Department of Human Biology, Nutrition and Toxicology Research Institute Maastricht (NUTRIM), Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands; Top Institute Food and Nutrition (TIFN), Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Physiol Behav. 2012 Oct 10;107(3):374-80. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2012.08.004. Epub 2012 Aug 19.
'Low-carb' diets have been suggested to be effective in body weight (BW) management. However, these diets are relatively high in protein as well.
To unravel whether body-weight loss and weight-maintenance depends on the high-protein or the 'low-carb' component of the diet.
Body-weight (BW), fat mass (FM), blood- and urine-parameters of 132 participants (age=50 ± 12 yr; BW=107 ± 20 kg; BMI=37 ± 6 kg/m(2); FM=47.5 ± 11.9 kg) were compared after 3 and 12 months between four energy-restricted diets with 33% of energy requirement for the first 3 months, and 67% for the last 9 months: normal-protein normal-carbohydrate (NPNC), normal-protein low-carbohydrate (NPLC); high-protein normal-carbohydrate (HPNC), high-protein low-carbohydrate (HPLC); 24h N-analyses confirmed daily protein intakes for the normal-protein diets of 0.7 ± 0.1 and for the high-protein diets of 1.1 ± 0.2g/kg BW (p<0.01).
BW and FM decreased over 3 months (p<0.001): HP (-14.1 ± 4 kg; -11.9 ± 1.7 kg) vs. NP (-11.5 ± 4 kg; -9.3 ± 0.7 kg) (p<0.001); LC (-13.5 ± 4 kg; -11.0 ± 1.2 kg) vs. NC (-12.3 ± 3 kg; -10.3 ± 1.1 kg) (ns). Diet × time interaction showed HPLC (-14.7 ± 5 kg; -11.9 ± 1.6 kg) vs. HPNC (-13.8 ± 3 kg; -11.9 ± 1.8 kg) (ns); NPLC (-12.2 ± 4 kg; -10.0 ± 0.8 kg) vs. NPNC (-10.7 ± 4 kg; -8.6 ± 0.7 kg) (ns); HPLC vs. NPLC (p<0.001); HPNC vs. NPNC (p<0.001). Decreases over 12 months (p<0.001) showed HP (-12.8 ± 4 kg; -9.1 ± 0.8 kg) vs. NP (-8.9 ± 3 kg; -7.7 ± 0.6 kg) (p<0.001); LC (-10.6 ± 4 kg; -8.3 ± 0.7 kg) vs. NC (11.1 ± 3 kg; 9.3 ± 0.7 kg) (ns). Diet × time interaction showed HPLC (-11.6 ± 5 kg ; -8.2 ± 0.7 kg) vs. HPNC (-14.1 ± 4 kg; -10.0 ± 0.9 kg) (ns); NPNC (-8.2 ± 3 kg; -6.7 ± 0.6 kg) vs. NPLC (-9.7 ± 3 kg; -8.5 ± 0.7 kg) (ns); HPLC vs. NPLC (p<0.01); HPNC vs. NPNC (p<0.01). HPNC vs. all other diets reduced diastolic blood pressure more. Relationships between changes in BW, FM, FFM or metabolic parameters and energy percentage of fat in the diet were not statistically significant. Metabolic profile and fat-free-mass were improved following weight-loss.
Body-weight loss and weight-maintenance depends on the high-protein, but not on the 'low-carb' component of the diet, while it is unrelated to the concomitant fat-content of the diet.
“低碳水化合物”饮食被认为在体重管理方面是有效的。然而,这些饮食中的蛋白质含量也相对较高。
揭示体重减轻和维持体重是否取决于饮食中的高蛋白部分还是“低碳水化合物”部分。
比较 132 名参与者(年龄=50 ± 12 岁;体重=107 ± 20 公斤;BMI=37 ± 6 公斤/平方米;体脂=47.5 ± 11.9 公斤)在三个月和 12 个月时的体重(BW)、脂肪量(FM)、血液和尿液参数,这些参与者接受了四种能量限制饮食,前三个月的能量需求为总能量需求的 33%,后九个月为 67%:正常蛋白正常碳水化合物(NPNC)、正常蛋白低碳水化合物(NPLC);高蛋白正常碳水化合物(HPNC)、高蛋白低碳水化合物(HPLC);24 小时 N 分析证实,正常蛋白饮食的每日蛋白质摄入量为 0.7 ± 0.1,高蛋白饮食的每日蛋白质摄入量为 1.1 ± 0.2g/kg BW(p<0.01)。
BW 和 FM 在三个月内下降(p<0.001):HP(-14.1 ± 4 公斤;-11.9 ± 1.7 公斤)与 NP(-11.5 ± 4 公斤;-9.3 ± 0.7 公斤)(p<0.001);LC(-13.5 ± 4 公斤;-11.0 ± 1.2 公斤)与 NC(-12.3 ± 3 公斤;-10.3 ± 1.1 公斤)(ns)。饮食×时间的交互作用显示,HPLC(-14.7 ± 5 公斤;-11.9 ± 1.6 公斤)与 HPNC(-13.8 ± 3 公斤;-11.9 ± 1.8 公斤)(ns);NPLC(-12.2 ± 4 公斤;-10.0 ± 0.8 公斤)与 NPNC(-10.7 ± 4 公斤;-8.6 ± 0.7 公斤)(ns);HPLC 与 NPLC(p<0.001);HPNC 与 NPNC(p<0.001)。12 个月内的下降(p<0.001)显示 HP(-12.8 ± 4 公斤;-9.1 ± 0.8 公斤)与 NP(-8.9 ± 3 公斤;-7.7 ± 0.6 公斤)(p<0.001);LC(-10.6 ± 4 公斤;-8.3 ± 0.7 公斤)与 NC(11.1 ± 3 公斤;9.3 ± 0.7 公斤)(ns)。饮食×时间的交互作用显示,HPLC(-11.6 ± 5 公斤;-8.2 ± 0.7 公斤)与 HPNC(-14.1 ± 4 公斤;-10.0 ± 0.9 公斤)(ns);NPNC(-8.2 ± 3 公斤;-6.7 ± 0.6 公斤)与 NPLC(-9.7 ± 3 公斤;-8.5 ± 0.7 公斤)(ns);HPLC 与 NPLC(p<0.01);HPNC 与 NPNC(p<0.01)。HPNC 比其他所有饮食都能更有效地降低舒张压。BW、FM、FFM 或代谢参数的变化与饮食中脂肪的能量百分比之间没有统计学意义。体重减轻后代谢特征和瘦体重得到改善。
体重减轻和维持体重取决于饮食中的高蛋白部分,而不是“低碳水化合物”部分,而与饮食中脂肪含量无关。