Almonds vs complex carbohydrates in a weight reduction program

Edible nuts and metabolic health

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review summarizes evidence for metabolic health benefits of tree nuts and groundnuts (peanuts). While a role for nuts in the dietary management of LDL-cholesterol is well established, it is evident that regular consumption of nuts may also help to counteract other cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors.

RECENT FINDINGS

Nuts are not only energy dense foods, they are rich sources of monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids and other bioactive nutrients with important metabolic effects. Contrary to expectations, epidemiological studies indicate that regular consumption of nuts is unlikely to contribute to obesity or increased risk of diabetes. In fact, it may help to regulate body weight by suppressing appetite and fat absorption. Nut consumption counteracts dyslipidemia and has the capacity to improve circulatory function through the actions of multiple constituents (arginine, polyphenols) on endothelial mechanisms.

SUMMARY

Nuts are densely packaged nutrients with wide-ranging cardiovascular and metabolic benefits, which can be readily incorporated in healthy diets. Their potential role in counteracting obesity and the metabolic syndrome warrants further investigation.

Nut consumption and weight gain in a Mediterranean cohort: The SUN study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association, in a Mediterranean population, between nut consumption and risk of weight gain (at least 5 kg) or the risk of becoming overweight/obese.

RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES

The Seguimiento Universidad de Navarra project is a prospective cohort of 8865 adult men and women who completed a follow-up questionnaire after a median of 28 months. Dietary habits were assessed with a previously validated semiquantitative food-frequency questionnaire.

RESULTS

Nine hundred thirty-seven participants reported a weight gain of > or =5 kg at follow-up. After adjusting for age, sex, smoking, leisure time physical activity, and other known risk factors for obesity, participants who ate nuts two or more times per week had a significantly lower risk of weight gain (odds ratio: 0.69; 95% confidence interval: 0.53 to 0.90, p for trend = 0.006) than those who never or almost never ate nuts. Participants with little nut consumption (never/almost never) gained an average of 424 grams (95% confidence interval: 102 to 746) more than frequent nut eaters. Nut consumption was not significantly associated with incident overweight/obesity in the cohort.

DISCUSSION

Frequent nut consumption was associated with a reduced risk of weight gain (5 kg or more). These results support the recommendation of nut consumption as an important component of a cardioprotective diet and also allay fears of possible weight gain.

Ghrelin response to protein and carbohydrate meals in relation to food intake and glycerol levels in obese subjects

Obese subjects have lower basal and an attenuated decrease of postprandial plasma ghrelin following carbohydrate-rich meals, while the response to protein is unknown. Therefore, plasma ghrelin levels were examined after ingestion of satiating amounts of a protein- or carbohydrate-rich meal in relation to food and energy intake and hunger/satiety ratings in 30 obese subjects followed 240 min later by ad lib sandwiches. Food intake and hunger/satiety ratings were identical while energy intake was significantly greater after bread (861 +/- 62.7 vs. 441 +/- 50.4 kcal, p < 0.001). Second meal food and energy intake were not different. Ghrelin decreased after bread, but increased by 50 pg/ml (p < 0.001) after meat. The corresponding increase of insulin was 55 vs. 9 microU/ml (p < 0.001). Glycerol levels decreased significantly less after the protein meal compared to carbohydrates. After protein glycerol was significantly correlated to the rise of ghrelin but not insulin. These data demonstrate that, in obese subjects, protein has no different satiating effect than carbohydrate despite divergent ghrelin levels. Energy intake corresponds to energy density of the respective food items. Ghrelin response to both meals is qualitatively similar but quantitatively attenuated compared to normal weight subjects. The relationship between ghrelin and glycerol would support recent observations of a possible role of ghrelin in fat metabolism.

Effects of variation in protein and carbohydrate intake on body mass and composition during energy restriction: a meta-regression 1

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether low-carbohydrate, high-protein, weight-loss diets benefit body mass and composition beyond energy restriction alone.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to use meta-regression to determine the effects of variations in protein and carbohydrate intakes on body mass and composition during energy restriction.

