Varying the protein source in mixed meal modifies glucose, insulin and glucagon kinetics in healthy men, has weak effects on subjective satiety and fails to affect food intake

Lang, Vincent; Bellisle, F.; Alamowitch, C; Craplet, C.; Bornet, Francis; Slama, G.; Guy‐Grand, Bernard

doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1600881

Cited by 89 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A mixed meal study of Lang et al of healthy men ingesting casein, gelatin or soy protein resulted in no difference in the satiety effect. However, there were significant effects on the kinetics of metabolic response (Lang et al, 1999). Glucose and insulin responses following casein-enriched meal lagged 1-1.5 h behind responses following soy protein-enriched meal.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…In six healthy males, the postprandial plasma insulin level increased, with a higher insulin/glucagon ratio, when fed beef rather than a fish meal (Soucy and Le Blanc, 1999). In another group of healthy men, modification of the protein source in mixed meals containing either casein, gelatin or soy protein was associated with diverging kinetics of postprandial blood glucose (Lang et al, 1999).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Glucose and insulin responses in healthy women after intake of composite meals containing cod-, milk-, and soy protein

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate the metabolic effect of three different kinds of dietary proteins as part of composite meals with similar macronutrient composition in healthy subjects. Design: A randomised meal study. Setting: Metabolic ward. Subjects and methods: In total, 17 healthy women, 30-65 years old, consumed three meals in randomised order. The meals consisted of foodstuffs with similar nutrient composition but different types of protein (cod, cottage cheese, or soy protein isolate). The distribution of energy from protein, fat and carbohydrates was 33, 26, and 41 energy percent, respectively. Total amount of energy was 2300 kJ. Blood samples were drawn for assay of B-glucose, S-insulin, S-free fatty acids, S-triglycerides, and C-peptide in the fasting state and at seven times (20, 40, 60, 90, 120, 180, and 240 min) after starting to eat the test meal. Results: The blood glucose response after the cod protein meal differed from that of the soy protein meal, with a larger area under the curve (AUC) calculated up to 120 min. The serum insulin response after the milk protein meal differed from that of the cod protein meal with a larger AUC calculated up to 240 min. The insulin/C-peptide and the insulin/glucose ratios differed between the meals; the insulin/C-peptide ratio was higher after the milk protein meal compared to the cod, and soy protein meal at 120 min. The insulin/glucose ratio was lower after the cod protein meal compared to the milk, and soy protein meals at 120 min. The results showed that the metabolic responses differed after meals with similar macronutrient composition containing cod-, milk-, or soy protein.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Glucose and insulin responses in healthy women after intake of composite meals containing cod-, milk-, and soy protein

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the effect of the nature of the proteins was not present in all experiments. Indeed, various proteins have been used in other experiments described in the literature, and it is still not clear if the nature of the protein can significantly affect the feeding response studied (egg albumin, casein, soya or whey or pea proteins in human subjects) (30,31) . The results observed with biochemically very different proteins strongly suggest that the satiating effect of protein is primarily a very general property that does not depend on such specific characteristics of one or another protein (3) .…”

Section: Protein Snacks (Or Loads)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Peripheral and central mechanisms involved in the control of food intake by dietary amino acids and proteins

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present review summarises current knowledge and recent findings on the modulation of appetite by dietary protein, via both peripheral and central mechanisms. Of the three macronutrients, proteins are recognised as the strongest inhibitor of food intake. The well-recognised poor palatability of proteins is not the principal mechanism explaining the decrease in high-protein (HP) diet intake. Consumption of a HP diet does not induce conditioned food aversion, but rather experience-enhanced satiety. Amino acid consumption is detected by multiple and redundant mechanisms originating from visceral (during digestion) and metabolic (inter-prandial period) sources, recorded both directly and indirectly (mainly vagus-mediated) by the central nervous system (CNS). Peripherally, the satiating effect of dietary proteins appears to be mediated by anorexigenic gut peptides, principally cholecystokinin, glucagon-like peptide-1 and peptide YY. In the CNS, HP diets trigger the activation of noradrenergic and adrenergic neurons in the nucleus of the solitary tract and melanocortin neurons in the arcuate nucleus. Additionally, there is evidence that circulating leucine levels may modulate food intake. Leucine is associated with neural mechanisms involving mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) and AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK), energy sensors active in the control of energy intake, at least in the arcuate nucleus of the hypothalamus. In addition, HP diets inhibit the activation of opioid and GABAergic neurons in the nucleus accumbens, and thus inhibit food intake by reducing the hedonic response to food, presumably because of their low palatability. Future studies should concentrate on studying the adaptation of different neural circuits following the ingestion of protein diets.

show abstract

“…Lang et al (1998) found no differences between the effect of egg albumin, casein, gelatin, soy, pea, or wheat gluten on appetite. Subsequently, Lang et al (1999) found a weak effect on satiety but no difference in energy intake after consumption of casein, gelatin, or soy protein based meals. found no difference on appetite and energy intake of a whey or casein preload and found whey, soy, and gluten protein tended to reduce ad libitum food intake equally.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differences in satiety effects of alginate- and whey protein-based foods

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phone (08) 92662771Key words: hunger, satiety, whey protein, alginate, viscosity. 2 AbstractSatiety is important in regulating food intake and has important public health significance in the control of obesity. Food containing protein and non-starch polysaccharides provides a satiety effect through various mechanisms but a comparison of the satiety effect on each has not previously been investigated. This study compared the satiety effect or reduction of hunger after consumption of (i) a whey protein-based drink versus an alginate-based drink of the same viscosity where only the protein content differed , (ii) two alginate-based drinks differing in alginate type and viscosity, and iii) a whey protein-based drink versus an alginate-based drink differing in protein content and viscosity. Fasted subjects assessed the effect of a drink on hunger that was one of three variants: a low viscosity whey-protein drink (LVHP); a high viscosity low protein alginate-based drink (HVLP); or a low viscosity low protein alginate-based drink (LVLP) over the 240 minutes postprandial period using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). When protein differed and viscosity was the same, resultsshowed subjects felt significantly less hungry after consuming the LVHP drink compared to the LVLP drink, so protein reduced hunger. Subjects reported reduced hunger from the HVLP drink compared to the LVLP drink where viscosity of drinks differed, suggesting viscosity and/or gelation reduced hunger. Subjects reported reduced hunger from the HVLP drink compared to LVHP drink where both protein and viscosity differed, suggesting that viscosity reduced hunger more than the protein effect. Results suggest the physical characteristics such as viscosity and/or gel strength and protein content reduce hunger.Further studies should investigate which of these parameters is more important.3

show abstract

Varying the protein source in mixed meal modifies glucose, insulin and glucagon kinetics in healthy men, has weak effects on subjective satiety and fails to affect food intake

Cited by 89 publications

References 23 publications

Glucose and insulin responses in healthy women after intake of composite meals containing cod-, milk-, and soy protein

Glucose and insulin responses in healthy women after intake of composite meals containing cod-, milk-, and soy protein

Peripheral and central mechanisms involved in the control of food intake by dietary amino acids and proteins

Differences in satiety effects of alginate- and whey protein-based foods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About