QUICKLINKS AND VIEW OPITONS
Three servings per day of green tea beverage with caffeine and calcium increases metabolism by 4.6%
Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:33 am Email this article
Men and women who consumed three servings of a beverage containing green tea, caffeine and calcium, increased the amount of calories burned each day by 106 calories per day or by 4.6 percent according to a new study from researchers from Lausanne University in Lausanne, Switzerland and Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana, USA. Subjects
Subjects: 31 men and women
The study involved 31 men and women who consumed the beverage for three days, and on the third day, were put in a calorimeter chamber in order to measure their metabolism precisely.
3 Servings per day, each 8.5 ounces
Each of them consumed three servings of the beverage per day, each serving being about 8.5 ounces.
Conclusion: Such a beverage may help with weight control
“Although this increase is modest… When consumed regularly as part of a healthy diet and exercise regime, such a beverage may provide benefits for weight control,” the authors concluded.
Comments: Every little bit helps
Previous studies have shown that both green tea and caffeine can increase metabolism.
Ephedrine and obese researcher, Abdul Dullo, found that the combination of green tea and caffeine which much more potent than green tea alone, so this formula makes sense.
Calcium can also stimulate thermogenesis, however, I don’t know if it adds anything in this formula.
I completely agree with the idea that small things like this—burning an extra 100 calories per day—are helpful in controlling weight.
If consumed before meals, it is possible that this type of beverage might also reduce food intake in some people.
Rudelle S, Ferruzzi M, Cristiani I, Moulin J, Mace K, Acheson K, Tappy L. Effect of a thermogenic beverage on 24-hour energy metabolism in humans. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2007 Feb, 15(2):349-55.
AUTHOR’S CONTACT INFORMATION
Department of Physiology
Rue du Bugnon 7
Articles on the same subject can be found here:
On Apr 27, 2007 at 12:28 am Clabbergirl wrote:
. . . . .
Am I correct to assume this type of drink is something like, Lipton DIET Green Tea, for example?
On Apr 27, 2007 at 12:51 am Larry Hobbs wrote:
. . . . .
I don't have a copy of the study yet, but I assume it is the new green tea drink called "Enviga" by Nestea because one of the researchers was from Nestl? Research Center in Switzerland -- Nestea is owned by Nestle -- and the study used 3 drinks per day, which is what they are recommending for "Enviga" -- 3 cans per day.
Here is the link to the Enviga website:
On Apr 27, 2007 at 4:47 am Clabbergirl wrote:
. . . . .
I tried some of this in the grocery the other day as a sample. Hmmm. Research says weight loss from drink - researcher works for company making drink - hmmmm......
On Apr 27, 2007 at 5:29 am Larry Hobbs wrote:
. . . . .
Unfortunately, most research is like this, where the company making the product or drug is involved in the study. They pay for the research, so they have one of their researchers involved. Sometimes their researcher is listed as a co-author, and sometimes not. But they are always behind the scenes trying to influence how the paper is written and how they word things in order to make it sound as good as possible.
I would suggest that people be skeptical of ALL research. Assume that the results are the best possible results.
Often times, with drug studies, people will drop out of the study, which I imagine is because of side effects or lack of efficacy, and the researchers do not include the data from these dropouts and claim that the people dropped out due to "personal reasons". Nonsense. Would you stop taking a drug if it was working great and had no side effects? Of course not.
Even when it is only a university researcher doing the research, they want to tell the company what they want to hear so that they can get more research from the company.
Several years ago, I interviewed a fairly well-known researcher from a major university, who has authored several weight loss books. I interviewed him about a Meridia study he had done, and asked him how effective was Meridia compared to Fen-Phen. I had already read numerous studies and knew that, at best, Meridia was only maybe half as effective as Fen-Phen.
However, this researcher said, "Oh, Meridia is about equally effective at causing weight loss as Fen-Phen." Nonsense. I knew better. He sounded more like a salesman for the company than a researcher looking for the truth. I imagine he wanted to keep the company happy in case the read the interview.
One more story and I'll be done.
There was another Meridia study in which probably the most well-known obesity researcher in the world was a coauthor.
Someone in the study had a stroke which, in my opinion, was probably caused by Meridia because of the way it works.
Meridia increases noradrenaline which constricts blood vessels, which, in certain susceptible individuals, perhaps people with a deficiency of magnesium or potassium or copper, and / or a history of stroke, could theoretically result in a stroke.
However, the study reported that they did not believe that Meridia had anything to do with the stroke. What? More nonsense. At the very least, the paper should have explained why they did not think Meridia was involved, but they did not.
I imagine that, in this case, the drug company convinced the researchers that it was a rare occurrence and that if they said Meridia might have caused the stroke, then the company could be sued for a ton of money by the next person who had a stroke by simply arguing, "You knew Meridia can cause a stroke. There is a study which says so."
So, it appears to me, that even the most well-known obesity researcher in the world may not always tell the truth as he knows it.
Therefore, I would be skeptical of all research, and assume that it is the best possible outcome, and that your results may not be this good.
On Apr 27, 2007 at 5:42 am Larry Hobbs wrote:
. . . . .
I have also seen research about nutritional supplements that I think is simply made up. It is a case of "Pay For Results".
Several years ago, I reviewed a study about pens that had different smells that you would smell before eating and they were supposed to reduce your appetite.
There is some interesting research about this, but the study I reviewed was simply too good to be true, and therefore I did not believe the results.
So I contacted the research facility who had been paid to conduct the study, and asked to interview the lead author of the study, but he would not talk to me. And his secretary told me that he did not want his name associated with the study. Wow. That's a huge red flag.
So, in a newsletter I used to write called "Obesity Research Update", I reviewed the study and said that I did not believe the results and told the story.
After the newsletter was published, the company who had paid for the research and was selling the pens, had their lawyer send me a letter threatening to sue me unless I retracted what I said.
I told them it was just my opinion and I did not make a retraction.
Fortunately, they did not sue me.
I think a lot of the smaller chromium picolinate studies and CLA studies and hydroxycitrate studies which show substantial weight loss, all fall into this category. I simply don't believe the results. Ithink the results are made up.
So my advice is be skeptical of all studies.
Please feel free to share your comments about this article.
© Copyright 2003-2017 - Larry Hobbs - All Rights Reserved.