Equivalent reductions in body weight during the Beef WISE Study: beef's role in weight improvement, satisfaction and energy

R D Sayer, K J Speaker, Z Pan, J C Peters, H R Wyatt, J O Hill, R D Sayer, K J Speaker, Z Pan, J C Peters, H R Wyatt, J O Hill

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this randomized equivalence trial was to determine the impact of consuming lean beef as part of a high protein (HP) weight-reducing diet on changes in body weight, body composition and cardiometabolic health.

Methods: A total of 120 adults (99 female) with overweight or obesity (BMI: 35.7 ± 7.0 kg m-2) were randomly assigned to consume either a HP diet with ≥4 weekly servings of lean beef (B; n = 60) or a HP diet restricted in all red meats (NB; n = 60) during a 16-week weight loss intervention.

Results: Body weight was reduced by 7.8 ± 5.9% in B and 7.7 ± 5.5% in NB (p < 0.01 for both). Changes in percent body weight were equivalent between B and NB (mean difference: 0.06%, 90% confidence interval: (-1.7, 1.8)). Fat mass was reduced in both groups (p < 0.01; B: 8.0 ± 0.6 kg, NB: 8.6 ± 0.6 kg), while lean mass was not reduced in either group. Improvements in markers of cardiometabolic health (total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides and blood pressure) were not different between B and NB.

Conclusion: Results of this study demonstrate that HP diets - either rich or restricted in red meat intakes - are effective for decreasing body weight and improving body composition and cardiometabolic health.

Keywords: Body composition; lean body mass; obesity; red meats; weight loss.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Participant recruitment diagram.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Mean difference in weight loss between Beef and Non‐beef groups. Equivalence was assessed using a 90% CI of the mean between‐group difference in % weight loss between two groups. An interval of −2.5% to 2.5% (vertical bars) of the between‐group mean difference in percent weight loss over 16 weeks was considered clinically equivalent. Changes in body weight were equivalent between Beef and Non‐beef groups.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Changes in total, fat and lean mass. Linear mixed models (SAS, Proc Mixed) were used to assess changes in total, fat and lean between groups (Beef vs. Non‐beef) and over time (Baseline vs. Week 16). Significant reductions in total and fat mass were observed that did not differ between Beef and Non‐beef. Lean mass at Week 16 was not significantly different from Baseline in either group. Change in mass presented as LSMEANS ± SE from linear mixed model and * indicates a significant change from Baseline.

