Is there an optimal diet for weight management and metabolic health?

Individuals can lose body weight and improve health status on a wide range of energy (calorie) restricted dietary interventions. In this paper, we have reviewed the effectiveness of the most commonly utilized diets, including low-fat, low-carbohydrate and Mediterranean approaches in addition to commercial slimming programmes, meal replacements and newly-popularized intermittent fasting diets. We also consider the role of artificial sweeteners in weight management. Low-fat diets tend to improve LDL-cholesterol most, whilst lower-carbohydrate diets may preferentially improve triglycerides and HDL-cholesterol, however differences between diets are marginal. Weight loss improves almost all obesity related co-morbidities and metabolic markers, regardless of the macronutrient composition of the diet, but individuals do vary in preferences and ability to adhere to different diets. Optimizing adherence is the most important factor for weight loss success, and this is enhanced by regular professional contact and supportive behavioral change programs. Maintaining weight losses in the long-term remains the biggest challenge, and is undermined by an ‘obesogenic’ environment and biological adaptations that accompany weight loss

The effects of moderate alterations in adrenergic activity on acute appetite regulation in obese women: a randomised crossover trial

Background: Previous evidence has demonstrated that serum leptin is correlated with appetite in combination with, but not without, modest exercise. Aim: The present experiments investigated the effects of exogenous adrenaline and α/β adrenoceptor blockade in combination with moderate exercise on serum leptin concentrations, appetite/satiety sensations and subsequent food intake in obese women. Methods: A total of 10 obese women ((mean ± SEM), age: 50 (1.9) years, body mass index 36 (4.1) kg/m2, waist 104.8 (4.1) cm) participated in two separate, double-blind randomised experimental trials. Experiment 1: moderate exercise after α/β adrenergic blocker (labetalol, 100 mg orally) versus moderate exercise plus placebo; experiment 2: adrenaline infusion for 20 minutes versus saline infusion. Appetite/satiety and biochemistry were measured at baseline, pre- and immediately post-intervention, then 1 hour post-intervention (i.e., before dinner). Food intake was assessed via ad libitum buffet-style dinner. Results: No differences were found in appetite/satiety, subsequent food intake or serum leptin in any of the studies (experiment 1 or experiment 2). In experiment 1, blood glucose was higher (p < 0.01) and plasma free fatty acids lower (p = 0.04) versus placebo. In experiment 2, plasma free fatty acids (p < 0.05) increased after adrenaline versus saline infusion. Conclusions: Neither inhibition of exercise-induced adrenergic activity by combined α/β adrenergic blockade nor moderate increases in adrenergic activity induced by intravenous adrenaline infusion affected acute appetite regulation

Iodine status during pregnancy in India and related neonatal and infant outcomes

Objective: To document iodine status in Indian pregnancies, associations with maternal diet and demographics, and offspring developmental measures. Design: Longitudinal study following mothers through pregnancy and offspring up to 24 months. Setting: Rural health-care centre (Vadu) and urban antenatal clinic (Pune) in the Maharashtra region of India. Subjects: Pregnant mothers at 17 (n 132) and 34 weeks’ (n 151) gestation and their infants from birth to the age of 24 months. Results: Median urinary iodine concentration (UIC) was 203 and 211 μg/l at 17 and 34 weeks of pregnancy, respectively (range 26–800 μg/l). Using the UIC distribution adjusted for within-person variation, extreme UIC quartiles were compared for predictors and outcomes. There was no correlation between UIC at 17 and 34 weeks, but 24 % of those with UIC in the lowest quartile at 17 weeks had UIC in the same lowest quartile at 34 weeks. Maternal educational, socio-economic status and milk products consumption (frequency) were different between the lowest and highest quartile of UIC at 34 weeks. Selected offspring developmental outcomes differed between the lowest and highest UIC quartiles (abdominal circumference at 24 months, subscapular and triceps skinfolds at 12 and 24 months). However, UIC was only a weak predictor of subscapular skinfold at 12 months and of triceps skinfold at 24 months. Conclusions: Median UIC in this pregnant population suggested adequate dietary provision at both gestational stages studied. Occasional high results found in spot samples may indicate intermittent consumption of iodine-rich foods. Maternal UIC had limited influence on offspring developmental outcomes

Was UV spectral solar irradiance lower during the recent low sunspot minimum?

