4.7 Article

Biological Response to Meal Ingestion: Gender Differences

Journal

NUTRIENTS
Volume 11, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu11030702

Keywords

meal ingestion; gender differences; postprandial sensations; hedonic response; homeostatic response; metabolomic response

Funding

  1. Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (Direccion General de Investigacion Cientifica y Tecnica) [SAF 2016-76648-R]
  2. Instituto de Salud Carlos III
  3. People Programme of the EU's 7th Framework Programme under REA [607652]
  4. Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In a previous study, we demonstrated that women enjoyed and tolerated lower meal loads than men. Hence, we hypothesized that with the same meal load, their postprandial response is more pronounced than in men. We performed a randomized parallel trial in 12 women and 12 men comparing the postprandial responses to a palatable comfort meal. We measured homeostatic sensations (hunger/satiety, fullness) and hedonic sensations (digestive well-being, mood) on 10 cm scales, vagal tone by heart ratio variability and the metabolomic profile before and after meal ingestion. Gender differences were analyzed by repeated measures ANCOVA. Overall (n = 24), ingestion of the probe meal induced satiation, fullness, digestive well-being and improved mood (main time-effect p <= 0.005 for all). Women exhibited a more intense sensory experience, specially more postprandial fullness, than men [main gender-effect F (1, 21) = 7.14; p = 0.014]; hedonic responses in women also tended to be stronger than in men. Women exhibited more pronounced effects on vagal tone [main gender-effect F (1, 21) = 5.5; p = 0.029] and a different lipoprotein response than men. In conclusion, our data indicate that gender influences the responses to meal ingestion, and these differences may explain the predisposition and higher incidence in women of meal-related functional disorders.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available