David John Hume1, Sonja Yokum2, Eric Stice2. 1. Division of Exercise Science and Sports Medicine, Department of Human Biology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa; and davidjohnhume@gmail.com. 2. Oregon Research Institute, Eugene, OR.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of studies that have prospectively tested the energy surfeit theory of obesity with the use of objectively estimated energy intake and energy expenditure in humans. An alternative theory is that homeostatic regulation of body weight is more effective when energy intake and expenditure are both high (high energy flux), implying that low energy flux should predict weight gain. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine the predictive relations of energy balance and energy flux to future weight gain and tested whether results were replicable in 2 independent samples. DESIGN: Adolescents (n = 154) and college-aged women (n = 75) underwent 2-wk objective doubly labeled water, resting metabolic rate, and percentage of body fat measures at baseline. Percentage of body fat was measured annually for 3 y of follow-up for the adolescent sample and for 2 y of follow-up for the young adult sample. RESULTS: Low energy flux, but not energy surfeit, predicted future increases in body fat in both studies. Furthermore, high energy flux appeared to prevent fat gain in part because it was associated with a higher resting metabolic rate. CONCLUSION: Counter to the energy surfeit model of obesity, results suggest that increasing energy expenditure may be more effective for reducing body fat than caloric restriction, which is currently the treatment of choice for obesity. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02084836.
BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of studies that have prospectively tested the energy surfeit theory of obesity with the use of objectively estimated energy intake and energy expenditure in humans. An alternative theory is that homeostatic regulation of body weight is more effective when energy intake and expenditure are both high (high energy flux), implying that low energy flux should predict weight gain. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine the predictive relations of energy balance and energy flux to future weight gain and tested whether results were replicable in 2 independent samples. DESIGN: Adolescents (n = 154) and college-aged women (n = 75) underwent 2-wk objective doubly labeled water, resting metabolic rate, and percentage of body fat measures at baseline. Percentage of body fat was measured annually for 3 y of follow-up for the adolescent sample and for 2 y of follow-up for the young adult sample. RESULTS: Low energy flux, but not energy surfeit, predicted future increases in body fat in both studies. Furthermore, high energy flux appeared to prevent fat gain in part because it was associated with a higher resting metabolic rate. CONCLUSION: Counter to the energy surfeit model of obesity, results suggest that increasing energy expenditure may be more effective for reducing body fat than caloric restriction, which is currently the treatment of choice for obesity. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02084836.
Authors: Rikke Krogh-Madsen; Maria Pedersen; Thomas P J Solomon; Sine Haugaard Knudsen; Louise Seier Hansen; Kristian Karstoft; Louise Lehrskov-Schmidt; Karin Kaereby Pedersen; Carsten Thomsen; Jens Juul Holst; Bente K Pedersen Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2013-11-07
Authors: Andreas Schwiertz; David Taras; Klaus Schäfer; Silvia Beijer; Nicolaas A Bos; Christiane Donus; Philip D Hardt Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2009-06-04 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: A Avenell; J Broom; T J Brown; A Poobalan; L Aucott; S C Stearns; W C S Smith; R T Jung; M K Campbell; A M Grant Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Desiree M Seeyave; Sharon Coleman; Danielle Appugliese; Robert F Corwyn; Robert H Bradley; Natalie S Davidson; Niko Kaciroti; Julie C Lumeng Journal: Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med Date: 2009-04
Authors: Jasper Most; L Anne Gilmore; Abby D Altazan; Marshall St Amant; Robbie A Beyl; Eric Ravussin; Leanne M Redman Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Marie A Labouesse; Andrea M Sartori; Oliver Weinmann; Eleanor H Simpson; Christoph Kellendonk; Ulrike Weber-Stadlbauer Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2018-09-25 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: E Matthew Morris; Roberto D Noland; Julie A Allen; Colin S McCoin; Qing Xia; Devin C Koestler; Robin P Shook; John R B Lighton; Julie A Christianson; John P Thyfault Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2020-08-28 Impact factor: 9.298