DESIGN

English-language studies with a dietary intervention of > or =4200 kJ/d (1000 kcal/d), with a duration of > or =4 wk, and conducted in subjects aged > or =19 y were considered eligible for inclusion. A self-reported intake in conjunction with a biological marker of macronutrient intake was required as a minimum level of dietary control. A total of 87 studies comprising 165 intervention groups met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

After control for energy intake, diets consisting of < or =35-41.4% energy from carbohydrate were associated with a 1.74 kg greater loss of body mass, a 0.69 kg greater loss of fat-free mass, a 1.29% greater loss in percentage body fat, and a 2.05 kg greater loss of fat mass than were diets with a higher percentage of energy from carbohydrate. In studies that were conducted for >12 wk, these differences increased to 6.56 kg, 1.74 kg, 3.55%, and 5.57 kg, respectively. Protein intakes of >1.05 g/kg were associated with 0.60 kg additional fat-free mass retention compared with diets with protein intakes < or =1.05 g/kg. In studies conducted for >12 wk, this difference increased to 1.21 kg. No significant effects of protein intake on loss of either body mass or fat mass were observed.

CONCLUSION

Low-carbohydrate, high-protein diets favorably affect body mass and composition independent of energy intake, which in part supports the proposed metabolic advantage of these diets.

Cholesterol lowering effects of nuts compared with a Canola oil enriched cereal of similar fat composition

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Small quantities of nuts protect against subsequent cardiovascular risk. There is speculation that the cholesterol lowering effect associated with nut consumption arises primarily from the fatty acid composition of nuts but may be caused by some other component. To evaluate this possibility we compared the effect of various nuts, against a Canola oil based cereal with a comparable fatty acid profile, on lipids, lipoproteins and fatty acids to determine whether the fatty acid profile of nuts explains their cholesterol lowering effects.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Twenty-eight men and women with mean (s.d.) levels of total and low density lipoprotein cholesterol of 6.0 (1.1) mmol/L, and 4.1 (1.0) mmol/L, respectively and a mean body mass index (BMI) of 26.9 (3.2) kg/m2 took part in a randomised cross over trial. For two periods of six weeks, separated by a four-week washout, participants were asked to consume a low saturated fat diet, which included either 30 g/d nuts (nut diet) or one serving of a cereal containing Canola oil (cereal diet). There were no significant differences in the lipids, lipoproteins, plasma fatty acids or other variables between the two diets at the end of the study. Total cholesterol (TC) and low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) were lower on both experimental diets than at baseline, 0.51 mmol/L and 0.40 mmol/L (p<0.001, p<0.01), respectively on the nut diet and 0.42 mmol/L and 0.37 mmol/L (p<0.001, p<0.01), respectively on the cereal diet.

CONCLUSION

A 30 g serving of nuts, or a serving of a Canola oil enriched cereal with a similar fatty acid composition reduced total and LDL cholesterol to a similar extent when consumed as part of a lipid lowering diet. Results suggest that foods with a similar fatty acid composition to nuts can produce comparable decreases in lipoprotein mediated cardiovascular risk.

Protein, body weight, and cardiovascular health

Widespread popularity of high-protein diets has drawn controversy as well as scientific interest. By reducing intake of carbohydrates and increasing consumption of fats and proteins, such diets are thought to increase satiety, facilitate weight loss, and improve cardiovascular risk factors. In recent years, many randomized controlled studies have compared the effects of higher-protein diets on weight loss and cardiovascular risk factors with those of lower-protein diets. The aim of this review was to provide an overview of experimental and epidemiologic evidence regarding the role of protein in weight loss and cardiovascular risk. Emerging evidence from clinical trials indicates that higher-protein diets increase short-term weight loss and improve blood lipids, but long-term data are lacking. Findings from epidemiologic studies show a significant relationship between increased protein intake and lower risk of hypertension and coronary heart disease. However, different sources of protein appear to have different effects on cardiovascular disease. Although optimal amounts and sources of protein cannot be determined at this time, evidence suggests a potential benefit of partially replace refined carbohydrates with protein sources low in saturated fats.

