Interessanter Lesestoff

[Flo]

Warum haben wir hier eigentlich noch keinen "schaut her, was ich tolles zum Thema Ernährung gefunden habe"-Thread?

Ich fang mal an:

Mind Over Milkshakes: Mindsets, Not Just Nutrients, Determine Ghrelin Response – Research Review

Mind over milkshakes: Mindsets, not just nutrients, determine ghrelin response. Crum AJ et. al. Health Psychol. 2011 May 16. [Epub ahead of print]

Objective: To test whether physiological satiation as measured by the gut peptide ghrelin may vary depending on the mindset in which one approaches consumption of food. Methods: On 2 separate occasions, participants (n = 46) consumed a 380-calorie milkshake under the pretense that it was either a 620-calorie “indulgent” shake or a 140-calorie “sensible” shake. Ghrelin was measured via intravenous blood samples at 3 time points: baseline (20 min), anticipatory (60 min), and postconsumption (90 min). During the first interval (between 20 and 60 min) participants were asked to view and rate the (misleading) label of the shake. During the second interval (between 60 and 90 min) participants were asked to drink and rate the milkshake. Results: The mindset of indulgence produced a dramatically steeper decline in ghrelin after consuming the shake, whereas the mindset of sensibility produced a relatively flat ghrelin response. Participants’ satiety was consistent with what they believed they were consuming rather than the actual nutritional value of what they consumed. Conclusions: The effect of food consumption on ghrelin may be psychologically mediated, and mindset meaningfully affects physiological responses to food. (PsycINFO Database Record © 2011 APA, all rights reserved).

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/researc...eview.html

Ein erster bewiesener Zusammenhang zwischen Ernährungsphysiologie und -psychologie. Sollte man zwar in der praktischen Anwendbarkeit nicht überbewerten, aber der ein oder andere sollte dabei schon Nerd-Chills kriegen.

Int J Obes (Lond). 2008 Mar;32(3):573-6. Epub 2007 Sep 11.
What is the required energy deficit per unit weight loss?
Hall KD.
Source
Laboratory of Biological Modeling, National Institute of Diabetes & Digestive & Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892-5621, USA. kevinh@niddk.nih.gov
Abstract

One of the most pervasive weight loss rules is that a cumulative energy deficit of 3500 kcal is required per pound of body weight loss, or equivalently 32.2 MJ kg(-1). Under what conditions is it appropriate to use this rule of thumb and what are the factors that determine the cumulative energy deficit required per unit weight loss? Here, I examine this question using a modification of the classic Forbes equation that predicts the composition of weight loss as a function of the initial body fat and magnitude of weight loss. The resulting model predicts that a larger cumulative energy deficit is required per unit weight loss for people with greater initial body fat-a prediction supported by published weight loss data from obese and lean subjects. This may also explain why men can lose more weight than women for a given energy deficit since women typically have more body fat than men of similar body weight. Furthermore, additional weight loss is predicted to be associated with a lower average cumulative energy deficit since a greater proportion of the weight loss is predicted to result from loss of lean body mass, which has a relatively low energy density in comparison with body fat. The rule of thumb approximately matches the predicted energy density of lost weight in obese subjects with an initial body fat above 30 kg but overestimates the cumulative energy deficit required per unit weight loss for people with lower initial body fat. International Journal of Obesity (2008) 32, 573-576; doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0803720; published online 11 September 2007.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=17848938
Volltext: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2376744/

Räumt mit der (vA im englischsprachigen Raum beliebten) Faustregel "3500 kcal Defizit = 1 Pfund abnehmen" auf.


Mehr, mehr, mehr!
(Wenns denn wen interessiert..)