A Weightloss and diet forum. WeightLossBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » WeightLossBanter forum » alt.support.diet newsgroups » General Discussion
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

additional protein limits weight regain



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 8th, 2005, 03:03 AM
Doug Skrecky
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default additional protein limits weight regain

Br J Nutr. 2005 Feb;93(2):281-9.
Additional protein intake limits weight regain after weight loss
in humans.
Since long-term weight maintenance (WM) is a major problem,
interventions to improve WM are needed. The aim of the study was
to investigate whether the addition of protein to the diet might
limit weight regain after a weight loss of 5-10 % in overweight
subjects. In a randomised parallel study design, 113 overweight
subjects (BMI 29.3 (SD 2.5) kg/m2); age 45.1 (SD 10.4) years)
followed a very-low-energy diet for 4 weeks, after which there was
a 6-month period of WM. During WM, subjects were randomised into
either a protein group or a control group. The protein group
received 30 g/d protein in addition to their own usual diet.
During the very-low-energy diet, no differences were observed
between the groups. During WM, the protein group showed a higher
protein intake (18 % v. 15 %; P0.05), a lower weight regain
(0.8 v. 3.0 kg; P0.05), a decreased waist circumference (-1.2
(SD 0.7) v. 0.5 (SD 0.5 ) cm; P0.05) and a smaller increase in
respiratory quotient (0.03 (SD 0.01) v. 0.07 0.01; (SD/)P 0.05)
compared with the control group. Weight regain in the protein
group consisted of only fat-free mass, whereas the control group
gained fat mass as well. Satiety in the fasted state before
breakfast increased significantly more in the protein group than
in the control group. After 6 months follow-up, body weight
showed a significant group x time interaction. A protein intake
of 18 % compared with 15 % resulted in improved WM in overweight
subjects after a weight loss of 7.5 %. This improved WM implied
several factors, i.e. improved body composition, fat distribution,
substrate oxidation and satiety.

Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2004 Jan;28(1):57-64.
High protein intake sustains weight maintenance after body weight
loss in humans.
BACKGROUND: A relatively high percentage of energy intake as
protein has been shown to increase satiety and decrease energy
efficiency during overfeeding. AIM: To investigate whether addition
of protein may improve weight maintenance by preventing or limiting
weight regain after weight loss of 5-10% in moderately obese
subjects. DESIGN OF THE STUDY: In a randomized parallel design,
148 male and female subjects (age 44.2 +/- 10.1 y; body mass index
(BMI) 29.5 +/- 2.5 kg/m2; body fat 37.2 +/- 5.0%) followed a very
low-energy diet (2.1 MJ/day) during 4 weeks. For subsequent 3 months
weight-maintenance assessment, they were stratified according to
age, BMI, body weight, restrained eating, and resting energy
expenditure (REE), and randomized over two groups. Both groups
visited the University with the same frequency, receiving the same
counseling on demand by the dietitian. One group (n=73) received
48.2 g/day additional protein to their diet. Measurements at
baseline, after weight loss, and after 3 months weight maintenance
were body weight, body composition, metabolic measurements, appetite
profile, eating attitude, and relevant blood parameters. RESULTS:
Changes in body mass, waist circumference, REE, respiratory quotient
(RQ), total energy expenditure (TEE), dietary restraint, fasting
blood-glucose, insulin, triacylglycerol, leptin, beta-hydroxybutyrate,
glycerol, and free fatty acids were significant during weight loss
and did not differ between groups. During weight maintenance, the
'additional-protein group' showed in comparison to the
nonadditional-protein group 18 vs 15 en% protein intake, a 50% lower
body weight regain only consisting of fat-free mass, a 50% decreased
energy efficiency, increased satiety while energy intake did not
differ, and a lower increase in triacylglycerol and in leptin; REE,
RQ, TEE, and increases in other blood parameters measured did not
differ. CONCLUSION: A 20% higher protein intake, that is, 18% of
energy vs 15% of energy during weight maintenance after weight loss,
resulted in a 50% lower body weight regain, only consisting of
fat-free mass, and related to increased satiety and decreased energy
efficiency.

  #2  
Old June 8th, 2005, 06:21 AM
Michael C Price
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Authors or PMIDs would be useful!

Cheers,
Michael C Price
----------------------------------------
http://mcp.longevity-report.com
http://www.hedweb.com/manworld.htm

"Doug Skrecky" wrote in message
...
Br J Nutr. 2005 Feb;93(2):281-9.
Additional protein intake limits weight regain after weight loss
in humans.
Since long-term weight maintenance (WM) is a major problem,
interventions to improve WM are needed. The aim of the study was
to investigate whether the addition of protein to the diet might
limit weight regain after a weight loss of 5-10 % in overweight
subjects. In a randomised parallel study design, 113 overweight
subjects (BMI 29.3 (SD 2.5) kg/m2); age 45.1 (SD 10.4) years)
followed a very-low-energy diet for 4 weeks, after which there was
a 6-month period of WM. During WM, subjects were randomised into
either a protein group or a control group. The protein group
received 30 g/d protein in addition to their own usual diet.
During the very-low-energy diet, no differences were observed
between the groups. During WM, the protein group showed a higher
protein intake (18 % v. 15 %; P0.05), a lower weight regain
(0.8 v. 3.0 kg; P0.05), a decreased waist circumference (-1.2
(SD 0.7) v. 0.5 (SD 0.5 ) cm; P0.05) and a smaller increase in
respiratory quotient (0.03 (SD 0.01) v. 0.07 0.01; (SD/)P 0.05)
compared with the control group. Weight regain in the protein
group consisted of only fat-free mass, whereas the control group
gained fat mass as well. Satiety in the fasted state before
breakfast increased significantly more in the protein group than
in the control group. After 6 months follow-up, body weight
showed a significant group x time interaction. A protein intake
of 18 % compared with 15 % resulted in improved WM in overweight
subjects after a weight loss of 7.5 %. This improved WM implied
several factors, i.e. improved body composition, fat distribution,
substrate oxidation and satiety.

Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2004 Jan;28(1):57-64.
High protein intake sustains weight maintenance after body weight
loss in humans.
BACKGROUND: A relatively high percentage of energy intake as
protein has been shown to increase satiety and decrease energy
efficiency during overfeeding. AIM: To investigate whether addition
of protein may improve weight maintenance by preventing or limiting
weight regain after weight loss of 5-10% in moderately obese
subjects. DESIGN OF THE STUDY: In a randomized parallel design,
148 male and female subjects (age 44.2 +/- 10.1 y; body mass index
(BMI) 29.5 +/- 2.5 kg/m2; body fat 37.2 +/- 5.0%) followed a very
low-energy diet (2.1 MJ/day) during 4 weeks. For subsequent 3 months
weight-maintenance assessment, they were stratified according to
age, BMI, body weight, restrained eating, and resting energy
expenditure (REE), and randomized over two groups. Both groups
visited the University with the same frequency, receiving the same
counseling on demand by the dietitian. One group (n=73) received
48.2 g/day additional protein to their diet. Measurements at
baseline, after weight loss, and after 3 months weight maintenance
were body weight, body composition, metabolic measurements, appetite
profile, eating attitude, and relevant blood parameters. RESULTS:
Changes in body mass, waist circumference, REE, respiratory quotient
(RQ), total energy expenditure (TEE), dietary restraint, fasting
blood-glucose, insulin, triacylglycerol, leptin, beta-hydroxybutyrate,
glycerol, and free fatty acids were significant during weight loss
and did not differ between groups. During weight maintenance, the
'additional-protein group' showed in comparison to the
nonadditional-protein group 18 vs 15 en% protein intake, a 50% lower
body weight regain only consisting of fat-free mass, a 50% decreased
energy efficiency, increased satiety while energy intake did not
differ, and a lower increase in triacylglycerol and in leptin; REE,
RQ, TEE, and increases in other blood parameters measured did not
differ. CONCLUSION: A 20% higher protein intake, that is, 18% of
energy vs 15% of energy during weight maintenance after weight loss,
resulted in a 50% lower body weight regain, only consisting of
fat-free mass, and related to increased satiety and decreased energy
efficiency.



  #3  
Old June 8th, 2005, 06:38 AM
Michael C Price
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Here they are with authors and PMIDs
(plus a review article)

Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2003 Nov;6(6):635-8.

The significance of protein in food intake and body weight regulation.

Westerterp-Plantenga MS.

Department of Human Biology, PO Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The
Netherlands.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To highlight the underexposed but important role of
protein in food intake and body weight regulation. RECENT FINDINGS: Protein
plays a key role in food intake regulation through satiety related to
diet-induced thermogenesis. Protein also plays a key role in body weight
regulation through its effect on thermogenesis and body composition. A high
percentage of energy from dietary protein limits body weight (re)gain
through its satiety and energy inefficiency related to the change in body
composition. SUMMARY: Protein is more satiating than carbohydrate and fat in
the short term, over 24 h and in the long term. Thermogenesis plays a role
in this satiety effect, but the role of satiety hormones still needs to be
elucidated. On the short-term 'fast' proteins are more satiating than 'slow'
proteins, and animal protein induces a higher thermogenesis than vegetable
protein. In the longer term the higher postabsorptive satiety and
thermogenesis are sustained irrespective of the protein source. High-protein
diets affect body weight loss positively only under ad-libitum energy intake
conditions, implying also a decreased energy intake. Body composition and
metabolic profile are improved. Additional protein consumption results in a
significantly lower body weight regain after weight loss, due to body
composition, satiety, thermogenesis, and energy inefficiency, while the
metabolic profile improves. Implications from these findings a for
practice, recommendations for increasing the percentage of energy from
protein while reducing energy intake; for clinical research, assessment of
the paradox of increasing the percentage energy from a highly satiating
macronutrient; of the potential roles of protein in a negative and positive
energy balance; assessment of possibilities of replacing dietary protein by
effective amino acids or peptides that may show a similar impact on body
weight regulation.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial

PMID: 14557793

Br J Nutr. 2005 Feb;93(2):281-9.

Additional protein intake limits weight regain after weight loss in humans.

Lejeune MP, Kovacs EM, Westerterp-Plantenga MS.

Department of Human Biology, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD
Maastricht, The Netherlands.


Since long-term weight maintenance (WM) is a major problem, interventions to
improve WM are needed. The aim of the study was to investigate whether the
addition of protein to the diet might limit weight regain after a weight
loss of 5-10 % in overweight subjects. In a randomised parallel study
design, 113 overweight subjects (BMI 29.3 (SD 2.5) kg/m2); age 45.1 (SD
10.4) years) followed a very-low-energy diet for 4 weeks, after which there
was a 6-month period of WM. During WM, subjects were randomised into either
a protein group or a control group. The protein group received 30 g/d
protein in addition to their own usual diet. During the very-low-energy
diet, no differences were observed between the groups. During WM, the
protein group showed a higher protein intake (18 % v. 15 %; P0.05), a lower
weight regain (0.8 v. 3.0 kg; P0.05), a decreased waist circumference (-1.2
(SD 0.7) v. 0.5 (SD 0.5 ) cm; P0.05) and a smaller increase in respiratory
quotient (0.03 (SD 0.01) v. 0.07 0.01; (SD/)P 0.05) compared with the
control group. Weight regain in the protein group consisted of only fat-free
mass, whereas the control group gained fat mass as well. Satiety in the
fasted state before breakfast increased significantly more in the protein
group than in the control group. After 6 months follow-up, body weight
showed a significant group x time interaction. A protein intake of 18 %
compared with 15 % resulted in improved WM in overweight subjects after a
weight loss of 7.5 %. This improved WM implied several factors, i.e.
improved body composition, fat distribution, substrate oxidation and
satiety.

Publication Types:
Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial

PMID: 15788122

Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2004 Jan;28(1):57-64.

High protein intake sustains weight maintenance after body weight loss in
humans.

Westerterp-Plantenga MS, Lejeune MP, Nijs I, van Ooijen M, Kovacs EM.

Department of Human Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The
Netherlands.


