Appetite Control across the Lifecourse: The Acute Impact of Breakfast Drink Quantity and Protein Content. The Full4Health Project

Ultraprocessed Foods and Obesity Risk: A Critical Review of Reported Mechanisms

Epidemiologic evidence supports a positive association between ultraprocessed food (UPF) consumption and body mass index. This has led to recommendations to avoid UPFs despite very limited evidence establishing causality. Many mechanisms have been proposed, and this review critically aimed to evaluate selected possibilities for specificity, clarity, and consistency related to food choice (i.e., low cost, shelf-life, food packaging, hyperpalatability, and stimulation of hunger/suppression of fullness); food composition (i.e., macronutrients, food texture, added sugar, fat and salt, energy density, low-calorie sweeteners, and additives); and digestive processes (i.e., oral processing/eating rate, gastric emptying time, gastrointestinal transit time, and microbiome). For some purported mechanisms (e.g., fiber content, texture, gastric emptying, and intestinal transit time), data directly contrasting the effects of UPF and non-UPF intake on the indices of appetite, food intake, and adiposity are available and do not support a unique contribution of UPFs. In other instances, data are not available (e.g., microbiome and food additives) or are insufficient (e.g., packaging, food cost, shelf-life, macronutrient intake, and appetite stimulation) to judge the benefits versus the risks of UPF avoidance. There are yet other evoked mechanisms in which the preponderance of evidence indicates ingredients in UPFs actually moderate body weight (e.g., low-calorie sweetener use for weight management; beverage consumption as it dilutes energy density; and higher fat content because it reduces glycemic responses). Because avoidance of UPFs holds potential adverse effects (e.g., reduced diet quality, increased risk of food poisoning, and food wastage), it is imprudent to make recommendations regarding their role in diets before causality and plausible mechanisms have been verified.

Salivary ghrelin response to drinks varying in protein content and quantity and association with energy intake and appetite

Salivary hormone analysis is a non-invasive alternative to blood-borne hormone analysis. The orexigenic hormone ghrelin has been detected in human saliva, though the relationship between salivary and blood-borne ghrelin and salivary ghrelin's association with energy intake (EI) and appetite remains unclear. The primary aim of this study was to compare salivary and plasma ghrelin responses to dairy breakfast drinks varying in protein content and quantity, and to determine the relationship between salivary ghrelin and EI and appetite. Participants (n = 25) consumed four test drinks, varying in protein content and quantity, on four separate days in a double-blind randomized controlled study. Salivary and plasma total ghrelin were measured at 0, 30, 60 and 120 min and appetite perceptions at 0, 30, 60, 90 and 120 min. A buffet-style test meal was presented at 120 min to measure ad libitum EI. There was no correlation between the sample means for fasted salivary and plasma ghrelin (r = 0.099, p = 0.637). Furthermore, there was no within-participant association between fasted salivary and plasma ghrelin (r = -0.041, p = 0.725). Mean bias between fasted salivary and plasma ghrelin was -448 pg/ml (95% confidence intervals (CI) = -623 - -273 pg/ml) and upper and lower limits of agreement (LOA) were 427 pg/ml and -1324 pg/ml, respectively. Variation in postprandial levels of salivary and plasma ghrelin within-participants were not associated (r = -0.004, p = 0.943). There was no significant association between EI and salivary (r = 0.003, p = 0.979) or plasma (r = -0.080, p = 0.492) ghrelin. Salivary ghrelin was not significantly correlated with composite appetite score (r = 0.023; p = 0.654), though plasma ghrelin was (r = 0.225, p < 0.001). Mean bias between postprandial salivary and plasma ghrelin was -210 pg/ml (95% CI = -380 - -40 pg/ml) and upper and lower LOA were 641 pg/ml and -1061 pg/ml, respectively. These findings suggest that salivary and plasma ghrelin responses to drinks varying in protein content and quantity are unrelated and that salivary ghrelin is not associated with EI or appetite perceptions in healthy non-obese adults. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrial.gov (NCT01597024).

Appetite and Satiety Control-Contribution of Gut Mechanisms

The prevalence of obesity, and its comorbidities, particularly type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular and hepatic disease and certain cancers, continues to rise at an alarming rate worldwide [...].

Associations between ghrelin and leptin and neural food cue reactivity in a fasted and sated state

Food cue exposure can trigger eating. Food cue reactivity (FCR) is a conditioned response to food cues and includes physiological responses and activation of reward-related brain areas. FCR can be affected by hunger and weight status. The appetite-regulating hormones ghrelin and leptin play a pivotal role in homeostatic as well as hedonic eating. We examined the association between ghrelin and leptin levels and neural FCR in the fasted and sated state and the association between meal-induced changes in ghrelin and neural FCR, and in how far these associations are related to BMI and HOMA-IR. Data from 109 participants from three European centers (age 50±18 y, BMI 27±5 kg/m²) who performed a food viewing task during fMRI after an overnight fast and after a standardized meal were analyzed. Blood samples were drawn prior to the viewing task in which high-caloric, low-caloric and non-food images were shown. Fasting ghrelin was positively associated with neural FCR in the inferior and superior occipital gyrus in the fasted state. This was partly attributable to BMI and HOMA-IR. These brain regions are involved in visual attention, suggesting that individuals with higher fasting ghrelin have heightened attention to food cues. Leptin was positively associated with high calorie FCR in the medial prefrontal cortex (PFC) in the fasted state and to neural FCR in the left supramarginal gyrus in the fasted versus sated state, when correcting for BMI and HOMA-IR, respectively. This PFC region is involved in assessing anticipated reward value, suggesting that for individuals with higher leptin levels high-caloric foods are more salient than low-caloric foods, but foods in general are not more salient than non-foods. There were no associations between ghrelin and leptin and neural FCR in the sated state, nor between meal-induced changes in ghrelin and neural FCR. In conclusion, we show modest associations between ghrelin and leptin and neural FCR in a relatively large sample of European adults with a broad age and BMI range. Our findings indicate that people with higher leptin levels for their weight status and people with higher ghrelin levels may be more attracted to high caloric foods when hungry. The results of the present study form a foundation for future studies to test whether food intake and (changes in) weight status can be predicted by the association between (mainly fasting) ghrelin and leptin levels and neural FCR.