Risk factors in this analysis, their exposure variables, theoretical-minimum-risk exposure distributions, disease outcomes, and data sources for exposure.

aOutcomes in italics are those for which the effects were not quantified in the main analysis due to weaker evidence on causality (e.g. tobacco smoking and colorectal cancer or high blood glucose and cancers) or because there were very few deaths from the disease (e.g. high BMI and gallbladder cancer).bWe evaluated sensitivity to the choice of exposure metric by using total cholesterol instead of LDL-cholesterol (Table S1).cTwo alternative TMREDs for LDL cholesterol with means of 1.6 mmol/l and 2.3 mmol/l were examined in sensitivity analysis (Table S1).dThis category includes rheumatic heart disease, acute and subacute endocarditis, cardiomyopathy, other inflammatory cardiac diseases, valvular disorders, aortic aneurysm, pulmonary embolism, conduction disorders, peripheral vascular disorders, and other ill-defined cardiovascular diseases.eWe did not include some of the cancers that were found to have significant association with BMI in a recent meta-analysis [17] either because there were very few deaths in the US (adenocarcinoma of esophagus and gallbladder cancer) or because there was not strong evidence on a causal effect from other studies (leukemia and multiple myeloma). We included non-Hodgkin lymphoma in a sensitivity analysis (Table S1).fThe NHANES rounds in 2003�C2006 include a 2-d dietary intake survey and could be used to estimate dietary trans fatty acids. However, a reliable source for the trans fat content of each food item was not available to us. We have used the intake estimates in the Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII) 1989�C1991 [68] in our analysis.gOmega-3 intake categories in the analysis were: 0 to hThe effect of reduction in salt intake on SBP and the effect of subsequent decline in SBP on the relevant disease outcomes were estimated at the individual level to account for possible correlation between salt intake and SBP.iWe evaluated sensitivity to the assumption of normal distribution for fruit and vegetable intake (Table S1).jExposure categories were: Abstainer, a person not having had a drink containing alcohol within the last year; DI, 0�C19.99 g of pure alcohol daily (females) and 0�C39.99 g (males); DII, 20�C39.99 g (females) and 40�C59.99 g (males); and DIII, >40 g (females) and >60 g (males). Binge drinking was defined as having at least one occasion of five or more drinks in the last month.kAn alternative TMRED for alcohol use as regular drinking of small amounts of alcohol is considered in sensitivity analysis (Table S1).lThis category includes ICD-9 codes 210�C239.mThis category includes ICD-9 codes 291, 303, and 305.0.nCategories of physical activity were defined as below using responses to questions regarding physical activity during the past 30 d: inactive, no moderate or vigorous physical activity; low-active, oThis TMRED is based on multiple prospective studies that report beneficial effects of physical activity continuing above the current recommended levels [69]�C[72].pWe also calculated the mortality effects of tobacco smoking using the prevalence of current and former smokers, as used by Smoking-Attributable Mortality, Morbidity, and Economic Costs (SAMMEC; http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/sammec) [73], in a sensitivity analysis (Table S1).qThis category includes lower respiratory tract infections and asthma.rEvidence of a causal association between tobacco smoking and colorectal cancer was classified as suggestive in the 2004 Report of the US Surgeon General [73]. The 2004 report also excluded hypertensive disease from the outcomes considered in smoking-attributable mortality. Therefore, colorectal cancer and hypertensive disease were not included in the main analysis, but were included in sensitivity analysis (Table S1).