References

    1. Jensen MD, Ryan DH, Apovian CM, et al. 2013 AHA/ACC/TOS guideline for the management of overweight and obesity in adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and The Obesity Society. Circulation 2014; 129: S102–S138.
    1. Leidy HJ, Clifton PM, Astrup A, et al. The role of protein in weight loss and maintenance. Am J Clin Nutr 2015. pii: ajcn084038. [Epub ahead of print].
    1. Kim JE, O'Connor LE, Sands LP, Slebodnik MB, Campbell WW. Effects of dietary protein intake on body composition changes after weight loss in older adults: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Nutr Rev 2016; 74: 210–224.
    1. Santesso N, Akl EA, Bianchi M, et al. Effects of higher‐ versus lower‐protein diets on health outcomes: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Eur J Clin Nutr 2012; 66: 780–788.
    1. Wycherley TP, Moran LJ, Clifton PM, Noakes M, Brinkworth GD. Effects of energy‐restricted high‐protein, low‐fat compared with standard‐protein, low‐fat diets: a meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Clin Nutr 2012; 96: 1281–1298.
    1. Schwingshackl L, Hoffmann G. Long‐term effects of low‐fat diets either low or high in protein on cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Nutr J 2013; 12: 48.
    1. Li J, Armstrong CLH, Campbell WW. Effects of dietary protein source and quantity during weight loss on appetite, energy expenditure, and cardio‐metabolic responses. Nutr 2016; 8: 63.
    1. Hill AM, Harris Jackson KA, Roussell MA, West SG, Kris‐Etherton PM. Type and amount of dietary protein in the treatment of metabolic syndrome: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Clin Nutr 2015; 102: 757–770.
    1. Velasquez MT, Bhathena SJ. Role of dietary soy protein in obesity. Int J Med Sci 2007; 4: 72–82.
    1. Pasiakos SM. Metabolic advantages of higher protein diets and benefits of dairy foods on weight management, glycemic regulation, and bone. J Food Sci 2015; 80: A2–A7.
    1. Roussell MA, Hill AM, Gaugler TL, et al. Beef in an Optimal Lean Diet study: effects on lipids, lipoproteins, and apolipoproteins. Am J Clin Nutr 2012; 95: 9–16.
    1. Roussell MA, Hill AM, Gaugler TL, et al. Effects of a DASH‐like diet containing lean beef on vascular health. J Hum Hypertens 2014; 28: 600–605.
    1. Sayer RD, Wright AJ, Chen N, Campbell WW. Dietary approaches to stop hypertension diet retains effectiveness to reduce blood pressure when lean pork is substituted for chicken and fish as the predominant source of protein. Am J Clin Nutr 2015; 102: 302–308.
    1. Alisson‐Silva F, Kawanishi K, Varki A. Human risk of diseases associated with red meat intake: analysis of current theories and proposed role for metabolic incorporation of a non‐human sialic acid. Mol Aspects Med 2016; 51: 16–30.
    1. Boada LD, Henríquez‐Hernández LA, Luzardo OP. The impact of red and processed meat consumption on cancer and other health outcomes: epidemiological evidences. Food Chem Toxicol Int J Publ Br Ind Biol Res Assoc 2016; 92: 236–244.
    1. Wolk A. Potential health hazards of eating red meat. Journal of Internal Medicine 2017; 281: 106–122.
    1. Eckel RH, Jakicic JM, Ard JD, et al. AHA/ACC guideline on lifestyle management to reduce cardiovascular risk: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2014; 129: S76–S99.
    1. Dietary guidelines for Americans 2015–2020, eighth edition.
    1. Chen GC, Lv DB, Pang Z, Liu QF. Red and processed meat consumption and risk of stroke: a meta‐analysis of prospective cohort studies. Eur J Clin Nutr 2013; 67: 91–95.
    1. Micha R, Michas G, Mozaffarian D. Unprocessed red and processed meats and risk of coronary artery disease and type 2 diabetes – an updated review of the evidence. Curr Atheroscler Rep 2012; 14: 515–524.
    1. Chan DS, Lau R, Aune D, et al. Red and processed meat and colorectal cancer incidence: meta‐analysis of prospective studies. PloS One 2011; 6: e20456.
    1. Zhu HC, Yang X, Xu LP, et al. Meat consumption is associated with esophageal cancer risk in a meat‐ and cancer‐histological‐type dependent manner. Dig Sci 2014; 59: 664–673.
    1. Ziegler D, Strom A, Nowotny B, et al. Effect of low‐energy diets differing in fiber, red meat, and coffee intake on cardiac autonomic function in obese individuals with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2015; 38: 1750–1757.
    1. Daniel CR, Cross AJ, Koebnick C, Sinha R. Trends in meat consumption in the USA. Public Health Nutr 2011; 14: 575–583.
    1. Hill JO, Wyatt H, Aschwanden C. State of Slim: Fix your Metabolism and Drop 20 Pounds in 8 Weeks on the Colorado Diet. Emmaus, Pennsylvania: Rodale, 2013.
    1. Butryn ML, Phelan S, Hill JO, Wing RR. Consistent self‐monitoring of weight: a key component of successful weight loss maintenance. Obes Silver Spring 2007; 15: 3091–3096.
    1. Dhurandhar NV, Schoeller D, Brown AW, et al. Energy balance measurement: when something is not better than nothing. Int J Obes 2005 2015; 39: 1109–1113.
    1. Anon . Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic. Report of a WHO consultation. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser 2000; 894: i–xii. 1‐253.
    1. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap) – a metadata‐driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009; 42: 377–381.
    1. Weinheimer EM, Sands LP, Campbell WW. A systematic review of the separate and combined effects of energy restriction and exercise on fat‐free mass in middle‐aged and older adults: implications for sarcopenic obesity. Nutr Rev 2010; 68: 375–388.
    1. Nowson CA, Wattanapenpaiboon N, Pachett A. Low‐sodium dietary approaches to stop hypertension‐type diet including lean red meat lowers blood pressure in postmenopausal women. Nutr Res 2009; 29: 8–18.
    1. Blackburn G. Effect of degree of weight loss on health benefits. Obes Res 1995; 3: 211s–216s.
    1. Wing RR, Lang W, Wadden TA, et al. Benefits of modest weight loss in improving cardiovascular risk factors in overweight and obese individuals with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2011; 34: 1481–1486.
    1. Fayh APT, Lopes AL, da Silva AMV, Reischak‐Oliveira A, Friedman R. Effects of 5% weight loss through diet or diet plus exercise on cardiovascular parameters of obese: a randomized clinical trial. Eur J Nutr 2013; 52: 1443–1450.
    1. O'Connor LE, Kim JE, Campbell WW. Total red meat intake of ≥0.5 servings/d does not negatively influence cardiovascular disease risk factors: a systemically searched meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Clin Nutr 2017; 105: 57–69.
    1. Bruckert E, Pouchain D, Auboiron S, Mulet C. Cross‐analysis of dietary prescriptions and adherence in 356 hypercholesterolaemic patients. Arch Cardiovasc Dis 2012; 105: 557–565.
    1. Cheng L, Leung DY‐P, Sit JW‐H, et al. Factors associated with diet barriers in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. Patient Prefer Adherence 2016; 10: 37–44.
    1. Walker E, Nowacki AS. Understanding equivalence and noninferiority testing. J Gen Intern Med 2011; 26: 192–196.
    1. Peters JC, Beck J, Cardel M, et al. The effects of water and non‐nutritive sweetened beverages on weight loss and weight maintenance: a randomized clinical trial. Obes Silver Spring Md 2016; 24: 297–304.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorit ja yhteistyökumppanit

Sairaudet

Huumeiden interventiot

3
Tilaa