Plant or animal proteins: An impact on health

Plant or animal proteins: An impact on health

OVERVIEW

  • Plant-based proteins meet all the amino acid requirements if care is taken to vary the diet and include plants high in protein such as whole grains, legumes and oleaginous seeds.
  • Excessive consumption of sulfur amino acids, which are found in greater amounts in animal proteins, has been associated with a higher risk of cardiometabolic diseases.
  • In animal models, a limited supply of sulfur amino acids in the diet has the effect of delaying the aging process, inhibiting the onset of age-related diseases and disorders, and increasing life expectancy.
Proteins are essential macromolecules found in all living cells, in microorganisms as well as in plants and animals. Whatever their origin and function, proteins are linear chains of amino acids linked by peptide links, and whose sequence is encoded by a specific gene (DNA). Proteins have very diverse functions and are found in animal cells and organs in the form of structural proteins (e.g., collagen, keratin) and proteins with biological activity: enzymes, contractile proteins (e.g., muscle myosin), hormones (e.g., insulin, growth hormone), defence proteins (e.g., immunoglobulins, fibrinogen), transport proteins (e.g., hemoglobin, lipoproteins), etc.

From a nutritional point of view, the important parameters of dietary protein intake are quantity and quality, particularly with regard to the relative amino acid composition of proteins of plant or animal origin. Of the 20 amino acids, 8 are said to be “essential” or indispensable because they cannot be synthesized by our body and therefore must come from the diet. These are lysine, methionine, phenylalanine, tryptophan, threonine, valine, leucine and isoleucine. The proteins ingested during a meal are “cut” into peptides in the stomach, then into free amino acids during their passage in the intestine. It is these free amino acids and not the proteins that are absorbed in the intestine.

Does the origin of the protein contained in food, i.e., plant or animal, have an impact on health? This is an interesting question that is still being debated. Two questions caught our attention:

1) Does a vegetarian diet meet all the energy and amino acid needs?
2) Why are plant proteins better for health than animal proteins?

Nutritional value of plant protein
Do vegetarians eat enough protein? In developed countries, vegetable proteins from different plants are used in the form of mixtures, especially in vegetarian dishes, and the amount of protein consumed exceeds the recommended nutritional intake. According to data from the EPIC-Oxford study of 58,056 Europeans, all types of diet provide more protein than the Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA: 0.83 g/kg of body weight/day for adults) and the Estimated Average Requirement (EAR: 0.66 g/kg/day) (see Figure 1 below). Even the vegan diet, with an average daily intake of 0.99 g of protein per kg of body weight, meets protein needs in most cases. However, experts have estimated that a small percentage of vegans may not be getting enough protein. It should be noted that children and adolescents and the elderly need more protein to support growth in the young and to compensate for loss of appetite in the elderly.

Figure 1. Daily protein intake by type of diet. According to data from the EPIC-Oxford study (Sobiecki et al., 2016.)

It is often said, incorrectly, that the vegetarian diet is deficient in amino acids (see this review article). In fact, plant proteins contain all 20 amino acids, including the 8 essential amino acids, but it is true that they generally contain less lysine and methionine than those of animal origin. However, by varying one’s diet and taking care to include legumes, nuts and whole grains (three types of protein-rich foods), it has been shown that the vegetarian diet provides ample amounts of each of the amino acids, including lysine and methionine. For example, in the EPIC-Oxford study, it was estimated that lacto-ovo vegetarians and vegans consume an average of 58 and 43 mg of lysine/kg of body weight every day, respectively, which is significantly higher than the estimated average requirement of 30 mg/kg. In rare cases, a deficiency could occur when a vegetarian person has a poor diet, consisting mainly of starchy foods (pasta, fries, pastries) or of a single food (rice or beans).

Why consume more plant protein?
Recent studies suggest an interesting avenue to explain why plant-based proteins are superior in preventing chronic diseases. Sulfur amino acids (cysteine and methionine) are present in greater quantities in animal proteins; however, the average consumption of an adult far exceeds the amount required to be healthy. Consuming these sulfur amino acids (SAAs) in excess has been associated with a higher risk of cardiometabolic diseases and certain cancers, regardless of the total amount of protein consumed.