BACKGROUND: A relatively high percentage of energy intake as protein has
been shown to increase satiety and decrease energy efficiency during
overfeeding. AIM: To investigate whether addition of protein may improve
weight maintenance by preventing or limiting weight regain after weight loss
of 5-10% in moderately obese subjects. DESIGN OF THE STUDY: In a randomized
parallel design, 148 male and female subjects (age 44.2 +/- 10.1 y; body
mass index (BMI) 29.5 +/- 2.5 kg/m2; body fat 37.2 +/- 5.0%) followed a very
low-energy diet (2.1 MJ/day) during 4 weeks. For subsequent 3 months
weight-maintenance assessment, they were stratified according to age, BMI,
body weight, restrained eating, and resting energy expenditure (REE), and
randomized over two groups. Both groups visited the University with the same
frequency, receiving the same counseling on demand by the dietitian. One
group (n=73) received 48.2 g/day additional protein to their diet.
Measurements at baseline, after weight loss, and after 3 months weight
maintenance were body weight, body composition, metabolic measurements,
appetite profile, eating attitude, and relevant blood parameters. RESULTS:
Changes in body mass, waist circumference, REE, respiratory quotient (RQ),
total energy expenditure (TEE), dietary restraint, fasting blood-glucose,
insulin, triacylglycerol, leptin, beta-hydroxybutyrate, glycerol, and free
fatty acids were significant during weight loss and did not differ between
groups. During weight maintenance, the 'additional-protein group' showed in
comparison to the nonadditional-protein group 18 vs 15 en% protein intake, a
50% lower body weight regain only consisting of fat-free mass, a 50%
decreased energy efficiency, increased satiety while energy intake did not
differ, and a lower increase in triacylglycerol and in leptin; REE, RQ, TEE,
and increases in other blood parameters measured did not differ. CONCLUSION:
A 20% higher protein intake, that is, 18% of energy vs 15% of energy during
weight maintenance after weight loss, resulted in a 50% lower body weight
regain, only consisting of fat-free mass, and related to increased satiety
and decreased energy efficiency.

Publication Types:
Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial

PMID: 14710168

Cheers,
Michael C Price
----------------------------------------
http://mcp.longevity-report.com
http://www.hedweb.com/manworld.htm


  #4  
Old June 8th, 2005, 07:54 AM
Olafur Pall Olafsson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi Michael and Doug,

The weight reduction effects of high protein diets might be largely
caused by increased metabolism in the liver as the abstract below
shows. Increasing the metabolism in the liver might not be very
healthy for you. The prefered method of course would be to simply eat
fewer calories.

Physiol Rev. 1992 Apr;72(2):419-48. Related Articles, Links
Click here to read
Quantitative analysis of amino acid oxidation and related
gluconeogenesis in humans.

Jungas RL, Halperin ML, Brosnan JT.

Department of Physiology, University of Connecticut Health Center,
Farmington.

Significant gaps remain in our knowledge of the pathways of amino
acid catabolism in humans. Further quantitative data describing amino
acid metabolism in the kidney are especially needed as are further
details concerning the pathways utilized for certain amino acids in
liver. Sufficient data do exist to allow a broad picture of the overall
process of amino acid oxidation to be developed along with approximate
quantitative assessments of the role played by liver, muscle, kidney,
and small intestine. Our analysis indicates that amino acids are the
major fuel of liver, i.e., their oxidative conversion to glucose
accounts for about one-half of the daily oxygen consumption of the
liver, and no other fuel contributes nearly so importantly. The daily
supply of amino acids provided in the diet cannot be totally oxidized
to CO2 in the liver because such a process would provide far more ATP
than the liver could utilize. Instead, most amino acids are oxidatively
converted to glucose. This results in an overall ATP production during
amino acid oxidation very nearly equal to the ATP required to convert
amino acid carbon to glucose. Thus gluconeogenesis occurs without
either a need for ATP from other fuels or an excessive ATP production
that could limit the maximal rate of the process. The net effect of the
oxidation of amino acids to glucose in the liver is to make nearly
two-thirds of the total energy available from the oxidation of amino
acids accessible to peripheral tissues, without necessitating that
peripheral tissues synthesize the complex array of enzymes needed to
support direct amino acid oxidation. As a balanced mixture of amino
acids is oxidized in the liver, nearly all carbon from glucogenic amino
acids flows into the mitochondrial aspartate pool and is actively
transported out of the mitochondria via the aspartate-glutamate
antiport linked to proton entry. In the cytoplasm the aspartate is
converted to fumarate utilizing urea cycle enzymes; the fumarate flows
via oxaloacetate to PEP and on to glucose. Thus carbon flow through the
urea cycle is normally interlinked with gluconeogenic carbon flow
because these metabolic pathways share a common step. Liver
mitochondria experience a severe nonvolatile acid load during amino
acid oxidation. It is suggested that this acid load is alleviated
mainly by the respiratory chain proton pump in a form of uncoupled
respiration.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Publication Types:

* Review
* Review, Tutorial


PMID: 1557428 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Michael C Price wrote:
Here they are with authors and PMIDs
(plus a review article)

Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2003 Nov;6(6):635-8.

The significance of protein in food intake and body weight regulation.

Westerterp-Plantenga MS.

Department of Human Biology, PO Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The
Netherlands.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To highlight the underexposed but important role of
protein in food intake and body weight regulation. RECENT FINDINGS: Protein
plays a key role in food intake regulation through satiety related to
diet-induced thermogenesis. Protein also plays a key role in body weight
regulation through its effect on thermogenesis and body composition. A high
percentage of energy from dietary protein limits body weight (re)gain
through its satiety and energy inefficiency related to the change in body
composition. SUMMARY: Protein is more satiating than carbohydrate and fat in
the short term, over 24 h and in the long term. Thermogenesis plays a role
in this satiety effect, but the role of satiety hormones still needs to be
elucidated. On the short-term 'fast' proteins are more satiating than 'slow'
proteins, and animal protein induces a higher thermogenesis than vegetable
protein. In the longer term the higher postabsorptive satiety and
thermogenesis are sustained irrespective of the protein source. High-protein
diets affect body weight loss positively only under ad-libitum energy intake
conditions, implying also a decreased energy intake. Body composition and
metabolic profile are improved. Additional protein consumption results in a
significantly lower body weight regain after weight loss, due to body
composition, satiety, thermogenesis, and energy inefficiency, while the
metabolic profile improves. Implications from these findings a for
practice, recommendations for increasing the percentage of energy from
protein while reducing energy intake; for clinical research, assessment of
the paradox of increasing the percentage energy from a highly satiating
macronutrient; of the potential roles of protein in a negative and positive
energy balance; assessment of possibilities of replacing dietary protein by
effective amino acids or peptides that may show a similar impact on body
weight regulation.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial

PMID: 14557793

Br J Nutr. 2005 Feb;93(2):281-9.

Additional protein intake limits weight regain after weight loss in humans.

Lejeune MP, Kovacs EM, Westerterp-Plantenga MS.

Department of Human Biology, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD
Maastricht, The Netherlands.


