Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Previous studies have reported that polydextrose can reduce food intake; however, the optimal dose required to achieve this effect is currently unknown. The present study investigated the effects of consuming a range of doses of polydextrose on appetite and energy intake (EI) using a randomised within-subject, cross-over design. For this purpose, twenty-one participants (n 12 men, n 9 women) consumed an 837 kJ liquid preload containing 0 g (control), 6·3, 12·5 or 25 g polydextrose. Subjective appetite ratings were collected using visual analogue scales and an ad libitum test meal was served 90 min later. Participants recorded EI for the remainder of the day in a food diary. Test meal EI following the control preload (5756 (sem 423) kJ) was significantly higher than following the 6·3 g (5048 (sem 384) kJ), 12·5 g (4722 (sem 384) kJ) and 25 g (4362 (sem 316) kJ) preloads (P< 0·05), and EI following the 6·3 g preload was significantly higher than following the 25 g preload (P< 0·01). There were no differences in self-reported EI during the remainder of the day between the preloads containing the varying doses of polydextrose. Total EI (breakfast+preload+ad libitum test meal+remainder of the day) was significantly higher when the control preload was consumed (12 051 (sem 805) kJ) compared with either the 12·5 g (10 854 (sem 589) kJ) or 25 g (10 658 (sem 506) kJ) preload (P< 0·05). These differences in EI were not accompanied by corresponding differences in subjective appetite ratings. In summary, polydextrose effectively reduces subsequent EI in a dose-dependent manner. Copyright © The Authors 2012.

Original publication

DOI

10.1017/S0007114512005776

Type

Journal article

Journal

British Journal of Nutrition

Publication Date

14/09/2013

Volume

110

Pages

934 - 942