The cohort studied was derived from the NHANES III study, conducted between 1988 and 1994 among 11,576 adult Americans. The participants’ average SAA consumption was more than 2.5 times higher than the estimated average requirement, i.e., 39.2 mg/kg/day vs. 15 mg/kg/day. Participants in the first quintile consumed an average of 20.1 mg/kg/day SAAs, while those in the last quintile consumed 62.7 mg/kg/day, or 4.2 times the estimated average requirement. Consumption of excess SAAs was associated with several individual risk factors, including blood levels of cholesterol, glucose, uric acid, urea nitrogen, insulin and glycated hemoglobin.

Several previous studies in animal models have illustrated the effect of a diet limited in SAAs to delay the aging process and inhibit the onset of ageing-related diseases and disorders (see this review article). Benefits of this type of diet on animals include increased life expectancy, reductions in body weight and adiposity, decreased insulin resistance, and positive changes in blood levels of several biomarkers such as insulin, glucose, leptin and adiponectin.

Several animal studies have reported that a diet low in methionine inhibits tumour growth. Indeed, a common feature of some cancers is that their growth and survival require an exogenous supply (from the diet) of methionine. In humans, certain types of vegetarian diets low in methionine could be a useful nutritional strategy for controlling tumour growth.

In summary, it seems beneficial for maintaining good health to reduce the consumption of animal proteins and replace them with plant-based proteins. There is no risk of a protein or essential amino acid deficiency for people who adopt a vegetarian diet, as long as they take care to vary their diet and include plants rich in protein such as whole grains (wheat, rice, rye), legumes (e.g., chickpeas, beans, lentils, soybeans, broad beans) and oilseeds (e.g., nuts, cashews, almonds, hazelnuts).

Optimism reduces the risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality

Optimism reduces the risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality

OVERVIEW

  • According to a meta-analysis of 15 studies, optimism was associated with a 35% lower risk of cardiovascular events and a 14% lower risk of mortality.
  • Another study published in 2019 suggests that optimism is associated with exceptional longevity (≥85 years) in two separate cohorts of men and women.
It is now well established that there is an association between negative emotions (anger, trauma), sociocultural factors, chronic stress and the development of heart problems. Much less is known about the potential impact of mental attitude on cardiovascular risk, but there has been more and more research on this topic in recent years.

Optimism is a mental disposition characterized by the general idea that good things will happen, or by the sense that thefuture will be favourable to us, since we can, if necessary, manage important problems. In empirical studies, optimism has been associated with greater success in school, work, sports, politics and interpersonal relationships. Studies have reported that optimistic people are less likely to suffer from chronic diseases and die prematurely than pessimistic people. For example, in a large prospective study, published in a prestigious scientific journal and involving more than 6,000 people, the most optimistic participants were 48% less likely to have heart failure than the least optimistic. Positive mental attitudes other than optimism, such as kindness, gratitude, and indulgence, and psychosocial factors other than pessimism, such as depression, anxiety, chronic stress, social isolation, and low self-esteem, can also have an effect on the risk of developing a chronic disease.

Optimism and cardiovascular disease
A meta-analysis of 15 studies published in 2019, including 229,391 participants, examined the association between optimism and cardiovascular events or all-cause mortality. After an average follow-up of 13.8 years, optimism was associated with a 35% lower risk of cardiovascular events and a 14% lower risk of mortality. In 12 of the 15 studies included in this meta-analysis, there was a linear relationship between the participants’ level of optimism and the decrease in the risk of cardiovascular events.

Optimism and longevity
Another study published in 2019 suggests that optimism is associated with exceptional longevity (≥85 years) in two separate cohorts of men and women. The data analyzed came from the Veterans Affairs Normative Aging Study (NAS) and the Nurses’ Health Study (NHS), with a follow-up after 30 years and 10 years, respectively. The most optimistic women in this study (top quintile) had an average lifespan 14.9% longer than the least optimistic women (bottom quintile). Similar results were obtained for men: the most optimistic had a lifespan 10.9% longer on average. The most optimistic participants were 1.5 times (women) and 1.7 times (men) more likely to live to age 85 than the least optimistic participants. These associations are independent of socio-economic status, health status, depression, social integration and health behaviours (e.g., smoking, diet, alcohol consumption).

In an editorial accompanying the publication of this study, Dr. Jeff C. Huffman concludes by answering the following question: Where does the field go from here?

