Postprandial appetite responses to a pecan enriched meal: A randomized crossover trial.

Longer-term pecan consumption has shown appetite-regulating effects as a part of a free-living diet, yet the physiologic appetite responses to a single pecan-containing meal are unclear. The purpose of this study was to compare the acute physiologic, subjective, and direct appetite responses of a pecan-containing meal to an energy- and macronutrient-matched control meal. This was an acute meal challenge study utilizing a double-blinded randomized crossover design with two periods. Participants were young, healthy adults (BMI: 22.9 ± 3.3 kg/m2, age: 22 ± 3 y) who consumed a meal containing either 68 g of pecans (PEC; 795 kcal) or an energy- and macronutrient-matched control meal (CON; 794 kcal) on separate testing days. At both testing visits, five postprandial blood draws, and visual analog scale (VAS) questionnaires (in-lab) were used to determine differences in peptide YY (PYY), ghrelin, and subjective appetite over a 4-h postprandial period. Participants also completed VAS questionnaires (at-home) and food records for the rest of the day after leaving the testing visits. Thirty-one out of thirty-two randomized participants completed the study. There was a greater overall postprandial PYY response (p < 0.001), and a greater suppression of postprandial ghrelin after time point 120 min (p < 0.001), with the PEC vs. CON meal. Further, there was a greater increase in subjective fullness (p = 0.001), and suppression of at-home overall appetite (p = 0.02), from time 240-780 min post-meal with PEC vs. CON meals. There were no differences in self-reported EI between meals or any other VAS measure. In conclusion, a pecan-containing breakfast shake produced more favorable physiologic and subjective improvements in appetite compared to an energy- and macronutrient-matched control meal. This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05230212).

Assessment of nutrition knowledge in division I college athletes.

OBJECTIVE: Assess nutrition knowledge of Division I college athletes. PARTICIPANTS: 128 student-athletes (n = 70 female) from eight sports completed the survey in June 2018. METHODS: The survey by Calella et al (2017) was used to assess both general and sport nutrition knowledge. RESULTS: Cases with more than 20% of responses missing were excluded (n = 3). Overall average score was 57.6% ± 18.6%. Females scored significantly (p < 0.001) better than the males (66.5% ± 16.4% versus 46.2% ± 14.7%). Participants were divided into revenue (football, ice hockey, male's basketball, women's basketball; n = 63) and non-revenue sports (field hockey, golf, rowing, soccer; n = 62) to address differences in knowledge between sports with greater versus lesser nutrition resource access. Revenue sports scored significantly (p < 0.001) worse than non-revenue sports (45.7% ± 15.2% versus 69.7% ± 13.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Athletes appear to have low nutrition knowledge, putting them at risk for inappropriate dietary choices that could decrease ability to optimally perform and increase risk of injury.