Anestis Dougkas1,2, Elin Östman3. 1. Food for Health Science Center, Lund University, Lund, 221 00, Sweden. anestis.dougkas@institutpaulbocuse.com. 2. Institut Paul Bocuse Research Centre, 6913, Ecully, France. anestis.dougkas@institutpaulbocuse.com. 3. Food for Health Science Center, Lund University, Lund, 221 00, Sweden.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The satiating effect of animal vs plant proteins remains unknown. The present study examined the effects of breakfasts containing animal proteins [milk (AP)], a blend of plant proteins [oat, pea and potato (VP)] or 50:50 mixture of the two (MP) compared with a carbohydrate-rich meal (CHO) on appetite, energy intake (EI) and metabolic measures. METHODS: A total of 28 males [mean age 27.4 (±SD 4.2) years, BMI 23.4 (±2.1) kg/m2] consumed three isoenergetic (1674 kJ) rice puddings matched for energy density and macronutrient content as breakfast (25% E from protein) in a single-blind, randomised, cross over design. Appetite ratings and blood samples were collected and assessed at baseline and every 30 and 60 min, respectively, until an ad libitum test meal was served 3.5 h later. Free-living appetite was recorded hourly and EI in weighed food records for the remainder of the day. RESULTS: No differences in subjective appetite ratings were observed after consumption of the AP, VP and MP. Furthermore, there were no differences between the AP, VP, MP and CHO breakfasts in ad libitum EI and self-reported EI during the remainder of the day. Although insulin metabolism was not affected, CHO induced a higher glucose response (P = 0.001) and total amino acids concentration was in the order of AP = MP > VP > CHO breakfast (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Manipulating the protein source of foods consumed as breakfast, elicited comparable effects on appetite and EI at both laboratory and free-living environment in healthy men.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The satiating effect of animal vs plant proteins remains unknown. The present study examined the effects of breakfasts containing animal proteins [milk (AP)], a blend of plant proteins [oat, pea and potato (VP)] or 50:50 mixture of the two (MP) compared with a carbohydrate-rich meal (CHO) on appetite, energy intake (EI) and metabolic measures. METHODS: A total of 28 males [mean age 27.4 (±SD 4.2) years, BMI 23.4 (±2.1) kg/m2] consumed three isoenergetic (1674 kJ) rice puddings matched for energy density and macronutrient content as breakfast (25% E from protein) in a single-blind, randomised, cross over design. Appetite ratings and blood samples were collected and assessed at baseline and every 30 and 60 min, respectively, until an ad libitum test meal was served 3.5 h later. Free-living appetite was recorded hourly and EI in weighed food records for the remainder of the day. RESULTS: No differences in subjective appetite ratings were observed after consumption of the AP, VP and MP. Furthermore, there were no differences between the AP, VP, MP and CHO breakfasts in ad libitum EI and self-reported EI during the remainder of the day. Although insulin metabolism was not affected, CHO induced a higher glucose response (P = 0.001) and total amino acids concentration was in the order of AP = MP > VP > CHO breakfast (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Manipulating the protein source of foods consumed as breakfast, elicited comparable effects on appetite and EI at both laboratory and free-living environment in healthy men.
Entities:
Keywords:
Amino acids; Appetite; Energy intake; Insulin; Milk proteins; Pea protein
Authors: Louise M Burke; Julie A Winter; David Cameron-Smith; Marc Enslen; Michelle Farnfield; Jacques Decombaz Journal: Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab Date: 2012-07-04 Impact factor: 4.599
Authors: Eva Almiron-Roig; Luigi Palla; Kathryn Guest; Cassandra Ricchiuti; Neil Vint; Susan A Jebb; Adam Drewnowski Journal: Nutr Rev Date: 2013-06-10 Impact factor: 7.110