“In terms of longitudinal studies, conducting studies that continue to examine the associations of more modifiable or state-based constructs with health outcomes will help to define clear, plausible, and important targets for intervention. These studies could also include more novel methods for assessing well-being, including ecological momentary assessment (Editor’s note: a method for assessing fluctuating and environmentally dependent psychological states) or Day reconstruction methods (Editor’s note: a method that assesses how people spend their time and how they experience the various activities and settings of their lives) that address the challenges with single or retrospective sampling.”

“Regarding intervention studies, interventions should focus on improving and measuring not only well-being, but also important additional downstream outcomes (e.g., physical activity and biomarkers) that are associated with health. Ongoing studies should also determine whether programs to promote psychological well-being might be best used alone or in conjunction with other, established behavioural interventions to boost their effect.”

Because a person’s level of optimism can be modified, these data suggest that optimism could be an important psychosocial resource for interventions to prevent or delay heart disease and prolong the lives of the elderly.

Choosing dietary sources of unsaturated fats has many health benefits

Choosing dietary sources of unsaturated fats has many health benefits

OVERVIEW

  • Unsaturated fatty acids, found mainly in vegetable oils, nuts, certain seeds and fatty fish, play several essential roles for the proper functioning of the human body.
  • While saturated fatty acids, found mainly in foods of animal origin, increase LDL cholesterol levels, unsaturated fats lower this type of cholesterol and thereby reduce the risk of cardiovascular events.
  • Current scientific consensus is therefore that a reduction in saturated fat intake combined with an increased intake of unsaturated fat represents the optimal combination of fat to prevent cardiovascular disease and reduce the risk of premature mortality.
Most nutrition experts now agree that a reduction in saturated fat intake combined with an increased intake of quality unsaturated fat (especially monounsaturated and polyunsaturated omega-3) represents the optimal combination of fat to prevent cardiovascular disease and reduce the risk of premature death. The current consensus, recently summarized in articles published in the journals Science and BMJ, is therefore to choose dietary sources of unsaturated fats, such as vegetable oils (particularly extra virgin olive oil and those rich in omega-3s such as canola), nuts, certain seeds (flax, chia, hemp) and fatty fish (salmon, sardine), while limiting the intake of foods mainly composed of saturated fats such as red meat. This roughly corresponds to the Mediterranean diet, a way of eating that has repeatedly been associated with a decreased risk of several chronic diseases, especially cardiovascular disease.

Yet despite this scientific consensus, the popular press and social media are full of conflicting information about the impact of different forms of dietary fat on health. This has become particularly striking since the rise in popularity of low-carbohydrate (low-carb) diets, notably the ketogenic diet, which advocates a drastic reduction in carbohydrates combined with a high fat intake. In general, these diets make no distinction as to the type of fat that should be consumed, which can lead to questionable recommendations like adding butter to your coffee or eating bacon every day. As a result, followers of these diets may eat excessive amounts of foods high in saturated fat, and studies show that this type of diet is associated with a significant increase in LDL cholesterol, an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease. According to a recent study, a low-carbohydrate diet (<40% of calories), but that contains a lot of fat and protein of animal origin, could even significantly increase the risk of premature death.

As a result, there is a lot of confusion surrounding the effects of different dietary fats on health. To get a clearer picture, it seems useful to take a look at the main differences between saturated and unsaturated fats, both in terms of their chemical structure and their effects on the development of certain diseases.

A little chemistry…
Fatty acids are carbon chains of variable length whose rigidity varies depending on the degree of saturation of these carbon atoms by hydrogen atoms. When all the carbon atoms in the chain form single bonds with each other by engaging two electrons (one from each carbon), the fatty acid is said to be saturated because each carbon carries as much hydrogen as possible. Conversely, when certain carbons in the chain use 4 electrons to form a double bond between them (2 from each carbon), the fatty acid is said to be unsaturated because it lacks hydrogen atoms.

These differences in saturation have a great influence on the physicochemical properties of fatty acids. When saturated, fatty acids are linear chains that allow molecules to squeeze tightly against each other and thus be more stable. It is for this reason that butter and animal fats, rich sources of these saturated fats, are solid or semi-solid at room temperature and require a source of heat to melt.

