1.
Is reducing appetite beneficial for body weight management in the context of overweight and obesity? A systematic review and meta-analysis from clinical trials assessing body weight management after exposure to satiety enhancing and/or hunger reducing products.
Hansen, TT, Andersen, SV, Astrup, A, Blundell, J, Sjödin, A
Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity. 2019;(7):983-997
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
This review aims to investigate whether interventions that enhance satiety and/or reduce hunger lead to beneficial effects on body weight management in the context of overweight and obesity. A comprehensive review protocol was prepared before conducting a systematic search in PubMed identifying 517 papers with 12 meeting the inclusion criteria. A thorough risk of bias assessment was performed based on the Cochrane collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. Based on a meta-analysis, the average of 75 subjects exposed to satiety enhancing and/or hunger reducing foods during more than 8 weeks coincidently reduced their body weight by 3.60 (1.05; 6.15) kg (mean (95% confidence interval)) more compared with controls. Two studies analysed whether individual reductions in appetite were associated with body weight. Decreased ad libitum energy intake after exposure to the satiety enhancing and/or hunger reducing interventions explained 58% (P < 0.001) and 23% (P < 0.001) of the variations in the subsequent weight losses over 12 and 8 weeks, respectively. Robust acute effects on appetite were found equally likely to be linked to improved body weight management as sustained effects. Satiety enhancing and/or hunger reducing interventions are supported to improve body weight management, but studies specifically designed to demonstrate a causal link remain needed.
2.
Resistant starch and protein intake enhances fat oxidation and feelings of fullness in lean and overweight/obese women.
Gentile, CL, Ward, E, Holst, JJ, Astrup, A, Ormsbee, MJ, Connelly, S, Arciero, PJ
Nutrition journal. 2015;:113
Abstract
BACKGROUND Diets high in either resistant starch or protein have been shown to aid in weight management. We examined the effects of meals high in non-resistant or resistant starch with and without elevated protein intake on substrate utilization, energy expenditure, and satiety in lean and overweight/obese women. METHODS Women of varying levels of adiposity consumed one of four pancake test meals in a single-blind, randomized crossover design: 1) waxy maize (control) starch (WMS); 2) waxy maize starch and whey protein (WMS+WP); 3) resistant starch (RS); or 4) RS and whey protein (RS+WP). RESULTS Total post-prandial energy expenditure did not differ following any of the four test meals (WMS = 197.9 ± 8.9; WMS+WP = 188 ± 8.1; RS = 191.9 ± 8.9; RS+WP = 195.8 ± 8.7, kcals/180 min), although the combination of RS+WP, but not either intervention alone, significantly increased (P <0.01) fat oxidation (WMS = 89.5 ± 5.4; WMS+WP = 84.5 ± 7.2; RS = 97.4 ± 5.4; RS+WP = 107.8 ± 5.4, kcals/180 min). Measures of fullness increased (125% vs. 45%) and hunger decreased (55% vs. 16%) following WP supplemented versus non-whey conditions (WMS+WP, RS+WP vs. WMS, RS), whereas circulating hunger and satiety factors were not different among any of the test meals. However, peptide YY (PYY) was significantly elevated at 180 min following RS+WP meal. CONCLUSIONS The combined consumption of dietary resistant starch and protein increases fat oxidation, PYY, and enhances feelings of satiety and fullness to levels that may be clinically relevant if maintained under chronic conditions. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02418429.
3.
A low glycemic index diet does not affect postprandial energy metabolism but decreases postprandial insulinemia and increases fullness ratings in healthy women.
Krog-Mikkelsen, I, Sloth, B, Dimitrov, D, Tetens, I, Björck, I, Flint, A, Holst, JJ, Astrup, A, Elmståhl, H, Raben, A
The Journal of nutrition. 2011;(9):1679-84
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
At present, it is difficult to determine whether glycemic index (GI) is an important tool in the prevention of lifestyle diseases, and long-term studies investigating GI with diets matched in macronutrient composition, fiber content, energy content, and energy density are still scarce. We investigated the effects of 2 high-carbohydrate (55%) diets with low GI (LGI; 79) or high GI (HGI; 103) on postprandial blood profile, subjective appetite sensations, energy expenditure (EE), substrate oxidation rates, and ad libitum energy intake (EI) from a corresponding test meal (LGI or HGI) after consuming the diets ad libitum for 10 wk. Two groups of a total of 29 healthy, overweight women (age: 30.5 ± 6.6 y; BMI: 27.6 ± 1.5 kg/m(2)) participated in the 10-wk intervention and a subsequent 4-h meal test. The breakfast test meals differed in GI but were equal in total energy, macronutrient composition, fiber content, and energy density. The LGI meal resulted in lower plasma glucose, serum insulin, and plasma glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 and higher plasma glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide concentrations than the HGI meal (P ≤ 0.05). Ratings of fullness were slightly higher and the desire to eat something fatty was lower after the test meal in the LGI group (P < 0.05). Postprandial plasma GLP-2, plasma glucagon, serum leptin, plasma ghrelin, EE, substrate oxidation rates, and ad libitum EI at lunch did not differ between groups. In conclusion, postprandial glycemia, insulinemia, and subjective appetite ratings after a test meal were better after 10-wk ad libitum intake of a LGI compared to a HGI diet. EE and substrate oxidation rates were, however, not affected. These findings give some support to recommendations to consume a LGI diet.