ARTICLE: Depression, daily stressors and inflammatory responses to high-fat meal

Question

ARTICLE:

Depression, daily stressors and inflammatory responses to high-fat meals: when stress overrides healthier food choices

J K Kiecolt-Glaser, C P Fagundes, R Andridge, J Peng, W B Malarkey, D Habash and M A Belury

Abstract

Depression, stress and diet can all alter inflammation. This double-blind, randomized crossover study addressed the impact of daily stressors and a history of major depressive disorder (MDD) on inflammatory responses to high-fat meals. During two separate 9.5h admissions, 58 healthy women (38 breast cancer survivors and 20 demographically similar controls), mean age 53.1 years, received either a high saturated fat meal or a high oleic sunflower oil meal. The Daily Inventory of Stressful Events assessed prior day stressors and the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV evaluated MDD. As expected, for a woman with no prior day stressors, C-reactive protein (CRP), serum amyloid A (SAA), intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (sICAM-1) and vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (sVCAM-1) were higher following the saturated fat meal than the high oleic sunflower oil meal after controlling for pre-meal measures, age, trunk fat and physical activity. But if a woman had prior day stressors, these meal-related differences disappeared—because the stressors heightened CRP, SAA, sICAM-1 and sVCAM-1 responses to the sunflower oil meal, making it look more like the responses to the saturated fat meal. In addition, women with an MDD history had higher post-meal blood pressure responses than those without a similar history. These data show how recent stressors and an MDD history can reverberate through metabolic alterations, promoting inflammatory and atherogenic responses.

Based on the study designed used, do you think the data produced from this experiment are reliable? In other words, do you think that there was any source of bias that could have altered the results?

Explanation / Answer

Usually, the data obtained from double-blind, randomized crossover study are reliable. Double blinding in the study design eliminates interviewer's bias, randomization takes care of the effect produced by unknown confounding factors and crossover design reduces patient variability.

The given study design employs double blinding, randomisation and crossover in its study design. So, the results obtained from this study are reliable.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse A
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.