is a calorie a calorie? - asu college of health solutions 1 is a calorie a calorie? richard d....

4/8/2016

1

Is a Caloriea Calorie?Richard D. Mattes, MPH, PhD, RD

Purdue University

West Lafayette, IN, USA

Laboratory for Sensory and Ingestive Studies

Average bond energies, kcal/mole

C-H 98

O-H 110

C-C 80

C-O 78

H-H 103

C-N 65

O=O 116 (2 x 58)

C=O 187* (2 x 93.5)

C=C 145 (2 x 72.5)

(* as found in CO2)

Rate of Weight Loss is Unaffected by Dietary Macronutrient Content

Kinsell, et al Metabolism 13:195, 1964.

160

180

200

220

240

260

280

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Days

Fat 12-83%en

Protein 14-36%en

Carbohydrate 3-64%en

Energy Intake of Trappist Nuns Unaffected by Diet Composition

Van Stratum Am J Clin Nutr 31:206, 1978

N=22

Fat: 24 vs 47%en

Protein: 18%en

In Energy Balance, Weight is Unaffectedby Diet Composition

Leibel, et al Am J Clin Nutr 55:350, 1992.

N=16: 13 adults, 3 children

Intervention:15-56 days

Protein: 15%en

Dansinger et al., JAMA 2005;293:43-53

4/8/2016

2

Sacks et al., NEJM 2009;360:859-873 Sacks et al., NEJM 2009;360:859-873

Dietary Approaches to Optimize Health

Dietary level

• Nutrients/food constituents

• Foods

• Diets

Examples

• Protein, Fiber, Calcium, Capsaicin

• Fruits, Vegetables, w\Whole Grains

• Glycemic Index, Vegan, Energy Density, Paleo

Common assumption: A Calorie A Calorie

Wansink. Obes Res 2005.

Perceived Time

Behavior: Perceived time

• Manipulate perceived time at habitual mealtimes

• Is energy intake influenced by:

– External (time) and/or internal (hunger) cues?

• Effects in lean (23±1.5kg/m2) vs. overweight (29±2.6kg/m2)

• No food or time cues-except for wall clock– Two conditions:

Actual Time5:40pm

Slow 5:20pm

Fast 6:10pm

Modified from Schachter and Gross. J Pers Soc Psychol 1968.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Slow Fast Slow Fast

Fo

od

In

tak

e (

g)

Energy Intake Significantly Influenced By Time Cues in Overweight

Overweight Lean

*

* P < 0.05Modified from Schachter and Gross. J Pers Soc Psychol 1968.

4/8/2016

3

Wansink. Obes Res 2005.

Perceived Portion Size

Accurate:

Normal bowl

Biased:

Self-refilling bowl

Emptied 60% slower

Modified from Wansink. Obes Res 2005.

Self-Estimation of Energy Intake

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Accurate Biased

*


Disruption of Visual Portion Size Cues Increases Energy Intake

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Accurate Biased

En

erg

y i

nta

ke (

kcal)

* P < 0.05


73 %

difference

Perceived Energy Content

Mattes Physiol Behav 1990;47:1037-1044.

4/8/2016

4

Swithers & Davidson Behav Neurosci 2008;122:161-173.

Conditioning equivalent to:

• 2.2 year old infant

• 1.8 liters of sweetened beverage/day

• 265 days

Effects of sweet taste on measures of cumulative energy intake across the day in HASB and LASB. Hashed bars represent LASB, solid bars represent HASB. In each pair, the dark bars on the left represent consumption after the W preload, the pale

bars on the right represent consumption after the AS preload. ⁎Significant differences ( pb0.05) between Wand AS preloads

in LASB, no differences in HASB. #Significant differences ( pb0.05) between LASB and HASB, independent of preload.

Appleton & Blundell. Physiol Behav 2007;92:479-486.

Porikos et al., AJCN

1977;30:1638-1644.

Miller & Perez AJCN 2014;100:765-777

Cohort Studies: Substitute LCS for NS

Miller & Perez AJCN 2014;100:765-777

RCT’s: Substitution of NS with LCS

4/8/2016

5

Rogers et al., IJO 2015; doi:10.1038/ijo.2015.177

Cohort Studies: Substitute LCS for NS

Rogers et al., IJO 2015; doi:10.1038/ijo.2015.177

RCT’s: Substitution of NS with LCS

Peters et al., Obesity 2016;24:297-304

Perceived Healthfulness

Provencher et al., Appetite 2009;52:340-344

Perceived Food Form

4/8/2016

6

Cassady et al., Am J Clin Nutr2012;95;587-593

Cassady et al., Am J Clin Nutr 2012;95;587-593

4/8/2016

7

Cassady et al., Am J Clin Nutr 2012;95;587-593 Cassady et al., Am J Clin Nutr 2012;95;587-593

Cassady et al., Am J Clin Nutr2012;95;587-593

Sensory Properties

Cephalic Phase Responses

Lokko et al., Food

Q Pref

2004;15:129-136.

4/8/2016

8

Sarles et al., Gut 1968; 9:214

Sarles et al., Gut 1968; 9:214Escandon-Calles J, Robbins DC. Diabetes 1987; 36:1167.

Treatment (overall): p < 0.05; treatment (time points): p < 0.05*

0.80

0.81

0.82

0.83

0.84

0.85

0.86

0.87

0.88

0.89

0.90

Resp

irato

ry Q

uo

tien

t (C

O2

elim

ina

ted

/ O

2 c

on

su

me

d)

Minutes Post-Test Meal

OralCapsule

*

*

Fat Oxidation Greater When

RP Was Consumed Orally

Ludy & mattes, Physiol & Behav 2011;102:251-258.

-0.05

-0.04

-0.03

-0.02

-0.01

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

Baseline 0-30 60-90 120-150 180-210 240-270

Ch

ang

e in

Res

pir

ato

ry Q

uo

tien

t (C

O2

elim

inat

ed /

O2

con

sum

ed)

Minutes Post-Test Meal

User High Fat

User High Carb

Non-User High Fat

Non-User High Carb

N = 25 (13 users, 12 non-users) Diet by user status interaction (overall & AUC): p < 0.05*

*

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.20

High Fat High Carb

AU

C (

Arb

itra

ry U

nit

s)

Fat Oxidation Greater in Non-Users

After a High Fat Lead-In Diet


4/8/2016

9

N = 25 (13 users, 12 non-users) Treatment by user status interaction: p < 0.05*

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

User Non-User

Ch

allen

ge M

eal

Inta

ke (

kcal/m

eal)

1 gRP

*↓ 66 kcal

Energy Intake


Heterogeneity between groups: p = 0.158

Overall (I-squared = 16.6%, p = 0.281)

Subtotal (I-squared = 33.8%, p = 0.196)

Lejeune

3

Lim

AUTHOR

2

Yoshioka

Yoshioka

Ahuja_a

1

Matsumoto


Chaiyata

Ahuja

Smeets

Ahuja_b

Ludy_a

Subtotal (I-squared = .%, p = .)

Ludy_b

2003

1997

YEAR

1995

1998

2006

2000

2003

2007

2009

2006

2011

2011

0.11 (-0.06, 0.29)

0.10 (-0.17, 0.37)

0.56 (0.06, 1.05)

-0.05 (-1.03, 0.93)

SMD (95% CI)

0.87 (-0.16, 1.91)

0.25 (-0.52, 1.03)

-0.10 (-0.61, 0.40)

0.57 (-0.16, 1.30)

0.02 (-0.23, 0.27)

0.13 (-0.68, 0.93)

-0.04 (-0.50, 0.42)

-0.40 (-0.91, 0.11)

-0.09 (-0.59, 0.42)

0.35 (-0.20, 0.91)

0.56 (0.06, 1.05)

0.14 (-0.42, 0.69)

100.00

%

40.37

12.07

3.07

Weight

2.77

4.94

11.49

5.51

47.56

4.59

13.80

11.27

11.49

9.43

12.07

9.56

0.11 (-0.06, 0.29)

0.10 (-0.17, 0.37)

0.56 (0.06, 1.05)

-0.05 (-1.03, 0.93)

SMD (95% CI)

0.87 (-0.16, 1.91)

0.25 (-0.52, 1.03)

-0.10 (-0.61, 0.40)

0.57 (-0.16, 1.30)

0.02 (-0.23, 0.27)

0.13 (-0.68, 0.93)

-0.04 (-0.50, 0.42)

-0.40 (-0.91, 0.11)

-0.09 (-0.59, 0.42)

0.35 (-0.20, 0.91)

0.56 (0.06, 1.05)

0.14 (-0.42, 0.69)

100.00

%

40.37

12.07

3.07

Weight

2.77

4.94

11.49

5.51

47.56

4.59

13.80

11.27

11.49

9.43

12.07

9.56

0-2 -1.5 -1 -.5 0 .5 1 1.5 2

Heterogeneity between groups: p = 0.116

Overall (I-squared = 5.6%, p = 0.390)

Ahuja

AUTHOR

2



Shin

Lim

Yoshioka

Ludy_a

Lejeune


Matsumoto

3

Smeets

Ludy_b

Yoshioka

1

2007

YEAR

2007

1997

1998

2011

2003

2000

2009

2011

1995

-0.35 (-0.54, -0.15)

-0.86 (-1.35, -0.37)

SMD (95% CI)

-0.13 (-0.42, 0.15)

-0.53 (-0.88, -0.17)

-0.32 (-1.20, 0.57)

-0.04 (-1.02, 0.94)

-0.39 (-1.16, 0.39)

-0.17 (-0.72, 0.39)

-0.67 (-1.16, -0.17)

-0.58 (-1.02, -0.15)

0.02 (-0.67, 0.71)

-0.22 (-0.73, 0.29)

-0.09 (-0.65, 0.46)

0.09 (-0.89, 1.08)

100.00

16.20

Weight

48.53

30.77

5.00

4.06

6.46

12.63

15.70

20.71

8.11

%

15.12

12.66

4.05

-0.35 (-0.54, -0.15)

-0.86 (-1.35, -0.37)

SMD (95% CI)

-0.13 (-0.42, 0.15)

-0.53 (-0.88, -0.17)

-0.32 (-1.20, 0.57)

-0.04 (-1.02, 0.94)

-0.39 (-1.16, 0.39)

-0.17 (-0.72, 0.39)

-0.67 (-1.16, -0.17)

-0.58 (-1.02, -0.15)

0.02 (-0.67, 0.71)

-0.22 (-0.73, 0.29)

-0.09 (-0.65, 0.46)

0.09 (-0.89, 1.08)

100.00

16.20

Weight

48.53

30.77

5.00

4.06

6.46

12.63

15.70

20.71

8.11

%

15.12

12.66

4.05

0-2 -1.5 -1 -.5 0 .5 1 1.5 2

Energy Expenditure Substrate Oxidation

Ludy et al., Chemical Senses 2012;37:103-121

Capsaicin

Potential Dangers of

False Assumptions

Assuming

Positive

Health Effects

European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition Study) (N=10,449)

1 3 3214 42

Nothlings et al., J Nutr 2008;138:775-781 He et al., IJO 2004;28:1569-1574

Prospective Cohort Study – Nurses Health Study (N=74,063; 12 year follow-up)

4/8/2016

10

“Study groups differed by less than 80 kcal/d in energy intake and by less than 1 kg in body weight at any study point.”

Pierce et al., JAMA 2007;298:289-298.

Women’s Healthy Eating and Living (WHEL) Trial (N=3,088) Study Design:

Beverage/Solid Crossover

SOLID

8 weeks

BEVERAGE

8 weeks

BEVERAGE

8 weeks

SOLID

8 weeks

WASHOUT

3 weeks

Body Weight Change

* p<0.0001 vs.

baseline† p=0.003 vs.

baseline‡ p=0.002 vs.

baseline

§ p=0.022 vs. baseline,

p=0.03 vs. lean and

overweight

**

† ‡

§

** *

Assuming

Negative

Health Effects

Mechanisms

•Appetite

•Energy yield

•Energy expenditure

Dietary Compensation

Study Nut % Compensation

Fraser et al., 2002 Almonds 54, 75

LoveJoy et al., 2002 Almonds 63

Hollis & Mattes Almonds 76

Curb et al., 1992 Macadamias 58, 113

Kirkmeyer & Mattes, 2000 Peanuts 104%

Alper & Mattes, 2001 Peanuts 66%

Almario et al., 2001 Walnuts 96%

Abbey et al., 1994 Walnuts 55%

Tey et al., 2011 Hazelnuts 100%

4/8/2016

11

Cassady et al., Am J Clin Nutr 2009;89:794-800

Almond particle size after mastication by number of chews

Cassady et al., Am J Clin Nutr 2009;89:794-800

Fecal fat and energy lost by number of chews

Ellis et al., AJCN

2004;80:604.

Food Form and Metabolizable Energy Value

• Almonds ~ 80%

• Walnuts ~ 80%

• Pistachios ~ 95%

Baer et al., Br J Nutr 2012;107:120-125.

Novotny et al., AJCN 2012; 96:2096-301.

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

kJ/d

Resting Energy Expenditure

Before Peanut

Consumption

After Peanut

Consumption

a

b

Alper & Mattes IJO 2002;26:1129-1137

Component of Energy Balance

% Almond Energy

Dissipated

Predicted body weight gain (kg) 3.1

Actual body weight gained (kg) 0

Dietary compensation (KJ) 802 74

Fecal excretion (kJ) 84 7

Energy Expenditure (KJ)REETEFPhysical ActivityTotal Energy (DLW)

18413-79180

13.01-614

Total Energy Explained 95

Hollis J & Mattes R. Br J Nutr 2007;98:651-656.

Nuts and Energy Balance

4/8/2016

12

Unanticipated

Consequences

Mattes & Considine. Under Review

Summary• A calorie is a predictable quantity at the

molecular and metabolic level

• A calorie is not a predictable quantity at the behavioral, sensory and digestive level

• Counselling at the individual and policy level must be careful and precise to achieved desired ends and avoid unintended consequences

Cognitive Orosensory Gastric

Where theCalorie=Calorie

Story Breaks Down

Powley & Phillips Physiol & Behav 2004;82:69-74.

4/8/2016

13

Lavin et al., Int’l J Obes 2002;26:80-86. Kamiji et al., Am J Clin Nutr 2009;89:231-239.

Cognitive Orosensory Gastric Duodenum


Story Breaks Down

Maljaars et al.

Cognitive Orosensory Gastric Duodenum Ilium


Story Breaks Down

Maljaars et al., Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2007;26 Suppl 2:241.

4/8/2016

14

Maljaars et al., Am j Cln Nutr 2009;89:1019-1024

Cognitive Orosensory Gastric Duodenum Ilium Colon


Story Breaks Down

Backhed et al., PNAS 2004;101:15718-15723

Turnbaugh et al., Nature 2006;444:1027.

Cognitive Orosensory Gastric Duodenum Ilium Colon Periphery Total Diet


Story Breaks Down

Are there opportunities for weight management?

Metabolizable Energy from Peanuts

Fat Excretion

20g Crude Fiber in Diet

• Whole Peanuts – 17.8%

• Peanut Butter – 7.0%

• Peanut Oil – 4.5%

Fat Excretion

5g Crude Fiber in Diet

• Whole peanuts – 16.8%

• Peanut Butter – 4.2%

• Peanut Oil – 1.8%

Levine & Silvis. NEJM 1980;303:917-918.

4/8/2016

15



Story Breaks Down

Cognitive Orosensory Gastric Duodenum Ilium Colon Periphery


Story Breaks Down



Story Breaks Down

PROTOCOLConditions: Full-Fat Cream Cheese

Non-Fat Cream Cheese

Full-Fat Cream Cheese with sucrose

Full-Fat Cream Cheese with sucrose and Quinine

Full-Fat Cream Cheese with Splenda

Ingest 50 1g

safflower oil

capsules

10 min.

intervals

60

min.

360

min.

240

min.

120

min.

Consume 56g

Reeses’ Pieces

at 2200h day

before session

Arrive at

lab ~700h

Blood Draws

Begin oral

stimulation

0

min.

-15

min.

Mattes RD. Chem Percept 2010;3:91-98.

4/8/2016

16

Mattes RD. Chem Percept 2010;3:91-98. Mattes RD. Chem Percept 2010;3:91-98.

Palatable Food

Insulin Release

LPLActivity

TAGClearance

Palatable Food

Insulin Release

LPLActivity

TAGClearance

Unpalatable Food

TAGClearance

Are all snacks an

equal threat for

weight gain?

Piernas & Popkin J Nutr 2010;140:325-332

4/8/2016

17

www.ars.usda.gov/ba/bhnrc/fsr

g Piernas & Popkin J Nutr 2010;140:325-332

Piernas & Popkin J

Nutr 2010;140:325-332www.ars.usda.gov/ba/bhnrc/fsrg

Piernas & Popkin J Nutr 2010;140:325-

332 www.ars.usda.gov/ba/bhnrc/fsrg

4/8/2016

18

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Kcals

Energy Intake(N=40)

Liquid

Solid

Liquid

Solid

Liquid

Solid

Carbohydrate Fat Protein

**

*

(Watermellon) (Coconut) (Dairy)

Chapelot et al., Obesity 2006;14:215-227

Crum et al., Health

Psychology 2011 (do1:

10.1037/a0023467).

Crum et al., Health Psychology 2011 (do1: 10.1037/a0023467). Lavin et al., Int’l J Obes 2002;26:80-86.

4/8/2016

19

Kristensen & Jensen. Appetite 2011;56:65-70.

Reduced Energy

intakeReduced Appetite

Reduced Gastric

Emptying

No change/Increased Energy intake

No Change/ Increased Appetite

No Change/ Increased Gastric

Emptying

Haenni et al., Scand J

Gastroenterol

2009;44:1186-1190

Maljaars et al., Intl J

Obes 2008;32:1633.

Woods SC. Appetite 2012; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2012.08.016

Melanson et al.,

Am J Physiol

1999;277:R337-

R345 Zorrilla etal., Psychopharmacol 2005;177:324-335

4/8/2016

20

Schwartz et al., Cell metab 2008;8:281-288

Mellinkoff et al., J Appl

Physiol 1956;8:535-538

Maljaars et al.,

Richardson & Feldman, AJP 1986; 250:G85

Richardson et al., J Clin Invest 1977; 60:435

Janowitz, H.D., et al. Gastroenterology 16(1):104, 1950.

4/8/2016

21

Gut 1968; 9:214H. Sarles, R. Dani, G. Prezelin, C. Souville, and C. Figarella

Sarles et al., Gut 1968; 9:214

Escandon-Calles J, Robbins DC. Diabetes 1987; 36:1167. Am J Physiol 1985; 248:E333.

Maljaars et al., Kong et al., LWT - Food Science and Technology2013;50:32-38.

4/8/2016

22

Cognitive

Where the

Calorie=Calorie

Story Breaks Down

Cognitive Orosensory

Where the

Calorie=Calorie

Story Breaks Down

is a calorie a calorie? - asu college of health solutions 1 is a calorie a calorie? richard d....

Documents