A detailed analysis is presented of solar UV spectral irradiance for the period between May 2003 and August 2005, when data are available from both the Solar Ultraviolet pectral Irradiance Monitor (SUSIM) instrument (on board the pper Atmosphere Research Satellite (UARS) spacecraft) and the Solar Stellar Irradiance Comparison Experiment (SOLSTICE) instrument (on board the Solar Radiation and Climate Experiment (SORCE) satellite). The ultimate aim is to develop a data composite that can be used to accurately determine any differences between the “exceptional” solar minimum at the end of solar cycle 23 and the previous minimum at the end of solar cycle 22 without having to rely on proxy data to set the long‐term change. SUSIM data are studied because they are the only data available in the “SOLSTICE gap” between the end of available UARS SOLSTICE data and the start of the SORCE data. At any one wavelength the two data sets are considered too dissimilar to be combined into a meaningful composite if any one of three correlations does not exceed a threshold of 0.8. This criterion removes all wavelengths except those in a small range between 156 nm and 208 nm, the longer wavelengths of which influence ozone production and heating in the lower stratosphere. Eight different methods are employed to intercalibrate the two data sequences. All methods give smaller changes between the minima than are seen when the data are not adjusted; however, correcting the SUSIM data to allow for an exponentially decaying offset drift gives a composite that is largely consistent with the unadjusted data from the SOLSTICE instruments on both UARS and SORCE and in which the recent minimum is consistently lower in the wave band studied

Randomised controlled feasibility trial of a web-based weight management intervention with nurse support for obese patients in primary care

<b>Background</b><p></p> There is a need for cost-effective weight management interventions that primary care can deliver to reduce the morbidity caused by obesity. Automated web-based interventions might provide a solution, but evidence suggests that they may be ineffective without additional human support. The main aim of this study was to carry out a feasibility trial of a web-based weight management intervention in primary care, comparing different levels of nurse support, to determine the optimal combination of web-based and personal support to be tested in a full trial.<p></p> <b>Methods</b><p></p> This was an individually randomised four arm parallel non-blinded trial, recruiting obese patients in primary care. Following online registration, patients were randomly allocated by the automated intervention to either usual care, the web-based intervention only, or the web-based intervention with either basic nurse support (3 sessions in 3 months) or regular nurse support (7 sessions in 6 months). The main outcome measure (intended as the primary outcome for the main trial) was weight loss in kg at 12 months. As this was a feasibility trial no statistical analyses were carried out, but we present means, confidence intervals and effect sizes for weight loss in each group, uptake and retention, and completion of intervention components and outcome measures.<p></p> <b>Results</b><p></p> All randomised patients were included in the weight loss analyses (using Last Observation Carried Forward). At 12 months mean weight loss was: usual care group (n = 43) 2.44 kg; web-based only group (n = 45) 2.30 kg; basic nurse support group (n = 44) 4.31 kg; regular nurse support group (n = 47) 2.50 kg. Intervention effect sizes compared with usual care were: d = 0.01 web-based; d = 0.34 basic nurse support; d = 0.02 regular nurse support. Two practices deviated from protocol by providing considerable weight management support to their usual care patients.<p></p> <b>Conclusions</b><p></p> This study demonstrated the feasibility of delivering a web-based weight management intervention supported by practice nurses in primary care, and suggests that the combination of the web-based intervention with basic nurse support could provide an effective solution to weight management support in a primary care context

The Diabetes Remission Clinical Trial (DiRECT): protocol for a cluster randomised trial

Background: Despite improving evidence-based practice following clinical guidelines to optimise drug therapy, Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) still exerts a devastating toll from vascular complications and premature death. Biochemical remission of T2DM has been demonstrated with weight loss around 15kg following bariatric surgery and in several small studies of non-surgical energy-restriction treatments. The non-surgical Counterweight-Plus programme, running in Primary Care where obesity and T2DM are routinely managed, produces >15 kg weight loss in 33 % of all enrolled patients. The Diabetes UK-funded Counterpoint study suggested that this should be sufficient to reverse T2DM by removing ectopic fat in liver and pancreas, restoring first-phase insulin secretion. The Diabetes Remission Clinical Trial (DiRECT) was designed to determine whether a structured, intensive, weight management programme, delivered in a routine Primary Care setting, is a viable treatment for achieving durable normoglycaemia. Other aims are to understand the mechanistic basis of remission and to identify psychological predictors of response. Methods/Design: Cluster-randomised design with GP practice as the unit of randomisation: 280 participants from around 30 practices in Scotland and England will be allocated either to continue usual guideline-based care or to add the Counterweight-Plus weight management programme, which includes primary care nurse or dietitian delivery of 12-20weeks low calorie diet replacement, food reintroduction, and long-term weight loss maintenance. Main inclusion criteria: men and women aged 20-65years, all ethnicities, T2DM 0-6years duration, BMI 27-45 kg/m2. Tyneside participants will undergo Magnetic Resonance (MR) studies of pancreatic and hepatic fat, and metabolic studies to determine mechanisms underlying T2DM remission. Co-primary endpoints: weight reduction ≥ 15 kg and HbA1c <48 mmol/mol at one year. Further follow-up at 2 years. Discussion: This study will establish whether a structured weight management programme, delivered in Primary Care by practice nurses or dietitians, is a viable treatment to achieve T2DM remission. Results, available from 2018 onwards, will inform future service strategy

