Matching Items (2)
Description
It is widely recognized that dietary protein induces greater satiety compared to carbohydrate and fat. Two separate trials were conducted to assess the use of protein as a dietary approach to manage energy intake (EI). The first, crossover trial, examined 24– hour EI after consuming a high protein bar (HP) vs. a high carbohydrate (HC) bar upon awakening on two separate days and a control, no bar day. Of the 54 participants who entered the trial, 37 subjects completed the study in its entirety. Results showed there was no significant difference in mean EI between the intervention days when the bars were consumed and the control day. The subjects consumed 1752±99 kcal on the control day, and 1846±75 and 1891±110 kcal on the days the HP and HC bars were consumed, respectively (P=0.591). However, compared to the control day, snack bar ingestion was significantly related to an increase in EI for the subjects who self-reported high weekly physical activity levels (n=11) (+22%; P=0.038 and +45%; P=0.030, HP and HC bars, respectively). These data suggest that individuals who have moderate to low physical activity levels compensate for the ingestion of energy bars (regardless of protein content) over a 24–hour period. The second parallel-arm, pilot trial examined the effect of 6 g daily gelatin ingestion vs. control on EI and weight change in healthy, overweight and obese women who initiated a walking program. Of the 37 women who entered the trial, 28 completed the six week trial. The results showed activity level (steps/d) increased in both groups (+ 22%, P=0.022). There was a significant group difference in mean EI at week 6 vs. baseline (–174±612 kcal/d and +197±320 kcal/d, P=0.001; gelatin and control groups, respectively). However, there was no significant between group difference for changes in weight, percent body fat and waist circumference. Those subjects having baseline Disinhibition scores of ≥12 gained significantly more weight throughout the study vs. those scoring <12 (P=0.004). These results indicate that daily gelatin ingestion may be a practical strategy for controlling EI among overweight and obese women initiating an exercise program.
ContributorsTrier, Catherine M (Author) / Johnston, Carol S. (Thesis advisor) / Swan, Pamela D. (Committee member) / Mayol-Kreiser, Sandra N. (Committee member) / Appel, Christy L. (Committee member) / Gaesser, Glenn A. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
Description
ABSTRACT
Objective: This research examined the effectiveness of a weight loss diet incorporating high protein pasta and breakfast cereal products as compared to a weight loss diet using conventional versions of gluten-free pasta and breakfast cereal.
Design: In a 6-week parallel-arm food trial (representing the first phase of a 12-week cross-over trial), 26 overweight and obese (Mean BMI 43.1 ± 12.4 kg/m²) participants, free of related comorbidities, were randomly assigned to the Zone diet (~29% energy intake from protein) or a control diet (~9% energy from protein). Participants were included in the trial if they satisfied the criteria for elevated risk for metabolic syndrome (top half of the TG/HDL ratios of all who were tested). Participants were instructed to eat prepared meals (total of 7 cereal packets and 14 pasta meals weekly) that included patented food technologies for the Zone diet and commercially available gluten-free rice pasta and a conventional name brand boxed cereal for the control diet. Body composition was measured with a bioelectrical impedance scale at weeks 1, and 6. Food records and diet adherence were recorded daily by the participants.
Results: Both the Zone and control diets resulted in significant weight loss (-2.9 ± 3.1 kg vs. -2.7 ± 2.6 kg respectively) over time (p = 0.03) but not between groups (p = 0.96). Although not statistically significant, the Zone diet appears to have influenced more weight loss at trial weeks 3, 4, and 5 (p = 0.46) than the control diet. The change in FFM was significant (p = 0.02) between the Zone and control groups (1.4 ± 3.6 kg vs. -0.6 ± 1.5 kg respectively) at week-6. Study adherence did not differ significantly between diet groups (p = 0.53).
Conclusions: Energy-restricted diets are effective for short-term weight loss and high protein intake appears to promote protein sparing and preservation of FFM during weight loss. The macronutrient profile of the diet does not appear to influence calorie intake, but it does appear to influence the quality of weight loss. Other measures of body composition and overall health outcomes should be examined by future studies to appropriately identify the potential health effects between these diet types.
Objective: This research examined the effectiveness of a weight loss diet incorporating high protein pasta and breakfast cereal products as compared to a weight loss diet using conventional versions of gluten-free pasta and breakfast cereal.
Design: In a 6-week parallel-arm food trial (representing the first phase of a 12-week cross-over trial), 26 overweight and obese (Mean BMI 43.1 ± 12.4 kg/m²) participants, free of related comorbidities, were randomly assigned to the Zone diet (~29% energy intake from protein) or a control diet (~9% energy from protein). Participants were included in the trial if they satisfied the criteria for elevated risk for metabolic syndrome (top half of the TG/HDL ratios of all who were tested). Participants were instructed to eat prepared meals (total of 7 cereal packets and 14 pasta meals weekly) that included patented food technologies for the Zone diet and commercially available gluten-free rice pasta and a conventional name brand boxed cereal for the control diet. Body composition was measured with a bioelectrical impedance scale at weeks 1, and 6. Food records and diet adherence were recorded daily by the participants.
Results: Both the Zone and control diets resulted in significant weight loss (-2.9 ± 3.1 kg vs. -2.7 ± 2.6 kg respectively) over time (p = 0.03) but not between groups (p = 0.96). Although not statistically significant, the Zone diet appears to have influenced more weight loss at trial weeks 3, 4, and 5 (p = 0.46) than the control diet. The change in FFM was significant (p = 0.02) between the Zone and control groups (1.4 ± 3.6 kg vs. -0.6 ± 1.5 kg respectively) at week-6. Study adherence did not differ significantly between diet groups (p = 0.53).
Conclusions: Energy-restricted diets are effective for short-term weight loss and high protein intake appears to promote protein sparing and preservation of FFM during weight loss. The macronutrient profile of the diet does not appear to influence calorie intake, but it does appear to influence the quality of weight loss. Other measures of body composition and overall health outcomes should be examined by future studies to appropriately identify the potential health effects between these diet types.
ContributorsJames, Andrew (Author) / Johnston, Carol (Thesis advisor) / Mayol-Kreiser, Sandra (Committee member) / Shepard, Christina (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015