Table 4 |
||||||
|
Previous studies investigating the effect of fatty acid saturation on subjective appetite ratings and ad libitum energy intake (measured or from diet records) at a meal, highlighting methodological differences between trials |
||||||
|
Publication |
Participants |
Lipid dose |
Lipid composition [% of total lipid] |
Inter-meal interval |
Study endpoint |
Study outcome |
|
|
||||||
|
Current study: Strik et al., 2010 |
Lean, men, n = 18 |
26 g, [50 en% fat] |
Butter fat, high stearic-lauric blend [65% SFA]; Olive oil, high oleic acid [76% MUFA]; Safflower oil, linoleic acid [76% PUFA] |
210 mins |
Ad libitum EI from lunch meal |
No effect of saturation on EI |
|
Lawton et al., 2000 [37] |
Lean, men, n = 10 women, n = 10 |
Women 58 g; Men 83 g; [55 en% fat] |
Stearic-oleic blend [44% SFA, 44% MUFA]; High-oleic oil [81% MUFA]; High linoleic oil [75% PUFA] |
240 mins |
Ad libitum EI from buffet dinner + snack boxes |
PUFA and SFA tended to decrease EI relative to MUFA (trend only) |
|
French et al.,2000 [36] |
Lean, men, n = 10 |
Duodenal infusion; 20 g lipid emulsion [100 en% fat], at rate of 1 mL/min over 100 mins |
High stearic/oleic [40% SFA; 44% MUFA]; High oleic acid [75% MUFA]; High linoleic acid [74% PUFA]; Intralipid [16% SFA, 29% MUFA, 54% PUFA]; saline |
90 mins |
Ad libitum EI from lunch meal |
PUFA decreased EI relative to SFA and MUFA (trend only); signif lower than saline control |
|
Kamphuis et al., 2001 [40] |
Overweight, men, n = 8; women, n = 8 |
20 ml (~20 g) lunch; 25 ml (~25 g) dinner added to usual diet [~36 en % fat] |
High-linoleic oil [67% LA, PUFA]; High-γ-linolenic [20% GLA, PUFA]; High-oleic oil [80% MUFA] |
Test lipids given as part of ad lib meals |
24-h ad libitum EI: restricted choice; lunch, dinner, snacks |
MUFA decreased EI relative to PUFA at test dinner; no difference over 24 h |
|
Alfenas et al., 2003 [43] |
Lean, men, n = 9; women, n = 11 |
30-40 g; [54-59 en % fat] |
Butter fat [66% SFA]; Peanut oil [49% MUFA]; Canola oil [62% MUFA]; fat free |
>120 mins |
Diet records of EI during free feeding over 24-h [no outcome meal] |
No effect of saturation on EI |
|
MacIntosh et al., 2003 [41] |
Lean, men, n = 10 |
30 g; [55 en% fat] |
Butter fat [69% SFA]; Sunola oil [80% MUFA]; Sunflower oil [64% PUFA]; |
120 mins |
Ad libitum EI from lunch meal + diet; diet records over rest of day |
No effect of saturation on EI |
|
Flint et al., 2003 [42] |
Overweight men, n = 19 |
63-87 g; [60 en% fat] |
High-oleic sunflower oil [83% MUFA]; Hydrogenated rapeseed oil [54% trans; 31% SFA]; Grape- seed oil [70% PUFA] |
300 mins |
Ad libitum EI from lunch meal |
No effect of saturation on EI |
|
|
||||||
|
Burton-Freeman et al., 2005 [39] |
Lean, men, n = 12; women, n = 13 |
Men 13 g; Women 9 g; [39 en% fat] |
High-oleic safflower oil [72% MUFA]; Walnut oil [66% PUFA];Ground walnuts [66% PUFA]; low fat [1.4 g fat] |
45 mins |
Ad libitum EI from lunch meal |
No effect of saturation on EI |
|
Feltrin et al. 2008 [38] |
Lean, men, n = 13 |
Duodenal infusion; ~3 g lipid emulsion [100en% fat], at rate of 4 mL/min over 60 mins |
Lauric acid [100% SFA]; Oleic acid [100% MUFA]; saline |
60 mins |
Ad libitum EI from lunch meal |
SFA decreased EI relative to MUFA and saline control |
|
|
||||||
|
Strik et al. Nutrition Journal 2010 9:24 doi:10.1186/1475-2891-9-24 |
||||||
