English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background/objectives Intermittent energy restriction (IER) may overcome poor long-term adherence with continuous energy restriction (CER), for weight reduction. We compared the effects of IER with CER for fasting and postprandial metabolism and appetite in metabolically healthy participants, in whom excess weight would not confound intrinsic metabolic differences. Subjects/methods In a 2-week randomised, parallel trial, 16 young, healthy-weight participants were assigned to either CER (20% below estimated energy requirements (EER)) or 5:2 IER (70% below EER on 2 non-consecutive days; 5 days at EER, per week). Metabolic and appetite regulation markers were assessed before and for 3 h after a liquid breakfast; followed by an ad libitum lunch; pre- and post-intervention. Results Weight loss was similar in both groups: −2.5 (95% CI, −3.4, −1.6) kg for 5:2 IER vs. −2.3 (−2.9, −1.7) kg for CER. There were no differences between groups for postprandial incremental area under the curve for serum insulin, blood glucose or subjective appetite ratings. Compared with CER, 5:2 IER led to a reduction in fasting blood glucose concentrations (treatment-by-time interaction,  P  = 0.018,  η  2   p   = 0.14). Similarly, compared with CER, there were beneficial changes in fasting composite appetite scores after 5:2 IER (treatment-by-time interaction,  P  = 0.0003,  η  2   p   = 0.35). Conclusions There were no significant differences in postprandial insulinaemic, glycaemic or appetite responses between treatments. However, 5:2 IER resulted in greater improvements in fasting blood glucose, and beneficial changes in fasting subjective appetite ratings.

european journal of clinical nutrition

Effects of intermittent (5:2) or continuous energy restriction on basal and postprandial metabolism: a randomised study in normal-weight, young participants