Unsaturated fatty acids have a very different structure (Figure 1). The double bonds in their chains create points of stiffness that produce a “crease” in the chain and prevent molecules from tightening against each other as closely as saturated fat. Foods that are mainly composed of unsaturated fats, vegetable oils for example, are therefore liquid at room temperature. This fluidity directly depends on the number of double bonds present in the chain of unsaturated fat: monounsaturated fats contain only one double bond and are therefore less fluid than polyunsaturated fats which contain 2 or 3, and this is why olive oil, a rich source of monounsaturated fat, is liquid at room temperature but solidifies in the refrigerator, while oils rich in polyunsaturated fat remain liquid even at cold temperatures.

Figure 1. Structure of the main types of saturated, monounsaturated and polyunsaturated omega-3 and omega-6 fats. The main food sources for each fat are shown in italics.

Polyunsaturated fats can be classified into two main classes, omega-3 and omega-6. The term omega refers to the locationof the first double bond in the fatty acid chain from its end (omega is the last letter of the Greek alphabet). An omega-3 or omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acid is therefore a fat whose first double bond is located in position 3 or 6, respectively (indicated in red in the figure).

It should be noted that there is no food that contains only one type of fat. On the other hand, plant foods (especially oils, seeds and nuts) are generally made up of unsaturated fats, while those of animal origin, such as meat, eggs and dairy products, contain more saturated fat. There are, however, exceptions: some tropical oils like palm and coconut oils contain large amounts of saturated fat (more than butter), while some meats like fatty fish are rich sources of omega-3 polyunsaturated fats such as eicosapentaenoic (EPA) and docosahexaenoic (DHA) acids.

Physiological roles of fatty acids
All fatty acids, whether saturated or unsaturated, play important roles in the normal functioning of the human body, especially as constituents of cell membranes and as a source of energy for our cells. From a dietary point of view, however, only polyunsaturated fats are essential: while our metabolism is capable of producing saturated and monounsaturated fatty acids on its own (mainly from glucose and fructose in the liver), linoleic (omega-6) and linolenic (omega-3) acids must absolutely be obtained from food. These two polyunsaturated fats, as well as their longer chain derivatives (ALA, EPA, DHA), play essential roles in several basic physiological functions, in particular in the brain, retina, heart, and reproductive and immune systems. These benefits are largely due to the degree of unsaturation of these fats, which gives greater fluidity to cell membranes, and at the same time facilitate a host of processes such as the transmission of electrical impulses in the heart or neurotransmitters in the synapses of the brain. In short, while all fats have important functions for the functioning of the body, polyunsaturated fats clearly stand out for their contribution to several processes essential to life.

Impacts on cholesterol
Another major difference between saturated and unsaturated fatty acids is their respective effects on LDL cholesterol levels. After absorption in the intestine, the fats ingested during the meal (mainly in the form of triglycerides and cholesterol) are “packaged” in structures called chylomicrons and transported to the peripheral organs (the fatty tissue and the muscles, mainly) where they are captured and used as a source of energy or stored for future use. The residues of these chylomicrons, containing the portion of excess fatty acids and cholesterol, are then transported to the liver, where they are taken up and will influence certain genes involved in the production of low-density lipoproteins (LDL), which serve to transport cholesterol, as well as their receptors (LDLR), which serve to eliminate it from the blood circulation.

And this is where the main difference between saturated and unsaturated fats lies: a very large number of studies have shown that saturated fats (especially those made up of 12, 14 and 16 carbon atoms) increase LDL production while decreasing that of its receptor, with the result that the amount of LDL cholesterol in the blood increases. Conversely, while polyunsaturated fats also increase LDL cholesterol production, they also increase the number and efficiency of LDLR receptors, which overall lowers LDL cholesterol levels in the blood. It has been proposed that this greater activity of the LDLR receptor is due to an increase in the fluidity of the membranes caused by the presence of polyunsaturated fats which would allow the receptor to recycle more quickly on the surface liver cells (and therefore be able to carry more LDL particles inside the cells).

Reduction of the risk of cardiovascular disease
A very large number of epidemiological studies have shown that an increase in LDL cholesterol levels is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular diseases. Since saturated fat increases LDL cholesterol while unsaturated fat decreases it, we can expect that replacing saturated fat with unsaturated fat will lower the risk of these diseases. And that is exactly what studies show: for example, an analysis of 11 prospective studies indicates that replacing 5% of caloric intake from saturated fat with polyunsaturated fat was associated with a 13% decrease in the risk of coronary artery disease. A similar decrease has been observed in clinical studies, where replacing every 1% of energy from saturated fat with unsaturated fat reduced the risk of cardiovascular events by 2%. In light of these results, there is no doubt that substituting saturated fats with unsaturated fats is an essential dietary change to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease.

