ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Whey-Adapted versus Natural Cow's Milk Formulation: Distinctive Feeding Responses and Post-Ingestive c-Fos Expression in Laboratory Mice.
Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The natural 20:80 whey:casein ratio in cow's milk (CM) for adults and infants is adjusted to reflect the 60:40 ratio of human milk, but the feeding and metabolic consequences of this adjustment have been understudied. In adult human subjects, the 60:40 CM differently affects glucose metabolism and hormone release than the 20:80 CM. In laboratory animals, whey-adapted goat's milk is consumed in larger quantities. It is unknown whether whey enhancement of CM would have similar consequences on appetite and whether it would affect feeding-relevant brain regulatory mechanisms. In this set of studies utilizing laboratory mice, we found that the 60:40 CM was consumed more avidly than the 20:80 control formulation by animals motivated to eat by energy deprivation and by palatability (in the absence of hunger) and that this hyperphagia stemmed from prolongation of the meal. Furthermore, in two-bottle choice paradigms, whey-adapted CM was preferred against the natural 20:80 milk. The intake of the whey-adapted CM induced neuronal activation (assessed through analysis of c-Fos expression in neurons) in brain sites promoting satiation, but importantly, this activation was less pronounced than after ingestion of the natural 20:80 whey:casein CM. Activation of hypothalamic neurons synthesizing anorexigenic neuropeptide oxytocin (OT) was also less robust after the 60:40 CM intake than after the 20:80 CM. Pharmacological blockade of the OT receptor in mice led to an increase in the consumption only of the 20:80 CM, thus, of the milk that induced greater activation of OT neurons. We conclude that the whey-adapted CM is overconsumed compared to the natural 20:80 CM and that this overconsumption is associated with weakened responsiveness of central networks involved in satiety signalling, including OT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.