, this study had some limitations. First, due to our study only included women, our results cannot be generalized to both genders. Furthermore, the use of the FFQ questionnaire for participants’dietary assessment is inevitably subject to error. Due to the subjective nature of this method, over-or under-reporting of food intake cannot be predicted, therefore more detailed studies are required.