Since long-term weight maintenance (WM) is a major problem, interventions to
improve WM are needed. The aim of the study was to investigate whether the
addition of protein to the diet might limit weight regain after a weight
loss of 5-10 % in overweight subjects. In a randomised parallel study
design, 113 overweight subjects (BMI 29.3 (SD 2.5) kg/m2); age 45.1 (SD
10.4) years) followed a very-low-energy diet for 4 weeks, after which there
was a 6-month period of WM. During WM, subjects were randomised into either
a protein group or a control group. The protein group received 30 g/d
protein in addition to their own usual diet. During the very-low-energy
diet, no differences were observed between the groups. During WM, the
protein group showed a higher protein intake (18 % v. 15 %; P0.05), a lower
weight regain (0.8 v. 3.0 kg; P0.05), a decreased waist circumference (-1.2
(SD 0.7) v. 0.5 (SD 0.5 ) cm; P0.05) and a smaller increase in respiratory
quotient (0.03 (SD 0.01) v. 0.07 0.01; (SD/)P 0.05) compared with the
control group. Weight regain in the protein group consisted of only fat-free
mass, whereas the control group gained fat mass as well. Satiety in the
fasted state before breakfast increased significantly more in the protein
group than in the control group. After 6 months follow-up, body weight
showed a significant group x time interaction. A protein intake of 18 %
compared with 15 % resulted in improved WM in overweight subjects after a
weight loss of 7.5 %. This improved WM implied several factors, i.e.
improved body composition, fat distribution, substrate oxidation and
satiety.

Publication Types:
Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial

PMID: 15788122

Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2004 Jan;28(1):57-64.

High protein intake sustains weight maintenance after body weight loss in
humans.

Westerterp-Plantenga MS, Lejeune MP, Nijs I, van Ooijen M, Kovacs EM.

Department of Human Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The
Netherlands.


BACKGROUND: A relatively high percentage of energy intake as protein has
been shown to increase satiety and decrease energy efficiency during
overfeeding. AIM: To investigate whether addition of protein may improve
weight maintenance by preventing or limiting weight regain after weight loss
of 5-10% in moderately obese subjects. DESIGN OF THE STUDY: In a randomized
parallel design, 148 male and female subjects (age 44.2 +/- 10.1 y; body
mass index (BMI) 29.5 +/- 2.5 kg/m2; body fat 37.2 +/- 5.0%) followed a very
low-energy diet (2.1 MJ/day) during 4 weeks. For subsequent 3 months
weight-maintenance assessment, they were stratified according to age, BMI,
body weight, restrained eating, and resting energy expenditure (REE), and
randomized over two groups. Both groups visited the University with the same
frequency, receiving the same counseling on demand by the dietitian. One
group (n=73) received 48.2 g/day additional protein to their diet.
Measurements at baseline, after weight loss, and after 3 months weight
maintenance were body weight, body composition, metabolic measurements,
appetite profile, eating attitude, and relevant blood parameters. RESULTS:
Changes in body mass, waist circumference, REE, respiratory quotient (RQ),
total energy expenditure (TEE), dietary restraint, fasting blood-glucose,
insulin, triacylglycerol, leptin, beta-hydroxybutyrate, glycerol, and free
fatty acids were significant during weight loss and did not differ between
groups. During weight maintenance, the 'additional-protein group' showed in
comparison to the nonadditional-protein group 18 vs 15 en% protein intake, a
50% lower body weight regain only consisting of fat-free mass, a 50%
decreased energy efficiency, increased satiety while energy intake did not
differ, and a lower increase in triacylglycerol and in leptin; REE, RQ, TEE,
and increases in other blood parameters measured did not differ. CONCLUSION:
A 20% higher protein intake, that is, 18% of energy vs 15% of energy during
weight maintenance after weight loss, resulted in a 50% lower body weight
regain, only consisting of fat-free mass, and related to increased satiety
and decreased energy efficiency.

Publication Types:
Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial

PMID: 14710168

Cheers,
Michael C Price
----------------------------------------
http://mcp.longevity-report.com
http://www.hedweb.com/manworld.htm


  #5  
Old June 8th, 2005, 09:50 AM
Michael C Price
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi Olafur, Doug;

I don't see why the high protein diet increased satiety
unless there something else going on beside the increased
energy expenditure during processing by the liver.
I suspect that the protein is also correcting sub-clinical
deficiencies in various amino-acids (essential and
non-essential).

Cheers,
Michael C Price
----------------------------------------
http://mcp.longevity-report.com
http://www.hedweb.com/manworld.htm

"Olafur Pall Olafsson" wrote in message
ups.com...
Hi Michael and Doug,

The weight reduction effects of high protein diets might be largely
caused by increased metabolism in the liver as the abstract below
shows. Increasing the metabolism in the liver might not be very
healthy for you. The prefered method of course would be to simply eat
fewer calories.

Physiol Rev. 1992 Apr;72(2):419-48. Related Articles, Links
Click here to read
Quantitative analysis of amino acid oxidation and related
gluconeogenesis in humans.

Jungas RL, Halperin ML, Brosnan JT.

Department of Physiology, University of Connecticut Health Center,
Farmington.

Significant gaps remain in our knowledge of the pathways of amino
acid catabolism in humans. Further quantitative data describing amino
acid metabolism in the kidney are especially needed as are further
details concerning the pathways utilized for certain amino acids in
liver. Sufficient data do exist to allow a broad picture of the overall
process of amino acid oxidation to be developed along with approximate
quantitative assessments of the role played by liver, muscle, kidney,
and small intestine. Our analysis indicates that amino acids are the
major fuel of liver, i.e., their oxidative conversion to glucose
accounts for about one-half of the daily oxygen consumption of the
liver, and no other fuel contributes nearly so importantly. The daily
supply of amino acids provided in the diet cannot be totally oxidized
to CO2 in the liver because such a process would provide far more ATP
than the liver could utilize. Instead, most amino acids are oxidatively
converted to glucose. This results in an overall ATP production during
amino acid oxidation very nearly equal to the ATP required to convert
amino acid carbon to glucose. Thus gluconeogenesis occurs without
either a need for ATP from other fuels or an excessive ATP production
that could limit the maximal rate of the process. The net effect of the
oxidation of amino acids to glucose in the liver is to make nearly
two-thirds of the total energy available from the oxidation of amino
acids accessible to peripheral tissues, without necessitating that
peripheral tissues synthesize the complex array of enzymes needed to
support direct amino acid oxidation. As a balanced mixture of amino
acids is oxidized in the liver, nearly all carbon from glucogenic amino
acids flows into the mitochondrial aspartate pool and is actively
transported out of the mitochondria via the aspartate-glutamate
antiport linked to proton entry. In the cytoplasm the aspartate is
converted to fumarate utilizing urea cycle enzymes; the fumarate flows
via oxaloacetate to PEP and on to glucose. Thus carbon flow through the
urea cycle is normally interlinked with gluconeogenic carbon flow
because these metabolic pathways share a common step. Liver
mitochondria experience a severe nonvolatile acid load during amino
acid oxidation. It is suggested that this acid load is alleviated
mainly by the respiratory chain proton pump in a form of uncoupled
respiration.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Publication Types:

* Review
* Review, Tutorial


PMID: 1557428 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Michael C Price wrote:
Here they are with authors and PMIDs
(plus a review article)

Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2003 Nov;6(6):635-8.

