Transcript reviseParagraphs2Ext..

From the Discussion Section of Johnston et al.'s Research Paper
(1) The metabolic consequences of HP diets are controversial, but most
experts agree that protein intakes should not exceed 2 g per kg of body
weight per day, the level utilized in the present report. (2) Americans
typically consume 15% of dietary energy as protein, corresponding to
about 1 g per kg per day. (3) An often cited, adverse effect of diets high in
protein is a potential effect on renal function, and individuals with
impaired kidney function are advised to reduce levels of dietary protein.
(4) Experimental data, however, indicate that GFR varies little when
dietary protein ranges from 10% to 30% of total energy. (5) The data
presented here further demonstrated that an acute change in dietary
protein, 15% to 30% of dietary energy, had little effect on renal function in
healthy individuals. (6) Furthermore, both plasma urea nitrogen and urine
urea nitrogen concentrations remained within normal ranges following the
HP diet intervention.
From the Discussion Section of Johnston et al.'s Research Paper
(1) The popularity of HP diets for weight loss is unquestionable. (2)
Although this research did not assess weight loss or the long-term effects of
a HP diet, results indicated that the increased thermogenesis of a HP diet
may contribute to its efficacy. (3) The recent literature suggests that diets
high in protein, but with a moderate carbohydrate and low fat content, do
promote a greater degree of weight loss compared to the currently
recommended high-carbohydrate, low-fat diets. (4) When considering other
health issues, HP diets should be low in saturated fat and rely on low-fat
milk products, egg whites, poultry and fish as protein sources. (5) Changes
in postprandial thermogenesis induced by HP diets based on non-animal
products versus HC diets awaits investigation.
From the Introduction Section of Eisenstein et al.'s Review Paper
(1) The prevalence of obesity in the United States and other industrialized
countries continues to rise despite increased increased public awareness and
efforts to control weight. (2) However, there remains no scientific consensus on
dietary and other causes of the rising prevalence of obesity, or on optimal
methods for weight loss and prevention of weight regain. (3) In the absence of
scientific unity on this issue, non-scientific prescriptions for weight loss have
flourished and are frequently attempted by individuals wishing to lose weight.
(4) Many of these have focused on dietary protein and have advocated
consumption of high-protein or high-protein, high-fat diets. (5) The purported
benefits of such diets include weight loss, amelioration of hunger, and
prevention, reduction, or even resolution of several chronic diseases. (6) This
review focuses on evidence for the safety and effects of high dietary protein on
energy regulation and is the fourth in a series from our laboratory on the
influence of different dietary factors on weight gain and weight control.
From Halton and Hu's Review Paper
(1) The mechanisms by which protein may affect satiety remain elusive. (2)
Satiety is a complicated interaction of psychological, behavioral and
physiological mechanisms. (3) One theory was developed by Mellinkoff in
1956 and is termed the aminostatic hypothesis. (4) Since amino acid
concentrations are correlated with a reduction in appetite, Mellinkoff
believed there to be a satiety center in the brain. (5) In this hypothesis, the
center is sensitive to serum amino acid levels and once levels reach a certain
point, hunger would cease. (6) It would seem to make sense that the control
of amino acids would be a priority considering their importance for tissue
growth and maintenance coupled with their potential for toxicity at very
high levels. (7) However, there is little evidence to support this hypothesis.
Unity || Topic Sentence || Coherence