Panacea Index Logo

Command Palette

Search for a command to run...

Protein status elicits compensatory changes in food intake and food preferences.

The American journal of clinical nutrition
January 1, 2012
Sanne Griffioen-Roose et al. (6 authors)
Journal ArticleRandomized Controlled TrialResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tHuman StudyClinical
Study Details

Study Goal

The researchers aimed to investigate the effects of low versus high protein status on food intake and preferences, specifically whether compensatory mechanisms exist to restore protein balance.

Results Summary

The study found that after a low-protein diet, protein intake increased by 13% during the ad libitum phase, with enhanced preferences for savory high-protein foods, suggesting adaptive behavioral strategies to restore protein status. Total energy intake remained unchanged.

Population

37 subjects (mean age 21 ± 2 years, BMI 21.9 ± 1.5 kg/m²)

Effective Dosage

Low-protein diet (0.5 g protein/kg BW/day) and high-protein diet (2.0 g protein/kg BW/day)

Duration

14-day dietary intervention followed by a 2.5-day ad libitum phase

Interactions

None mentioned

Extracted Claims (3)
InterventionDirectionEndpointPopulationDosageImpactClaim #
low-protein diet (0.5 g protein · kg body weight (BW)(-1) · d(-1))
increase
protein intake
37 subjects [mean ± SD age: 21 ± 2 y; BMI (in kg/m(2)): 21.9 ± 1.5]
13%
was 13% higher after
#1
low-protein diet (0.5 g protein · kg body weight (BW)(-1) · d(-1))
no change
total energy intake
37 subjects [mean ± SD age: 21 ± 2 y; BMI (in kg/m(2)): 21.9 ± 1.5]
not different
was not different
#2
low-protein diet (0.5 g protein · kg body weight (BW)(-1) · d(-1))
increase
food preferences for savory high-protein foods
37 subjects [mean ± SD age: 21 ± 2 y; BMI (in kg/m(2)): 21.9 ± 1.5]
-
were enhanced
#3
Abstract

BACKGROUND: Protein is an indispensable component within the human diet. It is unclear, however, whether behavioral strategies exist to avoid shortages. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to investigate the effect of a low protein status compared with a high protein status on food intake and food preferences. DESIGN: We used a randomized crossover design that consisted of a 14-d fully controlled dietary intervention involving 37 subjects [mean ± SD age: 21 ± 2 y; BMI (in kg/m(2)): 21.9 ± 1.5] who consumed individualized, isoenergetic diets that were either low in protein [0.5 g protein · kg body weight (BW)(-1) · d(-1)] or high in protein (2.0 g protein · kg BW(-1) · d(-1)). The diets were followed by an ad libitum phase of 2.5 d, during which a large array of food items was available, and protein and energy intakes were measured. RESULTS: We showed that in the ad libitum phase protein intake was 13% higher after the low-protein diet than after the high-protein diet (253 ± 70 compared with 225 ± 63 g, P < 0.001), whereas total energy intake was not different. The higher intake of protein was evident throughout the ad libitum phase of 2.5 d. In addition, after the low-protein diet, food preferences for savory high-protein foods were enhanced. CONCLUSIONS: After a protein deficit, food intake and food preferences show adaptive changes that suggest that compensatory mechanisms are induced to restore adequate protein status. This indicates that there are human behavioral strategies present to avoid protein shortage and that these involve selection of savory high-protein foods. This trial was registered with the Dutch Trial register at http://www.trialregister.nl as NTR2491.

Medical Subject Headings (MeSH)
AdultCross-Over StudiesDietDiet, Protein-RestrictedDietary ProteinsEnergy IntakeFemaleFood PreferencesHumansMaleNutritional StatusYoung Adult
Study Links
Quality Scores
SafetyNot Assessed
Efficacy85/10
Quality90/10
Citation Metrics
Total Citations94
Citations/Year7.2
Relative Citation Ratio3.28
NIH Percentile86.7%
Research Impact Scores
APT Score0.75
Weight Score1.71
Normalized Score0.72
Related Supplements