Location: Healthy Body Weight ResearchTitle: Eating responses to external food cues and internal satiety signals in weight discordant siblings Author
|Salvy, Sarah-jeanne - University Of Alabama|
|Feda, Denise - University Of Buffalo|
|Epstein, Leonard - University Of Buffalo|
Submitted to: Society for Behavioral Medicine
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: 1/16/2017
Publication Date: 3/1/2017
Citation: Ufholz, K.E., Salvy, S., Feda, D.M., Epstein, L.H., Roemmich, J.N. 2017. Eating responses to external food cues and internal satiety signals in weight discordant siblings [abstract]. Society for Behavioral Medicine. 51(Suppl 1):S2675.
Technical Abstract: Background: Compared to normal-weight children, over-weight children are more responsive to external food cues and less sensitive to internal satiety signals, either of which may facilitate greater energy intake. The ability to compensate for prior kcal intake may decrease with age, with children showing better compensation than adolescents. Studies of non-twin siblings discordant for weight status control for genetic and within-family factors, allowing examination of non-shared environment that may explain intra-family weight differences. Objective: Two randomized controlled trials determined whether weight-discordant sibs would differ in responsiveness to external food cues and compensation for prior kcal intake. It was predicted that compared to their non-overweight sibs, overweight sibs would consume more kcal in response to external food cues and would compensate less for prior kcal intake. Methods: Results are from same-sex biological sibs (N = 38 pairs). For cue reactivity, sibs were exposed to an appetizing food cue and allowed to consume as much as they desired. For compensation, sibs were given a low-calorie or a high-calorie preload, followed by lunch. Kcal consumed, cue responsivity, and compensation were predicted via multilevel modeling. Predictors included gender, birth order, adiposity group, perceived parental control of child’s feeding, and children’s dietary restraint. Results: For cue responsiveness index, no sibling similarity was indicated, rho = 0.08. For COMPX, a slight sibling similarity was found, rho = 0.20. Sib groups did not differ in kcal intake, in both experiments. Sib differences in zBMI were not predicted by differences in cue responsiveness or compensation, but were associated with differences in eating restraint. Conclusion: Sibs were dissimilar for internal and external food cue responsiveness. However, these differences did not predict differences in sib adiposity. Thus, other non-shared factors must contribute to adiposity differences.