No abstract

Background: Increased consumption of nuts has been advocated because of their health benefits, but the role of nuts in the treatment of obesity is unclear given their high energy density.Objective: This study was designed to evaluate the effects of a hypocaloric, almond-enriched diet (AED) compared with a hypocaloric nut-free diet (NFD) on body weight and cardiovascular disease risk factors in the context of an 18-mo behavioral weight-management program.Design: Overweight and obese individuals [n = 123; age = 46.8 y, BMI (in kg/m2) = 34.0] were randomly assigned to consume an AED or NFD and instructed in traditional behavioral methods of weight control. Anthropometric and metabolic measurements were made at baseline, 6 mo, and 18 mo.Results: Those in the AED group lost slightly but significantly less weight than did those in the NFD group at 6 mo (−5.5 compared with −7.4 kg; P = 0.04), but there were no differences at 18 mo. No significant differences in body composition were found between the groups at 6 or 18 mo. The AED, compared with the NFD, was associated with greater reductions in total cholesterol (P = 0.03), total:HDL cholesterol (P = 0.02), and triglycerides (P = 0.048) at 6 mo, and no differences were observed between the groups at 18 mo.Conclusions: The AED and NFD groups experienced clinically significant and comparable weight loss at 18 mo. Despite smaller weight loss in the AED group at 6 mo, the AED group experienced greater improvements in lipid profiles. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00194428.

No abstract

The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of a commercially available weight loss program on weight and glycemic control among obese patients with type 2 diabetes. Participants included 69 patients (49 females, 20 males) with type 2 diabetes who had a mean +/- SD age of 52.2 +/- 9.5 years, a body mass index of 39.0 +/- 6.2 kg/m(2), and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) of 7.5 +/- 1.6%. Over half (52.2%) of the participants were African American. Participants were randomly assigned to: 1) a portion-controlled diet (NutriSystem D) (PCD) or 2) a diabetes support and education (DSE) program. After the initial 3 months, the PCD group continued on the PCD for the remaining 3 months, and the DSE group crossed over to PCD for the remaining 3 months. The primary comparison for this study was at 3 months. At 3 months, the PCD group lost significantly more weight (7.1 +/- 4%) than the DSE group (0.4 +/- 2.3%) (P < 0.0001). From 3 to 6 months the change in weight for both groups was statistically significant. After 3 months, the PCD group had greater reductions in HbA1c than the DSE group (-0.88 +/- 1.1 vs 0.03 +/- 1.09; P < 0.001). From 3 to 6 months the PCD group had no further change in HbA1c, while the DSE group showed a significant reduction. These data suggest that obese patients with type 2 diabetes will experience significant improvements in weight, glycemic control, and cardiovascular disease risk factors after the use of a commercially available weight management program.

The purpose of this study was to examine the factor structure and anthropometric correlates of the Emotional Eating Scale in overweight and obese adults presenting for weight loss. Participants were 217 men and women with a mean body-mass index of 33.1 (±3.4) kg/m2. Results indicated a four factor structure: depression, anger, anxiety, and somatic arousal. These factors demonstrated strong internal consistency, and together accounted for approximately 60% of the total variance. Women had significantly higher depression and total scores than did men. There were no significant correlations between the Emotional Eating Scale scores and anthropometric measures. This work begins to add to the literature base regarding the applicability of the original design of the Emotional Eating Scale for samples consisting of men and African Americans.

Background: A Curriculum Embedded Weight Sensitivity Training program (CeWebs) was integrated into an undergraduate nursing course to improve attitudes and beliefs toward individuals with obesity. Method: A one-group repeated measures study was conducted to compare students' pretest and posttest attitudes and beliefs using the Attitudes Toward Obese Persons (ATOP) and Beliefs About Obese Persons (BAOP) at the beginning and end of the semester. Results: Comparison of pretraining and posttraining scores of 125 junior nursing students on ATOP (73.96 ± 15.02 and 84.59 ± 15.39, respectively) indicated a significant increase in scores ( p < .01), which reflects more positive attitudes. Comparison of pretraining and posttraining BAOP scores (18.20 ± 6.84 and 22.22 ± 7.87, respectively) indicated a significant ( p < .01) increase in scores, indicating beliefs that obesity is not controllable. Conclusion: These findings suggest that embedding weight sensitivity training into undergraduate nursing curricula may improve attitudes and beliefs toward patients with obesity. [ J Nurs Educ . 2020;59(8):453–456.]

Although high protein and low glycemic index (GI) foods are thought to promote satiety, little is known about the effects of GI, protein, and their interaction on hunger and energy intake several hours following a mixed meal. This study investigated the long term effects of GI, protein, and their combined effects on glucose, insulin, hunger, and energy intake in healthy, sedentary, overweight, and obese adults (BMI of 30.9 ± 3.7 kg/m 2 ). Sixteen individuals participated separately in four testing sessions after an overnight fast. The majority (75%) were non-Hispanic Blacks. Each consumed one of four breakfast meals (high GI/low protein, high GI/high protein, low GI/low protein, low GI/high protein) in random order. Visual analog scales (VAS) and blood samples were taken at baseline, 15 min, and at 30 min intervals over 4 h following the meal. After 4 h, participants were given the opportunity to consume food ad libitum from a buffet style lunch. Meals containing low GI foods produced a smaller glucose (P < 0.002) and insulin (P = 0.0001) response than meals containing high GI foods. No main effects for protein or interactions between GI and protein were observed in glucose or insulin responses, respectively. The four meals had no differential effect on observed energy intake or self-reported hunger, satiety, and prospective energy intake. Low GI meals produced the smallest postprandial increases in glucose and insulin. There were no effects for GI, protein, or their interaction on appetite or energy intake 4 h after breakfast.

No abstract