Adults taking part in an eight-month New York City programme saw improvements in A1C, blood pressure and diet quality, though the preliminary study cannot show meals alone caused the changes.
Adults with type 2 diabetes and high blood pressure in New York City saw measurable improvements in blood sugar, blood pressure and diet quality after taking part in an eight-month medically tailored meal programme, according to preliminary findings released by the American Heart Association. The results suggest that food support may help people manage two closely linked chronic conditions, particularly when it is paired with nutrition counselling and practical cooking guidance.
The study involved 110 adults recruited from one New York City site between 2024 and 2026, in neighbourhoods with high rates of chronic disease and early death. Participants were, on average, 63 years old; 68% were women, 47% identified as Hispanic and 43% were Black. One group received 10 meals a week throughout the programme, while the other started on the same amount before gradually tapering to five meals a week by the final month. Both groups also met with a dietitian, took part in a heart-health curriculum built around the association’s Life’s Essential 8, joined culturally responsive cooking demonstrations and received ingredients such as fresh produce and healthy seasonings for home use.
By the end of the programme, both groups had improved on several measures. Diet quality rose by about three points on a scale that tracks adherence to a Mediterranean-style eating pattern, and participants were more than twice as likely to reach a higher level of food security on a six-item US Department of Agriculture scale. Average A1C, a long-term measure of blood sugar, fell by about 0.5 percentage points, while both systolic and diastolic blood pressure dropped by roughly four points. Nour Makarem, an assistant professor of epidemiology at Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health and the study’s lead researcher, said the gains in diet and cardiometabolic health appeared in both groups, suggesting that gradually reducing meal deliveries did not weaken the programme’s effect when other nutrition support remained in place.
Even so, the findings should be treated cautiously. The work was presented as a conference abstract, not a peer-reviewed paper, and all participants received meals, which means there was no true comparison group that went without the intervention. As a result, the study cannot show that the meals alone caused the improvements. Other factors, including extra attention from clinicians, changes in medication or the natural course of illness, could also have played a part. The programme itself bundled several elements together, so the research also cannot separate the effect of meal delivery from the impact of counselling, cooking education and added groceries.
The results arrive as medically tailored meals gain attention as a possible benefit for people with limited resources and complex health needs. Several states now offer some form of meal support to certain Medicaid members, and broader research has pointed to possible healthcare savings as well as health gains. A separate study in Nature Medicine, which looked at nearly 1,900 Massachusetts Medicaid members, found that people who received medically tailored meals had fewer hospital admissions and emergency department visits than similar patients who did not. The New York study, by contrast, focused on A1C, blood pressure, diet quality and food security rather than long-term outcomes such as heart attacks or strokes.
The work was funded through the American Heart Association’s Health Care by Food initiative, and Kevin Volpp, a University of Pennsylvania physician and economist who serves as the initiative’s scientific lead, said the tapering approach did not appear to reduce effectiveness. Because he is closely tied to the programme that supported the research, his remarks should be viewed in that context. The authors said larger, multi-site studies are needed before firm conclusions can be drawn. For now, the findings add to evidence that food-based interventions may help some adults better manage diabetes and hypertension, even if the size and durability of the benefit remain uncertain.
Disclaimer: This content is for informational purposes only and is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical judgment, advice, diagnosis, or treatment.