The significance of protein in food intake and body weight regulation.

Westerterp-Plantenga MS.

Department of Human Biology, PO Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The
Netherlands.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To highlight the underexposed but important role of
protein in food intake and body weight regulation. RECENT FINDINGS:

Protein
plays a key role in food intake regulation through satiety related to
diet-induced thermogenesis. Protein also plays a key role in body weight
regulation through its effect on thermogenesis and body composition. A

high
percentage of energy from dietary protein limits body weight (re)gain
through its satiety and energy inefficiency related to the change in

body
composition. SUMMARY: Protein is more satiating than carbohydrate and

fat in
the short term, over 24 h and in the long term. Thermogenesis plays a

role
in this satiety effect, but the role of satiety hormones still needs to

be
elucidated. On the short-term 'fast' proteins are more satiating than

'slow'
proteins, and animal protein induces a higher thermogenesis than

vegetable
protein. In the longer term the higher postabsorptive satiety and
thermogenesis are sustained irrespective of the protein source.

High-protein
diets affect body weight loss positively only under ad-libitum energy

intake
conditions, implying also a decreased energy intake. Body composition

and
metabolic profile are improved. Additional protein consumption results

in a
significantly lower body weight regain after weight loss, due to body
composition, satiety, thermogenesis, and energy inefficiency, while the
metabolic profile improves. Implications from these findings a for
practice, recommendations for increasing the percentage of energy from
protein while reducing energy intake; for clinical research, assessment

of
the paradox of increasing the percentage energy from a highly satiating
macronutrient; of the potential roles of protein in a negative and

positive
energy balance; assessment of possibilities of replacing dietary protein

by
effective amino acids or peptides that may show a similar impact on body
weight regulation.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial

PMID: 14557793

Br J Nutr. 2005 Feb;93(2):281-9.

Additional protein intake limits weight regain after weight loss in

humans.

Lejeune MP, Kovacs EM, Westerterp-Plantenga MS.

Department of Human Biology, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200

MD
Maastricht, The Netherlands.


Since long-term weight maintenance (WM) is a major problem,

interventions to
improve WM are needed. The aim of the study was to investigate whether

the
addition of protein to the diet might limit weight regain after a weight
loss of 5-10 % in overweight subjects. In a randomised parallel study
design, 113 overweight subjects (BMI 29.3 (SD 2.5) kg/m2); age 45.1 (SD
10.4) years) followed a very-low-energy diet for 4 weeks, after which

there
was a 6-month period of WM. During WM, subjects were randomised into

either
a protein group or a control group. The protein group received 30 g/d
protein in addition to their own usual diet. During the very-low-energy
diet, no differences were observed between the groups. During WM, the
protein group showed a higher protein intake (18 % v. 15 %; P0.05), a

lower
weight regain (0.8 v. 3.0 kg; P0.05), a decreased waist circumference

(-1.2
(SD 0.7) v. 0.5 (SD 0.5 ) cm; P0.05) and a smaller increase in

respiratory
quotient (0.03 (SD 0.01) v. 0.07 0.01; (SD/)P 0.05) compared with the
control group. Weight regain in the protein group consisted of only

fat-free
mass, whereas the control group gained fat mass as well. Satiety in the
fasted state before breakfast increased significantly more in the

protein
group than in the control group. After 6 months follow-up, body weight
showed a significant group x time interaction. A protein intake of 18 %
compared with 15 % resulted in improved WM in overweight subjects after

a
weight loss of 7.5 %. This improved WM implied several factors, i.e.
improved body composition, fat distribution, substrate oxidation and
satiety.

Publication Types:
Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial

PMID: 15788122

Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2004 Jan;28(1):57-64.

High protein intake sustains weight maintenance after body weight loss

in
humans.

Westerterp-Plantenga MS, Lejeune MP, Nijs I, van Ooijen M, Kovacs EM.

Department of Human Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The
Netherlands.


BACKGROUND: A relatively high percentage of energy intake as protein has
been shown to increase satiety and decrease energy efficiency during
overfeeding. AIM: To investigate whether addition of protein may improve
weight maintenance by preventing or limiting weight regain after weight

loss
of 5-10% in moderately obese subjects. DESIGN OF THE STUDY: In a

randomized
parallel design, 148 male and female subjects (age 44.2 +/- 10.1 y; body
mass index (BMI) 29.5 +/- 2.5 kg/m2; body fat 37.2 +/- 5.0%) followed a

very
low-energy diet (2.1 MJ/day) during 4 weeks. For subsequent 3 months
weight-maintenance assessment, they were stratified according to age,

BMI,
body weight, restrained eating, and resting energy expenditure (REE),

and
randomized over two groups. Both groups visited the University with the

same
frequency, receiving the same counseling on demand by the dietitian. One
group (n=73) received 48.2 g/day additional protein to their diet.
Measurements at baseline, after weight loss, and after 3 months weight
maintenance were body weight, body composition, metabolic measurements,
appetite profile, eating attitude, and relevant blood parameters.

RESULTS:
Changes in body mass, waist circumference, REE, respiratory quotient

(RQ),
total energy expenditure (TEE), dietary restraint, fasting

blood-glucose,
insulin, triacylglycerol, leptin, beta-hydroxybutyrate, glycerol, and

free
fatty acids were significant during weight loss and did not differ

between
groups. During weight maintenance, the 'additional-protein group' showed

in
comparison to the nonadditional-protein group 18 vs 15 en% protein

intake, a
50% lower body weight regain only consisting of fat-free mass, a 50%
decreased energy efficiency, increased satiety while energy intake did

not
differ, and a lower increase in triacylglycerol and in leptin; REE, RQ,

TEE,
and increases in other blood parameters measured did not differ.

CONCLUSION:
A 20% higher protein intake, that is, 18% of energy vs 15% of energy

during
weight maintenance after weight loss, resulted in a 50% lower body

weight
regain, only consisting of fat-free mass, and related to increased

satiety
and decreased energy efficiency.

