These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: How covert are covertly manipulated diets?
    Author: Stubbs RJ, Mullen S, Johnstone AM, Rist M, Kracht A, Reid C.
    Journal: Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord; 2001 Apr; 25(4):567-73. PubMed ID: 11319663.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To quantitatively assess subjects' ability to detect hedonic (palatability), sensory and nutritional differences between covertly manipulated high-fat (HF) and low-fat (LF) diets. SUBJECTS AND DIETS: This study examined the response of 16 subjects (eight men, eight women) to 20 LF and 20 HF versions of manipulated foods. Average percentage protein:fat:carbohydrate (by energy) and energy density (ED) of the two diets were 13:25:62, 371 kJ/100 g and 13:50:37, 672 kJ/100 g, respectively. PROTOCOL: Subjects were asked to simultaneously assess the HF and LF versions of each food in terms of (i) subjective pleasantness of each food, (ii) perceived differences in appearance, smell, taste and texture of the foods, and (iii) for each sample to assess whether it was high or low in energy, protein, carbohydrate, fat, fibre, sugar and salt. ANALYSIS: Perceived pleasantness of HF and LF versions of the foods was compared by analysis of variance. Comparisons used chi-squared tests of independence to assess departure from the null hypothesis of no perceived difference in remaining parameters (ii-iii). RESULTS: On average, subjects exhibited no significant preference for LF or HF versions of the foods (no difference 15 foods, three HF foods more pleasant, two LF foods more pleasant (P<0.03)). On average there were no general differences in comparison of sensory attributes that were consistently ascribable to the LF or HF foods, although there were numerous significant differences for individual foods. Subjects appeared unable to distinguish the HF foods as being HF (66% of estimates) and guessed correctly 33% of the time. They were better able to categorize the LF foods correctly (53% correct). On aggregate 43% of HF and LF foods were correctly identified. Subjects appeared able to detect sensory differences between foods but not to relate them to energy or nutrient content of these foods. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that subjects are on average not able to perceive large differences in the fat content of diets manipulated in this manner. In general the assumption that the manipulation of such foods is covert appears to hold, but subjects were far better at correctly identifying certain food types (dairy-based) over others.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]