Energy intake and appetite following exercise in lean and overweight girls.
ABSTRACT Twelve 11-year-old girls (six lean, six overweight) were given meals in the laboratory and at school for 5 days, with exercise imposed for 2 days and sedentary activities on another 2 days in counterbalanced sequences. During a preliminary visit, the FLEX heart rate method was used to predict individual exercise durations eliciting 1.5 MJ energy expenditure. Morning and afternoon cycling exercise was subsequently imposed in the laboratory on 2 consecutive days as part of the 5-day intervention. Energy intake was measured via observation with meals being standardised between conditions, prepared and weighed by the research team. Hunger, fullness and desire to eat were rated by subjects immediately before and after meals and exercise. Energy expenditure was significantly elevated in the exercise condition, compared to sedentary. No exercise-induced differences in total daily or 5-day total energy intake were observed between groups or treatments. Overweight girls, however, rated their appetite immediately after exercise as being stronger than they rated it before exercise. In response to exercise-induced energy expenditure, 11-year old overweight and lean girls did not elevate their energy intake over a 5-day period.
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study is to determine the impact of moderate intensity exercise on acute post-exercise energy intake (EI) in normal and overweight females. Twelve normal weight (BMI<25), and 12 over weight (BMI>25) inactive women (mean age 35+/-8) participated in a 2-day experimental study. On the exercise day, participants were asked to walk on a treadmill at 60% maximum heart rate for 1h. After the exercise, participants selected and ate food at a university cafeteria. Post-exercise EI was compared to a non-exercise day. A single mixed model repeated 2 x 2 ANOVA was used to determine the impact of exercise on post-exercise EI. The overweight women consumed significantly more (p<0.02) than the normal weight women on both experimental days and there was a significant (p<0.03) difference in fat intake. The higher post -exercise EI of the overweight group may have been due to the energy needs associated with a higher BMI but it is also possible that cognitive factors, food availability and environment may influence post-exercise EI.Appetite 02/2003; 40(1):43-6. · 2.54 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: 1. A modified heart rate (HR) method for predicting total energy expenditure (TEE) was cross-validated against whole-body calorimetry (CAL). Minute-by-minute HR was converted to energy expenditure (EE) using individual calibration curves when HR exceeded a pre-determined 'FLEX' value designed to discriminate periods of activity. ('FLEX' HR was defined as the mean of the highest HR during rest and the lowest HR during the lightest imposed exercise.) Sedentary EE (below FLEX) was calculated as the mean EE during lying down, sitting and standing at rest. Sleeping EE was calculated as basal metabolic rate (BMR) predicted from standard equations. 2. Calibration curves of oxygen consumption v. HR for different postures at rest and during exercise were obtained for twenty healthy subjects (eleven male, nine female); mean r 0.941 (SD 0.04). The mean FLEX HR for men and women were 86 (SD 10) and 96 (SD 6) beats/min respectively. 3. Simultaneous measurements of HR and EE were made during 21 h continuous CAL, which included 4 x 30 min imposed exercise (cycling, rowing, stepping, jogging). HR exceeded FLEX for a mean of 98 (SD 41) min. Mean TEE by CAL (TEE.CAL) was 8063 (SD 1445) kJ. 4. The HR method yielded a mean non-significant underestimate in TEE (TEE.HR) of 1.2 (SD 6.2)% (range -11.4 to +10.6%). Regression of TEE.HR (Y) v. TEE.CAL (X) yielded Y = 0.868 X + 927 kJ, r 0.943, SE of the estimate 458 kJ, n 20. 5. The satisfactory predictive power and low cost of the method makes it suitable for many field and epidemiological applications.British Journal Of Nutrition 04/1989; 61(2):175-86. · 3.30 Impact Factor
- BMJ. 01/2000; 320:1240-1243.