The effects of acute exercise on appetite and energy intake in men and women.

PURPOSE: To compare energy intake (EI) and appetite regulation responses between men and women following acute bouts of aerobic (AEx), resistance exercise (REx), and a sedentary control (CON). METHODS: Men and women (n = 24; 50% male) with overweight/obesity, matched on age (32.3 ±â€¯2 vs. 36.8 ±â€¯2 yrs, p = 0.14) and BMI (28.1 ±â€¯1.2 vs 29.0 ±â€¯1.5 kg/m2, p = 0.64) completed 3 conditions: 1) AEx (65-70% of age-predicted maximum heart rate for 45 min); 2) REx (1-set to failure on 12 exercises); and 3) CON. Each condition was initiated in the post-prandial state (35 min following consumption of a standardized breakfast). Appetite (visual analog scale for hunger, satiety, and prospective food consumption [PFC]) and hormones (ghrelin, PYY, and GLP-1) were measured in the fasted state and every 30 min post-prandially for 3 h. Post-exercise ad libitum EI at the lunch meal was also measured. RESULTS: Men reported higher levels of hunger compared to women across all study conditions (AEx: Men: 7815.00 ±â€¯368.3; Women: 5428.50 ±â€¯440.0 mm x 180 min; p = 0.025; REx: Men: 7110.00 ±â€¯548.4; Women: 6086.25 ±â€¯482.9 mm x 180 min; p = 0.427; CON: Men: 8315.00 ±â€¯429.8; Women: 5311.25 ±â€¯543.1 mm x 180 min; p = 0.021) and consumed a greater absolute caloric load than women at the ad libitum lunch meal (AEx: Men: 1021.6 ±â€¯105.4; Women: 851.7 ±â€¯70.5 kcals; p = 0.20; REx: Men: 1114.7 ±â€¯104.0; Women: 867.7 ±â€¯76.4 kcals; p = 0.07; CON: Men: 1087.0 ±â€¯98.8; Women: 800.5 ±â€¯102.3 kcals; p = 0.06). However, when adjusted for relative energy needs, there was no difference in relative ad libitum EI observed between men and women. No differences in Area Under the Curve for Satiety, PFC, ghrelin, PYY, and GLP-1 were noted between men and women following acute exercise (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that women report lower ratings of appetite following an acute bout of exercise or sedentary time when compared to men, yet have similar relative EI. Future work is needed to examine whether sex-based differences in appetite regulation and EI are present with chronic exercise of differing modalities.

Appetite and Energy Intake Regulation in Response to Acute Exercise.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine if energy intake and appetite regulation differ in response to an acute bout of resistance exercise (REx) versus aerobic exercise (AEx). METHODS: Physically inactive adults (n = 24, 35% ± 2% body fat, 50% female) completed three conditions: AEx (walking at 65%-70% heart rate max for 45 min), REx (1 set to failure of 12 exercises), and sedentary control (SED). Each condition was initiated in the postprandial state (35 min after breakfast). Appetite (visual analog scale for hunger, satiety, and prospective food consumption) and hormones (ghrelin, peptide YY (PYY), and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1)) were measured before and 30, 90, 120, 150, and 180 min after a standardized breakfast. Area under the curve was calculated using the trapezoid method. Ad libitum energy intake was evaluated at a lunch meal after the 180-min measurements. RESULTS: No differences in ad libitum energy intake (REx, 991 ± 68; AEx, 937 ± 65; SED, 944 ± 76 kcal; P = 0.50) or appetite ratings (all, P > 0.05) were detected. The area under the curve for ghrelin, PYY, and GLP-1 were all lower after REx versus AEx (ghrelin: 130,737 ± 4928 for REx; 143,708 ± 7500 for AEx (P = 0.006); PYY: 20,540 ± 1177 for REx, 23,812 ± 1592 for AEx (P = 0.001); and GLP-1: 1314 ± 93 for REx, 1615 ± 110 for AEx (P = 0.013)). Neither exercise condition significantly differed from SED. CONCLUSIONS: Acute REx lowers both orexigenic (ghrelin) and anorectic (PYY and GLP-1) gut peptides compared with acute AEx. Ad libitum energy intake did not increase compared with SED in either exercise condition, indicating both exercise modalities have appetite and energy intake suppressing effects. Future work is needed to determine if exercise of differing modalities influences chronic appetite regulation.