A very important point of these studies, which is still poorly understood by many people (including some health professionals), is that it is not only a reduction of saturated fat intake that counts for improving the health of the heart and vessels, but most importantly the source of energy that is consumed to replace these saturated fats. For example, while the substitution of saturated fats by polyunsaturated fats, monounsaturated fats or sources of complex carbohydrates like whole grains is associated with a substantial reduction in the risk of cardiovascular disease, this decrease is completely abolished when saturated fats are replaced by trans fats or poor quality carbohydrate sources (e.g., refined flours and added sugars) (Figure 2). Clinical studies indicate that the negative effect of an increased intake of simple sugars is caused by a reduction in HDL cholesterol (the good one) as well as an increase in triglyceride levels. In other words, if a person decreases their intake of saturated fat while simultaneously increasing their consumption of simple carbohydrates (white bread, potatoes, processed foods containing added sugars), these sugars simply cancel any potential cardiovascular benefit from reducing saturated fat intake.


Figure 2. Modulation of the risk of coronary heart disease following a substitution of saturated fat by unsaturated fat or by different sources of carbohydrates. The values shown correspond to variations in the risk of coronary heart disease following a replacement of 5% of the caloric intake from saturated fat by 5% of the various energy sources. Adapted from Li et al. (2015).

Another implication of these results is that one should be wary of “low-fat” or “0% fat” products, even though these foods are generally promoted as healthier. In the vast majority of cases, reducing saturated fat in these products involves the parallel addition of simple sugars, which counteracts the positive effects of reducing saturated fat.

This increased risk from simple sugars largely explains the confusion generated by some studies suggesting that there is no link between the consumption of saturated fat and the risk of cardiovascular disease (see here and here, for example). However, most participants in these studies used simple carbohydrates as an energy source to replace saturated fat, which outweighed the benefits of reduced intake of saturated fat. Unfortunately, media coverage of these studies did not capture these nuances, with the result that many people may have mistakenly believed that a high intake of saturated fat posed no risk to cardiovascular health.

In conclusion, it is worth recalling once again the current scientific consensus, stated following the critical examination of several hundred studies: replacing saturated fats by unsaturated fats (monounsaturated or polyunsaturated) is associated with a significant reduction in the risk of cardiovascular disease. As mentioned earlier, the easiest way to make this substitution is to use vegetable oils as the main fatty substance instead of butter and to choose foods rich in unsaturated fats such as nuts, certain seeds and fatty fish (salmon, sardine), while limiting the intake of foods rich in saturated fats such as red meat. It is also interesting to note that in addition to exerting positive effects on the cardiovascular system, recent studies suggest that this type of diet prevents excessive accumulation of fat in the liver (liver steatosis), an important risk factor of insulin resistance and therefore type 2 diabetes. An important role in liver function is also suggested by the recent observation that replacing saturated fats of animal origin by mono- or polyunsaturated fats was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma, the main form of liver cancer. Consequently, there are only advantages to choosing dietary sources of unsaturated fat.

Effectiveness of exercise to prevent and mitigate diabetes: An important role of the gut microbiota

Effectiveness of exercise to prevent and mitigate diabetes: An important role of the gut microbiota

OVERVIEW

  • In overweight, prediabetic and sedentary men, exercise induced changes in the gut microbiota that are correlated with improvements in blood sugar control and insulin sensitivity.
  • The microbiota of the participants who are “responders” to exercise had a greater ability to produce short chain fatty acids (SCFAs) and to eliminate branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs). Conversely, the microbiota of non-responders was characterized by an increased production of metabolically harmful compounds.
  • Transplantation of the fecal microbiota of responders into obese mice produced roughly the same beneficial effects of exercise on insulin resistance. Such effects were not observed after transplanting the microbiota of non-responders.
Regular exercise has beneficial effects on blood glucose control and insulin sensitivity, and is therefore an interesting strategy to prevent and mitigate type 2 diabetes. Unfortunately, in some people, exercise does not cause a favourable metabolic response, a phenomenon called “exercise resistance”. The causes of this phenomenon have not been clearly established, although some researchers have suggested that genetic predispositions and epigenetic changes may contribute to this.

