Search

Background: Limited evidence suggests that consuming a higher-protein diet during weight loss improves subjective indices of sleep in overweight and obese adults.Objective: We sought to a priori assess the effects of consuming the recommended versus a higher protein Healthy US-Style Eating Pattern during energy-restriction on sleep quality indices.Design: Using a randomized, parallel study design, 51 adults (mean ± SEM age: 47 ± 1 y; BMI: 32.6 ± 0.5 kg/m2) consumed a controlled USDA Healthy US-Style Eating Pattern containing 750 kcal/d less than their estimated energy requirement for 12 wk. Participants were randomly assigned to consume either 5 or 12.5 oz-equivalent (eq)/d of protein foods. The additional 7.5 oz-eq/d came from animal-based protein sources and displaced primarily grains. Objective (wrist-worn actigraphy) and subjective (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, Epworth Sleepiness Scale) sleep quality indices were measured at baseline, week 6, and week 12.Results: Among all participants, body mass decreased (-6.2 ± 0.4 kg). Dietary protein intake did not affect any objective or subjective sleep quality outcomes measured (repeated measures ANOVA). Over time, objective measures of time spent in bed, time spent sleeping, sleep onset latency, and time awake after sleep onset did not change; however, sleep efficiency improved (1 ± 1%; P = 0.027). Subjectively, global sleep scores [GSS: -2.7 ± 0.4 arbitrary units (au)] and daytime sleepiness scores (-3.8 ± 0.4 au; both P < 0.001) improved over time. The GSS improvement transitioned the participants from being categorized with "poor" to "good" sleep (GSS: >5 compared with ≤5 au of a 0-21 au scale; baseline 7.6 ± 0.4 au, week 12: 4.8 ± 0.4 au).Conclusions: Although objective sleep quality may not improve, adults who are overweight or obese and poor sleepers may become good sleepers while consuming either the recommended or a higher-protein energy-restricted Healthy US-Style Eating Pattern. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03174769. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract We assessed whether body composition changes with 9 months of exercise training predicted changes in cardiometabolic health indices in weight-stable adults. We hypothesized that within ±5% weight change, changes in whole-body fat and lean masses would predict changes in cardiometabolic health indices with exercise training. Using a randomized parallel design, 152 adults (age: 49 ± 8 year; body mass index: 30.0 ± 2.7 kg/m2; mean ± SD) performed resistance exercises 2 d/wk and aerobic exercises 1 d/wk for 9 months. Participants consumed isoenergetic supplements with 0, 10, 20, or 30 g whey protein twice daily and remained weight stable within ±5% of baseline weight. Body weight and composition were measured using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry pre- and postintervention. Multiple linear regression model was applied for data analyses. Independent of whey protein supplementation, reductions in fat mass predicted increases in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (unstandardized beta-coefficient [ β ], −0.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], −0.06 to −0.01; P =.007) and insulin sensitivity index (β , −0.52; 95% CI, −0.95 to −0.09; P =.018) and decreases in waist circumference (β , 0.67; 95% CI, 0.17-1.18; P =.009). In contrast, increases in lean mass did not predict changes in any of the measured cardiometabolic health indices. Health improvements with training that emphasize resistance exercises are typically attributed to increases in lean mass; however, these results underscore reducing body fat to predict cardiometabolic health improvements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Amino acids from meals peak in the plasma at ~180 minutes postprandial. Conversely, amino acids from rapidly digestible whey protein appear in the plasma within 15 minutes and peak at 60 minutes postprandial. Therefore, we hypothesized that consuming a 20-g whey protein snack 2 hours after a standard mixed-macronutrient, lower protein breakfast (10 g) would result in peak and composite postprandial plasma essential amino acid (EAA) responses that were not different from consuming a 30-g protein breakfast alone. Using a randomized, crossover design, 12 subjects (6 men, 6 women; age: 29 ± 1 y; BMI: 26.0 ± 1.0 kg/m 2 ; mean ± SE) completed three 330-minute trials in which they consumed breakfasts containing (i) 10 g of protein (10-PRO, control), (ii) 30 g of protein (30-PRO), and (iii) 10 g of protein followed by 20 g of whey protein isolate 120 minutes later (10/20-PRO). For both 30-PRO and 10/20-PRO, EAA peaked 180 minutes after breakfast, with greater peak concentrations for 10/20-PRO than 30-PRO (Tukey adjusted, P < .0001). Essential amino acid positive incremental areas under the curve (iAUCpos) over 300 minutes were not different between 30-PRO and 10/20-PRO. Consuming a rapidly digested whey protein snack 2 hours after a slowly digested, lower protein breakfast resulted in a greater peak plasma EAA concentration but comparable plasma EAA availability than consuming a single higher protein breakfast. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Emerging research suggests that redistributing total protein intake from 1 high-protein meal/d to multiple moderately high-protein meals improves 24-h muscle protein synthesis. Over time, this may promote positive changes in body composition. Objective: We sought to assess the effects of within-day protein intake distribution on changes in body composition during dietary energy restriction and resistance training. Design: In a randomized parallel-design study, 41 men and women [mean ± SEM age: 35 ± 2 y; body mass index (in kg/m²): 31.5 ± 0.5] consumed an energy-restricted diet (750 kcal/d below the requirement) for 16 wk while performing resistance training 3 d/wk. Subjects consumed 90 g protein/d (1.0 ± 0.03 g ⋅ kg-1 ⋅ d-1, 125% of the Recommended Dietary Allowance, at intervention week 1) in either a skewed (10 g at breakfast, 20 g at lunch, and 60 g at dinner; n = 20) or even (30 g each at breakfast, lunch, and dinner; n = 21) distribution pattern. Body composition was measured pre- and postintervention. Results: Over time, whole-body mass (least-squares mean ± SE: -7.9 ± 0.6 kg), whole-body lean mass ( - 1.0 ± 0.2 kg), whole-body fat mass (-6.9 ± 0.5 kg), appendicular lean mass (-0.7 ± 0.1 kg), and appendicular fat mass (-2.6 ± 0.2 kg) each decreased. The midthigh muscle area (0 ± 1 cm²) did not change over time, whereas the midcalf muscle area decreased (-3 ± 1 cm²). Within-day protein distribution did not differentially affect these body-composition responses. Conclusion: The effectiveness of dietary energy restriction combined with resistance training to improve body composition is not influenced by the within-day distribution of protein when adequate total protein is consumed. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials. gov as NCT02066948. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]