4.7 Article

The capsaicin analog nonivamide decreases total energy intake from a standardized breakfast and enhances plasma serotonin levels in moderately overweight men after administered in an oral glucose tolerance test: A randomized, crossover trial

期刊

MOLECULAR NUTRITION & FOOD RESEARCH
卷 58, 期 6, 页码 1282-1290

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mnfr.201300821

关键词

Capsaicin; Human intervention study; Nonivamide; Satiety; Total energy intake

资金

  1. Austrian Federal Ministry of Economy, Family and Youth
  2. Austrian National Foundation for Research, Technology and Development
  3. Symrise AG

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Scope: Since bolus administration of capsaicin has been shown to reduce appetite and ad libitum energy intake, this study elucidated the satiating effect of the less pungent capsaicin analog, nonivamide, on subjective feelings of hunger, ad libitum food intake, and satiating hormones in moderately overweight male subjects. Methods and results: Following a randomized, crossover design, 24male subjects (BMI 27.5 +/- 1.53 kg/m(2)) received either 75 g glucose in 300 mL water (control treatment, CT) or the same glucose solution supplemented with 0.15 mg nonivamide (nonivamide treatment, NT). Ratings of hunger were assessed before and 2 h after each intervention by means of visual analog scales. Ad libitum energy and macronutrient intakes from a standardized breakfast 2 h postintervention were calculated. Plasma glucose, insulin, peptide YY (3-36), glucagon-like peptide 1, and serotonin were quantified in blood samples drawn before and 15, 30, 60, 90, and 120 min after each intervention. NT reduced subjective feelings of hunger and ad libitum energy and carbohydrate intakes from a standardized breakfast compared to CT. Plasma analysis revealed higher mean plasma glucagon-like peptide 1 and serotonin concentrations after NT versus CT. Conclusion: Addition of 0.15 mg nonivamide to a glucose solution reduced ad libitum energy intake from a standardized breakfast in moderately overweight men.

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

4.7
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