Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T02:52:46.724Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

An investigation of very low calorie intakes reported in Jamaica

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

Ann Ashworth
Affiliation:
Medical Research Council, Tropical Metabolism Research Unit, University of the West Indies, Jamaica
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. A previous dietary survey has reported some very low calorie intakes in a farming community in rural Jamaica. Subsequently, ten subjects were specially selected on the basis of being very poor and underfed and individual dietary surveys were carried out in their homes for 7 days.

2. The accuracy of the dietary surveys was tested in a metabolic ward by feeding the subjects with the same meals as were recorded in their homes. Body-weight, calorie and nitrogen intakes, and urinary and faecal N outputs were measured.

3. Basal metabolic rates and the calorie expenditure during sleep were measured to investigate whether any metabolic adaptations to the low calorie intakes had occurred. The calorie cost of performing a standard step-test was measured and compared with that of well-fed control subjects to find out if there were differences in physical efficiency.

4. Nine of the subjects were found to be thinner than the average person of the same age and sex in their district, and were considerably thinner than the average American.

5. Five of the dietary surveys were thought to have given a correct picture of the normal dietary pattern. The remaining five surveys were unsatisfactory.

6. In the five correct surveys, calorie intakes were 61, 69, 72, 78 and 98% of the FAO recommended requirements.

7. No clear-cut evidence of an adaptive change in basal metabolic rate was found.

8. Few calories were available for physical exertion and there was an apparent increase in the physical efficiency of work.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1968

References

Anonymous (1966). Nutr. Rev. 24, 39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashcroft, M. T., Ling, J., Lovell, H. G. & Miall, W. E. (1966). Br. J. prev. soc. Med. 20, 22.Google Scholar
Atwater, W. O. (1902). Rep. Storrs agric. Exp. Stn, 1901.Google Scholar
Atwater, W. O. & Bryant, A. P. (1900). Rep. Storrs agric. Exp. Stn, 1899.Google Scholar
Du Bois, D. & Du Bois, E. F. (1916). Archs intern. Med. 17, 863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durnin, J. V. G. A. (1961). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 20, 52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edholm, O. G. (1961). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 20, 71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FAO: Second Committee on Calorie Requirements (1957). F.A.O. nutr. stud. no. 15.Google Scholar
Fleisch, A. (1951). Helv. med. acta 18, 23.Google Scholar
Furnass, S. B. (1959). J. Physiol., Lond. 149, 63P.Google Scholar
Garry, R. C., Passmore, R., Warnock, G. M. & Durnin, J. V. G. A. (1955). Spec. Rep. Ser. med. Res. Coun. no. 289.Google Scholar
Keys, A., Brozek, J., Henschel, A., Mickelsen., O. & Taylor, H. L. (1950). The Biology of Human Starvation. Vol. 1. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundgren, N. P. V. (1948). Proc. Congr. int. Mal. prof. IX. London, p. 273.Google Scholar
Passmore, R. & Durnin, J. V. G. A. (1955). Physiol. Rev. 35, 801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widdowson, E. M. (1947). Spec. Rep. Ser. med. Res. Coun. no. 257.Google Scholar
Wolff, H. S. (1958). Q. Jl exp. Physiol. 43, 270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar