Dataset Information

Consuming Beef vs. Soy Protein Has Little Effect on Appetite, Satiety, and Food Intake in Healthy Adults.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Although protein-rich plant foods have recently been touted as an equivalent to animal products, limited data exist regarding the effects of animal vs. plant proteins on appetite, satiety, and subsequent food intake. OBJECTIVE:The objective was to determine whether a high-protein beef lunch alters the appetitive, hormonal, and neural signals controlling food intake regulation vs. a macronutrient and fiber-matched (MF) or serving size-matched (SS) soy lunch in healthy adults. METHODS:A randomized, double-blind, crossover design study was completed in 21 adults (aged 23 ± 1 y; body mass index: 23.8 ± 0.6 kg/m²; mean ± SEM) to compare 400-kcal MF and SS lunches varying in protein quality. The MF lunches contained 24-g beef protein or 24-g soy protein, whereas the SS lunches contained 1 serving of beef (24-g protein/1-g fiber) or soy (14-g protein/5-g fiber). Pre- and postlunch appetite questionnaires and blood sampling were completed over an 8-h period until dinner was voluntarily requested. In addition, pre- and postlunch functional MRI brain scans were completed to assess neural activation in response to food stimuli. RESULTS:On average, dinner was requested at ?250 ± 20 min postlunch with no differences between beef vs. soy within the MF and SS conditions. Furthermore, no differences in hunger, fullness, peptide YY, or glucagon-like peptide-1 responses were observed after the beef vs. soy lunches within the MF and SS conditions. The SS beef meal led to reductions in anterior cingulate activation (-22 ± 6%) vs. soy (+7 ± 9%; P < 0.01) and greater reductions in insular activation (-30 ± 6%) vs. SS soy (-7 ± 10%; P < 0.01). The participants consumed ?945 ± 78 kcal after the MF meals and 910 ± 74 kcal after the SS meals with no differences between beef vs. soy. CONCLUSIONS:When comparing 2 high-quality protein sources, such as beef and soy, the type of protein consumed within a mixed meal elicited very little effect on appetite, satiety, and food intake in healthy adults.

SUBMITTER: Douglas SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7289332 | biostudies-literature | 2015 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Consuming Beef vs. Soy Protein Has Little Effect on Appetite, Satiety, and Food Intake in Healthy Adults.

Douglas Steve M SM Lasley Tyler R TR Leidy Heather J HJ

The Journal of nutrition 20150325 5

<h4>Background</h4>Although protein-rich plant foods have recently been touted as an equivalent to animal products, limited data exist regarding the effects of animal vs. plant proteins on appetite, satiety, and subsequent food intake.<h4>Objective</h4>The objective was to determine whether a high-protein beef lunch alters the appetitive, hormonal, and neural signals controlling food intake regulation vs. a macronutrient and fiber-matched (MF) or serving size-matched (SS) soy lunch in healthy ad ...[more]

