4.6 Article

Blueberries Decrease Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Obese Men and Women with Metabolic Syndrome

期刊

JOURNAL OF NUTRITION
卷 140, 期 9, 页码 1582-1587

出版社

AMER SOC NUTRITIONAL SCIENCE
DOI: 10.3945/jn.110.124701

关键词

-

资金

  1. US Highbush Blueberry Council
  2. University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center General Clinical Research Center [M01-RR14467]
  3. National Center for Research Resources, NIH

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Among all fruits, berries have shown substantial cardio-protective benefits due to their high polyphenol content. However, investigation of their efficacy in improving features of metabolic syndrome and related cardiovascular risk factors in obesity is limited. We examined the effects of blueberry supplementation on features of metabolic syndrome, lipid peroxidation, and inflammation in obese men and women. Forty-eight participants with metabolic syndrome [4 males and 44 females; BMI: 37.8 +/- 2.3 kg/m(2); age: 50.0 +/- 3.0 y (mean +/- SE)] consumed freeze-dried blueberry beverage (50 g freeze-dried blueberries, similar to 350 g fresh blueberries) or equivalent amounts of fluids (controls, 960 mL water) daily for 8 wk in a randomized controlled trial. Anthropometric and blood pressure measurements, assessment of dietary intakes, and fasting blood draws were conducted at screening and at wk 4 and 8 of the study. The decreases in systolic and diastolic blood pressures were greater in the blueberry-supplemented group (-6 and -4%, respectively) than in controls (-1.5 and -1.2%) (P < 0.05), whereas the serum glucose concentration and lipid profiles were not affected. The decreases in plasma oxidized LDL and serum malondialdehyde and hydroxynonenal concentrations were greater in the blueberry group (-28 and -17%, respectively) than in the control group (-9 and -9%) (P < 0.01). Our study shows blueberries may improve selected features of metabolic syndrome and related cardiovascular risk factors at dietary achievable doses. J. Nutr. 140: 1582-1587, 2010.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据