-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Research shows a positive relationship between dietary energy density (ED) and body mass index (BMI), but dietary ED of weight loss maintainers is unknown. This preliminary investigation was a secondary data analysis that compared self-reported dietary ED and food group servings consumed in overweight adults (OW: BMI=27-45kg/m(2)), normal weight adults (NW: BMI=19-24.9 kg/m(2)), and weight loss maintainers (WLM: current BMI=19-24.9kg/m(2) [lost≥10% of maximum body weight and maintained loss for ≥5years]) participating in 2 studies, with data collected from July 2006 to March 2007. Three 24-h phone dietary recalls from 287 participants (OW=97, NW=85, WLM=105) assessed self-reported dietary intake. ED (kcal/g) was calculated by three methods (food+all beverages except water [F+AB], food+caloric beverages [F+CB], and food only [FO]). Differences in self-reported consumption of dietary ED, food group servings, energy, grams of food/beverages, fat, and fiber were assessed using one-way MANCOVA, adjusting for age, sex, and weekly energy expenditure from self-reported physical activity. ED, calculated by all three methods, was significantly lower in WLM than in NW or OW (FO: WLM=1.39±0.45kcal/g; NW=1.60±0.43 kcal/g; OW=1.83±0.42 kcal/g). Self-reported daily servings of vegetables and whole grains consumed were significantly higher in WLM compared to NW and OW (vegetables: WLM=4.9±3.1 servings/day; NW=3.9±2.0 servings/day; OW=3.4±1.7 servings/day; whole grains: WLM=2.2±1.8 servings/day; NW=1.4±1.2 servings/day; OW=1.3±1.3 servings/day). WLM self-reported consuming significantly less energy from fat and more fiber than the other two groups. Self-reported energy intake per day was significantly lower in WLM than OW, and WLM self-reported consuming significantly more grams of food/beverages per day than OW. These preliminary findings suggest that consuming a diet lower in ED, characterized by greater intake of vegetables and whole grains, may aid with weight loss maintenance and should be further tested in prospective randomized controlled trials.
Eating behaviors 04/2011; 12(2):119-25.
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Many factors influence children's dietary intake, including children's and parents' food hedonics (liking), and parent intake. This secondary data analysis studied the relationship between child and parent liking, and parent intake and child intake of fruits, vegetables, low-fat dairy, snack foods, and sweetened beverages in 4- to 9-year-old overweight/obese (body mass index ≥85th percentile) children presenting for obesity treatment (September 2005 to September 2007) in Providence, RI. One hundred thirty-five parent-child pairs, with complete baseline dietary (3-day food record) and food group hedonic data were included. Hedonic ratings were mean ratings using a 5-point Likert scale (lower scores represented greater liking of a food group). Children were aged 7.2±1.6 years, 63.0% girls, 12.6% African American, and 17.8% Hispanic, with a mean body mass index z score of 2.3±0.6. Total servings consumed by children over 3 days were: fruits 2.7±3.2, vegetables 3.4±2.5, low-fat dairy 2.4±2.1, snack foods 5.9±4.2, and sweetened beverages 2.7±3.1. After demographic and anthropometric variables were controlled, parent intake was positively related (P<0.05) to child intake of all food groups except sweetened beverages. Child liking was only significantly (P<0.05) related to child intake of vegetables. In young children with obesity/overweight, parent intake was consistently related to child intake. Changing parent intake may be important in helping to change the dietary intake of young children with overweight/obesity.
Journal of the American Dietetic Association 03/2011; 111(3):425-30. · 3.59 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Larger portion sizes increase energy intake, yet it is unclear whether single-serving packages can reduce intake. This study examined the effects of providing breakfast foods in single-serving packages and nonportioned packages on energy intake of these foods during an 8-week behavioral weight-loss program. In fall 2005, 19 adults (mean body mass index [calculated as kg/m(2)]=31.8+/-4.0) were randomized to conditions that provided foods in single-serving packages (Single-Serving) or in nonportioned packages (Standard). Overall amounts and types of foods provided were consistent across conditions: cereal and peaches (weeks 1, 3, 5, and 7) and applesauce and cheese (weeks 2, 4, 6, and 8). Participants were instructed to eat one serving of each food for breakfast and not to consume the provided foods at other times. Mean daily energy intake of the provided foods was the primary dependent variable. The Single-Serving group ate less energy from the combined pairs of foods provided together as compared to Standard (cereal and peaches, 117.0+/-3.2 kcal/day vs 143.5+/-39.3 kcal/day; P<0.05 and applesauce and cheese, 174.2+/-13.5 kcal/day vs 199.0+/-29.4 kcal/day; P<0.05). This effect was a result of less energy consumed from cereal and applesauce in Single-Serving compared to Standard conditions (cereal, 80.2+/-2.9 kcal/day vs 106.3+/-22.9 kcal/day; P<0.01 and applesauce, 44.5+/-0.6 kcal/day vs 59.3+/-5.0 kcal/day; P<0.01), with no differences in energy consumption for peaches and cheese (P>0.10). This suggests that single-serving packages may help reduce energy intake at breakfast within the context of a behavioral weight-control program.
