Search Results (5)

Previously, narrative reviews have considered the effects of intermittent fasting on appetite. One suggestion is that intermittent fasting attenuates an increase in appetite that typically accompanies weight loss. Here, we conducted the first systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify the effects of intermittent fasting on appetite, when compared to a continuous energy restriction intervention. Five electronic databases and trial registers were searched in February 2021 and February 2022. Abstracts (N = 2800) were screened and 17 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), consisting of a variety of intermittent fasting regimes, met our inclusion criteria. The total number of participants allocated to interventions was 1111 and all RCTs were judged as having either some concerns or a high risk of bias (Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool). Random effects meta-analyses were conducted on change-from-baseline appetite ratings. There was no clear evidence that intermittent fasting affected hunger (WMD = −3.03; 95% CI [−8.13, 2.08]; p = 0.25; N = 13), fullness (WMD = 3.11; 95% CI [−1.46, 7.69]; p = 0.18; N = 10), desire to eat (WMD = −3.89; 95% CI [−12.62, 4.83]; p = 0.38; N = 6), or prospective food consumption (WMD = −2.82; 95% CI [−3.87, 9.03]; p = 0.43; N = 5), differently to continuous energy restriction interventions. Our results suggest that intermittent fasting does not mitigate an increase in our drive to eat that is often associated with continuous energy restriction. Full article

The current dietary recommendation for protein intake in the UK is 0.75 g/kg/day, however, this population-wide recommendation does not necessarily reflect altered requirements for older adults to maintain muscle protein synthesis, nor does it encompass the potential impact of intake timing. Optimal muscle protein synthesis in older adults requires both higher intake requirements and a distribution of protein intake above a 25 g threshold, three times across the day. This study aimed to describe the protein intake of older adults in a UK region and compare the results to recommendations. The study re-assessed two existing datasets with rich diet information for older adults in the South Yorkshire area. Data were extracted from food diaries of 256 adults aged between 65 and 89 years old (mean ± SD 72.4 ± 5.3 years). Quantity and timing of intake were coded using Nutritics software and compared to recommendations. The relationship between body mass index (BMI), age, and protein intake was explored. Fewer than 50% of the participants met current UK recommendations (0.75 g/kg/day) and fewer than 15% met the ESPEN 1.2 g/kg/day age-specific recommendation. Only one participant met the 25 g/meal recommendation across three meals. These findings suggest that the older adult population is not achieving recommendations to maintain muscle protein synthesis. Nonetheless it identifies several straightforward opportunities for improvement, notably elevation of morning intake. Full article

With an ageing population, dietary approaches to promote health and independence later in life are needed. In part, this can be achieved by maintaining muscle mass and strength as people age. New evidence suggests that current dietary recommendations for protein intake may be insufficient to achieve this goal and that individuals might benefit by increasing their intake and frequency of consumption of high-quality protein. However, the environmental effects of increasing animal-protein production are a concern, and alternative, more sustainable protein sources should be considered. Protein is known to be more satiating than other macronutrients, and it is unclear whether diets high in plant proteins affect the appetite of older adults as they should be recommended for individuals at risk of malnutrition. The review considers the protein needs of an ageing population (>40 years old), sustainable protein sources, appetite-related implications of diets high in plant proteins, and related areas for future research. Full article

Laboratory studies have demonstrated that experimental manipulations of oral processing can have a marked effect on energy intake. Here, we explored whether variations in oral processing across a range of unmodified everyday meals could affect post-meal fullness and meal size. In Study 1, female participants (N = 12) attended the laboratory over 20 lunchtime sessions to consume a 400-kcal portion of a different commercially available pre-packaged meal. Prior to consumption, expected satiation was assessed. During each meal, oral processing was characterised using: (i) video-recordings of the mouth and (ii) real-time measures of plate weight. Hunger and fullness ratings were elicited pre- and post-consumption, and for a further three hours. Foods that were eaten slowly had higher expected satiation and delivered more satiation and satiety. Building on these findings, in Study 2 we selected two meals (identical energy density) from Study 1 that were equally liked but maximised differences in oral processing. On separate days, male and female participants (N = 24) consumed a 400-kcal portion of either the “fast” or “slow” meal followed by an ad libitum meal (either the same food or a dessert). When continuing with the same food, participants consumed less of the slow meal. Further, differences in food intake during the ad libitum meal were not compensated at a subsequent snacking opportunity an hour later. Together, these findings suggest that variations in oral processing across a range of unmodified everyday meals can affect fullness after consuming a fixed portion and can also impact meal size. Modifying food form to encourage increased oral processing (albeit to a lesser extent than in experimental manipulations) might represent a viable target for food manufacturers to help to nudge consumers to manage their weight. Full article

Expectations about a food’s satiating capacity predict self-selected portion size, food intake and food choice. However, two individuals might have a similar expectation, but one might be extremely confident while the other might be guessing. It is unclear whether confidence about an expectation affects adjustments in energy intake at a subsequent meal. In a randomized cross-over design, 24 subjects participated in three separate breakfast sessions, and were served a low-energy-dense preload (53 kcal/100 g), a high-energy-dense preload (94 kcal/100 g), or no preload. Subjects received ambiguous information about the preload’s satiating capacity and rated how confident they were about their expected satiation before consuming the preload in its entirety. They were served an ad libitum test meal 30 min later. Confidence ratings were negatively associated with energy compensation after consuming the high-energy-dense preload (r = −0.61; p = 0.001). The same relationship was evident after consuming the low-energy-dense preload, but only after controlling for dietary restraint, hunger prior to, and liking of the test meal (p = 0.03). Our results suggest that confidence modifies short-term controls of food intake by affecting energy compensation. These results merit consideration because imprecise caloric compensation has been identified as a potential risk factor for a positive energy balance and weight gain. Full article