Search

Background: Smaller portions may help to reduce energy intake. However, there may be a limit to the magnitude of the portion size reduction that can be made before consumers respond by increasing intake of other food immediately or at later meals. We tested the theoretical prediction that reductions to portion size would result in a significant reduction to daily energy intake when the resulting portion was visually perceived as 'normal' in size, but that a reduction resulting in a 'smaller than normal' portion size would cause immediate or later additional eating. Methods: Over three 5-day periods, daily energy intake was measured in a controlled laboratory study using a randomized crossover design (N = 30). The served portion size of the main meal component of lunch and dinner was manipulated in three conditions: 'large-normal' (747 kcal), 'small-normal' (543 kcal), and 'smaller than normal' (339 kcal). Perceived 'normality' of portion sizes was determined by two pilot studies. Ad libitum daily energy intake from all meals and snacks was measured. Results: Daily energy intake in the 'large-normal' condition was 2543 kcals. Daily energy intake was significantly lower in the 'small-normal' portion size condition (mean difference − 95 kcal/d, 95% CI [− 184, − 6], p =.04); and was also significantly lower in the 'smaller than normal' than the 'small-normal' condition (mean difference − 210 kcal/d, 95% CI [− 309, − 111], p <.001). Contrary to predictions, there was no evidence that the degree of additional food consumption observed was greater when portions were reduced past the point of appearing normal in size. Conclusions: Reductions to the portion size of main-meal foods resulted in significant decreases in daily energy intake. Additional food consumption did not offset this effect, even when portions were reduced to the point that they were no longer perceived as being normal in size. Trial registration: Prospectively registered protocol and analysis plan: https://osf.io/natws/; retrospectively registered: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03811210. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Treatment beliefs and preferences for psychological therapies were investigated in 80 overweight individuals trying to manage their weight. Method: Participants read 4 therapy descriptions: cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), behavior therapy (BT), cognitive therapy (CT), and acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT). They ranked the treatments in order of preference, explained the reason for their preferred choice, and reported their beliefs about each approach. Results: Individual CBT (43.42%) and BT (31.58%), delivered face-to-face or technologically, were the most preferred treatment options, while ACT (17.12%) and CT (7.89%) were the least preferred. The main reasons cited among those who chose CBT and BT were perceived comprehensiveness and the practical nature of the approach, respectively. Treatment beliefs were strongly predicted by psychological need satisfaction as well as perceived ease and effort. Conclusions: Further research should ascertain the stability of treatment beliefs and the efficacy of modifying the treatment context to meet individual needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Obesity is associated with a significant disease burden, but whether recognising as opposed to failing to recognise personal overweight is beneficial or detrimental to mental health is unclear. Here we examine the associations between perceived overweight and depressive symptoms and suicidality. A systematic search of three electronic databases yielded 10,398 unique records, from which 32 studies (110 observations) were eligible for inclusion. Pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for each outcome using random effects meta-analyses and potential publication bias was examined. Perceived overweight was associated with an increased risk of depressive symptoms (OR: 1.42, CI: 1.31, 1.54 p <.0001, N >128,585) and suicidality (OR: 1.41, CI: 1.28, 1.56, p <.0001, N = 133,576) in both cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. The association between perceived overweight and poorer mental health was observed irrespective of study origin, participant age (children vs. adults), gender, and whether or not a person was objectively overweight. The pooled statistical relationship between objective weight status and poorer mental health was attenuated to non-significance when perceived overweight was accounted for, suggesting that the detrimental effect of overweight on mental health is largely dependent on whether or not a person identifies as overweight. • Perceived overweight was associated with increased depression and suicidality in this systematic review and meta-analysis • Weight perception also explained the relationship between BMI and mental health • Results were consistent across multiple subgroup and sensitivity analyses • However, heterogeneity and the inclusion of only observational data limit the strength of conclusions • Results highlight the importance of the psychological experience of overweight in mental health [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Eating out is now common and food served out of the home is often of low nutritional quality. Kilocalorie (kcal) labelling of food and drink products sold in restaurant chains in the US is now mandatory, although in store kcal labelling practices among major UK restaurant and takeaway chains have not been examined.Methods: During August 2018, we contacted, visited the website and/or retail outlets of major eating out and takeaway food chains in the UK, including full-service and fast-food restaurants, cafes and coffee shops, some of which had previously made a voluntary pledge to provide kcal labelling. We examined the proportion of chains providing kcal information to customers at point of choice in store and the extent to which kcal information provision adhered to labelling recommendations. We also examined the proportion of chains that did not have point of choice kcal labelling but were able to provide kcal information on request. The study protocol was pre-registered on the Open Science Framework.Results: Of the 104 eligible chains, only a small minority (18 chains, 17%) provided in store kcal labelling. Of those that did, provision of kcal information tended not to adhere to recommended labelling practices. Of the 16 eligible chains that had previously committed to a voluntary public health pledge to provide point of choice kcal labelling, labelling did not meet recommendations and 4 (25%) did not provide kcal labelling. Of the 86 chains that did not provide kcal labelling in store, kcal information was available on request from 43 (50%) chains.Conclusions: It is rare for eating out and takeaway chains in the UK to provide point of choice kcal labelling and when labelling is provided it does not adhere to recommended labelling practices. Chains that previously volunteered to provide kcal labelling as part of an industry and public health partnership do so inadequately. Voluntary policies have not resulted in adequate kcal labelling in the UK eating out of home sector. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]