Publication Types:
Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial

PMID: 14710168

Cheers,
Michael C Price
----------------------------------------
http://mcp.longevity-report.com
http://www.hedweb.com/manworld.htm




  #6  
Old June 9th, 2005, 03:52 AM
Olafur Pall Olafsson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Michael C Price wrote:
Hi Olafur, Doug;

I don't see why the high protein diet increased satiety
unless there something else going on beside the increased
energy expenditure during processing by the liver.


I don't think the increased energy expenditure during the processing by
the liver caused the satiety. What might play a role in the increased
satiety of high protein diets is the effect protein has on lowering the
GI of meals. As the abstract below shows meals that have a lower GI
result in less hunger after consumption of the meal. Low GI meals
don't cause sudden drop in blood sugar and the following hunger pangs
that higher GI meals cause. I think the weight loss effect of high
protein diets is caused mainly by a mixture of the two. The satiety
effect of protein and the increased energy expenditure effect of
protein during processing by the liver.

Pediatrics. 2003 Nov;112(5):e414. Related Articles, Links
Click here to read
Low glycemic index breakfasts and reduced food intake in
preadolescent children.

Warren JM, Henry CJ, Simonite V.

Nutrition and Food Science Group, School of Biological and
Molecular Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Gipsy Lane Campus,
Headington, Oxford, United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVE: Recent reports have suggested that a low glycemic index
(GI) diet may have a role in the management of obesity through its
ability to increase the satiety value of food and modulate appetite. To
date, no long-term clinical trials have examined the effect of dietary
GI on body weight regulation. The majority of evidence comes from
single-day studies, most of which have been conducted in adults. The
purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of 3 test
breakfasts-low-GI, low-GI with 10% added sucrose, and high-GI-on ad
libitum lunch intake, appetite, and satiety and to compare these with
baseline values when habitual breakfast was consumed. METHODS: A 3-way
crossover study using block randomization of breakfast type was
conducted in a school that already ran a breakfast club. A total of 37
children aged 9 to 12 years (15 boys and 22 girls) completed the study.
The proportion of nonoverweight to overweight/obese children was 70:30.
Children were divided into 5 groups, and a rolling program was devised
whereby, week by week, each group would randomly receive 1 of 3 test
breakfasts for 3 consecutive days, with a minimum of 5 weeks between
the test breakfasts. Participants acted as their own control. The 3
test breakfasts were devised to match the energy and nutritional
content of an individual's habitual breakfast as far as possible. All
test breakfasts were composed of fruit juice, cereal, and milk
with/without bread and margarine; foods with an appropriate GI value
were selected. After each test breakfast, children were instructed not
to eat or drink anything until lunchtime, except water and a small
serving of fruit supplying approximately 10 g of carbohydrate, which
was provided. Breakfast palatability, satiation after breakfast, and
satiety before lunch were measured using rating scales based on
previously used tools. Lunch was a buffet-style meal, and children were
allowed free access to a range of foods. Lunch was served in the school
hall where the rest of the schoolchildren were eating. Food intake at
lunch was unobtrusively observed and recorded. Leftovers and food
swapping were recorded, and plate waste was estimated. Lunch intakes
were analyzed using a multilevel regression model for repeated measures
data. The likelihood ratio statistic was used to determine whether the
type of breakfast eaten had a significant effect on lunch intake after
allowing for sex and weight status. RESULTS: The type of breakfast
eaten had a statistically significant effect on mean energy intake at
lunchtime: lunch intake was lower after low-GI and low-GI with added
sucrose breakfasts compared with lunch intake after high-GI and
habitual breakfasts (which were high-GI). Overweight and sex did not
have a significant effect on lunch intake. Pairwise comparisons among
the 3 types of test breakfasts and between each test breakfast and
habitual breakfast were made. Lunch intake after the high-GI breakfast
was significantly higher than after the low-GI breakfast and low-GI
breakfast with added sucrose. The details of the pairwise comparisons
were as follows: high-GI versus low-GI = 145 +/- 54 kcal; high-GI
versus low-GI plus sucrose = 119 +/- 53 kcal; low-GI plus sucrose
versus low-GI = 27 +/- 54 kcal. Lunch intake after the low-GI breakfast
and the low-GI breakfast with added sucrose was significantly lower
than after the habitual breakfast. The details of the pairwise
comparisons were as follows: low-GI versus habitual = -109 +/- 75 kcal;
low-GI plus sucrose versus habitual = -83 +/- 75 kcal; high-GI versus
habitual = 36 +/- 75 kcal. There were no significant differences
between the test breakfasts in immediate satiation. The high-GI
breakfasts were rated to be more palatable than the low-GI breakfasts.
At lunchtime, hunger ratings were greater after the high-GI breakfast
compared with the other 2 test breakfasts on 2 of the 3 experimental
days. Prelunch satiety scales were inversely related to subsequent food
intake. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that low-GI foods eaten at
breakfast have a significant impact on food intake at lunch. This is
the first study to observe such an effect in a group of normal and
overweight children and adds to the growing body of evidence that
low-GI foods may have an important role in weight control and obesity
management. The potentially confounding effect of differences in the
macronutrient and dietary fiber content of the test breakfasts warrants
additional study. In addition, the impact of GI on food intake and body
weight regulation in the long term needs to be investigated.

PMID: 14595085 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

I suspect that the protein is also correcting sub-clinical
deficiencies in various amino-acids (essential and
non-essential).


That might definately be the case sometimes but I don't see how that
would effect weight loss.

  #7  
Old June 9th, 2005, 11:27 AM
Michael C Price
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thanks for the abstract, Olafur.
Here's another. It says
"High-protein foods promote postprandial thermogenesis
and greater satiety as compared to high-carbohydrate,
low-fat foods;"
but of course that leaves the question open as
to the exact causal link between protein and satiey.
Interesting about vitamin C. Perhaps I will have to
exercise!

J Am Coll Nutr. 2005 Jun;24(3):158-65. Related Articles, Links

Strategies for healthy weight loss: from vitamin C to the glycemic response.

Johnston CS.

Department of Nutrition, Arizona State University East, 7001 E. Williams
Field Rd., Mesa, AZ 85212. .

