Differences in energy metabolism between normal weight 'large-eating' and 'small-eating' women

Comportamento de restrição alimentar e obesidade

A obesidade é uma doença de alta prevalência no mundo e é responsável por sérias repercussões orgânicas e psicossociais, desde a infância até a vida adulta. O comportamento alimentar tem bases biológicas e sociais e, associado, à obesidade, torna-se um processo ainda mais complexo pelos aspectos psicológicos envolvidos, os quais se expressam por meio de humor depressivo, ansiedade, sentimento de culpa e, também, por mecanismos fisiológicos, como a resistência ao jejum na vigência de dietas restritivas. Há evidências de que, em indivíduos obesos, comportamentos de compulsão alimentar e ou restrição são mais freqüentes e parecem ser, em parte, responsáveis pelos fracassos observados no tratamento da obesidade. As restrições e auto-imposições das pessoas que fazem dieta, parecem ter um efeito rebote, resultando em compulsão alimentar, a qual pode associar-se a conseqüências psicológicas, como a perda da auto-estima, mudanças de humor e distração. As reflexões desta revisão sugerem que os programas para redução de peso corporal devem enfocar as bases do comportamento alimentar e desenvolver, efetivamente, ações interdisciplinares que permitam obter resultados eficazes no tratamento da obesidade.

Markers of the validity of reported energy intake

Energy intake (EI) is the foundation of the diet, because all other nutrients must be provided within the quantity of food needed to fulfill the energy requirement. Thus if total EI is underestimated, it is probable that the intakes of other nutrients are also underestimated. Under conditions of weight stability, EI equals energy expenditure (EE). Because at the group level weight may be regarded as stable in the timescale of a dietary assessment, the validity of reported EI can be evaluated by comparing it with either measured EE or an estimate of the energy requirement of the population. This paper provides the first comprehensive review of studies in which EI was reported and EE was measured using the doubly labeled water technique. These conclusively demonstrate widespread bias to the underestimation of EI. Because energy requirements of populations or individuals can be conveniently expressed as multiples of the basal metabolic rate (BMR), EE:BMR, reported EI may also be expressed as EI:BMR for comparison. Values of EI:BMR falling below the 95% confidence limit of agreement between these two measures signify the presence of underreporting. A formula for calculating the lower 95% confidence limit was proposed by Goldberg et al. (the Goldberg cutoff). It has been used by numerous authors to identify individual underreporters in different dietary databases to explore the variables associated with underreporting. These studies are also comprehensively reviewed. They explore the characteristics of underreporters and the biases in estimating nutrient intake and in describing meal patterns associated with underreporting. This review also examines some of the problems for the interpretation of data introduced by underreporting and particularly by variable underreporting across subjects. Future directions for research are identified.

The validity of self-reported energy intake as determined using the doubly labelled water technique

In the 1980s the development of the doubly labelled water (DLW) technique made it possible to determine the validity of dietary assessment methods using external, independent markers of intake in free-living populations. Since then, the accuracy of self-reported energy intake (EI) has been questioned on a number of occasions as under-reporting has been found to be prevalent in many different populations. This paper is a review of investigations using the DLW technique in conjunction with self-reported EI measures in groups including adults, children and adolescents, obese persons, athletes, military personnel and trekking explorers. In studies where a person other than the subject is responsible for recording dietary intake, such as parents of young children, EI generally corresponds to DLW determined energy expenditure. However, in instances where the subjects themselves report their intake, EI is generally under-reported when compared with energy expenditure. It was originally believed that this phenomenon of under-reporting was linked to increased adiposity and body size, however, it is now apparent that other factors, such as dietary restraint and socio-economic status, are also involved. This paper therefore aims to present a more comprehensive picture of under-reporting by tying in the findings of many DLW studies with other studies focusing particularly on the characteristics and mechanisms for under-reporting. Awareness of these characteristics and mechanisms will enable researchers to obtain more accurate self-reports of EI using all dietary recording techniques.

