[ad_1]
EEven the poorest people occasionally succumb to the temptation to overeat, which seems to have a deep focus in our brains. Although overeating to the point of nausea feels bad in the short term and may have long-term adverse effects, a new study from the Australian University Deakin suggests that the body can adapt to short-term overeating. – but only to a certain type.
When scientists study the effects of binge eating, they focus on a few key concerns. Weight gain is certainly one, but the level of glucose in the blood, that the new American Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and Metabolism study is concerned about, is also extremely important. It has been shown in the past that even short periods of overconsumption can disrupt the delicate glycemic balance of the body, which can lead over time to metabolic diseases such as diabetes.
The data presented in the new article may seem surprising: Scientists have discovered that eating 1000 extra calories a day do not have have remarkable effects on weight gain and, most importantly, on the treatment of insulin in a small sample of eight men. The team insists on this effect until minimal changes have helped their body adapt in the short term.
Adaptations to occasional overeating:
This small experiment involved eight "lean young men" who were given 1,000 extra calories a day for five days (the short-term experience) or 28 days (the long-term experience). In the long run, men gained on average 1.3 kg of body fat.
The team noticed very small changes in the way the participants' bodies treated insulin, the hormone that directs cells to take glucose, thus maintaining the amount of glucose in the blood. Immediately after the big meals, the team noted a "modest" insulinemia and blood glucose – an increase in these compounds in the blood – which meant that the body was absorbing the fast influx of glucose supplement at higher rates. than usual. These peaks, they add, were still in a "healthy normal" range.
During the past 28 days, glucose flow measurements have remained unchanged – that is, they have not increased as much as you would expect after consuming huge amounts of food. According to the authors, these increases suggest that when we eat too much in the short term, this slight rise in glucose and insulin response was helpful in "increasing glucose removal", which allows for control the level of blood glucose.
These results go against many previous studies on overfeeding, which showed the short-term adverse effects of overfeeding on glucose treatment. In the paper, the team poses Why their results differ from the rest: the types calories consumed by their participants were different from previous studies of the dangers of overeating.
Too much eating certain types of calories
The authors carefully forced their participants to follow a "maintenance of energy" diet composed of 55% of carbohydrates, 30% of fat and 15% of proteins, which, according to them, is typical of the 39; Australian. Then they asked each person to consume an extra 1,000 calories of snacks a day, usually crisps, chocolate and meal replacements. Crucially, these 1,000 additional calories could also be roughly divided into the same proportions as the diet (53% carbohydrate, 32% fat and 15% protein, respectively).
The overfeeding model used in this study is probably more indicative of the human condition that causes weight gain. "
This is important for two reasons: first, it suggests that the combination of fats, carbohydrates and proteins that make up all of these extra calories can go a long way toward determining their harmful effect. Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, most humans tend to eat more balanced foods – not just fat-based foods – and their study plan could be a more accurate way to study overeating. in the future.
"In conclusion, the overfeeding model used in this study is probably more indicative of the human condition that drives weight gain, as opposed to fat-rich overfeeding models that produce a larger effect size," write -they.
Like many food studies, this one is small. But this highlights a crucial point: not all food excesses are created equal. And now, as future studies seek to exploit these results, they could rely on a more realistic model of overfeeding to further inform the impact on health.
Abstract: At present, it is not known whether short-term overeating in healthy individuals significantly affects postprandial glycemic control, as most studies on human overeating have used induced experimental conditions such as the technique of euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp to evaluate glucoregulation. The aim of this study was to quantify glucose fluxes (meal glucose appearance (Ra), elimination (Rd) and endogenous glucose production (EGP) levels) in response to overfeeding during 5 and 28 days (+ 45% energy) macronutrient composition of the usual diet (31.0 ± 1.9% fat, 48.6 ± 2.2% carbohydrate, 16.7 ± 1.4% proteins). To achieve this goal, meal tolerance tests were combined with the tri-stable isotope tracer method. The visceral adipose volume increased by about 15% after 5 days of overeating, while there was no change after 28 days. In contrast, body mass (+1.6 kg) and body fat (+1.3 kg) increased significantly only after 28 days of overeating. EGP, Rd, and fasting insulin increased at age 5 but remained unchanged after 28 days. After 5 days of overeating, postprandial glycemic and insulin responses were unchanged, but increased modestly after 28 days (P <0.05), while Ra and glucose Rd meals increased significantly after 5 and 28 days (P <0). , 05). Despite this, overeating did not result in alteration of the postprandial suppression of EGP. Thus, contrary to the findings of euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic forceps studies, chronic overeating did not affect the ability of EGP suppression or Rd stimulation in postprandial conditions. Instead, the glucose flux was properly maintained after 28 days of overeating, due to a modest increase in postprandial glucose and insulinemia.
[ad_2]
Source link