Snacking: candy vs. peanuts

[JudoJosh]

Two weeks of overfeeding with candy,... [Scand J Clin Lab Invest. 2009] - PubMed - NCBI

Two weeks of overfeeding with candy, but not peanuts, increases insulin levels and body weight.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:
To study the effects of snacking based on fast acting carbohydrates (candy) or fat and protein (peanuts) in a prospective randomized, parallel intervention study.

METHODS:
Basal metabolic rate (BMR) and cardiovascular risk factors were measured before and after hyper-alimentation by addition of 20 kcal/kg (84 kJ/kg) body weight of either candy or roasted peanuts, to the regular caloric intake, for two weeks in healthy subjects. Eleven men and 14 women completed the randomized study.

RESULTS:
Energy-intake increased similarly in the groups (candy: +46.1+/-35%, peanuts: +46.8+/-28% p=0.96). Body-weight (candy: from 67.3+/-7.6 kg to 68.1+/-7.3 kg, p=0.01, nuts: from 68.7+/-6.1 kg to 69.0+/-5.7 kg p=0.3) and waist circumference increased significantly only in the candy group. At the end of the study LDL cholesterol (candy: 2.6+/-0.4 mmol/l peanuts: 2.1+/-0.4 mmol/l, p=0.005) and ApoB/ApoA-1-ratio (candy: 0.68+/-0.16 peanuts 0.53+/-0.11, p=0.01) were higher in the candy group than in the peanut group. On the other hand, BMR increased only in the peanut group (candy: from 6.657+/-1.1 MJ/24 h to 6.762+/-1.1 MJ/24 h, p=0.3 nuts: from 6.896+/-0.98 MJ/24 h to 7.256+/-1.1 MJ/24 h, p=0.02).

CONCLUSION:
Two weeks of snacking based on peanuts does not cause the same negative metabolic effects as an isocaloric diet in which the snacking is based on short acting carbohydrates in the form of candy in non-obese healthy subjects.

But... but... but... a calorie is a calorie.. right?

 

[SChasEE]

Interesting study you've found here. I'm a strong believer in the calories in vs calories out theory, but the results here seem to disprove this. Did you find any other supporting studies in regards to this topic of interest?

 

[kisaj]

Very interesting. I am the opposite of SchasEE in that I have always believed the thought of calorie in vs calorie out was misguided and false. Not just for weight, but overall health.

Nice find.

 

[saggy321]

I think people are getting confused between a kcal is a kcal for weight loss or gain and a kcal is kcal when it comes to it's effects on health. You have to run a calorific defecit to lose weight regardless of it macro profile.

 

[kisaj]

Why is one exclusive of the other when we have studies and experience to know that you need to lower caloric intake, or burn more, to lose weight and there is a healthy way and a not so healthy way to do it. I find it ridiculous that someone would choose to eat crap, only less of it, to lose weight when they could do it the right way.

Sorry, I am just about sustainability and not the lazy way.

 

[pyrobatt]

If I start to inject slin I'll stick with my sour patch kids!

 

[AntM1564]

I think people are getting confused between a kcal is a kcal for weight loss or gain and a kcal is kcal when it comes to it's effects on health. You have to run a calorific defecit to lose weight regardless of it macro profile.

My understanding too.

If I start to inject slin I'll stick with my sour patch kids!

Nah brah, Swedish Fish!!

 

[pyrobatt]

My understanding too.

Nah brah, Swedish Fish!!

Brah. Brah. Brah.... them skittles.

Or..If you want the effects of the study a almond herseys bar !

 

[T-Bone]

I'm not sure the study proves anything. I mean did the candy group eat the same amount of total calories or just the same amount of calories as in the nut group?. Was the "regular caloric intake" controlled?.....Eating all that candy obviously is going to make blood sugar levels yo-yo and when it goes down of course these girls are going to be subject to "hormonal hunger". Not real hunger but dropped serotonin and blood sugar levels. Of course eating candy is going to cause a more negative health effect than eating peanuts. I mean duh!.

I thought the "A calorie is calorie" theory was based on eating the same exact amount of calories in terms of fat loss. In other words eating the same amount of calories in candy and in nuts will have the same effect on fat loss. That is, if the candy eaters don't eat more when their blood sugar drops. Of course candy is going to have a negative effect on health.

 

[AntM1564]

Brah. Brah. Brah.... them skittles.

Or..If you want the effects of the study a almond herseys bar !

I will never eat Skittles again. I had a loose tooth as a kid, was eating Skittles, but right down on one with the loose tooth and it fell out. I've been traumatized ever since!

 

[JudoJosh]

Interesting study you've found here. I'm a strong believer in the calories in vs calories out theory, but the results here seem to disprove this. Did you find any other supporting studies in regards to this topic of interest?

The CICO model is a pretty controversial topic within some circles but to your question, no this isn't the smoking gun against CICO, but it does question and challange it

 

[Dulce]

Interesting study you've found here. I'm a strong believer in the calories in vs calories out theory, but the results here seem to disprove this. Did you find any other supporting studies in regards to this topic of interest?

I'm on your team with this one. It could also be a way for me to justify choosing candy over peanuts . the IFFYM diet works very well for me. Of course, I am not advocating that in place of 200 calories of protein we should sub in 200 cals of frosting, but in the end, whether consuming an excess of frosting or protein, both result in gains and storage

 

[NickNackPW]

A calorie is not just a calorie. Is this still up for debate? Will 400 calories from a chicken breast affect the body in the same way that 400 calories from ice cream does? No. What kind of calories are being ingested, specifically pertaining to the macronutrient makeup, will have a drastically different utilization by the body.

 

[tybolton]

skittles vs almonds...not srs...