Obesity Research Group, Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Obesity Research Group, Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Clin Nutr. 2018 Jun;37(3):815-823. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2017.04.002. Epub 2017 Apr 7.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Strong compensatory responses, with reduced resting metabolic rate (RMR), increased exercise efficiency (ExEff) and appetite, are activated when weight loss (WL) is achieved with continuous energy restriction (CER), which try to restore energy balance. Intermittent energy restriction (IER), where short spells of energy restriction are interspaced by periods of habitual energy intake, may offer some protection in minimizing those responses. We aimed to compare the effect of IER versus CER on body composition and the compensatory responses induced by WL.
35 adults (age: 39 ± 9 y) with obesity (BMI: 36 ± 4 kg/m) were randomized to lose a similar weight with an IER (N = 18) or a CER (N = 17) diet over a 12 week period. Macronutrient composition and overall energy restriction (33% reduction) were similar between groups. Body weight/composition, RMR, fasting respiratory quotient (RQ), ExEff (10, 25, and 50 W), subjective appetite ratings (hunger, fullness, desire to eat, and prospective food consumption (PFC)), and appetite-regulating hormones (active ghrelin (AG), cholecystokinin (CCK), total peptide YY (PYY), active glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), and insulin) were measured before and after WL.
Changes in body weight (≈12.5% WL) and composition were similar in both groups. Fasting RQ and ExEff at 10 W increased in both groups. Losing weight, either by IER or CER dieting, did not induce significant changes in subjective appetite ratings. RMR decreased and ExEff at 25 and 50 W increased (P < 0.001 for all) in IER group only. Basal and postprandial AG increased (P < 0.05) in IER group, whereas basal active GLP-1 decreased (P = 0.033) in CER group only. Postprandial CCK decreased in both groups (P = 0.0012 and P = 0.009 for IER and CER groups, respectively). No between group differences were apparent for any of the outcomes.
The technique used to achieve energy restriction, whether it is continuous or intermittent, does not appear to modulate the compensatory mechanisms activated by weight loss.
NCT02169778 (the study was registered in clinicaltrial.gov).
当通过持续能量限制（CER）实现体重减轻（WL）时，会激活强烈的代偿反应，表现为静息代谢率（RMR）降低、运动效率（ExEff）增加和食欲增加，这些反应试图恢复能量平衡。间歇性能量限制（IER），即在习惯性能量摄入的间隙短暂地进行能量限制，可以在最小化这些反应方面提供一些保护。我们旨在比较 IER 与 CER 对身体成分和 WL 诱导的代偿反应的影响。
35 名肥胖成年人（年龄：39 ± 9 岁）（BMI：36 ± 4kg/m²）被随机分配到 IER 组（N=18）或 CER 组（N=17），以在 12 周内减轻相似的体重。两组的宏量营养素组成和总能量限制（减少 33%）相似。体重/成分、RMR、空腹呼吸商（RQ）、ExEff（10、25 和 50W）、主观食欲评分（饥饿、饱腹感、进食欲望和预期食物摄入量（PFC））和食欲调节激素（活性胃饥饿素（AG）、胆囊收缩素（CCK）、总肽 YY（PYY）、活性胰高血糖素样肽-1（GLP-1）和胰岛素）在 WL 前后进行测量。
两组体重（≈12.5% WL）和成分的变化相似。两组的空腹 RQ 和 10W 的 ExEff 均增加。IER 或 CER 节食减肥均不会引起主观食欲评分的显著变化。仅 IER 组的 RMR 下降，25 和 50W 的 ExEff 增加（所有 P<0.001）。IER 组的基础和餐后 AG 增加（P<0.05），而 CER 组仅基础餐后 GLP-1 减少（P=0.033）。两组餐后 CCK 均降低（IER 组 P=0.0012 和 P=0.009，CER 组）。对于任何结果，两组之间均无明显差异。
用于实现能量限制的技术，无论是连续的还是间歇的，似乎都不会调节由体重减轻引起的代偿机制。
NCT02169778（该研究在 clinicaltrial.gov 上注册）。
