M Claessens1, M A van Baak, S Monsheimer, W H M Saris. 1. Department of Human Biology, Nutrition and Toxicology Research institute Maastricht, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:High-protein (HP) diets are often advocated for weight reduction and weight loss maintenance. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to compare the effect of low-fat, high-carbohydrate (HC) and low-fat, HP ad libitum diets on weight maintenance after weight loss induced by a very low-calorie diet, and on metabolic and cardiovascular risk factors in healthy obese subjects. DESIGN:Forty-eight subjects completed the study that consisted of an energy restriction period of 5-6 weeks followed by a weight maintenance period of 12 weeks. During weight maintenance subjects received maltodextrin (HC group) or protein (HP group) (casein (HPC subgroup) or whey (HPW subgroup)) supplements (2 x 25 g per day), respectively and consumed a low-fat diet. RESULTS: Subjects in the HP diet group showed significantly better weight maintenance after weight loss (2.3 kg difference, P=0.04) and fat mass reduction (2.2 kg difference, P=0.02) than subjects in the HC group. Triglyceride (0.6 mM difference, P=0.01) and glucagon (9.6 pg ml(-1) difference, P=0.02) concentrations increased more in the HC diet group, while glucose (0.3 mM difference, P=0.02) concentration increased more in the HP diet group. Changes in total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, insulin, HOMAir index, HbA1c, leptin and adiponectin concentrations did not differ between the diets. No differences were found between the casein- or whey-supplemented HP groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that low-fat, high-casein or whey protein weight maintenance diets are more effective for weight control than low-fat, HC diets and do not adversely affect metabolic and cardiovascular risk factors in weight-reduced moderately obese subjects without metabolic or cardiovascular complications.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: High-protein (HP) diets are often advocated for weight reduction and weight loss maintenance. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to compare the effect of low-fat, high-carbohydrate (HC) and low-fat, HP ad libitum diets on weight maintenance after weight loss induced by a very low-calorie diet, and on metabolic and cardiovascular risk factors in healthy obese subjects. DESIGN: Forty-eight subjects completed the study that consisted of an energy restriction period of 5-6 weeks followed by a weight maintenance period of 12 weeks. During weight maintenance subjects received maltodextrin (HC group) or protein (HP group) (casein (HPC subgroup) or whey (HPW subgroup)) supplements (2 x 25 g per day), respectively and consumed a low-fat diet. RESULTS: Subjects in the HP diet group showed significantly better weight maintenance after weight loss (2.3 kg difference, P=0.04) and fat mass reduction (2.2 kg difference, P=0.02) than subjects in the HC group. Triglyceride (0.6 mM difference, P=0.01) and glucagon (9.6 pg ml(-1) difference, P=0.02) concentrations increased more in the HC diet group, while glucose (0.3 mM difference, P=0.02) concentration increased more in the HP diet group. Changes in total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, insulin, HOMAir index, HbA1c, leptin and adiponectin concentrations did not differ between the diets. No differences were found between the casein- or whey-supplemented HP groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that low-fat, high-casein or whey protein weight maintenance diets are more effective for weight control than low-fat, HC diets and do not adversely affect metabolic and cardiovascular risk factors in weight-reduced moderately obese subjects without metabolic or cardiovascular complications.
Authors: J D Krebs; C R Elley; A Parry-Strong; H Lunt; P L Drury; D A Bell; E Robinson; S A Moyes; J I Mann Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Line Q Bendtsen; Janne K Lorenzen; Nathalie T Bendsen; Charlotte Rasmussen; Arne Astrup Journal: Adv Nutr Date: 2013-07-01 Impact factor: 8.701
Authors: Wenjie Ma; Tao Huang; Yan Zheng; Molin Wang; George A Bray; Frank M Sacks; Lu Qi Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2016-04-07 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Søren Gregersen; Sara Bystrup; Ann Overgaard; Per B Jeppesen; Anne C Sønderstgaard Thorup; Erik Jensen; Kjeld Hermansen Journal: Rev Diabet Stud Date: 2014-02-10
Authors: R Malhotra; K L Cavanaugh; W J Blot; T A Ikizler; L Lipworth; E K Kabagambe Journal: Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis Date: 2016-07-21 Impact factor: 4.222
Authors: Antti A Mero; Heikki Huovinen; Olle Matintupa; Juha J Hulmi; Risto Puurtinen; Hannele Hohtari; Tuomo Am Karila Journal: J Int Soc Sports Nutr Date: 2010-01-25 Impact factor: 5.150