Intermittent fasting interventions for the treatment of overweight and obesity in adults aged 18 years and over:a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: To examine the effectiveness of intermittent energy restriction in the treatment for overweight and obesity in adults, when compared to usual care treatment or no treatment. Introduction: Intermittent energy restriction encompasses dietary approaches including intermittent fasting, alternate day fasting, and fasting for two days per week. Despite the recent popularity of intermittent energy restriction and associated weight loss claims, the supporting evidence base is limited. Inclusion criteria: This review included overweight or obese (BMI ≥25 kg/m2) adults (≥18 years). Intermittent energy restriction was defined as consumption of ≤800 kcal on at least one day, but no more than six days per week. Intermittent energy restriction interventions were compared to no treatment (ad libitum diet) or usual care (continuous energy restriction ∼25% of recommended energy intake). Included interventions had a minimum duration of 12 weeks from baseline to post outcome measurements. The types of studies included were randomized and pseudo-randomized controlled trials. The primary outcome of this review was change in body weight. Secondary outcomes included: i) anthropometric outcomes (change in BMI, waist circumference, fat mass, fat free mass); ii) cardio-metabolic outcomes (change in blood glucose and insulin, lipoprotein profiles and blood pressure); and iii) lifestyle outcomes: diet, physical activity, quality of life and adverse events. Methods: A systematic search was conducted from database inception to November 2015. The following electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN registry, and anzctr.org.au for English language published studies, protocols and trials. Two independent reviewers evaluated the methodological quality of included studies using the standardized critical appraisal instruments from the Joanna Briggs Institute. Data were extracted from papers included in the review by two independent reviewers using the standardized data extraction tool from the Joanna Briggs Institute. Effect sizes were expressed as weighted mean differences and their 95% confidence intervals were calculated for meta-analyses. Results: Six studies were included in this review. The intermittent energy restriction regimens varied across studies and included alternate day fasting, fasting for two days, and up to four days per week. The duration of studies ranged from three to 12 months. Four studies included continuous energy restriction as a comparator intervention and two studies included a no treatment control intervention. Meta-analyses showed that intermittent energy restriction was more effective than no treatment for weight loss (−4.14 kg; 95% CI −6.30 kg to −1.99 kg; p ≤ 0.001). Although both treatment interventions achieved similar changes in body weight (approximately 7 kg), the pooled estimate for studies that investigated the effect of intermittent energy restriction in comparison to continuous energy restriction revealed no significant difference in weight loss (−1.03 kg; 95% CI −2.46 kg to 0.40 kg; p = 0.156). Conclusions: Intermittent energy restriction may be an effective strategy for the treatment of overweight and obesity. Intermittent energy restriction was comparable to continuous energy restriction for short term weight loss in overweight and obese adults. Intermittent energy restriction was shown to be more effective than no treatment, however, this should be interpreted cautiously due to the small number of studies and future research is warranted to confirm the findings of this review

An internet-based intervention with brief nurse support to manage obesity in primary care (POWeR+): a pragmatic, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial

Background The obesity epidemic has major public health consequences. Expert dietetic and behavioural counselling with intensive follow-up is effective, but resource requirements severely restrict widespread implementation in primary care, where most patients are managed. We aimed to estimate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an internet-based behavioural intervention (POWeR+) combined with brief practice nurse support in primary care. Methods We did this pragmatic, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial at 56 primary care practices in central and south England. Eligible adults aged 18 years or older with a BMI of 30 kg/m2 or more (or ≥28 kg/m2 with hypertension, hypercholesterolaemia, or diabetes) registered online with POWeR+—a 24 session, web-based, weight management intervention lasting 6 months. After registration, the website automatically randomly assigned patients (1:1:1), via computer-generated random numbers, to receive evidence-based dietetic advice to swap foods for similar, but healthier, choices and increase fruit and vegetable intake, in addition to 6 monthly nurse follow-up (control group); web-based intervention and face-to-face nurse support (POWeR+Face-to-face [POWeR+F]; up to seven nurse contacts over 6 months); or web-based intervention and remote nurse support (POWeR+Remote [POWeR+R]; up to five emails or brief phone calls over 6 months). Participants and investigators were masked to group allocation at the point of randomisation; masking of participants was not possible after randomisation. The primary outcome was weight loss averaged over 12 months. We did a secondary analysis of weight to measure maintenance of 5% weight loss at months 6 and 12. We modelled the cost-effectiveness of each intervention. We did analysis by intention to treat, with multiple imputation for missing data. This trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN21244703. Findings Between Jan 30, 2013, and March 20, 2014, 818 participants were randomly assigned to the control group (n=279), the POWeR+F group (n=269), or the POWeR+R group (n=270). Weight loss averaged over 12 months was recorded in 666 (81%) participants. The control group lost almost 3 kg over 12 months (crude mean weight: baseline 104·38 kg [SD 21·11; n=279], 6 months 101·91 kg [19·35; n=136], 12 months 101·74 kg [19·57; n=227]). The primary imputed analysis showed that compared with the control group, patients in the POWeR+F group achieved an additional weight reduction of 1·5 kg (95% CI 0·6–2·4; p=0·001) averaged over 12 months, and patients in the POWeR+R group achieved an additional 1·3 kg (0·34–2·2; p=0·007). 21% of patients in the control group had maintained a clinically important 5% weight reduction at month 12, compared with 29% of patients in the POWeR+F group (risk ratio 1·56, 0·96–2·51; p=0·070) and 32% of patients in the POWeR+R group (1·82, 1·31–2·74; p=0·004). The incremental overall cost to the health service per kg weight lost with the POWeR+ interventions versus the control strategy was £18 (95% CI −129 to 195) for POWeR+F and –£25 (−268 to 157) for POWeR+R; the probability of being cost-effective at a threshold of £100 per kg lost was 88% and 98%, respectively. No adverse events were reported. Interpretation Weight loss can be maintained in some individuals by use of novel written material with occasional brief nurse follow-up. However, more people can maintain clinically important weight reductions with a web-based behavioural program and brief remote follow-up, with no increase in health service costs. Future research should assess the extent to which clinically important weight loss can be maintained beyond 1 year

Clinical outcomes and adverse events of bariatric surgery in adults with severe obesity in Scotland: the SCOTS observational cohort study

Background: Bariatric surgery is a common procedure worldwide for the treatment of severe obesity and associated comorbid conditions but there is a lack of evidence as to medium-term safety and effectiveness outcomes in a United Kingdom setting. Objective: To establish the clinical outcomes and adverse events of different bariatric surgical procedures, their impact on quality of life and the effect on comorbidities. Design: Prospective observational cohort study. Setting: National Health Service secondary care and private practice in Scotland, United Kingdom. Participants: Adults (age >16 years) undergoing their first bariatric surgery procedure. Main outcome measures: Change in weight, hospital length of stay, readmission and reoperation rate, mortality, diabetes outcomes (HbA1c, medications), quality of life, anxiety, depression. Data sources: Patient-reported outcome measures, hospital records, national electronic health records (Scottish Morbidity Record 01, Scottish Care Information Diabetes, National Records Scotland, Prescription Information System). Results: Between December 2013 and February 2017, 548 eligible patients were approached and 445 participants were enrolled in the study. Of those, 335 had bariatric surgery and 1 withdrew from the study. Mean age was 46.0 (9.2) years, 74.7% were female and the median body mass index was 46.4 (42.4; 52.0) kg/m2. Weight was available for 128 participants at 3 years: mean change was −19.0% (±14.1) from the operation and −24.2% (±12.8) from the start of the preoperative weight-management programme. One hundred and thirty-nine (41.4%) participants were readmitted to hospital in the same or subsequent 35 months post surgery, 18 (5.4% of the operated cohort) had a reoperation or procedure considered to be related to bariatric surgery gastrointestinal complications or revisions. Fewer than five participants (<2%) died during follow-up. HbA1c was available for 93/182 and diabetes medications for 139/182 participants who had type 2 diabetes prior to surgery; HbA1c mean change was −5.72 (±16.71) (p = 0.001) mmol/mol and 65.5% required no diabetes medications (p < 0.001) at 3 years post surgery. Physical quality of life, available for 101/335 participants, improved in the 3 years post surgery, mean change in Rand 12-item Short Form Survey physical component score 8.32 (±8.95) (p < 0.001); however, there was no change in the prevalence of anxiety or depression. Limitations: Due to low numbers of bariatric surgery procedures in Scotland, recruitment was stopped before achieving the intended 2000 participants and follow-up was reduced from 10 years to 3 years. Conclusions: Bariatric surgery is a safe and effective treatment for obesity. Patients in Scotland, UK, appear to be older and have higher body mass than international comparators, which may be due to the small number of procedures performed. Future work: Intervention studies are required to identify the optimal pre- and post surgery pathway to maximise safety and cost-effectiveness. Study registration: This study is registered as ISRCTN47072588. Funding details: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 10/42/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 7. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information