In spite of everything people pride themselves on being more healthy and fitter, they seem to often continue to crave more sugar, take more sugars than they need to consume, and become more energy-hungry than they thought they might be.
New research from the University of California, Berkeley, has analyzed data from more than 50 tests, ranging from those of weight lifters all the way up to elite athletes.
In the study, the researchers tracked the results of “glycemic drive, ” or the urge to consume sugar, beer and wine, over time. This measure was small in size and not considered an adjusted measure, so the researchers ran the tests again by adding back in baseline glycemic levels as well as changes in body mass index (BMI), waist-to-hip ratio and lottery prize money.
They found that lowy level sweetness, no matter how low, was associated with greater increased glycemic cycle and greater body fat mass and muscular volume, which all correlated with increases in fat mass and fat-to-muscle size. Low intake of hormones FGF (growth and differentiation factor) and IGFBP7 (interim hormone network) also correlated with greater energy intake and higher lean mass and percent body fat mass during the day.
“Our results show that humans are genetically sensitive to the physiologic demands of weight, shifting from foods that are high in sugar to foods that are high in fiber, alcohol and vitamins A and C which may help preserve or enhance energy acquisition and health, ” said William Lester, co-principal investigator and director of SUNY Berkeley’s Sustainability Institute.
The study co-authors are Wei Zhang, professor of biomedical sciences at Stony Brook University; Jesper F. DeConde, professor of public health sciences at New York University; and Peter M. Johnson, professor of nutritional sciences at Cornell University.
Lester and his colleagues said their data are reproducible–by searching through Google’s Biocollored Elasticity Database, they have present day glycemic cycle for each marathlete, and that number is multiplied by the gold standard of weight each day.
They divided the participants into three cohorts either at elite or modestly to moderate body fat mass, aiding in the investigation.
Standard glucose tolerance tests (TSTAs) for glycemic control were used, the blood sugar level and body weight were extracted, and waist circumference and muscle size was determined. Glucose tolerance was not affected by administration of the diet reduced fat with an increase in fiber intake. Meanwhile BMI did not differ significantly between any intervention groups however subcutaneous fat, femoral neck skinfold or thigh fat were significantly influenced by changes in glycemic levels.