Assessment of the Dose-Response Relationship between Meal Protein Content and Postprandial Thermogenesis: Effect of Sex and the Oral Contraceptive Pill.

Implementation of efficacious dietary interventions to regulate energy balance requires understanding of the determinants of individual response. To date, information regarding individual variability in response to elevated meal protein content is lacking. This study investigates whether sex and/or oral contraceptive pill (OCP) use play a role in the response to elevated meal protein in 21 healthy young adults (seven men, seven women not taking OCP, and seven women who were OCP users). Participants consumed each of three standardized isocaloric (590 kcal) meals of differing protein content (11, 23, 31% kcal protein). Resting energy expenditure (EE), respiratory quotient (RQ), hunger and satiety were measured at baseline (fasting) and during 180 min postprandial. Whilst significant dose-response increases in EE were observed in men, meal protein-induced EE in women without OCP reached a maximum at <23% protein. Women taking OCP reported lower postprandial fullness than women without OCP, despite similar body size, but also, most notably, no significant difference in EE response between any of the meals. Whilst the mechanisms underpinning this thermogenic inflexibility in response across a wide-range (three-fold) of protein meal content require further investigation, this highlights the need for careful consideration of factors that may influence an individual's metabolic response to dietary interventions aimed at optimising postprandial thermogenesis for body weight regulation.

The contribution of Swiss scientists to the assessment of energy metabolism.

Although Switzerland is considered a small country, it has its share in discoveries, inventions and developments for the assessment of energy metabolism. This includes seminal contributions to respiratory and metabolic physiology and to devices for measuring energy expenditure by direct and indirect calorimetry in vivo in humans and small animals (as well as in vitro in organs/tissues), for the purpose of evaluating the basic nutritional requirements. A strong momentum came during World War II when it was necessary to evaluate the energy requirements of soldiers protecting the country by assessing their energy expenditure, as well as to determine the nutritional needs of the Swiss civil population in time of war when food rationing was necessary to ensure national neutrality and independence. A further impetus came in the 1970s at the start of the obesity epidemics, toward a better understanding of the metabolic basis of obesity, ranging from the development of whole-body concepts to molecular mechanisms. In a trip down memory lane, this review focuses on some of the earlier leading Swiss scientists who have contributed to a better understanding of the field.

Reliability of low-power cycling efficiency in energy expenditure phenotyping of inactive men and women.

Standardized approaches to assess human energy expenditure (EE) are well defined at rest and at moderate to high-intensity exercise, but not at light intensity physical activities energetically comparable with those of daily life (i.e., 1.5-4 times the resting EE, i.e., 1.5-4 METs). Our aim was to validate a graded exercise test for assessing the energy cost of low-intensity dynamic work in physically inactive humans, that is, those who habitually do not meet the guidelines for moderate-to-vigorous aerobic physical activity levels. In healthy and inactive young men and women (n = 55; aged 18-32 years), EE was assessed in the overnight-fasted state by indirect calorimetry at rest and during graded cycling between 5 and 50W for 5 min at each power output on a bicycle ergometer. Repeatability was investigated on three separate days, and the effect of cadence was investigated in the range of 40-90 rpm. Within the low power range of cycling, all subjects perceived the exercise test as "light" on the Borg scale, the preferred cadence being 60 rpm. A strong linearity of the EE-power relationship was observed between 10 and 50 W for each individual (r > 0.98), and the calculation of delta efficiency (DE) from the regression slope indicated that DE was similar in men and women (~29%). DE showed modest inter-individual variability with a coefficient of variation (CV) of 11%, and a low intra-individual variability with a CV of ~ 5%. No habituation or learning effect was observed in DE across days. In conclusion, the assessment of the efficiency of low power cycling by linear regression - and conducted within the range of EE observed for low-intensity movements of everyday life (1.5-4 METs) - extends the capacity for metabolic phenotyping in the inactive population.

Standing economy: does the heterogeneity in the energy cost of posture maintenance reside in differential patterns of spontaneous weight-shifting?

PURPOSE: Due to sedentarity-associated disease risks, there is much interest in methods to increase low-intensity physical activity. In this context, it is widely assumed that altering posture allocation can modify energy expenditure (EE) to impact body-weight regulation and health. However, we have recently shown the existence of two distinct phenotypes pertaining to the energy cost of standing-with most individuals having no sustained increase in EE during steady-state standing relative to sitting comfortably. Here, we investigated whether these distinct phenotypes are related to the presence/absence of spontaneous "weight-shifting", i.e. the redistribution of body-weight from one foot to the other. METHODS: Using indirect calorimetry to measure EE in young adults during sitting and 10 min of steady-state standing, we examined: (i) heterogeneity in EE during standing (n = 36); (ii) EE and spontaneous weight-shifting patterns (n = 18); (iii) EE during spontaneous weight-shifting versus experimentally induced weight-shifting (n = 7), and; (iv) EE during spontaneous weight-shifting versus intermittent leg/body displacement (n = 6). RESULTS: Despite heterogeneity in EE response to steady-state standing, no differences were found in the amount or pattern of spontaneous weight-shifting between the two phenotypes. Whilst experimentally induced weight-shifting resulted in a mean EE increase of only 11% (range: 0-25%), intermittent leg/body displacement increased EE to >1.5 METs in all participants. CONCLUSIONS: Although the variability in spontaneous weight-shifting signatures between individuals does not appear to underlie heterogeneity in the energy cost of standing posture maintenance, these studies underscore the fact that leg/body displacement, rather than standing posture alone, is needed to increase EE above the currently defined sedentary threshold.

