Variability of appetite control mechanisms in response to 9 weeks of progressive overfeeding in humans

Jebb, Susan A.; Siervo, Mario; Frühbeck, Gema; Goldberg, Gail; Murgatroyd, Peter R.; Prentice, Andrew M.

doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0803194

Cited by 40 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some subjects were able to control their energy intake (compensators), but others were not (noncompensators), perhaps indicating an interaction between physiological and cognitive mechanisms, the latter arising from the perception of an increased body weight and/or food portions (8,23,31). The inability of subjects to return to their baseline levels of energy intake points to an asymmetric regulation of appetite in humans as has been previously noted (1,23). Diaz et al (8) did not show data on energy intake during their 6-wk ad libitum post-OF phase.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficiency of autoregulatory homeostatic responses to imposed caloric excess in lean men

Siervo¹,

Frühbeck²,

Dixon³

et al. 2008

American Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and Metabolism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

sity implies a failure of autoregulatory homeostatic responses to caloric excess. We studied the mechanisms, effectiveness, and limits of such responses in six lean (21.9 Ϯ 1.3 kg/m 2 ), healthy men based in a metabolic suite for 17 wk of progressive intermittent overfeeding (OF) (3 wk, baseline; 3 wk, 20% OF; 1 wk, ad libitum; 3 wk, 40% OF; 1 wk, ad libitum; 3 wk, 60% OF; 3 wk, ad libitum). Body composition was assessed by a four-compartment model using dual X-ray absorptiometry, deuterium dilution, and plethysmography. Magnetic resonance imaging assessed subcutaneous/visceral fat at abdominal level at baseline and at the end of 60% OF. Energy intake was assessed throughout, energy expenditure (EE) and substrate oxidation rates were measured repeatedly by whole body calorimetry (calEE), and free-living EE (TEE) was measured by doubly labeled water at baseline and after 60% OF. At the end of 60% OF, calEE and TEE had increased by just 11.4% (P ϭ 0.001) and 16.2% (P ϭ 0.001), respectively. Weight and body fat (fat mass) had increased by 5.98 kg (8.8%, P ϭ 0.001) and 3.31 kg (22.6%, P ϭ 0.01), respectively. The relative increase in visceral fat (32.6%, P ϭ 0.02) exceeded that of subcutaneous fat (13.3%, P ϭ 0.002) in the abdominal region. The computed energy cost of tissue accretion differed from the excess ingested by only 13.1% (using calEE) and 11.6% (using TEE), indicating an absence of effective dissipative mechanisms. We conclude that elevations in EE provide very limited autoregulatory capacity in body weight regulation, and that regulation must be dominated by hypothalamic modulation of energy intake. This result supports present conclusions from genetic studies in which all known causes of human obesity are related to defects in the regulation of appetite. energy balance; body composition; whole body calorimetry; doubly labeled water; overfeeding; dissipative mechanisms OVEREATING, WHETHER CHRONIC or episodic, produces a positive energy balance and favors the accretion of new tissues, particularly fat (35,49). The efficiency of innate autoregulatory mechanisms that attempt to maintain body weight homeostasis has been explored extensively during the last century since the earliest experiments published by Neumann in 1902 (30) and Gulick in 1922 (14). These suggested the existence of energy dissipative mechanisms (termed luxuskonsumption) able to dispose of part of the energy excess as heat and decrease the storage of energy as fat. These two overfeeding studies were conducted on only one subject, and the authors claimed that an increase in energy expenditure (EE) dissipated the extra energy available and prevented weight gain. Forbes (11) reexamined the relationship between weight gain and excess energy intake in these two studies and observed that the slope of the regression line between weight gain and excess energy intake was close to the predicted cost of weight gain. Since then, numerous studies performed under experimental (3, 8, 17, 22, 24 -26, 37, 41) and nonexperimental settings (5,28,33,45) ha...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficiency of autoregulatory homeostatic responses to imposed caloric excess in lean men