Abstract America is experiencing a major obesity epidemic. The ramifications
of this epidemic are immense since obesity is associated with chronic
metabolic abnormalities such as insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, and heart
disease. Reduced physical activity and/or increased energy intakes are
important factors in this epidemic. Additionally, a genetic susceptibility
to obesity is associated with gene polymorphisms affecting biochemical
pathways that regulate fat oxidation, energy expenditure, or energy intake.
However, these pathways are also impacted by specific foods and nutrients.
Vitamin C status is inversely related to body mass. Individuals with
adequate vitamin C status oxidize 30% more fat during a moderate exercise
bout than individuals with low vitamin C status; thus, vitamin C depleted
individuals may be more resistant to fat mass loss. Food choices can impact
post-meal satiety and hunger. High-protein foods promote postprandial
thermogenesis and greater satiety as compared to high-carbohydrate, low-fat
foods; thus, diet regimens high in protein foods may improve diet compliance
and diet effectiveness. Vinegar and peanut ingestion can reduce the glycemic
effect of a meal, a phenomenon that has been related to satiety and reduced
food consumption. Thus, the effectiveness of regular exercise and a prudent
diet for weight loss may be enhanced by attention to specific diet details.

PMID: 15930480

I suspect that the protein is also correcting sub-clinical
deficiencies in various amino-acids (essential and
non-essential).


That might definately be the case sometimes but I don't see how
that would effect weight loss.


If appetite is partly driven to correct dietary deficiencies
-- which I think it is widely aknowledged to be the case
(e.g. pregnant women) -- then correcting amino acid
deficiencies (along with vitamins and minerals)
may supress appetite, independently of any associated
low GI factors.

Cheers,
Michael C Price
----------------------------------------
http://mcp.longevity-report.com
http://www.hedweb.com/manworld.htm


  #8  
Old June 9th, 2005, 04:25 PM
Michael C Price
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Another interesting study:

J Nutr. 2004 Mar;134(3):586-91.

High-protein, low-fat diets are effective for weight loss and favorably
alter biomarkers in healthy adults.

Johnston CS, Tjonn SL, Swan PD.

Department of Nutrition, Arizona State University, Mesa, AZ 85212, USA.


Although popular and effective for weight loss, low-carbohydrate,
high-protein, high-fat (Atkins) diets have been associated with adverse
changes in blood and renal biomarkers. High-protein diets low in fat may
represent an equally appealing diet plan but promote a more healthful weight
loss. Healthy adults (n = 20) were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 low-fat (30%
energy), energy-restricted groups: high-protein (30% energy) or
high-carbohydrate (60% energy); 24-h intakes were strictly controlled during
the 6-wk trial. One subject from each group did not complete the trial due
to out-of-state travel; two subjects in the high-carbohydrate group withdrew
from the trial due to extreme hunger. Body composition and metabolic indices
were assessed pre- and post-trial. Both diets were equally effective at
reducing body weight (-6%, P 0.05) and fat mass (-9 to -11%, P 0.05);
however, subjects consuming the high-protein diet reported more satisfaction
and less hunger in mo 1 of the trial. Both diets significantly lowered total
cholesterol (-10 to -12%), insulin (-25%), and uric acid (-22 to -30%)
concentrations in blood from fasting subjects. Urinary calcium excretion
increased 42% in subjects consuming the high-protein diet, mirroring the 50%
increase in dietary calcium with consumption of this diet; thus, apparent
calcium balance was not adversely affected. Creatinine clearance was not
altered by diet treatments, and nitrogen balance was more positive in
subjects consuming the high-protein diet vs. the high-carbohydrate diet (3.9
+/- 1.4 and 0.7 +/- 1.7 g N/d, respectively, P 0.05). Thus, low-fat,
energy-restricted diets of varying protein content (15 or 30% energy)
promoted healthful weight loss, but diet satisfaction was greater in those
consuming the high-protein diet.

Publication Types:
Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial

PMID: 14988451
--
Cheers,
Michael C Price
----------------------------------------
http://mcp.longevity-report.com
http://www.hedweb.com/manworld.htm



  #9  
Old June 10th, 2005, 06:00 AM
Doug Skrecky
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

[is it the calcium or the protein?]

Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2005 Apr;29(4):391-7.
Dairy augmentation of total and central fat loss in obese subjects.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: We have previously demonstrated an
antiobesity effect of dietary Ca; this is largely mediated by Ca
suppression of calcitriol levels, resulting in reduced adipocyte
intracellular Ca2+ and, consequently, a coordinated increase in
lipid utilization and decrease in lipogenesis. Notably, dairy Ca
is markedly more effective than other Ca sources. DESIGN: Obese
subjects were placed on balanced deficit (-500 kcal/day) diets and
randomized to control (400-500 mg Ca/day; n = 16) or yogurt
(1100 mg Ca/day; n = 18) treatments for 12 weeks. Dietary
macronutrients and fiber were held constant at the US average.
MEASUREMENTS: Body weight, body fat and fat distribution
(by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry), blood pressure and
circulating lipids were measured at baseline and after 12 weeks of
intervention. RESULTS: Fat loss was markedly increased on the
yogurt diet (-4.43+/-0.47 vs -2.75+/-0.73 kg in yogurt and control
groups; P0.005) while lean tissue loss was reduced by 31% on the
yogurt diet. Trunk fat loss was augmented by 81% on the yogurt vs
control diet (P0.001), and this was reflected in a markedly
greater reduction in waist circumference (-3.99+/-0.48 vs
-0.58+/-1.04 cm, P0.001). Further, the fraction of fat lost from
the trunk was higher on the yogurt diet vs control (P0.005).
CONCLUSION: Isocaloric substitution of yogurt for other foods
significantly augments fat loss and reduces central adiposity
during energy restriction..
  #10  
Old June 10th, 2005, 07:02 AM
Olafur Pall Olafsson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Michael C Price wrote:
Thanks for the abstract, Olafur.
Here's another. It says
"High-protein foods promote postprandial thermogenesis
and greater satiety as compared to high-carbohydrate,
low-fat foods;"
but of course that leaves the question open as
to the exact causal link between protein and satiey.
Interesting about vitamin C. Perhaps I will have to
exercise!

J Am Coll Nutr. 2005 Jun;24(3):158-65. Related Articles, Links

Strategies for healthy weight loss: from vitamin C to the glycemic response.

Johnston CS.

Department of Nutrition, Arizona State University East, 7001 E. Williams
Field Rd., Mesa, AZ 85212. .

