Article thumbnail

Testing Protein Leverage in Lean Humans: A Randomised Controlled Experimental Study

By Alison K. Gosby, Arthur D. Conigrave, Namson S. Lau, Miguel A. Iglesias, Rosemary M. Hall, Susan A. Jebb, Jennie Brand-Miller, Ian D. Caterson, David Raubenheimer and Stephen J. Simpson


A significant contributor to the rising rates of human obesity is an increase in energy intake. The ‘protein leverage hypothesis’ proposes that a dominant appetite for protein in conjunction with a decline in the ratio of protein to fat and carbohydrate in the diet drives excess energy intake and could therefore promote the development of obesity. Our aim was to test the ‘protein leverage hypothesis’ in lean humans by disguising the macronutrient composition of foods offered to subjects under ad libitum feeding conditions. Energy intakes and hunger ratings were measured for 22 lean subjects studied over three 4-day periods of in-house dietary manipulation. Subjects were restricted to fixed menus in random order comprising 28 foods designed to be similar in palatability, availability, variety and sensory quality and providing 10%, 15% or 25% energy as protein. Nutrient and energy intake was calculated as the product of the amount of each food eaten and its composition. Lowering the percent protein of the diet from 15% to 10% resulted in higher (+12±4.5%, p = 0.02) total energy intake, predominantly from savoury-flavoured foods available between meals. This increased energy intake was not sufficient to maintain protein intake constant, indicating that protein leverage is incomplete. Urinary urea on the 10% and 15% protein diets did not differ statistically, nor did they differ from habitual values prior to the study. In contrast, increasing protein from 15% to 25% did not alter energy intake. On the fourth day of the trial, however, there was a greater increase in the hunger score between 1–2 h after the 10% protein breakfast versus the 25% protein breakfast (1.6±0.4 vs 25%: 0.5±0.3, p = 0.005). In our study population a change in the nutritional environment that dilutes dietary protein with carbohydrate and fat promotes overconsumption, enhancing the risk for potential weight gain

Topics: Research Article
Publisher: Public Library of Science
OAI identifier:
Provided by: PubMed Central

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.

Suggested articles


  1. (2005). Algal macronutrients and food selection by the omnivorous marine fish Girella tricuspidata.
  2. (2010). Diets with high or low protein content and glycemic index for weight-loss maintenance.
  3. (1993). Energy partitioning, tissue growth and appetite control.
  4. (2009). Estimating the changes in energy flux that characterize the rise in obesity prevalence.
  5. (2004). Fat intake and energy-balance effects.
  6. (2010). Food Balance Sheets [Online]. Available: http:// Accessed
  7. (2003). Geometric analysis of macronutrient intake in humans: the power of protein?
  8. (1993). Growth and food intake responses to diets of different protein contents and a choice between diets containing two concentrations of protein in broiler and layer strains of chicken.
  9. (1997). Integrative models of nutrient balancing: application to insects and vertebrates.
  10. (2009). Nutritional goals of wild primates.
  11. (2005). Obesity: the protein leverage hypothesis.
  12. (2008). Protein-leverage in mice: the geometry of macronutrient balancing and consequences for fat deposition.
  13. (1991). The ability of pigs to control their protein intake when fed in three different ways.
  14. (2010). The price of protein: combining evolutionary and economic analysis to understand excessive energy consumption.
  15. (2011). Trends in carbohydrate, fat and protein intakes and association with energy intake in normal-weight, overweight, and obese individuals: 1971–2006.