Integrating components of energy intake in impaired glucose tolerant and type 2 diabetic populations
Citation
Sommerville, J. (2008) Integrating components of energy intake in impaired glucose tolerant and type 2 diabetic populations, no. 331.
Abstract
Objective - During feeding there is an integrated 'whole body' response which
endeavours to maintain energy homeostasis. The integrated response consists of sensory,
postingestive, postabsorptive and cognitive feedback which exerts control over ingestive
behaviour. It is accepted that when an imbalance in this integrated response occurs and
may promote an increased fat mass and ultimately can lead to obesity which is known to
play an important role in the development of IGT and type 2 diabetes. This study
investigated the integrated responses of a test meal to determine any differences between
IGT, type 2 diabetics and controls in their integrated response mechanisms. This
knowledge may be important in both predicting the onset of these diseases and in the
treatment of them.
Research Design and Methods - IGT and type 2 diabetics with a BMI greater than 30
and were recruited together with a group of healthy controls. The study assessed habitual
energy intakes and energy expenditure in all groups. All participants' height, weight,
BMI and WHR were measured. A taste test assessed the sensory component of food
intake. The metabolic response and parallel changes in appetite to the meal were
recorded at baseline and at 15, 30, 60, 90 and 120 minutes.
Results - Control participants had significantly lower weight (p<0.01), BMI (p<0.01),
waist (p<0.01) and hip (p<0.01) measurements compared to IGT and the type 2 diabetic
groups. Habitual diet diaries indicated a lower sugar intake in the type 2 diabetic group
compared with IGT and control groups. Percentage protein intake was significantly
lower in control participants (14.4%, p<0.05) compared to IGT (17.2%) and type 2
diabetics (18.5%). Activity diaries highlighted an indication of increased
strenuous/physical activity in the control participants compared to IGT participants
however, this was not statistically significant. The control group showed greater
sensitivity to PROP followed by type 2 diabetics and then IGT participants (p<0.05).
Throughout the study the control participants rated themselves the most hungry compared
to IGT (p<0.05) and type 2 diabetics (p<0.01) respectively and controls were also the
least satiated (p<0.05). There was no difference in fullness ratings. Control participants
rated prospective consumption the highest compared to IGT and then type 2 diabetics
(p<0.05) respectively. The differences in EE measured by calorimetry when normalised
for body weight indicated that IGT (p<0.01) and type 2 diabetic participants (p<0.01) had
significantly lower EE than control participants. CHO oxidation rates were significantly
lower in IGT and type 2 diabetics (p<0.05). Investigating the blood parameters showed
no differences in plasma ghrelin responses, that IGT participants had the highest overall
plasma glucose (p<0.01) and insulin (p<0.05) responses.
Conclusions - It is clear that there are subtle differences in the pathways of energy
balance in IGT and type 2 diabetics compared to controls; including sensitivity to taste,
subjective feelings of appetite, EE, oxidation rates and differing blood parameters. Taste
appears to be an important contributor to the sensory control of food intake and is
associated with an increased sugar intake. Furthermore, differences between IGT and
type 2 diabetics demonstrate that the degree of management of the disease can influence
the effectiveness of the metabolic pathways controlling food intake. It is not clear which
component is the most influential in the control of food intake and it is likely that the
synergistic effects are what potentiate the diseases and make them difficult to combat.