Biased over- or under-reporting is characteristic of individuals whether over time or by different assessment methods

Seven studies with repeated measurements of energy intake and/or nitrogen intake were examined to determine whether misreporting is characteristic of some persons or occurs randomly. Four of the studies were validated by doubly labeled water measurements of energy expenditure. Reporting validity was expressed as the ratio of energy intake to energy expenditure. Ratios were consistently below the expected value of 1.0 for some subjects and consistently above 1.0 for others, indicating characteristic reporting validity within subjects. Two year-long studies provided 4 to 12 measurements and a total number of days sufficient to measure individual habitual intake. Subjects mean energy intake to basal metabolic rate (BMR) ratios were < 1.35 in 45% and 47% and < 1.35 at every measurement in 25% of subjects. This indicated persistent underreporting over time, because 1.35 x BMR is the minimum energy expenditure compatible with a normally active lifestyle. Three of the studies used more than 1 assessment method (validated by doubly labeled water and/or urinary nitrogen excretion). There was a tendency for persons determined to be underreporters by 1 method to be also underreporters when tested by other methods. We conclude that biased over- or underreporting is characteristic of some persons. Thus, repeat measurements do not necessarily provide valid measures of individual intake, extreme intakes may reflect under- and overreporting rather than true low or high intakes, and subjects most prone to reporting bias may be repeatedly misclassified in quantiles of the distribution. This presents a challenge to dietitians nutritionists, and statisticians both for the design of surveys and the handling of flawed data.

Energy metabolism in sedentary and active 49- to 70-yr-old women

This study examined differences between long-term exercising (LE) and long-term nonexercising (LNE) women [n = 24; age 56.4 +/- 6.2 (SD) yr] for resting metabolic rate (RMR) and energy expenditure in the free-living state by using doubly labeled water (DLW). There was a statistically significant difference (P = 0.0002) between the 12 LE (94.85 +/- 8.44 kJ . kg-1 . day-1) and 12 LNE (81.16 +/- 6.62 kJ . kg-1 . day-1) for RMR, but this difference was only marginally significant (P = 0.06) when the data (MJ/day) were subjected to an analysis of covariance with fat-free mass as the covariate. The DLW data indicated that the eight most active LE (12.99 +/- 3.58 MJ/day) expended significantly (P = 0.01) more energy than did the eight least active LNE (9.30 +/- 1.15 MJ/day). Energy expenditures ranged from 7.64 to 18.15 MJ/day, but there was no difference (P = 0.96) between the LE and LNE in energy expenditure during activity that was not designed to either improve or maintain fitness. These cross-sectional data on 49- to 70-yr-old women therefore suggest that 1) aerobic-type training results in a greater RMR per unit of body mass and also when statistical control is exerted for the effect of the metabolically active fat-free mass, 2) there is a large range in the energy intake necessary to maintain energy balance, and 3) aerobic training does not result in a compensatory reduction in energy expenditure during the remainder of the day.

Normal levels of energy expenditure in patients with reported "low metabolism'

The present study examined the hypothesis that patients with apparent diet-resistant obesity have subnormal energy expenditure. Ten biochemically euthyroid patients (eight women and two men), aged 21-76 years, with either excessive gynoid fat distribution or obesity (BMI 23.8-41.0), were referred to the department thought to be suffering from a low metabolic rate syndrome since dietary records showed very low energy intake (< 5 MJ day-1) in combination with failure to lose weight on low-energy diets. Twenty-four-hour energy expenditure (24-h EE), basal energy expenditure (BEE) and sleeping energy expenditure (SEE) were measured in a respiration chamber on a fixed activity programme. The patients consumed a diet containing 37 energy-per cent (E%) fat, 47 E% carbohydrate and 16 E% protein. The individual energy intake was estimated from a previously established algorithm between 24-h EE and fat-free mass (FFM) estimated by bioimpedance. Results were compared with equivalent values in a reference population of 76 subjects ranging from normal weight to obese. No evidence of low metabolism was found in terms of adjusted 24-h EE in the patients with diet resistance when compared with the control group (9263 +/- 819 kJ vs. 9211 +/- 558 kJ). No differences were found when comparing adjusted BEE and SEE in the two groups (7655 +/- 727 vs. 7411 +/- 770 kJ 24 h-1 and 7048 +/- 672 vs. 6911 +/- 408 kJ 24 h-1). The physical activity index (PAI) during the chamber stay was likewise within normal values (1.32 +/- 0.07 vs. 1.34 +/- 0.04; NS).

