4.7 Article

Fueling the obesity epidemic? Artificially sweetened beverage use and long-term weight gain

期刊

OBESITY
卷 16, 期 8, 页码 1894-1900

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1038/oby.2008.284

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We have examined the relationship between artificially sweetened beverage (ASB) consumption and long-term weight gain in the San Antonio Heart Study. From 1979 to 1988, height, weight, and ASB consumption were measured among 5,158 adult residents of San Antonio, Texas. Seven to eight years later, 3,682 participants (74% of survivors) were re-examined. Outcome measures were incidence of overweight/obesity (OW/OBinc) and obesity (OBinc) (BMI >= 25 and >= 30 kg/m(2), respectively), and BMI change by follow-up (Delta BMI, kg/m2). A significant positive dose-response relationship emerged between baseline ASB consumption and all outcome measures, adjusted for baseline BMI and demographic/behavioral characteristics. Consuming > 21 ASBs/week (vs. none) was associated with almost-doubled risk of OW/OB (odds ratio (OR) = 1.93, P = 0.007) among 1,250 baseline normal-weight (NW) individuals, and doubled risk of obesity (OR = 2.03, P = 0.0005) among 2,571 individuals with baseline BMIs < 30 kg/m(2). Compared with nonusers (+1.01 kg/m(2)), Delta BMIs were significantly higher for ASB quartiles 2-4: +1.46 (P = 0.003), +1.50 (P = 0.002), and +1.78 kg/m(2) (P < 0.0001), respectively. Overall, adjusted Delta BMIs were 47% greater among artificial sweetner (AS) users than nonusers (+1.48 kg/m(2) VS. +1.01 kg/m(2), respectively, P < 0.0001). In separate analyses-stratified by gender; ethnicity; baseline weight category, dieting, or diabetes status; or exercise-change category-Delta BMIs were consistently greater among AS users. These differences, though not significant among exercise increasers, or those with baseline diabetes or BMI > 30 kg/m(2) (P = 0.069), were significant in all 13 remaining strata. These findings raise the question whether AS use might be fueling-rather than fighting-our escalating obesity epidemic.

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