AIM: Humans appear to defend against energy deficit to a greater extent than energy surplus. Severe dietary energy restriction resulting in 5-30% weight loss often leads to hyperphagia and weight regain in lean subjects. However, the period of time over which fasting is often endured in Western society are far shorter, approximately 1-2 days. This study examined how a 36 h fast effected the subsequent day's energy and nutrient intake in a group of 24 healthy, lean men and women. METHOD: Subjects underwent two 2 day treatments, termed 'fast' and 'maintenance'. During the 'fast' treatment, subjects were fed a maintenance diet on the day prior to the fast (day -1) to prevent overeating. They then consumed non-energy drinks only, from 20:00 h on day -1 to 08:00 h on day 2 (ad libitum feeding day), thus fasting for 36 h. On the 'maintenance' protocol, subjects received a maintenance diet throughout day 1. Throughout day 2 they had ad libitum access to a range of familiar foods, which were the same for both treatments. Body weight, blood glucose and respiratory quotient were used as compliance checks. Hunger was monitored on day's -1, 1 and 2 for the fast treatment only. RESULTS: On day 2, average energy intake was 10.2 vs 12.2 MJ/day (s.e.d. 1.0) on the post-maintenance and post-fast periods, respectively (P=0.049). Subjects altered feeding behaviour, in response to the fast, only at breakfast time, selecting a higher-fat meal (P<0.005). Compared to day -1, motivation to eat was elevated during the fast (P<0.05). This continued until breakfast was consumed during the re-feeding period (day 2), when values then returned to baseline. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that a 36 h fast, which generated a negative energy balance of approximately 12 MJ, did not induce a powerful, unconditioned stimulus to compensate on the subsequent day.
AIM: Humans appear to defend against energy deficit to a greater extent than energy surplus. Severe dietary energy restriction resulting in 5-30% weight loss often leads to hyperphagia and weight regain in lean subjects. However, the period of time over which fasting is often endured in Western society are far shorter, approximately 1-2 days. This study examined how a 36 h fast effected the subsequent day's energy and nutrient intake in a group of 24 healthy, lean men and women. METHOD: Subjects underwent two 2 day treatments, termed 'fast' and 'maintenance'. During the 'fast' treatment, subjects were fed a maintenance diet on the day prior to the fast (day -1) to prevent overeating. They then consumed non-energy drinks only, from 20:00 h on day -1 to 08:00 h on day 2 (ad libitum feeding day), thus fasting for 36 h. On the 'maintenance' protocol, subjects received a maintenance diet throughout day 1. Throughout day 2 they had ad libitum access to a range of familiar foods, which were the same for both treatments. Body weight, blood glucose and respiratory quotient were used as compliance checks. Hunger was monitored on day's -1, 1 and 2 for the fast treatment only. RESULTS: On day 2, average energy intake was 10.2 vs 12.2 MJ/day (s.e.d. 1.0) on the post-maintenance and post-fast periods, respectively (P=0.049). Subjects altered feeding behaviour, in response to the fast, only at breakfast time, selecting a higher-fat meal (P<0.005). Compared to day -1, motivation to eat was elevated during the fast (P<0.05). This continued until breakfast was consumed during the re-feeding period (day 2), when values then returned to baseline. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that a 36 h fast, which generated a negative energy balance of approximately 12 MJ, did not induce a powerful, unconditioned stimulus to compensate on the subsequent day.
Authors: Michelle Harvie; Claire Wright; Mary Pegington; Debbie McMullan; Ellen Mitchell; Bronwen Martin; Roy G Cutler; Gareth Evans; Sigrid Whiteside; Stuart Maudsley; Simonetta Camandola; Rui Wang; Olga D Carlson; Josephine M Egan; Mark P Mattson; Anthony Howell Journal: Br J Nutr Date: 2013-04-16 Impact factor: 3.718
Authors: M N Harvie; M Pegington; M P Mattson; J Frystyk; B Dillon; G Evans; J Cuzick; S A Jebb; B Martin; R G Cutler; T G Son; S Maudsley; O D Carlson; J M Egan; A Flyvbjerg; A Howell Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2010-10-05 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: Milka Sokolović; Aleksandar Sokolović; Diederik Wehkamp; Emiel Ver Loren van Themaat; Dirk R de Waart; Lisa A Gilhuijs-Pederson; Yuri Nikolsky; Antoine H C van Kampen; Theodorus B M Hakvoort; Wouter H Lamers Journal: BMC Genomics Date: 2008-11-06 Impact factor: 3.969