Article

Ghrelin Levels Increase After Pictures Showing Food

Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry, Munich, Germany.
Obesity (Impact Factor: 4.39). 01/2012; 20(6):1212-7. DOI: 10.1038/oby.2011.385
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The neuropeptide ghrelin is a major signal for food intake in various species including humans. After exogenous ghrelin administration, food intake and body weight increase in rodents. In normal human subjects, ghrelin administration increases self-rated appetite and calorie intake and prompts the imagination of favorite meals. It is unclear so far whether ghrelin levels are affected by external cues such as sight of food. We investigated the influence of pictures showing food compared to neutral pictures on ghrelin levels in young normal male subjects (n = 8). The study consisted of two consecutive sessions with a one-week interval. During each session, blood for later analysis of plasma concentrations of ghrelin was collected between 08:15 and 13:00 every 15 min (between 10:30 and 11:30 every 10 min). Breakfast and lunch was provided at 08:30 and 12:00, respectively. Fifty pictures were presented from 10:30 to 10:45 showing neutral images during the first session and food contents during the second session. As expected, ghrelin levels increased before each meal independent of the picture contents. In addition, ghrelin levels during the 30-min interval following the presentation of pictures with food increased significantly compared to the 30-min interval before this presentation (area under the curve (AUC): 188 % vs. 158 %, P < 0.05). The difference in the increases between the two picture conditions was also significant (P < 0.05). Our findings suggest that sight of food elevates ghrelin levels in healthy volunteers.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Alexander Yassouridis, Jul 09, 2014
2 Followers
 · 
171 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Ingestion of food affects the secretion of hormones from specialized endocrine cells scattered within the intestinal mucosa. Upon release, these hormones mostly decrease food intake by signaling information to the brain. Although enteroendocrine cells in the small intestine were thought to represent the predominant gut–brain regulators of food intake, recent advances also established a major role for gastric hormones in these regulatory pathways. First and foremost, the gastric endocrine X/A-like cell was in the focus of many studies due to the production of ghrelin, which is until now the only known orexigenic hormone that is peripherally produced and centrally acting. Although X/A-cells were initially thought to only release one hormone that stimulates food intake, this view has changed with the identification of additional peptide products also derived from this cell, namely desacyl ghrelin, obestatin, and nesfatin-1. Desacyl ghrelin may play a counter-regulatory role to the food intake stimulatory effect of ghrelin. The same property was suggested for obestatin; however, this hypothesis could not be confirmed in numerous subsequent studies. Moreover, the description of the stomach as the major source of the novel anorexigenic hormone nesfatin-1 derived from the NUCB2 gene further corroborated the assumption that the gastric X/A-like cell products are not only stimulant but also inhibitors of feeding, thereby acting as so far unique dual regulator of food intake located in a logistically important place where the gastrointestinal tract has initial contact with food.
    Current Gastroenterology Reports 12/2012; 14(6). DOI:10.1007/s11894-012-0291-3
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Obesity is emerging as the most significant health concern of the 21st century. Although this is attributable in part to changes in our environment-including the increased prevalence of energy-dense food-it also appears that several lifestyle factors may increase our vulnerability to this calorie-rich landscape. Epidemiologic studies have begun to show links between adiposity and behaviors such as television watching, alcohol intake, and sleep deprivation. However, these studies leave unclear the direction of this association. In addition, studies that investigated the acute impact of these factors on food intake have reported a wide variety of effect sizes, from highly positive to slightly negative. The purpose of this article was to provide a meta-analysis of the relation between lifestyle choices and increases in acute food intake. An initial search was performed on PubMed to collect articles relating television watching, sleep deprivation, and alcohol consumption to food intake. Only articles published before February 2012 were considered. Studies that took place in a controlled, laboratory setting with healthy individuals were included. Studies were analyzed by using 3 meta-analyses with random-effects models. In addition, a 1-factor ANOVA was run to discover any main effect of lifestyle. The 3 most prominent lifestyle factors-television watching, alcohol intake, and sleep deprivation-had significant short-term effects on food intake, with alcohol being more significant (Cohen's d = 1.03) than sleep deprivation (Cohen's d = 0.49) and television watching (Cohen's d = 0.2). Our results suggest that television watching, alcohol intake, and sleep deprivation are not merely correlated with obesity but likely contribute to it by encouraging excessive eating. Because these behaviors are all known to affect cognitive functions involved in reward saliency and inhibitory control, it may be that they represent common mechanisms through which this eating is facilitated.
    American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 07/2012; 96(3):492-7. DOI:10.3945/ajcn.112.039750 · 6.92 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: Cognitive factors and anticipation are known to influence food intake. The current study examined the effect of anticipation and actual consumption of food on hormone (ghrelin, cortisol, insulin) and glucose levels, appetite and ad libitum intake, to assess whether changes in hormone levels might explain the predicted differences in subsequent food intake. Design and Methods: During four breakfast sessions, participants consumed a yogurt preload that was either low-caloric (LC; 180 kcal/300 g) or high-caloric (HC; 530 kcal/300 g), and were provided with either consistent or inconsistent calorie information (i.e. stating the caloric content of the preload was low or high). Appetite ratings and hormone and glucose levels were measured at baseline (t=0), after providing the calorie information about the preload (t=20), after consumption of the preload (t=40) and just before ad libitum intake (t=60). Results: Ad libitum intake was lower after HC preloads (as compared to LC preloads; p<0.01). Intake after LC preloads was higher when provided with (consistent) LC-information (467±254 kcal) as compared to (inconsistent) HC-information (346±210 kcal), but intake after the HC preloads did not depend on the information provided (LC-info: 290±178 kcal, HCinfo: 333±179 kcal; caloric load*information p=0.03). Hormone levels did not respond in an anticipatory manner, and the post-prandial responses depended on actual calories consumed. Conclusions: These results suggest that both cognitive and physiological information determine food intake. When actual caloric intake was sufficient to produce physiological satiety, cognitive factors played no role; however, when physiological satiety was limited, cognitively-induced satiety reduced intake to comparable levels.
    Obesity 01/2013; · 4.39 Impact Factor
Show more