| Literature DB >> 17156448 |
Mario Ciampolini1, Riccardo Bianchi.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The will to eat is a decision associated with conditioned responses and with unconditioned body sensations that reflect changes in metabolic biomarkers. Here, we investigate whether this decision can be delayed until blood glucose is allowed to fall to low levels, when presumably feeding behavior is mostly unconditioned. Following such an eating pattern might avoid some of the metabolic risk factors that are associated with high glycemia.Entities:
Year: 2006 PMID: 17156448 PMCID: PMC1702540 DOI: 10.1186/1743-7075-3-42
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutr Metab (Lond) ISSN: 1743-7075 Impact factor: 4.169
Figure 1Consort flow chart. Randomization of the subjects recruited for this study into trained and control (untrained) groups. The subjects were men and women, 18 to 60 years of age, with recurrent functional disorders of diarrhea, abdominal pain, or dyspepsia.
Figure 2Investigation design. A randomized and controlled 7-week pilot clinical investigation to study the acquisition of the capacity to estimate blood glucose by body feelings after adequate training.
Trained and control (untrained) groups at baseline and after seven weeks at the final investigative session.
| Weeks after baseline | 0 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
| Number of subjects | 64 | 64 | 72 | 72 |
| Age (years) | 37.2 ± 11.0 | 37.4 ± 11.1 | 37.7 ± 10.6 | 37.9 ± 10.7 |
| Gender (F/M) | 38/26 | 38/26 | 46/26 | 46/26 |
| Overweight/normal-weight | 22/42 | 20/44 | 20/52 | 20/52 |
| Weight (kg) | 68.4 ± 15.7 | 66.2 ± 14.6 | 63.9 ± 10.6 | 63.2 ± 10.7 |
| Body Mass Index (BMI) | 24.0 ± 4.7 | 23.6 ± 4.6 | 22.8 ± 2.7 | 22.6 ± 2.8 |
Mean ± SD.
BMI = weight (kg)/height2 (m2); Overweight: BMI > 25; Normal-weight: BMI < 25.
Not significant vs baseline.
Estimated versus measured blood glucose at the final laboratory session (week 7).
| All Trained | 64 | 84.9 ± 7.8 | 87.2 ± 7.9 | -2.3 ± 4.7 | 4.1 ± 3.1 (4.7 ± 3.6) |
| Hungry Trained | 18 | 78.1 ± 6.7 | 80.1 ± 6.3 | -2.0 ± 2.5 | 2.6 ± 1.9 (3.2 ± 2.4) |
| Not-hungry Trained | 46 | 87.6 ± 6.5 | 90.0 ± 6.6 | -2.4 ± 5.3 | 4.8 ± 3.2 (5.4 ± 3.6) |
| All Controls | 72 | 78.5 ± 11.6 | 89.8 ± 10.5 | -11.3 ± 14.8 | 15.4 ± 10.4 (17.1 ± 11.5) |
| Hungry Controls | 42 | 75.9 ± 9.8 | 89.2 ± 10.2 | -13.3 ± 11.9 | 14.9 ± 9.8 (16.7 ± 11.0) |
| Not-hungry Controls | 30 | 82.2 ± 12.9 | 90.6 ± 10.9 | -8.4 ± 17.9 | 16.1 ± 11.3 (17.8 ± 12.4) |
Mean ± SD, mg/dL. Subjects stated to be either hungry or not hungry and they estimated their blood glucose at the hospital laboratory before breakfast.
Measurements performed by hospital autoanalyzer.
Estimated less measured blood glucose, significant at p < 0.01.
Absolute value of difference between estimated and measured blood glucose and, inside parenthesis, % of measurement.
Subjects who declared feeling hungry at the laboratory investigative session. The agreement limits (mean difference ± 2SD) were -7.0 to +3.0 mg/dL and -41.3 to +18.6 mg/dL in trained and control groups, respectively.
Subjects reporting to be not hungry at the laboratory investigative session. The agreement limits were -12.9 to +8.2 mg/dL and -45.0 to +28.0 mg/dL in trained and control groups, respectively.
p < 0.01 vs trained hungry subjects in the respective column.
p = 0.08, not significant, vs all 64 trained subjects.
F = 10.6, p = 0.0001 on the difference between estimated and measured blood glucose.
t-test p = 0.0001 vs all trained subjects.
p = 0.001 vs number of hungry subjects in the trained group.
F = 24.6, p = 0.0001 on the difference between estimated and measured blood glucose.
t test p = 0.0001 vs trained hungry subjects.
F = 11.9, p = 0.0001 on the difference between estimated and measured blood glucose.
t test p = 0.07 vs trained not-hungry subjects.
Figure 3Estimated . Hollow red circles, trained hungry subjects (n = 18); hollow black circles, control (untrained) hungry subjects (n = 42). Linear correlation was significant for the trained data (dashed red line; r = 0.92; p = 0.0001) but not for the control data (dashed black line; r = 0.29, p = 0.06).
Figure 4Estimated . The highest glycemic value measured in trained hungry subjects was 87 mg/dL. Below this value of measured blood glucose, 18 subjects reported to be hungry (hollow red circles) and 14 subjects were not hungry (filled red squares). Linear regression is significant for the hungry subjects (dashed red line; r = 0.92; p = 0.0001) but not for those not hungry (solid red line; r = 0.18; p = 0.54).
Figure 5Estimation error . Consistent with previous figures, symbols and regression lines are: hollow red circles and dashed red line, trained hungry subjects (n = 18; r = 0.20; p = 0.43); filled red squares and solid red line, trained not-hungry subjects (n = 46; r = 0.24; p = 0.18); hollow black circles and dashed black line, control hungry subjects (n = 42; r = 0.55; p = 0.0001); filled black squares and solid black line, control not-hungry subjects (n = 30; r = 0.58; p = 0.001).
Number of hunger events and breakfast consumptions during the 7th week of training (diary) and at the final laboratory session in trained (n = 64) and control (n = 72) subjects.
| Hunger events in diary | 71.2% (319/448) | 70.0% (353/504) |
| Hunger events at the final session | 28.1% (18/64) | 58.3% (42/72) |
| Difference in hunger reports (% final - % diary) | -43.1% | -11.7% |
| Breakfast consumptions in diary | 74.6% (334/448) | 85.7% (432/504) |
| Breakfast consumptions at the final session | 60.9% (39/64) | 81.9% (59/72) |
| Difference in breakfast consumption (% final - % diary) | -13.7% | -3.8% |
Data are reported as percentages of the total (n values are indicated in parenthesis).
(p < 0.0001) vs decrease in trained subjects (Chi square).
(p < 0.01) vs decrease in trained subjects (Chi square).