Abstract America is experiencing a major obesity epidemic. The ramifications
of this epidemic are immense since obesity is associated with chronic
metabolic abnormalities such as insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, and heart
disease. Reduced physical activity and/or increased energy intakes are
important factors in this epidemic. Additionally, a genetic susceptibility
to obesity is associated with gene polymorphisms affecting biochemical
pathways that regulate fat oxidation, energy expenditure, or energy intake.
However, these pathways are also impacted by specific foods and nutrients.
Vitamin C status is inversely related to body mass. Individuals with
adequate vitamin C status oxidize 30% more fat during a moderate exercise
bout than individuals with low vitamin C status; thus, vitamin C depleted
individuals may be more resistant to fat mass loss. Food choices can impact
post-meal satiety and hunger. High-protein foods promote postprandial
thermogenesis and greater satiety as compared to high-carbohydrate, low-fat
foods; thus, diet regimens high in protein foods may improve diet compliance
and diet effectiveness. Vinegar and peanut ingestion can reduce the glycemic
effect of a meal, a phenomenon that has been related to satiety and reduced
food consumption. Thus, the effectiveness of regular exercise and a prudent
diet for weight loss may be enhanced by attention to specific diet details.

PMID: 15930480


Thanks for the abstract, the vitamin C connection is very interesting.

As you said the exact link between protein and satiety is an open
question. It would be interesting to see a study comparing a high
protein diet to a low protein diet with a similar GI. The abstract
below seems to indicate that the thermogenesis is the key player in the
satiety effects of a hith protein diet not the GI. While protein
lowers the GI of meals fat also does so mainly by delaying gastric
emptying, so I would expect both the diets in the study below to have
had a medium-low GI and therefore the thermogenesis effect probably was
the main causual factor in the satiety effect.

Eur J Clin Nutr. 1999 Jun;53(6):495-502. Related Articles, Links

Satiety related to 24 h diet-induced thermogenesis during high
protein/carbohydrate vs high fat diets measured in a respiration
chamber.

Westerterp-Plantenga MS, Rolland V, Wilson SA, Westerterp KR.

Department of Human Biology, Maastricht University, The
Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: Assessment of a possible relationship between perception
of satiety and diet-induced thermogenesis, with different macronutrient
compositions, in a controlled situation over 24 h. DESIGN: Two diets
with different macronutrient compositions were offered to all subjects
in randomized order. SETTING: The study was executed in the respiration
chambers at the department of Human Biology, Maastricht University.
SUBJECTS: Subjects were eight females, ages 23-33 y, BMI 23+/-3 kg/m2,
recruited from University staff and students. INTERVENTIONS: Subjects
were fed in energy balance, with protein/carbohydrate/fat: 29/61/10 and
9/30/61 percentage of energy, with fixed meal sizes and meal intervals,
and a fixed activity protocol, during 36 h experiments in a respiration
chamber. The appetite profile was assessed by questionnaires during the
day and during meals. Diet induced thermogenesis was determined as part
of the energy expenditure. RESULTS: Energy balance was almost complete,
with non-significant deviations. Diet-Induced-Thermogenesis (DIT) was
14.6+/-2.9%, on the high protein/carbohydrate diet, and 10.5+/-3.8% on
the high fat diet (P 0.01). With the high protein/high carbohydrate
diet, satiety was higher during meals (P 0.001; P 0.05), as well as
over 24 h (P 0.001), than with the high fat diet. Within one diet, 24
h DIT and satiety were correlated (r = 0.6; P 0.05). The difference
in DIT between the diets correlated with the differences in satiety (r
= 0.8; P 0.01). CONCLUSION: In lean women, satiety and DIT were
synchronously higher with a high protein/high carbohydrate diet than
with a high fat diet. Differences (due to the different macronutrient
compositions) in DIT correlated with differences in satiety over 24 h.

Publication Types:

* Clinical Trial
* Randomized Controlled Trial


PMID: 10403587 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

I suspect that the protein is also correcting sub-clinical
deficiencies in various amino-acids (essential and
non-essential).


That might definately be the case sometimes but I don't see how
that would effect weight loss.


If appetite is partly driven to correct dietary deficiencies
-- which I think it is widely aknowledged to be the case
(e.g. pregnant women) -- then correcting amino acid
deficiencies (along with vitamins and minerals)
may supress appetite, independently of any associated
low GI factors.


That's a reasonable theory. In support of your theory dietary
deficiencies such as in protein can cause an increase in thermogenesis
possibly by an increased expression of uncoupling proteins. See this
article for details:
http://saturn.bids.ac.uk/cgi-bin/ds_...ry&format=html

As the abstract below states diet induced thermogenesis might have
evolved as a mechanism to enable animals to eat more in states of
nutrient deficiencies. A deficiency in protein or certain amino acids
might therefore cause an increase in thermogenesis which would probably
be accompanied by an increase in appetite.

Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1999 Nov;23(11):1105-17. Related
Articles, Links

Gluttony and thermogenesis revisited.

Stock MJ.

Department of Physiology, St George's Hospital Medical School,
University of London, London SW17 0RE, UK.

The evolutionary and biological significance of adaptive,
homeostatic forms of heat production (thermogenesis) is reviewed. After
summarizing the role and selective value of thermogenesis in body
temperature regulation (shivering and non-shivering thermogenesis) and
the febrile response to infection (fever), the review concentrates on
diet-induced thermogenesis (DIT). Animal studies indicate that DIT
evolved mainly to deal with nutrient-deficient or unbalanced diets, and
re-analysis of twelve overfeeding studies carried out between 1967 and
1999 suggests the same may be so for humans, particularly when dietary
protein concentration is varied. This implies that the role of DIT in
the regulation of energy balance is secondary to its function in
regulating the metabolic supply of essential nutrients. However,
individual differences in DIT are much more marked when high- or
low-protein diets are overfed, and this could provide a very sensitive
method for discriminating between those who are, in metabolic terms,
resistant and those who are susceptible to obesity.

Publication Types:

* Review
* Review, Tutorial


PMID: 10578199 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

However if a correction of deficiency in protein or amino acids occured
in any of the previously mentioned studies I would expect thermogenesis
to not have increased much or even decreased on the high protein diet.
Since this was not the case I don't think correction of deficiencies
generally plays a large role in the satiety effect of high protein
diets versus low protein diet unless the low protein diet is *very* low
in protein. A mild deficiency in some amino acids is probably not
enough to cause a significant effect on appetite, you would probably
need a severe deficiency in one or more amino acids for a significant
effect to occur.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ok, fine, whatever, I give up Luna Low Carbohydrate Diets 101 November 1st, 2005 05:33 AM
This morning with Steve Roberts on NPR Pat Low Carbohydrate Diets 1 December 16th, 2004 02:09 AM
False Weight Loss Claims Patricia Heil General Discussion 0 November 9th, 2004 06:47 PM
Study credits Weight Watchers with helping many to keep weight off Neutron General Discussion 4 May 30th, 2004 03:46 PM
Low carb diets General Discussion 249 January 9th, 2004 12:15 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 WeightLossBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.