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: Comparison of 4 diets of varying glycemic load on weight loss and cardiovascular risk reduction in overweight and obese young adults: a randomized controlled trial.
    Author: McMillan-Price J, Petocz P, Atkinson F, O'neill K, Samman S, Steinbeck K, Caterson I, Brand-Miller J.
    Journal: Arch Intern Med; 2006 Jul 24; 166(14):1466-75. PubMed ID: 16864756.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Despite the popularity of low-glycemic index (GI) and high-protein diets, to our knowledge no randomized, controlled trials have systematically compared their relative effects on weight loss and cardiovascular risk. METHODS: A total of 129 overweight or obese young adults (body mass index, > or =25 [calculated as weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters]) were assigned to 1 of 4 reduced-fat, high-fiber diets for 12 weeks. Diets 1 and 2 were high carbohydrate (55% of total energy intake), with high and low GIs, respectively; diets 3 and 4 were high protein (25% of total energy intake), with high and low GIs, respectively. The glycemic load was highest in diet 1 and lowest in diet 4. Changes in weight, body composition, and blood chemistry profile were studied. RESULTS: While all groups lost a similar mean +/- SE percentage of weight (diet 1, -4.2% +/- 0.6%; diet 2, -5.5% +/- 0.5%; diet 3, -6.2% +/- 0.4%; and diet 4, -4.8% +/- 0.7%; P = .09), the proportion of subjects in each group who lost 5% or more of body weight varied significantly by diet (diet 1, 31%; diet 2, 56%; diet 3, 66%; and diet 4, 33%; P = .01). Women on diets 2 and 3 lost approximately 80% more fat mass (-4.5 +/- 0.5 [mean +/- SE] kg and -4.6 +/- 0.5 kg) than those on diet 1 (-2.5 +/- 0.5 kg; P = .007). Mean +/- SE low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol levels declined significantly in the diet 2 group (-6.6 +/- 3.9 mg/dL [-0.17 +/- 0.10 mmol/L]) but increased in the diet 3 group (+10.0 +/- 3.9 mg/dL [+0.26 +/- 0.10 mmol/L]; P = .02). Goals for energy distribution were not achieved exactly: both carbohydrate groups ate less fat, and the diet 2 group ate more fiber. CONCLUSION: Both high-protein and low-GI regimens increase body fat loss, but cardiovascular risk reduction is optimized by a high-carbohydrate, low-GI diet.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]