Carbohydrate-restricted diets high in either monounsaturated fat or protein are equally effective at promoting fat loss and improving blood lipids

BACKGROUND

When substituted for carbohydrate in an energy-reduced diet, dietary protein enhances fat loss in women. It is unknown whether the effect is due to increased protein or reduced carbohydrate.

OBJECTIVE

We compared the effects of 2 isocaloric diets that differed in protein and fat content on weight loss, lipids, appetite regulation, and energy expenditure after test meals.

DESIGN

This was a parallel, randomized study in which subjects received either a low-fat, high-protein (LF-HP) diet (29 +/- 1% fat, 34 +/- 0.8% protein) or a high-fat, standard-protein (HF-SP) diet (45 +/- 0.6% fat, 18 +/- 0.3% protein) during 12 wk of energy restriction (6 +/- 0.1 MJ/d) and 4 wk of energy balance (7.4 +/- 0.3 MJ/d). Fifty-seven overweight and obese [mean body mass index (in kg/m(2)): 33.8 +/- 0.9] volunteers with insulin concentrations >12 mU/L completed the study.

RESULTS

Weight loss (LF-HP group, 9.7 +/- 1.1 kg; HF-SP group, 10.2 +/- 1.4 kg; P = 0.78) and fat loss were not significantly different between diet groups even though the subjects desired less to eat after the LF-HP meal (P = 0.02). The decrease in resting energy expenditure was not significantly different between diet groups (LF-HP, -342 +/- 185 kJ/d; HF-SP, -349 +/- 220 kJ/d). The decrease in the thermic effect of feeding with weight loss was smaller in the LF-HP group than in the HF-SP group (-0.3 +/- 1.0% compared with -3.6 +/- 0.7%; P = 0.014). Glucose and insulin responses to test meals improved after weight loss (P < 0.001) with no significant diet effect. Bone turnover, inflammation, and calcium excretion did not change significantly.

CONCLUSION

The magnitude of weight loss and the improvements in insulin resistance and cardiovascular disease risk factors did not differ significantly between the 2 diets, and neither diet had any detrimental effects on bone turnover or renal function.

Role of cell walls in the bioaccessibility of lipids in almond seeds

BACKGROUND

Certain nutrients and phytochemicals in almonds may confer protection against cardiovascular disease, but little is known about factors that influence their bioavailability. A crucial and relevant aspect is the amount of these dietary components available for absorption in the intestine, which is a concept referred to as bioaccessibility.

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the role played by cell walls in influencing the bioaccessibility of intracellular lipid from almond seeds.

DESIGN

Quantitative analyses of nonstarch polysaccharides (NSPs) and phenolic compounds of cell walls were performed by gas-liquid chromatography and HPLC, respectively. In a series of experiments, the effects of mechanical disruption, chewing, and digestion on almond seed microstructure and intracellular lipid release were determined. In the digestibility study, fecal samples were collected from healthy subjects who had consumed diets with or without almonds. Almond seeds and fecal samples were examined by microscopy to identify cell walls and intracellular lipid.

RESULTS

Cell walls were found to be rich in NSPs, particularly arabinose-rich polysaccharides, with a high concentration of phenolic compounds detected in the seed coat cell wall. During disruption of almond tissue by mechanical methods or chewing, only the first layer of cells at the fractured surface was ruptured and able to release lipid. In fecal samples collected from subjects consuming the almond diet, we observed intact cotyledonary cells, in which the cell walls encapsulated intracellular lipid. This lipid appeared susceptible to colonic fermentation once the cotyledonary cell walls were breached by bacterial degradation.

CONCLUSION

The cell walls of almond seeds reduce lipid bioaccessibility by hindering the release of lipid available for digestion.