Abstract:This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
“…The Leeds Food Preference Questionnaire (LFPQ) [99], used to assess food reward, is regularly used after an exercise session [44,100] or training [101], but only occasionally in assessments of the effects of environmental conditions. However, the preference for sweet foods and a liking for high-fat and savory foods were shown to increase during a fifteen day expedition to Greenland [102] and a four day rapid ascent in the Alps [103], respectively. However, the impact of environmental temperature was not assessed and remains unknown.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Nevertheless, such assessments of long-term exposure remain essential because it is unknown whether the different thermal stresses continue to affect energy intake similarly over time. Just as exercise-induced energy deficits gradually disappear due to an increase in spontaneous energy intake [102,106,107], it is possible that the effects described in this meta-analysis change over time.…”
The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the effect of acute heat/cold exposure on subsequent energy intake (EI) in adults. We searched the following sources for publications on this topic: PubMed, Ovid Medline, Science Direct and SPORTDiscus. The eligibility criteria for study selection were: randomized controlled trials performed in adults (169 men and 30 women; 20–52 years old) comparing EI at one or more meals taken ad libitum, during and/or after exposure to heat/cold and thermoneutral conditions. One of several exercise sessions could be realized before or during thermal exposures. Two of the thirteen studies included examined the effect of heat (one during exercise and one during exercise and at rest), eight investigated the effect of cold (six during exercise and two at rest), and three the effect of both heat and cold (two during exercise and one at rest). The meta-analysis revealed a small increase in EI in cold conditions (g = 0.44; p = 0.019) and a small decrease in hot conditions (g = −0.39, p = 0.022) for exposure during both rest and exercise. Exposures to heat and cold altered EI in opposite ways, with heat decreasing EI and cold increasing it. The effect of exercise remains unclear.
“…The Leeds Food Preference Questionnaire (LFPQ) [99], used to assess food reward, is regularly used after an exercise session [44,100] or training [101], but only occasionally in assessments of the effects of environmental conditions. However, the preference for sweet foods and a liking for high-fat and savory foods were shown to increase during a fifteen day expedition to Greenland [102] and a four day rapid ascent in the Alps [103], respectively. However, the impact of environmental temperature was not assessed and remains unknown.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Nevertheless, such assessments of long-term exposure remain essential because it is unknown whether the different thermal stresses continue to affect energy intake similarly over time. Just as exercise-induced energy deficits gradually disappear due to an increase in spontaneous energy intake [102,106,107], it is possible that the effects described in this meta-analysis change over time.…”
The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the effect of acute heat/cold exposure on subsequent energy intake (EI) in adults. We searched the following sources for publications on this topic: PubMed, Ovid Medline, Science Direct and SPORTDiscus. The eligibility criteria for study selection were: randomized controlled trials performed in adults (169 men and 30 women; 20–52 years old) comparing EI at one or more meals taken ad libitum, during and/or after exposure to heat/cold and thermoneutral conditions. One of several exercise sessions could be realized before or during thermal exposures. Two of the thirteen studies included examined the effect of heat (one during exercise and one during exercise and at rest), eight investigated the effect of cold (six during exercise and two at rest), and three the effect of both heat and cold (two during exercise and one at rest). The meta-analysis revealed a small increase in EI in cold conditions (g = 0.44; p = 0.019) and a small decrease in hot conditions (g = −0.39, p = 0.022) for exposure during both rest and exercise. Exposures to heat and cold altered EI in opposite ways, with heat decreasing EI and cold increasing it. The effect of exercise remains unclear.
“…Participants will be educated and encouraged to daily monitor their behavior, weight, and eating pattern, leading to self-efficacy for diet and WM, which are determinants of WL maintenance [ 66 ]. Although maintaining high levels of PA has been pointed out as a determinant of WL maintenance [ 74 ], the BREAK Study is a diet-only [ 75 ] intervention. Therefore, no PA recommendations will be given to participants throughout the WL and WM phases.…”
Background
Adaptive thermogenesis, defined as the decrease in the energy expenditure components beyond what can be predicted by changes in body mass stores, has been studied as a possible barrier to weight loss and weight maintenance. Intermittent energy restriction (IER), using energy balance refeeds, has been pointed out as a viable strategy to reduce adaptive thermogenesis and improve weight loss efficiency (greater weight loss per unit of energy deficit), as an alternative to a continuous energy restriction (CER). Following a randomized clinical trial design, the BREAK Study aims to compare the effects of IER versus CER on body composition and in adaptive thermogenesis, and understand whether participants will successfully maintain their weight loss after 12 months.
Methods
Seventy-four women with obesity and inactive (20–45 y) will be randomized to 16 weeks of CER or IER (8x2 weeks of energy restriction interspersed with 7x1 week in energy balance). Both groups will start with 2 weeks in energy balance before energy restriction, followed by 16 weeks in energy restriction, then 8 weeks in energy balance and finally a 12-month weight maintenance phase. Primary outcomes are changes in fat-mass and adaptive thermogenesis after weight loss and weight maintenance. Secondary outcomes include weight loss, fat-free mass preservation, alterations in energy expenditure components, and changes in hormones (thyroid function, insulin, leptin, and cortisol).
Discussion
We anticipate that The BREAK Study will allow us to better understand adaptive thermogenesis during weight loss and weight maintenance, in women with obesity. These findings will enable evidence-based decisions for obesity treatment.
Trial registration
ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05184361.
“…The impact of thermal exposures on food reward and preference is scarcely studied. We performed a pilot study on the impact of a 16-h passive exposure to heat (27) and field studies during a 15-day expedition in the cold (77,78) using an adapted paper version of the LFPQ (79) .…”
Effects of acute thermal exposures on appetite appear hypothetical in reason of very heterogeneous methodologies. The aim of this study was therefore to clearly define the effects of passive 24-h cold (16°C) and heat (32°C) exposures on appetitive responses compared to a thermo neutral condition (24°C). Twenty-three healthy, young, and active male participants realised three sessions (from 1 pm) in a laboratory conceived like an apartment dressed with the same outfit (Clo=1). Three meals composed of three or four cold or warm dishes were served ad libitum to assess energy intake (EI). Leeds Food Preference Questionnaires were used before each meal to assess food reward. Subjective appetite was regularly assessed and levels of appetitive hormones (acylated ghrelin, GLP-1, leptin, and PYY) were assessed before and after the last meal (lunch). Contrary to the literature, total EI was not modified by cold or heat exposure (p=0.120). Accordingly, hunger scores (p=0.554) were not altered. Levels of acylated ghrelin and leptin were marginally higher during the 16 (p=0.032) and 32°C (p<0.023) sessions, respectively. Interestingly, implicit wanting for cold and low-fat foods at 32°C and for warm and high-fat foods at 16°C were increased during the whole exposure (p < 0.024). Moreover, cold entrées were more consumed at 32 °C (p<0.062) and warm main dishes more consumed at 16°C (p<0.025). Thus, passive cold and hot exposures had limited effects on appetite and it seems that offering some choice based on food temperature may help individuals to express their specific food preferences and maintain EI.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.