Evaluating and comparing tolerance, nutritional quality and bio-functional activity of bovine-plasma, corn and whey proteins, outcomes of a randomized double blind controlled trial.

Important considerations in the choice of future sustainable protein sources for human application are tolerance, nutritional quality, and potential health benefits. We evaluated, in a double-blind cross-over intervention trial, tolerance, nutritional quality, and potential health effects of two sustainable protein sources. Thirty-six apparently healthy older adults (age 62.3 ± 7.2yrs, BMI 25 ± 3 kg/m2) received 40 g/day bovine-plasma protein (BP), corn protein (CP) or, as a benchmark, whey protein (WP) for one week with a washout period of one week in-between. In 12 participants, we also determined postprandial amino acid (PAA) uptake kinetics upon consumption of 20 g BP, CP, or WP. Changes in self-reported gastrointestinal complaints and intestinal permeability assessed using a multi-sugar acetylsalicylic acid test did not differ between the interventions. Clear differences in PAA responses were observed after consumption of the different proteins, but clear essential amino acid responses were observed for all proteins. BP consumption resulted in a small but significant increase in blood pressure outcomes, and CP consumption resulted in a small but significant decrease in insulin levels when compared to the other interventions. In conclusion, alternative protein concentrates and isolates studied here can be consumed in relative high quantities without experiencing unwanted GI complaints or gut barrier dysfunction and they can be a good source of essential amino acids. The rise in blood pressure observed during the BP intervention, potentially linked to the elevated salt content of the BP, constitutes a potential health issue. Future studies with longer intervention periods might however be recommended.

Brush border enzyme hydrolysis and glycaemic effects of isomaltulose compared to other saccharides in dogs.

Digestible carbohydrates differ in glycaemic response, therewith having the potential to influence metabolic conditions such as insulin resistance and diabetes mellitus. Isomaltulose has been proven to lower the glycaemic response in humans, which to date has not been studied in dogs. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to characterise the digestibility, as well as the physiological effects of isomaltulose in dogs, in comparison to other saccharides. To this end, three studies were performed. Study 1 was an in vitro study, evaluating the small intestinal hydrolysis of isomaltulose compared to other relevant carbohydrate sources. Three of these saccharides, having close and low-moderate degrees of hydrolysis by brush border enzymes, were also evaluated in vivo for their glycaemic effects by measuring plasma levels of glucose, insulin and glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) 0-180 min after administration of a single dosage after an overnight fast (i.e., isomaltulose, sucrose and maltodextrin in a 3 × 3 Latin-square design, in 9 dogs, Study 2). To understand if digestive enzymes, underlying glycaemic responses for isomaltulose and sucrose can be upregulated, we exposed dogs to these saccharides for 2 weeks and repeated the measurements after an overnight fast in 18 dogs (Study 3). Isomaltulose was hydrolysed by intestinal enzyme preparation from all three dogs, but the degrading activity was low (e.g., 3.95 ± 1.03 times lower vs. sucrose), indicating a slower rate of hydrolysis. Isomaltulose had a low glycaemic response, in line with in vitro data. In vitro hydrolysis of sucrose was comparable or even higher than maltodextrin in contrast to the more pronounced glycaemic response to maltodextrin observed in vivo. The numerically higher blood glucose response to sucrose after continuous consumption, might indicate an adaptive response. In conclusion, the current work provides valuable insights into the digestion physiology of various saccharides in dogs. Further investigations on related benefits are thus warranted.

A controlled human intervention trial to study protein quality by amino acid uptake kinetics with the novel Lemna protein concentrate as case study.

A human intervention trial was conducted to study amino acid uptake of the novel Lemna protein concentrate (LPC) in comparison to whey (WPC). The study was a cross-over, double-blind, controlled trial in which 12 healthy participants received 20 grams of LPC and WPC in randomised order. The LPC consumption resulted in a significant lower postprandial increase in almost all individual amino acids, total amino acid (TAA) and total essential amino acids (TEAA) compared to WPC based on area under the curve (AUC) calculations. When the AUC after WPC consumption was set at 100%, LPC showed a relative AUC of 60.4% for TAA and 66.3% for the TEAA. Interindividual variation for LPC was high with an uptake of TEAA of LPC compared to WPC ranging from 18.2 to 94.2%. Human intervention trials can partly replace animal trials as they fully reflect the human situation and provide estimates on individual variations.