Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from Nutrition Journal and BioMed Central.

Open Access Highly Accessed Research

No evidence of differential effects of SFA, MUFA or PUFA on post-ingestive satiety and energy intake: a randomised trial of fatty acid saturation

Caroline M Strik1, Fiona E Lithander2, Anne-Thea McGill3, Alastair K MacGibbon4, Brian H McArdle5 and Sally D Poppitt6*

Author Affiliations

1 Human Nutrition Unit, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

2 Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland

3 Human Nutrition Unit & School of Public Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

4 Fonterra Research Centre, Palmerston North, New Zealand

5 Department of Statistics, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

6 Human Nutrition Unit, School of Biological Sciences & Department of Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

For all author emails, please log on.

Nutrition Journal 2010, 9:24  doi:10.1186/1475-2891-9-24

Published: 24 May 2010

Abstract

Background

High fat diets have long been associated with weight gain and obesity, and the weak satiety response elicited in response to dietary lipids is likely to play a role. Suppression of appetite and food intake has consistently been shown to be diminished with high fat relative to either high protein or carbohydrate meals. There is however some evidence that the satiating capacity of lipids may be modulated when physicochemical properties are altered, but studies investigating the effect of lipid saturation on appetite have generated inconsistent findings. This study investigated the effects of changes in fatty acid saturation on post-ingestive satiety and energy intake.

Methods

High-fat (HF) test breakfasts (2.0 MJ) containing 26 g lipid were given to 18 healthy, lean men in a 3 treatment randomised cross-over design, each treatment separated by a washout of at least 3 days. The breakfasts were high in saturated (SFA, 65% of total fat), polyunsaturated (PUFA, 76%) or monounsaturated (MUFA, 76%) fatty acids, and comprised 2 savoury muffins. Participants rated appetite sensations using visual analogue scales (VAS) to assess palatability immediately following the meals, and hunger and fullness prior to the HF breakfast and throughout the day. Energy intake was measured by covert weighing of a lunch meal which was served 3.5 h after the breakfast, and from which the participants ate ad libitum.

Results

There was no difference in VAS ratings of pleasantness, visual appearance, smell, taste, aftertaste and overall palatability between the 3 high-fat test breakfasts. However, there was also no differential effect of the 3 treatments on ratings of hunger, fullness, satisfaction or prospective food consumption during the 3.5 h following the breakfast meal and over the full 6 h experiment. Energy and macronutrient intake at lunch also did not differ between treatments (mean, sem; SFA: 5275.9 ± 286.5 kJ; PUFA: 5227.7 ± 403.9 kJ; MUFA: 5215.6 ± 329.5 kJ; P > 0.05). The maximum difference in energy intake between treatments was less than 2%.

Conclusions

There was no evidence of a difference in post-ingestion satiety between high fat meals which differed in saturation profile in this group of lean, healthy men.

Trial Registration

ACTRN12610000193077