Dataset Information

Regional, but not total, body composition changes in overweight and obese adults consuming a higher protein, energy-restricted diet are sex specific.

ABSTRACT: Secondary analyses of data from 2 studies were used to assess the effects of protein intake and sex on diet-induced changes in body composition. The primary hypothesis was that the changes of body composition via energy restriction (ie, lean body mass [LBM], fat mass [FM], and bone) would be sex and diet specific. For 12 weeks, 43 male (study 1) and 45 female (study 2) overweight and obese adults consumed an energy-deficit diet (750 kcal/d less than energy needs) containing either 0.8 (normal protein [NP], 21 men and 23 women) or 1.4 g protein?kg(-1)?d(-1) (high protein [HP], 22 men and 22 women). Body composition measurements were performed at preintervention and postintervention. Over time, all research participants lost weight, LBM, and FM. Independent of protein intake, the men lost more LBM in the trunk (-0.9 vs -0.5 kg) and less in the legs (-1.5 vs -1.1 kg) compared with the women (P < .05). Independent of sex, the HP group lost less LBM in the trunk and legs than the NP group. These sex and protein intake responses resulted in the NP men losing the most LBM in the legs and the NP women losing the most LBM in the trunk. Over time, men lost more FM (-5.0 vs -3.9 kg) from the trunk and less from legs (-1.7 vs -2.1 kg) than women (P < .05), which resulted in a greater decrease of the android-to-gynoid fat ratio for the men. Protein intake did not influence these sex-specific responses or have any independent effects on changes in FM. In addition, protein intake did not influence bone mineral density responses over time; bone mineral density was reduced in women, but not in men. These findings indicate that higher protein intake during weight loss promotes the retention of LBM in both the trunk and legs despite the sex-specific changes in these body regions.

SUBMITTER: Tang M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3885872 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Regional, but not total, body composition changes in overweight and obese adults consuming a higher protein, energy-restricted diet are sex specific.

Tang Minghua M Leidy Heather J HJ Campbell Wayne W WW

Nutrition research (New York, N.Y.) 20130717 8

Secondary analyses of data from 2 studies were used to assess the effects of protein intake and sex on diet-induced changes in body composition. The primary hypothesis was that the changes of body composition via energy restriction (ie, lean body mass [LBM], fat mass [FM], and bone) would be sex and diet specific. For 12 weeks, 43 male (study 1) and 45 female (study 2) overweight and obese adults consumed an energy-deficit diet (750 kcal/d less than energy needs) containing either 0.8 (normal pr ...[more]

PMID: 23890352

Similar Datasets

Project description:The carbohydrate-insulin model of obesity posits that habitual consumption of a high-carbohydrate diet sequesters fat within adipose tissue because of hyperinsulinemia and results in adaptive suppression of energy expenditure (EE). Therefore, isocaloric exchange of dietary carbohydrate for fat is predicted to result in increased EE, increased fat oxidation, and loss of body fat. In contrast, a more conventional view that "a calorie is a calorie" predicts that isocaloric variations in dietary carbohydrate and fat will have no physiologically important effects on EE or body fat.We investigated whether an isocaloric low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet (KD) is associated with changes in EE, respiratory quotient (RQ), and body composition.Seventeen overweight or obese men were admitted to metabolic wards, where they consumed a high-carbohydrate baseline diet (BD) for 4 wk followed by 4 wk of an isocaloric KD with clamped protein. Subjects spent 2 consecutive days each week residing in metabolic chambers to measure changes in EE (EEchamber), sleeping EE (SEE), and RQ. Body composition changes were measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Average EE during the final 2 wk of the BD and KD periods was measured by doubly labeled water (EEDLW).Subjects lost weight and body fat throughout the study corresponding to an overall negative energy balance of ?300 kcal/d. Compared with BD, the KD coincided with increased EEchamber (57 ± 13 kcal/d, P = 0.0004) and SEE (89 ± 14 kcal/d, P < 0.0001) and decreased RQ (-0.111 ± 0.003, P < 0.0001). EEDLW increased by 151 ± 63 kcal/d (P = 0.03). Body fat loss slowed during the KD and coincided with increased protein utilization and loss of fat-free mass.The isocaloric KD was not accompanied by increased body fat loss but was associated with relatively small increases in EE that were near the limits of detection with the use of state-of-the-art technology. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01967563.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Limited and inconsistent research findings exist about the effect of dietary protein intake on indexes of sleep. OBJECTIVE:We assessed the effect of protein intake during dietary energy restriction on indexes of sleep in overweight and obese adults in 2 randomized, controlled feeding studies. DESIGN:For study 1, 14 participants [3 men and 11 women; mean ± SE age: 56 ± 3 y; body mass index (BMI; in kg/m(2)): 30.9 ± 0.6] consumed energy-restricted diets (a 750-kcal/d deficit) with either beef and pork (BP; n = 5) or soy and legume (SL; n = 9) as the main protein sources for 3 consecutive 4-wk periods with 10% (control), 20%, or 30% of total energy from protein (random order). At baseline and the end of each period, the global sleep score (GSS) was assessed with the use of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) questionnaire. For study 2, 44 participants (12 men and 32 women; age: 52 ± 1 y; BMI: 31.4 ± 0.5) consumed a 3-wk baseline energy-balance diet with 0.8 g protein · kg baseline body mass(-1) · d(-1). Then, study 2 subjects consumed either a normal-protein [NP (control); n = 23] or a high-protein (HP; n = 21) (0.8 compared with 1.5 g · kg(-1) · d(-1), respectively) energy-restricted diet (a 750-kcal/d deficit) for 16 wk. The PSQI was administered during baseline week 3 and intervention weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16. GSSs ranged from 0 to 21 arbitrary units (au), with a higher value representing a worse GSS during the preceding month. RESULTS:In study 1, we showed that a higher protein quantity improved GSSs independent of the protein source. The GSS was higher (P < 0.05) when 10% (6.0 ± 0.4 au) compared with 20% (5.0 ± 0.4 au) protein was consumed, with 30% protein (5.4 ± 0.6 au) intermediate. In study 2, at baseline, the GSS was not different between NP (5.2 ± 0.5 au) and HP (5.4 ± 0.5 au) groups. Over time, the GSS was unchanged for the NP group and improved for the HP group (P-group-by-time interaction < 0.05). After intervention (week 16), GSSs for NP and HP groups were 5.9 ± 0.5 and 4.0 ± 0.6 au, respectively (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION:The consumption of a greater proportion of energy from protein while dieting may improve sleep in overweight and obese adults. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01005563 (study 1) and NCT01692860 (study 2).