Journal of the American Dietetic Association 11/2009; 109(11):1922-5. · 3.59 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Habitual dietary intake, dietary cognitive restraint (CR), disinhibition and hunger are eating behaviors that influence energy balance in both young and older adults. Since the prevalence of overweight and obesity in older adults is steadily rising, it is important to identify eating behavior adaptations that allow individuals to maintain a healthy body weight with advancing age. The association of age with habitual dietary intake, dietary CR, dishinhibition and hunger was examined in 30 older (60-72 years) and 30 younger (18-25 years) nonobese, weight stable, nondieting healthy adults pair-matched by age group for sex, physical activity level (active >150 min of physical activity per week, sedentary <150 min of physical activity per week) and BMI. Dietary CR was significantly greater and hunger was significantly less in older compared to young adults (both P<0.05). Disinhibition scores, habitual energy and macronutrient intake did not differ between age groups. These results indicate that weight management in older, nonobese adults may be facilitated by increased dietary CR and decreased susceptibility to hunger with age. Additionally, changes in energy and macronutrient intake may not be necessary for successful weight management with advancing age.
Eating Behaviors 08/2008; 9(3):370-5. · 1.58 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The purpose of this investigation was to determine if energy intake compensation is more accurate in males compared to females matched for age, habitual physical activity, cardiorespiratory fitness, and dietary cognitive restraint. Healthy, nonobese young men (n=12) and women (n=12) were provided with an ad libitum lunch meal on two occasions. Thirty minutes prior to the lunch meals, subjects were given either a yogurt preload (YP; 500 mL, 1988 kJ, men; 375 mL, 1507 kJ, women) or no preload (NP). Energy intake at the two lunch meals was measured. Visual analog scales were used to assess changes in hunger and fullness. Blood glucose concentrations were also determined. Energy intake compensation for the YP was significantly more accurate in the male compared to the female subjects (86.2+/-5.0 vs. 73.6+/-4.8% compensation). There were no sex differences in perceptions of hunger and satiety. In the pooled sample, hunger ratings were significantly higher in the NP condition, but there were no significant differences in fullness ratings between test meals. In the YP condition, glycemic response to the preload and the ad libitum meal was significantly higher in males compared to females. These results suggest that under acute test meal conditions, energy intake regulation is more accurate in males. Relative inability to regulate energy intake may predispose females to gain weight over time.
Appetite 08/2007; 49(1):141-7. · 2.59 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To determine whether the consumption of water 30 minutes before an ad libitum meal reduces meal energy intake in young and older adults.
Healthy, non-obese young (n = 29; age, 21 to 35 years) and older (n = 21; age, 60 to 80 years) individuals were provided with an ad libitum lunch meal on two occasions. Thirty minutes before the lunch meals, subjects were given either a water preload (WP: 375 mL, women; 500 mL, men) or no preload (NP). Energy intake at the two lunch meals was measured. Visual analog scales were used to assess changes in hunger, fullness, and thirst during the meal studies.
There was no significant difference in meal energy intake between conditions in the young subjects (892 + 51 vs. 913 +/- 54 kcal for NP and WP, respectively; p = 0.65). However, meal energy intake after the WP was significantly reduced relative to the NP condition in the older subjects (682 + 53 vs. 624 +/- 56 kcal for NP and WP, respectively; p = 0.02). This effect was caused primarily by the reduction in meal energy intake after water consumption in older men. Hunger ratings were lower and fullness ratings were higher in older compared with younger adults (p < 0.01). Fullness ratings were higher in the WP condition compared with the NP condition for all subjects (p = 0.01). No age differences in thirst were detected during the test meals.
Under acute test meal conditions, pre-meal water consumption reduces meal energy intake in older but not younger adults. Because older adults are at increased risk for overweight and obesity, intervention studies are needed to determine whether pre-meal water consumption is an effective long-term weight management strategy for the aging population.
Obesity 02/2007; 15(1):93-9. · 4.28 Impact Factor