Correction: Energy Expenditure and Substrate Oxidation in Response to Side-Alternating Whole Body Vibration across Three Commonly-Used Vibration Frequencies.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0151552.].

Energy Expenditure and Substrate Oxidation in Response to Side-Alternating Whole Body Vibration across Three Commonly-Used Vibration Frequencies.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: There is increasing recognition about the importance of enhancing energy expenditure (EE) for weight control through increases in low-intensity physical activities comparable with daily life (1.5-4 METS). Whole-body vibration (WBV) increases EE modestly and could present both a useful adjuvant for obesity management and tool for metabolic phenotyping. However, it is unclear whether a "dose-response" exists between commonly-used vibration frequencies (VF) and EE, nor if WBV influences respiratory quotient (RQ), and hence substrate oxidation. We aimed to investigate the EE-VF and RQ-VF relationships across three different frequencies (30, 40, and 50Hz). METHODS: EE and RQ were measured in 8 healthy young adults by indirect calorimetry at rest, and subsequently during side-alternating WBV at one of 3 VFs (30, 40, and 50 Hz). Each frequency was assessed over 5 cycles of intermittent WBV (30s vibration/30s rest), separated by 5 min seated rest. During the WBV participants stood on the platform with knees flexed sufficiently to maintain comfort, prevent transmission of vibration to the upper body, and minimise voluntary physical exertion. Repeatability was assessed across 3 separate days in a subset of 4 individuals. In order to assess any sequence/habituation effect, an additional group of 6 men underwent 5 cycles of intermittent WBV (30s vibration/30s rest) at 40 Hz, separated by 5 min seated rest. RESULTS: Side-alternating WBV increased EE relative to standing, non-vibration levels (+36%, p<0.001). However, no differences in EE were observed across VFs. Similarly, no effect of VF on RQ was found, nor did WBV alter RQ relative to standing without vibration. CONCLUSION: No relationship could be demonstrated between EE and VF in the range of 30-50Hz, and substrate oxidation did not change in response to WBV. Furthermore, the thermogenic effect of intermittent WBV, whilst robust, was quantitatively small (<2 METS).

Heterogeneity in the energy cost of posture maintenance during standing relative to sitting: phenotyping according to magnitude and time-course.

BACKGROUND: Reducing sitting-time may decrease risk of disease and increase life-span. In the search for approaches to reduce sitting-time, research often compares sitting to standing and ambulation, but the energetic cost of standing alone versus sitting is equivocal, with large variation in reported mean values (0% to >20% increase in energy expenditure (EE) during standing). OBJECTIVE: To determine the magnitude and time-course of changes in EE and respiratory quotient (RQ) during steady-state standing versus sitting. DESIGN: Min-by-min monitoring using a posture-adapted ventilated-hood indirect calorimetry system was conducted in 22 young adults with normal BMI during 10 min of steady-state standing versus sitting comfortably. RESULTS: This study reveals three distinct phenotypes based on the magnitude and time-course of the EE response to steady-state standing. One-third of participants (8/22) showed little or no change in EE during standing relative to sitting (ΔEE <5%; below first quartile). Of the 14 responders (ΔEE 7-21%), 4 showed sustained, elevated EE during standing, while 10 decreased their EE to baseline sitting values during the second half of the standing period. These EE phenotypes were systematically mirrored by alterations in RQ (a proxy of substrate oxidation), with ΔEE inversely correlated with ΔRQ (r = 0.6-0.8, p<0.01). CONCLUSION: This study reveals different phenotypes pertaining to both energy cost and fuel utilization during standing, raising questions regarding standing as a strategy to increase EE and thermogenesis for weight control, and opening new avenues of research towards understanding the metabolic and psychomotor basis of variability in the energetics of standing and posture maintenance.

Water-induced thermogenesis reconsidered: the effects of osmolality and water temperature on energy expenditure after drinking.

CONTEXT: A recent study reported that drinking 500 ml of water causes a 30% increase in metabolic rate. If verified, this previously unrecognized thermogenic property of water would have important implications for weight-loss programs. However, the concept of a thermogenic effect of water is controversial because other studies have found that water drinking does not increase energy expenditure. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to test whether water drinking has a thermogenic effect in humans and, furthermore, determine whether the response is influenced by osmolality or by water temperature. DESIGN: This was a randomized, crossover design. SETTING: The study was conducted at a university physiology laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Participants included healthy young volunteer subjects. INTERVENTION: Intervention included drinking 7.5 ml/kg body weight (approximately 518 ml) of distilled water or 0.9% saline or 7% sucrose solution (positive control) on different days. In a subgroup of subjects, responses to cold water (3 C) were tested. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Resting energy expenditure, assessed by indirect calorimetry for 30 min before and 90 min after the drinks, was measured. RESULTS: Energy expenditure did not increase after drinking either distilled water (P = 0.34) or 0.9% saline (P = 0.33). Drinking the 7% sucrose solution significantly increased energy expenditure (P < 0.0001). Drinking water that had been cooled to 3 C caused a small increase in energy expenditure of 4.5% over 60 min (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Drinking distilled water at room temperature did not increase energy expenditure. Cooling the water before drinking only stimulated a small thermogenic response, well below the theoretical energy cost of warming the water to body temperature. These results cast doubt on water as a thermogenic agent for the management of obesity.