A Randomized Crossover Trial on the Effects of Whole Apple Consumption on Postprandial Response to an Oral Fat Tolerance Test in Overweight and Obese Individuals (P08-109-19)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Postprandial lipemia (PPL) is a possible target for dietary strategies seeking to reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, including in overweight and obese individuals. Apples contain pectin and polyphenols that have shown potential to modulate PPL in in vitro and animal studies. However, whole apples, as a complex food matrix, have not been investigated in terms of their impact on PPL in humans. Therefore, this study used an oral fat tolerance test (OFTT) with the aim of exploring the influence of co-ingesting whole apples with a high fat dairy beverage on PPL and possible mediators, including chylomicron metabolism, glycemia, insulinemia and gastric emptying in generally healthy, but overweight and obese adults. Six overweight and 20 obese participants (17 women and 9 men, mean ± SEM age of 45.5 ± 3.1 years, BMI of 34.1 ± 0.2 kg/m2, and fasting triacylglycerol (TAG) of 1.38 ± 0.08 mmol/L) completed this randomized, crossover acute meal study. After fasted participants consumed the OFTT (1 g fat/kg body weight, containing 1500 mg acetaminophen per meal for estimating gastric emptying rate) with and without 3 apples (∼200 g), plasma TAG, ApoB48, glucose, insulin, acetaminophen, and chylomicron-rich fraction (CMRF) particle size and fatty acid composition were analyzed over 6 hours. Differences in postprandial response (i.e., mean concentration, peak concentration (Cmax), time to peak (Tmax) and incremental area under the curve) between treatments were assessed by analysis of covariance. Consuming whole apples with the OFTT did not modify postprandial TAG, CMRF properties, glucose or gastric emptying rate (P > 0.05), but led to a higher Apo48 peak concentration (P < 0.01) and higher insulin concentrations between 20–180 min (P < 0.05). Consumption of apples, as a complex food matrix containing pectin and polyphenols, did not alter overall PPL following a high fat meal, but did lead to initially higher postprandial insulin. These results have relevance for using apples as a dietary strategy to manage CVD risk associated with high fat consumption in overweight and obese individuals. Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) and Ontario Apple Growers, Canada.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".