Project description:BackgroundLimited evidence suggests that consuming a higher-protein diet during weight loss improves subjective indices of sleep in overweight and obese adults.ObjectiveWe sought to a priori assess the effects of consuming the recommended versus a higher protein Healthy US-Style Eating Pattern during energy-restriction on sleep quality indices.DesignUsing a randomized, parallel study design, 51 adults (mean ± SEM age: 47 ± 1 y; BMI: 32.6 ± 0.5 kg/m2) consumed a controlled USDA Healthy US-Style Eating Pattern containing 750 kcal/d less than their estimated energy requirement for 12 wk. Participants were randomly assigned to consume either 5 or 12.5 oz-equivalent (eq)/d of protein foods. The additional 7.5 oz-eq/d came from animal-based protein sources and displaced primarily grains. Objective (wrist-worn actigraphy) and subjective (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, Epworth Sleepiness Scale) sleep quality indices were measured at baseline, week 6, and week 12.ResultsAmong all participants, body mass decreased (-6.2 ± 0.4 kg). Dietary protein intake did not affect any objective or subjective sleep quality outcomes measured (repeated measures ANOVA). Over time, objective measures of time spent in bed, time spent sleeping, sleep onset latency, and time awake after sleep onset did not change; however, sleep efficiency improved (1 ± 1%; P = 0.027). Subjectively, global sleep scores [GSS: -2.7 ± 0.4 arbitrary units (au)] and daytime sleepiness scores (-3.8 ± 0.4 au; both P < 0.001) improved over time. The GSS improvement transitioned the participants from being categorized with "poor" to "good" sleep (GSS: >5 compared with ≤5 au of a 0-21 au scale; baseline 7.6 ± 0.4 au, week 12: 4.8 ± 0.4 au).ConclusionsAlthough objective sleep quality may not improve, adults who are overweight or obese and poor sleepers may become good sleepers while consuming either the recommended or a higher-protein energy-restricted Healthy US-Style Eating Pattern. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03174769.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Longer-term feeding studies suggest that a low-carbohydrate diet increases energy expenditure, consistent with the carbohydrate-insulin model of obesity. However, the validity of methodology utilized in these studies, involving doubly labeled water (DLW), has been questioned. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to determine whether dietary energy requirement for weight-loss maintenance is higher on a low- compared with high-carbohydrate diet. METHODS:The study reports secondary outcomes from a feeding study in which the primary outcome was total energy expenditure (TEE). After attaining a mean Run-in weight loss of 10.5%, 164 adults (BMI ?25 kg/m2; 70.1% women) were randomly assigned to Low-Carbohydrate (percentage of total energy from carbohydrate, fat, protein: 20/60/20), Moderate-Carbohydrate (40/40/20), or High-Carbohydrate (60/20/20) Test diets for 20 wk. Calorie content was adjusted to maintain individual body weight within ± 2 kg of the postweight-loss value. In analyses by intention-to-treat (ITT, completers, n = 148) and per protocol (PP, completers also achieving weight-loss maintenance, n = 110), we compared the estimated energy requirement (EER) from 10 to 20 wk of the Test diets using ANCOVA. RESULTS:Mean EER was higher in the Low- versus High-Carbohydrate group in models of varying covariate structure involving ITT [ranging from 181 (95% CI: 8-353) to 246 (64-427) kcal/d; P ?0.04] and PP [ranging from 245 (43-446) to 323 (122-525) kcal/d; P ?0.02]. This difference remained significant in sensitivity analyses accounting for change in adiposity and possible nonadherence. CONCLUSIONS:Energy requirement was higher on a low- versus high-carbohydrate diet during weight-loss maintenance in adults, commensurate with TEE. These data are consistent with the carbohydrate-insulin model and lend qualified support for the validity of the DLW method with diets varying in macronutrient composition. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02068885.

Dataset Information

Regional, but not total, body composition changes in overweight and obese adults consuming a higher protein, energy-restricted diet are sex specific.

Publications

Regional, but not total, body composition changes in overweight and obese adults consuming a higher protein, energy-restricted diet are sex specific.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets