Effect of calorie restriction on the free-living physical activity levels of nonobese humans: results of three randomized trials.
Study Goal
The study aimed to evaluate the influence of calorie restriction (CR) on free-living physical activity levels among humans, not specifically related to Water.
Results Summary
The study found that calorie restriction led to variable decreases in activity energy expenditure (AEE), which reduced the expected rate of weight loss. Accelerometry and recall methods did not consistently detect changes in activity categories.
Population
Nonobese adults (BMI = 23.5-29.9 kg/m²) from three research centers.
Effective Dosage
Not applicable (study focused on calorie restriction, not Water).
Duration
6 to 12 months, depending on the research center.
Interactions
None mentioned
| Intervention | Direction | Endpoint | Population | Dosage | Impact | Claim # |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
25% calorie restriction (CR) | decrease | activity energy expenditure (AEE) | nonobese adults at Pennington Biomedical Research Center (PBRC) | - | larger decreases in AEE were observed | #1 |
low-calorie diet (LCD, 890 kcal/day supplement diet until 15% weight loss, then weight maintenance) | decrease | activity energy expenditure (AEE) | nonobese adults at Pennington Biomedical Research Center (PBRC) | - | larger decreases in AEE were observed | #2 |
10% calorie restriction (CR) | decrease | activity energy expenditure (AEE) | nonobese adults at Tufts University | - | significant decreases in AEE | #3 |
30% calorie restriction (CR) | decrease | activity energy expenditure (AEE) | nonobese adults at Tufts University | - | significant decreases in AEE | #4 |
20% calorie restriction (CR) | decrease | activity energy expenditure (AEE) | nonobese adults at Washington University School of Medicine (WUSM) | - | a larger decrease in AEE was observed | #5 |
calorie restriction (CR) | no change | activity categories | nonobese adults | - | did not consistently detect changes | #6 |
calorie restriction (CR) | decrease | energy deficit | nonobese adults | - | reduced the energy deficit | #7 |
calorie restriction (CR) | decrease | weight loss | nonobese adults | - | would reduce the expected rate | #8 |
accelerometry | no change | activity energy expenditure (AEE) | nonobese adults | - | did not consistently explain reduced AEE | #9 |
7-day recall | no change | activity energy expenditure (AEE) | nonobese adults | - | did not consistently explain reduced AEE | #10 |
accelerometry | decrease | sensitivity | - | - | negatively affected sensitivity | #11 |
7-day recall | decrease | sensitivity | - | - | negatively affected sensitivity | #12 |
The objective of this study was to evaluate the influence of calorie restriction (CR) on free-living physical activity levels among humans. Data were from three CALERIE phase I site-specific protocols. Participants were nonobese (body mass index = 23.5-29.9 kg/m² adults randomly assigned to 25% CR, low-calorie diet (LCD, 890 kcal/day supplement diet until 15% weight loss, then weight maintenance), or control at Pennington Biomedical Research Center (PBRC); 30% or 10% CR at Tufts University; and 20% CR or control at Washington University School of Medicine (WUSM). Activity was measured at months 0, 3, and 6 (PBRC) and at months 0, 3, 6, 9, and 12 (WUSM and Tufts). Total daily energy expenditure (TEE) by doubly labeled water and resting metabolic rate (RMR) were used to compute activity energy expenditure: AEE = TEE - RMR - 0.1 * TEE. Accelerometry and 7-day recall categorized activities by intensity. At Tufts, the 10% and 30% CR groups experienced significant decreases in AEE at months 6, 9, and 12. At month 6, a larger decrease in AEE was observed in the CR than the control group at WUSM. At months 3 and 6, larger decreases in AEE were observed in the CR and LCD groups than the control group at PBRC. Accelerometry and 7-day PAR did not consistently detect changes in activity categories. CR-associated changes in AEE were variable but, generally, reduced the energy deficit, which would reduce the expected rate of weight loss. Accelerometry and recall did not consistently explain reduced AEE, suggesting that increased muscle efficiency and/or decreased fidgeting accounted for decreased AEE. Inaccuracy of accelerometry and recall also likely negatively affected sensitivity.