Energy density and weight of food effect short-term caloric compensation in XXXX .

@entity1 @entity2101 @entity1735
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to examine the effect of energy density and food weight (volume) on subsequent intake. DESIGN: Sixteen lean @entity1 were each studied four times during a 2-d protocol at the Rowett's @entity1 Nutrition Unit. On day 1, subjects were fed a mandatory diet at 1.6 x resting metabolic rate (RMR). On day 2, during the mandatory morning period (08.30-12.30) subjects consumed a fixed breakfast (08.30) plus a snack (10.30) in one of four treatments [with values in weight (kg), ED (kJ/100g), Energy (MJ)]: (i) zero intake, 0:0:0 (ii) low energy density (LED), 0.615: 400: 2.46; (iii) @entity2101 ( @entity2101 ), 0.615: 800: 4.92; (iv) 2 x LED, 1.225: 400: 4.91. From 12.30, throughout the remainder of the day, subjects had ad libitum access to 15 high-protein, 15 high-fat and 15 high- @entity1735 foods. Motivation to eat was tracked hourly using 100 mm line scales. RESULTS: ANOVA showed subjects were hungrier after the zero and LED treatments in the mandatory period (p<0.001). Lunch time EI was 5.0, 3.1, 4.2 and 3.2 MJ on the zero, @entity2101 , LED and 2 x LED treatments, respectively (p<0.001). Total ad libitum EI was 11.7, 9.6, 10.3 and 9.5 MJ/d, respectively (p=0.033). Total ad libitum plus mandatory intakes amounted to 11.7, 14.5, 12.6 and 14.4 MJ/d, respectively (p=0.001). Corresponding food intakes were 2.18, 2.39, 2.51 and 3.06 kg/d, respectively (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The present study showed that subjects respond to both the amount of food eaten in the morning and to the energy density of those foods. However, compensation was only partial and short-term. Subjects only compensated EI by approximately 40% and that compensation only occurred at the next meal.
