BACKGROUND: Consuming foods low in energy density (kcal/g) decreases energy intake over several days, but the effectiveness of this strategy for weight loss has not been tested. OBJECTIVE: The effects on weight loss of 2 strategies for reducing the energy density of the diet were compared over 1 y. DESIGN:Obese women (n = 97) were randomly assigned to groups counseled either to reduce their fat intake (RF group) or to reduce their fat intake and increase their intake of water-rich foods, particularly fruit and vegetables (RF+FV group). No goals for energy or fat intake were assigned; the subjects were instructed to eat ad libitum amounts of food while following the principles of their diet. RESULTS: After 1 y, study completers (n = 71) in both groups had significant decreases in body weight (P < 0.0001). Subjects in the RF+FV group, however, had a significantly different pattern of weight loss (P = 0.002) than did subjects in the RF group. After 1 y, the RF+FV group lost 7.9 +/- 0.9 kg and the RF group lost 6.4 +/- 0.9 kg. Analysis of all randomly assigned subjects also showed a different pattern of weight loss between groups (P = 0.021). Diet records indicated that both groups had similar reductions in fat intake. The RF+FV group, however, had a lower dietary energy density than did the RF group (P = 0.019) as the result of consuming a greater weight of food (P = 0.025), especially fruit and vegetables (P = 0.037). The RF+FV group also reported less hunger (P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Reducing dietary energy density, particularly by combining increased fruit and vegetable intakes with decreased fat intake, is an effective strategy for managing body weight while controlling hunger.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Consuming foods low in energy density (kcal/g) decreases energy intake over several days, but the effectiveness of this strategy for weight loss has not been tested. OBJECTIVE: The effects on weight loss of 2 strategies for reducing the energy density of the diet were compared over 1 y. DESIGN: Obese women (n = 97) were randomly assigned to groups counseled either to reduce their fat intake (RF group) or to reduce their fat intake and increase their intake of water-rich foods, particularly fruit and vegetables (RF+FV group). No goals for energy or fat intake were assigned; the subjects were instructed to eat ad libitum amounts of food while following the principles of their diet. RESULTS: After 1 y, study completers (n = 71) in both groups had significant decreases in body weight (P < 0.0001). Subjects in the RF+FV group, however, had a significantly different pattern of weight loss (P = 0.002) than did subjects in the RF group. After 1 y, the RF+FV group lost 7.9 +/- 0.9 kg and the RF group lost 6.4 +/- 0.9 kg. Analysis of all randomly assigned subjects also showed a different pattern of weight loss between groups (P = 0.021). Diet records indicated that both groups had similar reductions in fat intake. The RF+FV group, however, had a lower dietary energy density than did the RF group (P = 0.019) as the result of consuming a greater weight of food (P = 0.025), especially fruit and vegetables (P = 0.037). The RF+FV group also reported less hunger (P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Reducing dietary energy density, particularly by combining increased fruit and vegetable intakes with decreased fat intake, is an effective strategy for managing body weight while controlling hunger.
Authors: Ursula G Kyle; Ingvar Bosaeus; Antonio D De Lorenzo; Paul Deurenberg; Marinos Elia; José Manuel Gómez; Berit Lilienthal Heitmann; Luisa Kent-Smith; Jean-Claude Melchior; Matthias Pirlich; Hermann Scharfetter; Annemie M W J Schols; Claude Pichard Journal: Clin Nutr Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 7.324
Authors: M M Windhauser; M A Evans; M L McCullough; J F Swain; P H Lin; K P Hoben; C S Plaisted; N M Karanja; W M Vollmer Journal: J Am Diet Assoc Date: 1999-08
Authors: C L Rock; M D Thornquist; A R Kristal; R E Patterson; D A Cooper; M L Neuhouser; D Neumark-Sztainer; L J Cheskin Journal: J Nutr Date: 1999-04 Impact factor: 4.798
Authors: Jenny H Ledikwe; Heidi M Blanck; Laura Kettel Khan; Mary K Serdula; Jennifer D Seymour; Beth C Tohill; Barbara J Rolls Journal: J Nutr Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 4.798
Authors: Hsin-Chia Hung; Kaumudi J Joshipura; Rui Jiang; Frank B Hu; David Hunter; Stephanie A Smith-Warner; Graham A Colditz; Bernard Rosner; Donna Spiegelman; Walter C Willett Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2004-11-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Jennifer Lin; Shumin M Zhang; Nancy R Cook; Kathryn M Rexrode; Simin Liu; JoAnn E Manson; I-Min Lee; Julie E Buring Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Jessica L Thomson; Lisa M Tussing-Humphreys; Stephen J Onufrak; Jamie M Zoellner; Carol L Connell; Margaret L Bogle; Kathy Yadrick Journal: J Nutr Date: 2011-10-26 Impact factor: 4.798
Authors: Véronique L Roger; Alan S Go; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Robert J Adams; Jarett D Berry; Todd M Brown; Mercedes R Carnethon; Shifan Dai; Giovanni de Simone; Earl S Ford; Caroline S Fox; Heather J Fullerton; Cathleen Gillespie; Kurt J Greenlund; Susan M Hailpern; John A Heit; P Michael Ho; Virginia J Howard; Brett M Kissela; Steven J Kittner; Daniel T Lackland; Judith H Lichtman; Lynda D Lisabeth; Diane M Makuc; Gregory M Marcus; Ariane Marelli; David B Matchar; Mary M McDermott; James B Meigs; Claudia S Moy; Dariush Mozaffarian; Michael E Mussolino; Graham Nichol; Nina P Paynter; Wayne D Rosamond; Paul D Sorlie; Randall S Stafford; Tanya N Turan; Melanie B Turner; Nathan D Wong; Judith Wylie-Rosett Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-12-15 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Leonard H Epstein; Jodie L Robinson; Jennifer L Temple; James N Roemmich; Angela L Marusewski; Rachel L Nadbrzuch Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2009-01-28 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Tanja V E Kral; Albert J Stunkard; Robert I Berkowitz; Nicolas Stettler; Virginia A Stallings; April Kabay; Myles S Faith Journal: Eat Behav Date: 2009-07-15