Individually timing high-protein preloads has no effect on daily energy intake, peptide YY and glucagon-like peptide-1

Willbond, Stephanie; Doucet, Éric

doi:10.1038/ejcn.2010.188

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Postprandial biochemical responses were poor predictors of subsequent EI, consistent with much of the existing evidence . However, appetite ratings tended to predict EI at lunch and the rest of the day.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of reducing portion size at a compulsory meal on later energy intake, gut hormones, and appetite in overweight adults

Lewis

Ahern

Solis-Trapala

et al. 2015

Obesity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Larger portion sizes (PS) are associated with greater energy intake (EI), but little evidence exists on the appetitive effects of PS reduction. This study investigated the impact of reducing breakfast PS on subsequent EI, postprandial gastrointestinal hormone responses, and appetite ratings. Methods: In a randomized crossover design (n 5 33 adults; mean BMI 29 kg/m 2 ), a compulsory breakfast was based on 25% of gender-specific estimated daily energy requirements; PS was reduced by 20% and 40%. EI was measured at an ad libitum lunch (240 min) and snack (360 min) and by weighed diet diaries until bed. Blood was sampled until lunch in 20 participants. Appetite ratings were measured using visual analogue scales. Results: EI at lunch (control: 2,930 6 203; 20% reduction: 2,853 6 198; 40% reduction: 2,911 6 179 kJ) and over the whole day except breakfast (control: 7,374 6 361; 20% reduction: 7,566 6 468; 40% reduction: 7,413 6 417 kJ) did not differ. Postprandial PYY, GLP-1, GIP, insulin, and fullness profiles were lower and hunger, desire to eat, and prospective consumption higher following 40% reduction compared to control. Appetite ratings profiles, but not hormone concentrations, were associated with subsequent EI. Conclusions: Smaller portions at breakfast led to reductions in gastrointestinal hormone secretion but did not affect subsequent energy intake, suggesting small reductions in portion size may be a useful strategy to constrain EI.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

“…Thus there is uncertainty about these present findings relating to PYY. In contrast to the clear exogenous effect, endogenous postprandial responses in PYY were not associated with subsequent EI , possibly as exogenous PYY tends to be used at supra‐physiological levels .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

Effect of reducing portion size at a compulsory meal on later energy intake, gut hormones, and appetite in overweight adults

Lewis

Ahern

Solis-Trapala

et al. 2015

Obesity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Doucet and Cameron (45) proposed that offering low‐calorie snacks specifically designed to elicit maximal post‐snack PYY and GLP‐1 levels to coincide with main courses could lead to better dietary control and compliance. However, the same group recently reported the timing of a high‐protein preload had no effect on PYY, GLP‐1 or energy intake (172).…”

Section: Future Directions: Gastrointestinal Targets Of Appetite Contmentioning

confidence: 97%

The effects of weight loss strategies on gastric emptying and appetite control

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The gastrointestinal tract plays an important role in the improved appetite control and weight loss in response to bariatric surgery. Other strategies which similarly alter gastrointestinal responses to food intake could contribute to successful weight management. The aim of this review is to discuss the effects of surgical, pharmacological and behavioural weight loss interventions on gastrointestinal targets of appetite control, including gastric emptying. Gastrointestinal peptides are also discussed because of their integrative relationship in appetite control. This review shows that different strategies exert diverse effects and there is no consensus on the optimal strategy for manipulating gastric emptying to improve appetite control. Emerging evidence from surgical procedures (e.g. sleeve gastrectomy and Roux‐en‐Y gastric bypass) suggests a faster emptying rate and earlier delivery of nutrients to the distal small intestine may improve appetite control. Energy restriction slows gastric emptying, while the effect of exercise‐induced weight loss on gastric emptying remains to be established. The limited evidence suggests that chronic exercise is associated with faster gastric emptying, which we hypothesize will impact on appetite control and energy balance. Understanding how behavioural weight loss interventions (e.g. diet and exercise) alter gastrointestinal targets of appetite control may be important to improve their success in weight management.

show abstract

“…Gut hormones can influence energy intake (Willbond & Doucet, 2011) and dietary intakes can influence their release. In particular the gut hormone ghrelin and its counterpart leptin have been shown to influence energy intake through alteration of hunger.…”

Section: Table 3 Effect Of High Protein (Hp) and Mixed Macronutrient mentioning

confidence: 99%

Protein Supplements: Do They Alter Dietary Intakes?

Mallard¹,

McLay-Cooke²,

Rehrer³

2014

International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effects of protein versus mixed macronutrient supplementation on total energy intake (TEI) and protein intake during an ad libitum diet were examined. Trained males undertook two, 2-week dietary interventions which were randomized, double blinded, and separated by 2 weeks. These were high-protein supplementation (HP: 1034.5 kJ energy, 29.6 g protein, 8.7 g fat and 12.3 g CHO) and standard meal supplementation (SM: 1039 kJ energy, 9.9 g protein, 9.5 g fat, and 29.4 g CHO) consumed daily following a week of baseline measures. Eighteen participants finished both interventions and one only completed HP. TEI (mean ± SD) was not different between baseline (11148 ± 3347 kJ) and HP (10705 ± 3143 kJ) nor between baseline and SM (12381 ± 3877 kJ), however, TEI was greater with SM than HP (923 ± 4015 kJ p = .043). Protein intake (%TEI) was greater with HP (22.4 ± 6.2%) than baseline (19.4 ± 5.4%; p = .008) but not SM (20.0 ± 5.0%). No differences in absolute daily protein intake were found. Absolute CHO intake was greater with SM than HP (52.0 ± 89.5 g, p = .006). No differences in fat intake were found. Body mass did not change between baseline (82.7 ± 11.2 kg) and either HP (83.1 ± 11.7 kg) or SM (82.9 ± 11.0 kg). Protein supplementation increases the relative proportion of protein in the diet, but doesn't increase the absolute amount of total protein or energy consumed. Thus some compensation by a reduction in other foods occurs. This is in contrast to a mixed nutrient supplement, which does not alter the proportion of protein consumed but does increase TEI.

show abstract

Individually timing high-protein preloads has no effect on daily energy intake, peptide YY and glucagon-like peptide-1

Cited by 3 publications

References 36 publications

Effect of reducing portion size at a compulsory meal on later energy intake, gut hormones, and appetite in overweight adults

Effect of reducing portion size at a compulsory meal on later energy intake, gut hormones, and appetite in overweight adults

The effects of weight loss strategies on gastric emptying and appetite control

Protein Supplements: Do They Alter Dietary Intakes?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About