4.5 Article

Greater energy intake from a buffet meal in lean, young women is associated with the 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP) non-taster phenotype

Journal

APPETITE
Volume 56, Issue 1, Pages 104-110

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2010.11.144

Keywords

6-n-Propylthiouracil; PROP phenotype; Diet variety; Diet selection; Food intake

Funding

  1. Hatch Act through the New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Taste blindness to 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP) is a common phenotype that has been associated with increased adiposity in women, and might be linked to increased selection of dietary fats. Since exposure to a variety of high-fat/energy-dense foods is known to promote excess energy intake, we investigated if PROP non-taster women would consume more fat and/or energy in a buffet setting than super-taster women. Subjects were non-diet restrained, lean, young women; 14 were non-tasters and 18 were super-tasters. Subjects ate lunch in the laboratory on four separate days. On one day they consumed an ad libitum, fixed-item lunch (control). On the other three days they consumed different buffet lunches (pizza/tacos/sub sandwiches with salad bar and choice of beverage and dessert). Energy intake from the control lunch did not differ between groups. When intake was averaged across the buffet lunches, non-taster women consumed 357 + 64 kcal more energy than during the control lunch (88% more), whereas super-taster women consumed 198 + 71 kcal more energy than during the control lunch (38% more). Neither fat intake nor selection of high-fat foods differed between groups. These data suggest that non-taster women consume more energy from a buffet meal than super-taster women, but not more fat. Increased responsiveness to a variety of energy-dense foods could be one mechanism contributing to increased energy intake and greater adiposity in non-taster women. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available