PMID: 25809680

Similar Datasets

Project description:Aging is often associated with overweight and obesity. There exists a long-standing debate about whether meal pattern also contributes to the development of obesity. The orexigenic hormone ghrelin regulates appetite and satiety by activating its receptor, growth hormone secretagogue receptor (GHS-R). In mice, circulating ghrelin concentrations and brain GHS-R expression were shown to increase with aging. To assess whether GHS-R regulates feeding pattern during aging, we studied meal patterns for the following cohorts of male mice fed a normal unpurified diet: 1) 3-4 mo, young wild-type (WT) mice; 2) 3-4 mo, young Ghsr-null (Ghsr(-/-)) mice; 3) 12-14 mo, middle-aged WT (WT-M) mice; 4) 12-14 mo, middle-aged Ghsr(-/-) (Ghsr(-/-)-M) mice; 5) 24-26 mo, old WT (WT-O) mice; and 6) 24-26 mo, old Ghsr(-/-) (Ghsr(-/-)-O) mice. Although the total daily food intake of Ghsr(-/-) mice was similar to that of WT controls, Ghsr(-/-)-M and Ghsr(-/-)-O mice had 9% (P = 0.07) and 16% (P < 0.05) less body weight compared with WT-M and WT-O mice, respectively, primarily due to reduced fat mass (P < 0.05, WT-M vs. Ghsr(-/-)-M and WT-O vs. Ghsr(-/-)-O). Intriguingly, Ghsr(-/-)-M mice ate larger meals (on average, Ghsr(-/-)-M mice ate 0.117 g/meal and WT-M mice ate 0.080 g/meal; P < 0.01) and took a longer time to eat (Ghsr(-/-)-M, 196.0 s and WT-M, 128.9 s; P < 0.01), but ate less frequently (Ghsr(-/-)-M, 31.0 times/d and WT-M, 42.3 times/d; P < 0.05) than WT-M controls. In addition, we found that expression of hypothalamic orexigenic peptides, neuropeptide Y (NPY) and agouti-related peptide (AgRP), was relatively lower in aged WT mice (P = 0.09 for NPY and P = 0.06 for AgRP), but anorexic peptide pro-opiomelanocortin (POMC) expression remained unchanged between the WT age groups. Interestingly, old Ghsr(-/-) mice had greater hypothalamic NPY expression (102% higher; P < 0.05) and AgRP expression (P = 0.07) but significantly lower POMC expression (P < 0.05) when compared with age-matched WT-O controls. Thus, our results indicate that GHS-R plays an important role in the regulation of meal pattern and that GHS-R ablation may modulate feeding behavior through the regulation of hypothalamic neuropeptides. Our results collectively suggest that ghrelin receptor antagonism may have a beneficial effect on metabolism during aging.

Project description:BackgroundLoss of appetite and body weight are potentially devastating, highly prevalent cancer complications. The ghrelin receptor is a mediator of appetite and metabolism, and anamorelin is a novel, orally administered ghrelin receptor agonist. Effects on appetite and food intake may influence body-weight gain but can be difficult to measure in multi-site studies. Here, we summarize two single-centre trials.MethodsBoth trials were phase I, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, partly/wholly crossover studies of healthy young adults. Study 102 tested single anamorelin doses of 1-20 mg. Assessments included post-dose self-ratings on 100 mm visual analogue scales for hunger, anticipated eating pleasure, and anticipated quantity of food consumption. Study 101 tested single 10, 25, and 50 mg doses. Assessments included the same scales plus caloric intake beginning 4 h post-dose.ResultsStudy 102 treated 16 male subjects (mean age, 26.3 years). Mean hunger scores generally increased after all treatments, with significant differences from placebo (P < 0.05) in the 5 mg anamorelin group at 0.5 and 1 h post-dose (+8.2 and +13.2 mm). Results for other scales were similar. Study 101 treated nine male subjects (mean age, 26.3 years). Pooled findings for anamorelin 25 and 50 mg vs. placebo showed significant mean increases in hunger scores at all but 1 pre-prandial time point, including the first assessment, 0.5 h post-dose (+10.9 vs. +0.7 mm, P = 0.0077), and the last assessment, 4 h post-dose (+32.7 vs. +7.0 mm, P = 0.0170), with a significant mean 18.4% increase vs. placebo in caloric intake (P = 0.0148).ConclusionsIn single-centre studies of healthy adults, single anamorelin doses of 1-20 mg elicited modest increases in hunger, and single doses of 25 and 50 mg achieved significant increases in hunger and caloric intake. The findings are consistent with dose-related weight gain reported in a prior phase I study as well as multi-centre findings in cachectic cancer patients and expand the evidence supporting anamorelin as a potential intervention.

Dataset Information

Consuming Beef vs. Soy Protein Has Little Effect on Appetite, Satiety, and Food Intake in Healthy Adults.

Publications

Consuming Beef vs. Soy Protein Has Little Effect on Appetite, Satiety, and Food Intake in Healthy Adults.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets