| Literature DB >> 29701639 |
Emi Kondo1, Hiroyuki Sagayama2,3, Yosuke Yamada4, Keisuke Shiose5, Takuya Osawa6, Keiko Motonaga7, Shiori Ouchi8, Akiko Kamei9, Kohei Nakajima10, Yasuki Higaki11, Hiroaki Tanaka12, Hideyuki Takahashi13, Koji Okamura14.
Abstract
To determine energy density for rapid weight loss (RWL) of weight-classified sports, eight male elite wrestlers were instructed to lose 6% of body mass (BM) within 53 h. Energy deficit during the RWL was calculated by subtracting total energy expenditure (TEE) determined using the doubly labeled water method (DLW) from energy intake (EI) assessed with diet records. It was also estimated from body composition change estimated with the four-component model (4C) and other conventional methods. BM decreased significantly by 4.7 ± 0.5 kg (6.4 ± 0.5%). Total body water loss was the major component of the BM loss (71.0 ± 7.6%). TEE was 9446 ± 1422 kcal, and EI was 2366 ± 1184 kcal during the RWL of 53-h; therefore, the energy deficit was 7080 ± 1525 kcal. Thus, energy density was 1507 ± 279 kcal/kg ∆BM during the RWL, comparable with values obtained using the 4C, three-component model, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry, and stable isotope dilution. Energy density for RWL of wrestlers is lower than that commonly used (7400 or 7700 kcal/kg ΔBM). Although RWL is not recommended, we propose that commonly practiced extreme energy restriction such as 7400 or 7700 kcal/kg ΔBM during RWL appears to be meaningless.Entities:
Keywords: body composition; doubly labeled water; energy balance; multi-component model; weight loss
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29701639 PMCID: PMC5986416 DOI: 10.3390/nu10050536
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Figure 1Experimental design. Abbreviations: BM, body mass; REE, resting energy expenditure; TEE, TEE during rapid weight loss indicated by dashed arrow was obtained by conversion of the TEE during the weight stable period into 53 h; EEtraining, energy expenditure during training calculated by rate of the perceived exertion with METs compendium; EI, energy intake.
Participant characteristics and change of body composition using the 4C model with stable isotope dilution method and DXA.
| PRE | POST | Change | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 20.3 ± 0.5 | - | - |
| Height (cm) | 169.7 ± 3.5 | - | - |
| BM (kg) | 73.7 ± 8.0 | 69.0 ± 7.7 *** | −4.7 ± 0.5 |
| %fat | 12.4 ± 2.5 | 12.3 ± 2.5 | −0.1 ± 0.6 |
| FM (kg) | 9.1 ± 1.9 | 8.5 ± 1.8 ** | −0.6 ± 0.4 |
| FFM (kg) | 64.6 ± 7.4 | 60.5 ± 6.8 *** | −4.1 ± 0.8 |
| TBW (kg) | 46.8 ± 5.6 | 43.5 ± 5.2 *** | −3.4 ± 0.6 |
| TBW (%/kg FFM) | 72.5 ± 0.7 | 71.9 ± 0.6 * | −0.6 ± 0.4 |
| Mo (kg) | 3.2 ± 0.3 | 3.2 ± 0.3 * | 0.0 ± 0.0 |
| Mo (%/kg FFM) | 5.0 ± 0.3 | 5.3 ± 0.4 *** | 0.4 ± 0.0 |
| FFDS (kg) | 14.5 ± 1.6 | 13.8 ± 1.4 ** | −0.8 ± 0.4 |
| FFDS (%/kg FFM) | 22.5 ± 0.5 | 22.8 ± 0.3 | 0.2 ± 0.4 |
| Density of FFM (g/cm3) | 1.094 ± 0.003 | 1.098 ± 0.004 *** | 0.004 ± 0.001 |
Data are expressed as means ± SD, n = 8. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 vs. PRE using paired t-test. Abbreviations: BM, body mass; %fat, percentage of fat mass; FM, fat mass; FFM, fat free mass; TBW, total body water; Mo, bone mineral content; FFDS, fat free dry solid.
Differences in body composition changes per method used.
| Methods | PRE | POST | Change | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| %fat | 4C model | 12.4 ± 2.5 | 12.3 ± 2.5 | −0.1 ± 0.6 a |
| 3C model | 12.8 ± 2.4 | 12.5 ± 2.2 | −0.2 ± 0.5 a | |
| DXA | 11.1 ± 1.8 | 11.2 ± 2.1 | 0.1 ± 0.4 a | |
| SID | 13.2 ± 2.7 | 13.9 ± 2.4 ** | 0.7 ± 0.6 a | |
| ADP | 11.7 ± 2.4 | 10.3 ± 2.3 *** | −1.4 ± 0.9 b | |
| BIA | 13.3 ± 2.0 | 10.4 ± 2.5 *** | −2.8 ± 0.9 c | |
| Fat mass (kg) | 4C model | 9.1 ± 1.9 | 8.5 ± 1.8 ** | −0.6 ± 0.4 a |
| 3C model | 9.4 ± 1.9 | 8.6 ± 1.8 *** | −0.7 ± 0.4 a | |
| DXA | 8.2 ± 1.5 | 7.7 ± 1.6 ** | −0.4 ± 0.3 a | |
| SID | 9.7 ± 1.9 | 9.6 ± 1.7 | −0.1 ± 0.4 a | |
| ADP | 8.7 ± 2.2 | 7.2 ± 2.1 *** | −1.5 ± 0.6 b | |
| BIA | 9.8 ± 2.2 | 7.2 ± 2.3 *** | −2.5 ± 0.6 c | |
| Fat free mass (kg) | 4C model | 64.6 ± 7.4 | 60.5 ± 6.8 *** | −4.1 ± 0.8 ab |
| 3C model | 64.3 ± 7.3 | 60.3 ± 6.7 *** | −4.0 ± 0.7 ab | |
| DXA | 65.5 ± 7.2 | 61.3 ± 7.0 *** | −4.3 ± 0.4 ab | |
| SID | 64.0 ± 7.6 | 59.4 ± 7.1 *** | −4.6 ± 0.8 a | |
| ADP | 65.0 ± 7.0 | 61.8 ± 6.3 *** | −3.2 ± 0.8 bc | |
| BIA | 63.5 ± 6.4 | 61.3 ± 6.2 *** | −2.2 ± 0.4 c |
Data are expressed as mean ± SD, n = 8. Significant interaction between time and methods are indicated by repeated measures ANOVA. ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 showed main effects (time). Values of the change marked by different superscript letters within the column were different significantly different according to the Bonferroni post-hoc test, p < 0.05.
Figure 2Ratio of body composition changes after rapid weight loss. Data are expressed as mean ± SD, n = 8. ** p < 0.01 vs. 4C model, 3C model, DXA, SID, and ADP using Bonferroni post-hoc test. † p < 0.05 vs. 4C model, 3C model, DXA, and SID using the Bonferroni post-hoc test.
Food weight, energy and macronutrient intake and energy expenditure.
| Baseline | RWL Period | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Food weight | (g/day) | 3686 ± 1615 | 1464 ± 720 ** |
| Energy intake | (kcal/day) | 3528 ± 829 | 1071 ± 536 *** |
| (kcal/kg BM/day) | 47.9 ± 10.2 | 14.5 ± 6.8 *** | |
| Protein | (g/day) | 125 ± 30 | 38 ± 18 *** |
| (g/kg BM/day) | 1.7 ± 0.4 | 0.5 ± 0.2 *** | |
| (%energy) | 14.2 ± 0.9 | 14.6 ± 2.8 | |
| Fat | (g/day) | 110 ± 24 | 34 ± 20 *** |
| (g/kg BM/day) | 1.5 ± 0.3 | 0.5 ± 0.3 *** | |
| (%energy) | 28.7 ± 5.3 | 28.4 ± 9.3 | |
| Carbohydrate | (g/day) | 509 ± 149 | 154 ± 77 *** |
| (g/kg BM/day) | 6.9 ± 1.9 | 2.1 ± 1.0 *** | |
| (%energy) | 57.1 ± 5.4 | 57.0 ± 11.4 | |
Data are expressed as means ± SD, n = 8. ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001 for the difference from baseline using paired t-test.
Figure 3Energy density of rapid weight loss. Data are expressed as mean ± SD, n = 8. *** p < 0.001 vs. EI-TEE using Dunnett’s post-hoc test.