Peihua Gu

Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, United States

Are you Peihua Gu?

Claim your profile

Publications (2)3.77 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background & Aims Restrained food consumption may alter metabolic function and contribute to eventual weight gain; however, sex differences in these relationships have not been assessed. The objective of this study was to examine the relationship between restrained eating and insulin resistance and the influence of body mass index and sex on this relationship in a large community sample of both men and women. We hypothesized that restrained eating would be related to insulin resistance and this relationship would be influenced by sex and body mass index. Methods In this cross-sectional, observational study, we studied 487 individuals from the community (men N = 222, women N = 265), who ranged from lean (body mass index 18.5-24.9 kg/m2, N = 173), overweight (body mass index 25-29.9 kg/m2, N = 159) and obese (body mass index > 30 kg/m2, N = 155) weight categories. We assessed restrained eating using the Dutch Eating Behavior Questionnaire and obtained fasting morning plasma insulin and glucose on all subjects. Results In men, but not in women, restrained eating was related to homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance levels were significantly higher in men who were high- versus low-restrained eaters (p = 0.0006). Conclusions This study is the first to report sex differences with regard to the relationship between restrained eating and insulin resistance. Our results suggest that high restraint eating is associated with insulin resistance in men but not in women.
    Eating Behaviors 04/2014; 15(2). DOI:10.1016/j.eatbeh.2014.03.008 · 1.58 Impact Factor
  • Emily B Ansell · Peihua Gu · Keri Tuit · Rajita Sinha ·
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The stress-vulnerability model of addiction predicts that environmental factors, such as cumulative stress, will result in individual adaptations that decrease self-control, increase impulsivity, and increase risk for addiction. Impulsivity and cumulative stress are risk factors for tobacco smoking that are rarely examined simultaneously in research. We examined the indirect and direct effects of cumulative adversity in a community sample consisting of 291 men and women who participated in an assessment of cumulative stress, self-reported impulsivity, and smoking history. Data were analyzed using bootstrapping techniques to estimate indirect effects of stress on smoking via impulsivity. Cumulative adversity is associated with smoking status via direct effects and indirect effects through impulsivity scores. Additional models examining specific types of stress indicate contributions of traumatic stress and recent life events as well as chronic relationship stressors. Overall, cumulative stress is associated with increased risk of smoking via increased impulsivity and via pathways independent of impulsivity. These findings support the stress-vulnerability model and highlight the utility of mediation models in assessing how, and for whom, cumulative stress increases risk of current cigarette smoking. Increasing self-control is a target for interventions with individuals who have experienced cumulative adversity.
    Human Psychopharmacology Clinical and Experimental 03/2012; 27(2):200-8. DOI:10.1002/hup.1269 · 2.19 Impact Factor