Article

Effects of macronutrient content and energy density of snacks consumed in a satiety state on the onset of the next meal.

Laboratoire de Physiologie du Comportement Alimentaire, Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, France.
Appetite (Impact Factor: 2.54). 05/2000; 34(2):161-8. DOI: 10.1006/appe.1999.0302
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We examined the effects of nutrient composition of a 1 MJ afternoon snack, consumed in a satiety state, on the spontaneous onset of the next meal in 11 young male subjects deprived of any temporal cues. All subjects attended four experimental sessions scheduled 2 weeks apart. The first, baseline, session served to establish: (1) the subjects' ad libitum lunch intake, (2) the latency of the spontaneous request for dinner following lunch, (3) ad libitum food intake at dinner. Lunches provided during the next three sessions were based on baseline lunch intakes. During the following three sessions, conducted in counterbalanced order, subjects were given a high-fat (58% of energy from fat), a high-protein (77%) or a high-carbohydrate (84%) snack to be consumed 240 min after the beginning of lunch. Latency to dinner and the amount of energy consumed at dinner were two dependent variables. Consumption of a high-protein snack delayed the request for dinner by 60 min. In contrast, high-fat snack delayed dinner request by 25 min, whereas high-carbohydrate snack delayed dinner request by 34 min. Snack composition had no impact on energy or macronutrient intakes during dinner.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
204 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Previous research suggests that monosodium glutamate (MSG) may have a biphasic effect on appetite, increasing appetite within a meal with its flavour-enhancing effect, but enhancing subsequent satiety due to its proposed role as a predictor of protein content. The present study explored this by assessing the impact of a 450 g soup preload differing in MSG concentration (1 % MSG added (MSG+) or no MSG (MSG–)) and nutrient content (low-energy control or high-energy carbohydrate or high-energy protein) on rated appetite and ad libitum intake of a test meal in thirty-five low-restraint male volunteers using a within-participant design. Protein-rich preloads significantly reduced intake at the test meal and resulted in more accurate energy compensation than did carbohydrate-rich preloads. This energy compensation was stronger in the MSG+ protein conditions when compared with MSG+ carbohydrate conditions. No clear differences in rated appetite were seen in MSG or the macronutrient conditions alone during preload ingestion or 45 min after intake. Overall, these findings indicate that MSG may act to further improve energy compensation when provided in a protein-rich context.
    Journal of Nutritional Science. 08/2014; 3:e15.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To compare the effects of the kappa-opioid agonist asimadoline and placebo on visceral sensation and gastrointestinal (GI) motor functions in humans, 91 healthy participants were randomized in a double-blind fashion to 0.15, 0.5, or 1.5 mg of asimadoline or placebo orally twice a day for 9 days. We assessed satiation (nutrient drink test), colonic compliance, tone, perception of colonic distension (barostat), and whole gut transit (scintigraphy). Treatment effect was assessed by analysis of covariance. Asimadoline increased nutrient drink intake (P = 0.03). Asimadoline decreased colonic tone during fasting (P = 0.03) without affecting postprandial colonic contraction, compliance, or transit. Gas scores in response to colonic distension were decreased with 0.5 mg of asimadoline at low levels (8 mmHg above operating pressure) of distension (P = 0.04) but not at higher levels of distension. Asimadoline at 1.5 mg increased gas scores at 16 mmHg of distension (P = 0.03) and pain scores at distensions of 8 and 16 mmHg (P = 0.003 and 0.03, respectively) but not at higher levels of distension. Further studies of this compound in diseases with altered satiation or visceral sensation are warranted.
    AJP Gastrointestinal and Liver Physiology 05/2003; 284(4):G558-66. · 3.65 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The global prevalence of overweight and obesity as a public health concern is well established and reflects the overall lack of success in our ability to achieve and maintain a healthy body weight. Being overweight and obese is associated with numerous comorbidities and is a risk factor for several of the leading causes of death, including cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, and many types of cancer. The foundation of treatment has been diet and exercise. There are >1,000 published weight loss diets, with more appearing in the lay literature and the media on a regular basis. The sheer number of existing diet regimens would suggest that no one diet has been universally successful at inducing and maintaining weight loss. Many of these dietary programs are based on sound scientific evidence and follow contemporary principles of weight loss. Others simply eliminate 1 or more of the essential food groups or recommend consumption of 1 type of food at the expense of other foods with little to no supporting evidence. The focus of this review is on weight loss diets, specifically those with the most supporting scientific evidence and those that are most likely to succeed in achievement and maintenance of desirable body weight. The effects of weight loss diets on energy expenditure, body weight, body composition, and metabolic parameters will be evaluated. Ultimately, the best diet is the one the patient will follow and incorporate into his or her daily life for lifelong maintenance of a healthy body weight.
    Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition. 10/2014;