Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2440/17244
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLuscombe-Marsh, N.-
dc.contributor.authorNoakes, M.-
dc.contributor.authorWittert, G.-
dc.contributor.authorKeogh, J.-
dc.contributor.authorFoster, P.-
dc.contributor.authorClifton, P.-
dc.date.issued2005-
dc.identifier.citationAmerican Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2005; 81(4):762-772-
dc.identifier.issn0002-9165-
dc.identifier.issn1938-3207-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/17244-
dc.description.abstract<h4>Background</h4>When substituted for carbohydrate in an energy-reduced diet, dietary protein enhances fat loss in women. It is unknown whether the effect is due to increased protein or reduced carbohydrate.<h4>Objective</h4>We compared the effects of 2 isocaloric diets that differed in protein and fat content on weight loss, lipids, appetite regulation, and energy expenditure after test meals.<h4>Design</h4>This was a parallel, randomized study in which subjects received either a low-fat, high-protein (LF-HP) diet (29 +/- 1% fat, 34 +/- 0.8% protein) or a high-fat, standard-protein (HF-SP) diet (45 +/- 0.6% fat, 18 +/- 0.3% protein) during 12 wk of energy restriction (6 +/- 0.1 MJ/d) and 4 wk of energy balance (7.4 +/- 0.3 MJ/d). Fifty-seven overweight and obese [mean body mass index (in kg/m(2)): 33.8 +/- 0.9] volunteers with insulin concentrations >12 mU/L completed the study.<h4>Results</h4>Weight loss (LF-HP group, 9.7 +/- 1.1 kg; HF-SP group, 10.2 +/- 1.4 kg; P = 0.78) and fat loss were not significantly different between diet groups even though the subjects desired less to eat after the LF-HP meal (P = 0.02). The decrease in resting energy expenditure was not significantly different between diet groups (LF-HP, -342 +/- 185 kJ/d; HF-SP, -349 +/- 220 kJ/d). The decrease in the thermic effect of feeding with weight loss was smaller in the LF-HP group than in the HF-SP group (-0.3 +/- 1.0% compared with -3.6 +/- 0.7%; P = 0.014). Glucose and insulin responses to test meals improved after weight loss (P < 0.001) with no significant diet effect. Bone turnover, inflammation, and calcium excretion did not change significantly.<h4>Conclusion</h4>The magnitude of weight loss and the improvements in insulin resistance and cardiovascular disease risk factors did not differ significantly between the 2 diets, and neither diet had any detrimental effects on bone turnover or renal function.-
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityNatalie D Luscombe-Marsh, Manny Noakes, Gary A Wittert, Jennifer B Keogh, Paul Foster, and Peter M Clifton-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.publisherAmer Soc Clinical Nutrition-
dc.rightsCopyright © 2005 American Society for Clinical Nutrition-
dc.source.urihttp://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/81/4/762-
dc.subjectweight loss-
dc.subjectprotein-
dc.subjectlow-carbohydrate diet-
dc.subjectenergy restriction-
dc.subjectinsulin resistance-
dc.subjectlipids-
dc.subjectenergy expenditure-
dc.subjectappetite-
dc.subjectbone turnover-
dc.subjecthumans-
dc.titleCarbohydrate-restricted diets high in either monounsaturated fat or protein are equally effective at promoting fat loss and improving blood lipids1-3-
dc.typeJournal article-
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/ajcn/81.4.762-
pubs.publication-statusPublished-
dc.identifier.orcidLuscombe-Marsh, N. [0000-0001-9690-4722]-
dc.identifier.orcidWittert, G. [0000-0001-6818-6065]-
dc.identifier.orcidClifton, P. [0000-0002-6411-626X]-
Appears in Collections:Aurora harvest 6
Obstetrics and Gynaecology publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.