A growing body of data indicates that an imbalance in the gut microbiota (dysbiosis) plays an important role in the development of insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes. Several different mechanisms are involved, including an increase in intestinal permeability and increased endotoxemia, changes in the production of certain short chain fatty acids and branched-chain amino acids, and disturbances in bile acid metabolism. Changes in the composition and function of the gut microbiota have been observed in people with type 2 diabetes and prediabetics. One study also showed that transplanting a healthy person’s microbiota into the intestines of people with metabolic syndrome results in increased microbial diversity and improved blood sugar control as well as sensitivity to insulin.

The intestinal microbiota (formerly intestinal flora) is a complex ecosystem of bacteria, archaea (small microorganisms without nuclei), eukaryotic microorganisms (fungi, protists) and viruses, which has evolved with human beings for several thousands of years. A human gut microbiota, which can weigh up to 2 kg, is absolutely necessary for digestion, metabolic function, and resistance to infection. The human gut microbiota has an enormous metabolic capacity, with more than 1,000 different species of bacteria and 3 million unique genes (the microbiome).

Recent data indicate that exercise modulates the gut microbiota in humans as well as in other species of animals. For example, it has been found that the gut microbiota of professional athletes is more diverse and has a healthier metabolic capacity than the microbiota of sedentary people. However, it is still unclear how these exercise-induced changes in the microbiota are involved in the metabolic benefits (see figure below).

Figure. Changes in the gut microbiota and intestinal epithelium through exercise and health benefits. BDNF: Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (growth factor). From: Mailing et al., 2019.

A study published in Cell Metabolism tried to answer this question by performing an intervention in overweight, prediabetic and sedentary men. Study participants were randomly assigned to a control group (sedentary) or to a 12-week supervised training program. Blood and fecal samples were collected before and after the procedure. After the 12 weeks, modest but significant weight loss and fat loss were observed in people who exercised, with improvements in several metabolic parameters, such as insulin sensitivity, favourable lipid profiles, improved cardiorespiratory capacity and levels of adipokines (signalling molecules secreted by adipose tissues) which are functionally associated with insulin sensitivity. The researchers observed that there was a high interpersonal variability in the results. After classifying the participants as “non-responders” and “responders”, according to their insulin sensitivity score, the researchers analyzed the composition of each participant’s microbiota.

Among responders, exercise altered the concentration of more than 6 species of bacteria belonging to the genera Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, and Probacteria. Among these bacteria, those belonging to the genus Bacteroidetes are involved in the metabolism of short chain fatty acids (SCFAs). Among the most striking differences between the microbiota of responders and non-responders, the researchers noted a 3.5-fold increase in the number of Lanchospiraceae bacterium, a butyrate producer (a SCFA), which is an indicator of intestinal health. The bacterium Alistipes shahii, which has already been associated with inflammation and is present in higher amounts in obese people, decreased by 43% in responders, while it increased 3.88 times in non-responders. The Prevotella copri bacteria proliferated at a reduced rate in the responders; it is one of the main bacteria responsible for the production of branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs) in the gut and contributes to insulin resistance.

The researchers then transplanted the fecal microbiota of responders and non-responders into obese mice. The fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) of the responders had the effect in mice of reducing blood sugar and insulin as well as improving insulin sensitivity, while such favourable effects were not observed in mice that received a FMT from non-responders.

Mice saw their blood levels of SCFAs increase significantly, while the levels of BCAAs (leucine, isoleucine, valine) and aromatic amino acids (phenylalanine, tryptophan) decreased after receiving the microbiota from responders. In contrast, mice that received the microbiota from non-responders saw opposite changes in the levels of these same metabolites. BCAA supplementation attenuated the beneficial effects of FMT from responders on blood sugar regulation and insulin sensitivity, while SCFA supplementation in mice that received the microbiota of non-responders partially corrected the defect in blood glucose regulation and insulin sensitivity.

Taken together, these results suggest that the gut microbiota and its metabolites are involved in the beneficial metabolic effects caused by exercise. In addition, this study indicates that poor adaptation of the gut microbiota is partly responsible for the lack of a favourable metabolic response in people who do not respond to exercise.