Department of Nutrition Science, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2059, USA.
Am J Clin Nutr. 2012 Mar;95(3):587-93. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.111.025437. Epub 2012 Jan 18.
Beverage consumption is implicated in the overweight/obesity epidemic through the weaker energy compensation response it elicits compared with solid food forms. However, plausible mechanisms are not documented.
This study assessed the cognitive and sensory contributions of differential postingestive responses to energy- and macronutrient-matched liquid (in beverage form) and solid food forms and identifies physiologic processes that may account for them.
Fifty-two healthy adults [mean ± SD age: 24.7 ± 5.5 y; BMI (in kg/m(2)): 26.3 ± 6.3] completed this randomized, 4-arm crossover study. Participants consumed oral liquid and solid preloads that they perceived, through cognitive manipulation, to be liquid or solid in their stomach (ie, oral liquid/perceived gastric liquid, oral liquid/perceived gastric solid, oral solid/perceived gastric liquid, or oral solid/perceived gastric solid). However, all preloads were designed to present a liquid gastric challenge. Appetite, gastric-emptying and orocecal transit times, and selected endocrine responses were monitored for the following 4 h; total energy intake was also recorded.
Oral-liquid and perceived gastric-liquid preloads elicited greater postprandial hunger and lower fullness sensations, more rapid gastric-emptying and orocecal transit times, attenuated insulin and glucagon-like peptide 1 release, and lower ghrelin suppression than did responses after oral-solid and perceived gastric-solid treatments (all P < 0.05). Faster gastric-emptying times were significantly associated with greater energy intake after consumption of perceived gastric-liquid preloads (P < 0.05). Energy intake was greater on days when perceived gastric-liquid preloads were consumed than when perceived gastric solids were consumed (2311 ± 95 compared with 1897 ± 72 kcal, P = 0.007).
These data document sensory and cognitive effects of food form on ingestive behavior and identify physical and endocrine variables that may account for the low satiety value of beverages. They are consistent with findings that clear, energy-yielding beverages pose a particular risk for positive energy balance. This study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01070199.
与固体食物形式相比，饮料消费通过较弱的能量补偿反应引发超重/肥胖流行，这与超重/肥胖流行有关。然而，没有记录到合理的机制。
本研究评估了能量和宏量营养素匹配的液体（饮料形式）和固体食物形式的不同餐后反应的认知和感官贡献，并确定了可能解释这些反应的生理过程。
52 名健康成年人[平均年龄±标准差（SD）：24.7±5.5 岁；BMI（kg/m2）：26.3±6.3]完成了这项随机、四臂交叉研究。参与者通过认知操作，将他们在胃中感知的口服液体和固体预加载物（即口服液体/感知胃液体、口服液体/感知胃固体、口服固体/感知胃液体或口服固体/感知胃固体）归类为液体或固体。然而，所有预加载物均设计为呈现液体胃挑战。监测以下 4 小时的食欲、胃排空和口腔-盲肠转运时间以及选择的内分泌反应；还记录了总能量摄入。
口服液体和感知胃液体预加载物比口服固体和感知胃固体处理后的反应引起更大的餐后饥饿感和更低的饱腹感，更快的胃排空和口腔-盲肠转运时间，减弱的胰岛素和胰高血糖素样肽 1 释放，以及更低的生长激素释放肽抑制（所有 P <0.05）。胃排空时间较快与感知胃液体预加载物消耗后能量摄入增加显著相关（P <0.05）。与消耗感知胃固体预加载物相比，消耗感知胃液体预加载物时的能量摄入更大（2311±95 与 1897±72 kcal，P = 0.007）。
这些数据记录了食物形式对摄食行为的感官和认知影响，并确定了可能解释饮料低饱腹感的物理和内分泌变量。它们与发现清澈、产能量的饮料对正能平衡构成特殊风险的发现一致。这项研究在 clinicaltrials.gov 上注册为 NCT01070199。
