OBJECTIVE: The hypothesis was studied whether restrained eaters had reduced resting metabolic rate (RMR) and diet-induced thermogenesis (DIT) and whether the effect was caused by weight cycling. METHOD: 12 restrained and 12 unrestrained eaters (classified by the Three Factor Eating Questionnaire) were studied with regard to RMR an DIT by direct calorimetry using a ventilated hood system. In a second study 12 weight cycling restrained eaters and 12 weight stable restrained eaters were compared. RESULTS: Restrained eaters had significantly lower RMR than unrestrained eaters. No difference in DIT was found. Weight cycling and no weight cycling restrained eaters did not differ with regard to RMR and DIT. DISCUSSION: These data indicate that restrained eating but not weight cycling significantly reduces RMR.
OBJECTIVE: The hypothesis was studied whether restrained eaters had reduced resting metabolic rate (RMR) and diet-induced thermogenesis (DIT) and whether the effect was caused by weight cycling. METHOD: 12 restrained and 12 unrestrained eaters (classified by the Three Factor Eating Questionnaire) were studied with regard to RMR an DIT by direct calorimetry using a ventilated hood system. In a second study 12 weight cycling restrained eaters and 12 weight stable restrained eaters were compared. RESULTS: Restrained eaters had significantly lower RMR than unrestrained eaters. No difference in DIT was found. Weight cycling and no weight cycling restrained eaters did not differ with regard to RMR and DIT. DISCUSSION: These data indicate that restrained eating but not weight cycling significantly reduces RMR.
Authors: Emma J Stinson; Alexis L Graham; Marie S Thearle; Marci E Gluck; Jonathan Krakoff; Paolo Piaggi Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2019-01-16 Impact factor: 5.095