Literature DB >> 10703459

Altering the temporal distribution of energy intake with isoenergetically dense foods given as snacks does not affect total daily energy intake in normal-weight men.

A M Johnstone1, E Shannon, S Whybrow, C A Reid, R J Stubbs.   

Abstract

The objectives of the present study were to examine the effects of (1) ingesting mandatory snacks v. no snacks and (2) the composition of isoenergetically-dense snacks high in protein, fat or carbohydrate, on food intake and energy intake (EI) in eight men with ad libitum access to a diet of fixed composition. Subjects were each studied four times in a 9 d protocol per treatment. On days 1-2, subjects were given a medium-fat maintenance diet estimated at 1.6 x resting metabolic rate (RMR). On days 3-9, subjects consumed three mandatory isoenergetic, isoenergetically dense (380 kJ/100 g) snacks at fixed time intervals (11.30, 15.30 and 19.30 hours). Total snack intake comprised 30% of the subjects' estimated daily energy requirements. The treatments were high protein (HP), high carbohydrate (HC), high fat (HF) and no snack (NS). The order was randomized across subjects in a counterbalanced, Latin-square design. During the remainder of the day, subjects had ad libitum (meal size and frequency) access to a covertly manipulated medium-fat diet of fixed composition (fat:carbohydrate:protein, 40:47:13 by energy), energy density 550 kJ/100 g. All foods eaten were investigator-weighed before ingestion and left-overs were weighed after ingestion. Subjective hunger and satiety feelings were tracked hourly during waking hours using visual analogue scales. Ad libitum EI amounted to 13.9 MJ/d on the NS treatment compared with 11.7, 11.7 and 12.2 MJ/d on the HP, HC and HF diets respectively (F(3,21) 5.35; P = 0.007, SED 0.66). Total EI values were not significantly different at 14.6, 14.5, 15.0 and 14.2 MJ/d respectively. Snack composition did not differentially affect total daily food intake or EI. Average daily hunger was unaffected by the composition of the snacks. Only at 12.00 hours did subjects feel significantly more hungry during the NS condition, relative to the other dietary treatments (F(3,18) 4.42; P = 0.017). Body weight was unaffected by dietary treatment. In conclusion, snacking per se led to compensatory adjustments in feeding behaviour in lean men. Snack composition (with energy density controlled) did not affect the amount eaten of a diet of fixed composition. Results may differ in real life where subjects can alter both composition and amount of food they eat and energy density is not controlled.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10703459

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Nutr        ISSN: 0007-1145            Impact factor:   3.718


  13 in total

Review 1.  Evidence for efficacy and effectiveness of changes in eating frequency for body weight management.

Authors:  Ashima K Kant
Journal:  Adv Nutr       Date:  2014-11-14       Impact factor: 8.701

2.  Within-person compensation for snack energy by US adults, NHANES 2007-2014.

Authors:  Ashima K Kant; Barry I Graubard
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 7.045

Review 3.  Weighing the Evidence of Common Beliefs in Obesity Research.

Authors:  Krista Casazza; Andrew Brown; Arne Astrup; Fredrik Bertz; Charles Baum; Michelle Bohan Brown; John Dawson; Nefertiti Durant; Gareth Dutton; David A Fields; Kevin R Fontaine; Steven Heymsfield; David Levitsky; Tapan Mehta; Nir Menachemi; P K Newby; Russell Pate; Hollie Raynor; Barbara J Rolls; Bisakha Sen; Daniel L Smith; Diana Thomas; Brian Wansink; David B Allison
Journal:  Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 11.176

Review 4.  Snack Food, Satiety, and Weight.

Authors:  Valentine Yanchou Njike; Teresa M Smith; Omree Shuval; Kerem Shuval; Ingrid Edshteyn; Vahid Kalantari; Amy L Yaroch
Journal:  Adv Nutr       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 8.701

Review 5.  Appetite control: methodological aspects of the evaluation of foods.

Authors:  J Blundell; C de Graaf; T Hulshof; S Jebb; B Livingstone; A Lluch; D Mela; S Salah; E Schuring; H van der Knaap; M Westerterp
Journal:  Obes Rev       Date:  2010-01-29       Impact factor: 9.213

6.  Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Effect of Portion Size and Ingestive Frequency on Energy Intake and Body Weight among Adults in Randomized Controlled Feeding Trials.

Authors:  Kelly A Higgins; Joshua L Hudson; Anna M R Hayes; Ethan Braun; Eunjin Cheon; Sam C Couture; Nilupa S Gunaratna; Erica R Hill; Stephanie R Hunter; Bethany S McGowan; Evan J Reister; Yu Wang; Richard D Mattes
Journal:  Adv Nutr       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 11.567

7.  Higher Eating Frequency Does Not Decrease Appetite in Healthy Adults.

Authors:  Martine M Perrigue; Adam Drewnowski; Ching-Yun Wang; Marian L Neuhouser
Journal:  J Nutr       Date:  2015-11-11       Impact factor: 4.798

8.  Short-term dietary compensation in free-living adults.

Authors:  F McKiernan; J H Hollis; R D Mattes
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2007-12-26

9.  Testing protein leverage in lean humans: a randomised controlled experimental study.

Authors:  Alison K Gosby; Arthur D Conigrave; Namson S Lau; Miguel A Iglesias; Rosemary M Hall; Susan A Jebb; Jennie Brand-Miller; Ian D Caterson; David Raubenheimer; Stephen J Simpson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-10-12       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Acculturation, meal frequency, eating-out, and body weight in Korean Americans.

Authors:  Soo-Kyung Lee
Journal:  Nutr Res Pract       Date:  2008-12-31       Impact factor: 1.926

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.