Siervo¹,

Frühbeck²,

Dixon³

et al. 2008

American Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and Metabolism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rodents (and humans) possess varying susceptibility to excessive weight gain in an obesogenic environment, with some individuals showing natural resistance (Levin et al, 1997;Jebb et al, 2006;Koza et al, 2006;Enriori et al, 2007). While a variety of mechanisms could contribute to this variability, several lines of evidence suggest that differences in the hypothalamic energy balance circuitry could be responsible.…”

Section: Vmn Pacap Neurons Are Likely To Be a Direct Target For Leptinmentioning

confidence: 99%

PACAP Neurons in the Hypothalamic Ventromedial Nucleus Are Targets of Central Leptin Signaling

Hawke

Ivanov²,

Bechtold³

et al. 2009

J. Neurosci.

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, there was an attempt by at least two men to compensate during the 7 d ad libitum periods, although 7 d may be insufficient for this ability to be fully expressed, and perhaps a longer period of free feeding would have permitted compensation to occur. Jebb et al (2006) have demonstrated that individual differences will determine how much weight is gained during systematic overfeeding. Evidently, there are some individuals who are resistant to situational cues to overeat, even when overfeeding is forced.…”

Section: Characteristics Of the Consumermentioning

confidence: 99%

Cues to overeat: psychological factors influencing overconsumption

Hetherington

2007

Proc. Nutr. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human food intake is driven by necessity, but modern industrialized societies are characterized by food surfeit and an increasingly 'obesogenic' environment. This environment tends to discourage energy expenditure and to facilitate energy intake. The amount eaten in any given eating episode depends less on internal need state and more on environmental contextual factors such as the availability of highly-palatable energy-dense foods. In addition, the process of satiation can easily be disrupted by the introduction within a meal of different foods (variety effect), the presence of others (social context) and competing tasks (distraction). Properties of ingestants such as alcohol promote food intake and characteristics of individuals make them more or less susceptible to situational cues to overeat. In the present review the role of each of these environmental factors in promoting overconsumption is considered and the extent to which these factors might contribute to long-term weight regulation is discussed. Overconsumption: Energy intake: Weight regulation: Environmental factorsHuman food intake is motivated by need, but influenced by a myriad of complex factors including those that reside within the environment (availability, variety, portion size), those that characterize the food itself (energy density, macronutrient composition, sensory features) and the response of the individual to these factors. Most industrialized countries and many developing nations are now facing an exponential rise in overweight and obesity that must largely be a result of changes in the food environment. The relatively high levels of genetic predisposition to gain weight (Loos & Bouchard, 2003) in permissive environments suggest that the characteristics of the obesogenic environment and the response of the consumer to this environment must be understood if the obesity epidemic is to be tackled. In order to expose elements of the environment that may promote overeating, it is important to identify those controls of ingestion likely to be influenced by the food environment and then to examine how these features operate to derail homeostatic controls. Direct and indirect controls of meal sizeThe brain receives a constant stream of information to guide food intake based on stored energy as well as current energy and nutrient sources (Woods, 2005). Thus, the amount eaten within a meal will depend both on the metabolism of previous meals and the currently-available food. However, there is no simple relationship between energy deficit and energy intake. For example, consumers in Western cultures tend to eat their smallest meals after the longest period of energy depletion and their largest meal at the end of the day, in anticipation of this deficit (Weingarten, 1986). Meal size does not correspond well with the immediately preceding inter-meal interval (Le Magnen, 1969), suggesting that meal size is highly variable and subject to the influence of many different factors somewhat uncoupled from specific energy deficits (Wiepkema, 1971;Lowe & ...

show abstract

Variability of appetite control mechanisms in response to 9 weeks of progressive overfeeding in humans

Cited by 40 publications

References 12 publications

Efficiency of autoregulatory homeostatic responses to imposed caloric excess in lean men

Efficiency of autoregulatory homeostatic responses to imposed caloric excess in lean men

PACAP Neurons in the Hypothalamic Ventromedial Nucleus Are Targets of Central Leptin Signaling

Cues to overeat: psychological factors influencing overconsumption

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About