Energy metabolism in free-living, 'large-eating' and 'small-eating' women: studies using 2H2(18)O

The doubly-labelled water (2H2(18)O) technique was used to assess the long-term rates of energy expenditure and, after accounting for any changes in body composition, the derived rates of energy intake in weight-stable 'large-eating' (n 6) and 'small-eating' (n 6) women. The self-reported energy intakes (approximately 11.2 v. 5.6 MJ/d) and energy expenditures (approximately 8.5 v. 12.4 MJ/d) for the 'large-eating' and 'small-eating' groups respectively, should not be sustainable without significant body-weight changes. 2H2(18)O-assessed rates of energy expenditure for the 'large-eaters' (approximately 8.5 MJ/d) and 'small-eaters' (approximately 11.3 MJ/d) were in close agreement with the results obtained using 5 d, self-reported activity diaries but the derived rates of energy intake for the 'large-' (approximately 8.5 MJ/d) and 'small-eaters' (approximately 10.8 MJ/d) were markedly different from those obtained using self-reported, weighed food diaries. When two 'small-eaters' were supplied with their self-reported energy intakes (approximately 5 MJ/d) for up to 28 d both subjects lost about 0.75 kg body-weight/week. These results provide no support for the existence of 'metabolically efficient' women in the community.

The prevalence and consequences of subclinical eating disorders in female athletes

A growing body of evidence suggests that the prevalence of eating disorders and excessive concerns regarding body weight in certain subpopulations of female athletes are increasing. The pressure on female athletes to improve their performances and physiques, coupled with the general sociocultural demand placed on all women to be thin, often results in attempts to achieve unrealistic body size and body weight goals. For some female athletes the pressure to achieve and maintain a low body weight leads to potentially harmful patterns of restrictive eating or chronic dieting. This paper seeks to further delineate the characteristics of a recently identified subclinical eating disorder in female athletes: anorexia athletica. Research studies that support the existence of subclinical eating disorders will be reviewed. In addition, the possible physiological and psychological consequences of subclinical eating disorders will be explored.

No major differences in energy metabolism between matched and unmatched groups of 'large-eating' and 'small-eating' men

Rates of energy expenditure (J/kg fat-free mass (FFM) per min) in normal weight, 'small-eating' men were compared with those obtained for normal weight (n 8) and underweight (n 5) 'large-eating' men. For the matched groups of 'large-' and 'small-eaters' there were no differences in resting metabolic rate (RMR) measurements but during controlled daily activities there was a small but significant increase (P < 0.05) in energy expenditure in the 'large-eaters'. These results contrast with those obtained for the unmatched groups where energy requirements were about 10% (P < 0.01) higher in the underweight 'large-eaters' at rest but were not different during the more energetic (walking) activities. However, after adjustment for differences in FFM between these two groups, the resting energy expenditures of the 'large-eaters' (82.54 (SE 1.51) J/kg FFM per min) were similar to those of the 'small-eaters' (81.87 (SE 1.51) J/kg FFM per min). Oral temperatures were significantly higher in the matched (0.35-0.65 degrees) and unmatched (0.7-0.9 degrees) 'large-eaters' both at rest and during the different activities, but the thermic effect of food (50 kJ/kg FFM) was one fifth lower (not significant) in both groups of 'large-eaters'. These results provide little evidence for any major metabolic differences between groups of 'large-eating' and 'small-eating' men.

Discrepancy between self-reported and actual caloric intake and exercise in obese subjects

BACKGROUND AND METHODS

Some obese subjects repeatedly fail to lose weight even though they report restricting their caloric intake to less than 1200 kcal per day. We studied two explanations for this apparent resistance to diet--low total energy expenditure and underreporting of caloric intake--in 224 consecutive obese subjects presenting for treatment. Group 1 consisted of nine women and one man with a history of diet resistance in whom we evaluated total energy expenditure and its main thermogenic components and actual energy intake for 14 days by indirect calorimetry and analysis of body composition. Group 2, subgroups of which served as controls in the various evaluations, consisted of 67 women and 13 men with no history of diet resistance.

RESULTS

Total energy expenditure and resting metabolic rate in the subjects with diet resistance (group 1) were within 5 percent of the predicted values for body composition, and there was no significant difference between groups 1 and 2 in the thermic effects of food and exercise. Low energy expenditure was thus excluded as a mechanism of self-reported diet resistance. In contrast, the subjects in group 1 underreported their actual food intake by an average (+/- SD) of 47 +/- 16 percent and overreported their physical activity by 51 +/- 75 percent. Although the subjects in group 1 had no distinct psychopathologic characteristics, they perceived a genetic cause for their obesity, used thyroid medication at a high frequency, and described their eating behavior as relatively normal (all P < 0.05 as compared with group 2).

CONCLUSIONS

The failure of some obese subjects to lose weight while eating a diet they report as low in calories is due to an energy intake substantially higher than reported and an overestimation of physical activity, not to an abnormality in thermogenesis.