David raubenheimer protein_and_the_burden_of_obesity_in_australia

750 views

Published on

From the Food Security Forum 2014: Good food, good health: delivering the benefits of food
security in Australia and beyond - 17 March 2014

Published in: Health & Medicine, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
750
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
18
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
15
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

David raubenheimer protein_and_the_burden_of_obesity_in_australia

  1. 1. The Silent Manipulator: Protein and the Burden of Obesity in Australia 1 David Raubenheimer Leonard P Ullman Chair of Nutritional Ecology Faculty of Vet Science | School of Biological Science | Charles Perkins Centre
  2. 2. Nutritional Ecology is …. • Ecological / evolutionary approach to nutrition - focus on how nutrition mediates the relationship between animal & environment - to determine health and wellbeing Animal Biology Environment NUTRITION health lifespan reproduction etc.
  3. 3. health lifespan reproduction etc. health lifespan reproduction etc. Aims for the talk NUTRITIONAL GEOMETRY Animal Biology Environment NUTRITION ECONOMIC$ HUMAN APPETITE OBESITY • Introduce Nutritional Geometry: approach for studying these interactions • Show how it has been used to understand: 1. 2. 3. 4.
  4. 4. Carbohydrate Protein excessC deficit P • Nutrient requirements • Foods • Feeding - nutritionally balanced foods - nutritionally imbalanced foods • The challenge of dietary imbalance Nutrient space 1) Nutritional Geometry: brief intro
  5. 5. Carbohydrate Protein prioritise C prioritiseP • Measuring how appetite responds to dietary imbalance
  6. 6. e.g.lifespan - or contour plot Protein Carbohydrate - response surface • Consequences
  7. 7. • How does the human appetite respond to dietary imbalance? 2) Human appetite ?
  8. 8. - humans prioritise P over F + C • Meta analysis: 26 published trials model Gosby et al. (2013) Obesity reviews. • Experiments in Oxford, Sydney & Jamaica prioritiseP
  9. 9. • Can protein prioritisation help understand the global rise in obesity? Source:AustralianInstituteofHealthandWelfare 3) Obesity Australia 1980-2008
  10. 10. Protein Carbohydrate+fat 14% P12.5% P (1.5%) - a small change in % P in foods will result in a large change in the amount Carbs + Fat eaten - for example, a 1.5% decrease in % P 14% increase in C + F eaten -> Called the “Protein Leverage Hypothesis” (PLH) - could this help explain the obesity epidemic? • Very likely:
  11. 11. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 20 40 60 80 Energy intake (kj/day) Protein (% kj) Fat(%kj) 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 11000 [0] [20] [40][60] (10:30:60) 1) Energy intake increases with decreasing %P Two predictions of PLH - Yes!
  12. 12. Prediction 2) Dietary % P has decreased with the rise in obesity Data:FAOSTAT2010 - e.g. Australia year Protein(%energy) - Yes!
  13. 13. 4) Economics • If we prioritise protein, why do we select low-P diets? ?
  14. 14. Source:AustralianInstituteofHealthandWelfare • A clue: obesity is more prevalent among low-income groups - suggests economics might drive the consumption of low-P diets
  15. 15. 0 10 20 30 40 0 20 40 60 80 100 Protein g/100g Fat+carbohydrateg/100g 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.82 2.2 1) Protein is more expensive than fats and carbs $/100g Brooks et al. (2009) Obesity reviews. Three predictions - 106 supermarket foods - price increases with % P - not with fats & carbs • Test • Result - compared the separate contributions to the price of each g of Pro, Fat and Car - suggests an economic incentive to eat low P foods • Conclude cheap expensive cheap
  16. 16. Prediction 2). Low SES groups eat low-protein diets - 14 diet surveys of low SES indigenous Australian communities - most have low % P relative to recommended range • Aboriginal study • Compared with Australian recommendations (AMDR) [With Aboriginal Nutrition Project Node]
  17. 17. Prediction 3). Low protein diets are associated with high energy intake - yes!
  18. 18. CONCLUSIONS Economic pressure Reduced dietary % protein Increased energy intake Obesity Obesity as an issue of “nutrient security” PROTEIN LEVERAGE

×