Variable lipemic response to dietary soy protein in healthy, normolipemic men

Citation
K. Nilausen et H. Meinertz, Variable lipemic response to dietary soy protein in healthy, normolipemic men, AM J CLIN N, 68(6), 1998, pp. 1380S-1384S
Citations number
26
Categorie Soggetti
Endocrynology, Metabolism & Nutrition","Endocrinology, Nutrition & Metabolism
Journal title
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION
ISSN journal
00029165 → ACNP
Volume
68
Issue
6
Year of publication
1998
Supplement
S
Pages
1380S - 1384S
Database
ISI
SICI code
0002-9165(199812)68:6<1380S:VLRTDS>2.0.ZU;2-1
Abstract
We found previously that dietary soy protein, compared with casein, reduced plasma LDL cholesterol and increased HDL cholesterol concentrations in hea lthy women and men. However, there was considerable variation among individ uals. The aim of this study was to characterize the lipoprotein responsiven ess of individuals to examine whether different response patterns could be identified. Nine normolipemic men consumed 2 liquid-formula diets of identi cal composition except that the protein component was either soy protein or casein. After 1 mo of consuming each diet, the subjects' plasma HDL choles terol (P < 0.01) and apolipoprotein (apo) A-I (P < 0.05) concentrations wer e increased by the soy-protein diet whereas the ratio of LDL cholesterol to HDL cholesterol was decreased (P < 0.01); total cholesterol, triacylglycer ol, LDL cholesterol, apo B and apo A-II were insignificantly affected. In 5 individuals, however, soy protein reduced mean LDL cholesterol, LDL2 chole sterol, and LDL2 apo B concentrations by 26% and plasma apo B by 16%, where as HDL cholesterol increased by 11%. In 3 other individuals, soy protein in creased mean HDL cholesterol by 17% and plasma apo A-I by 12%, but did not lower LDL. In 1 subject, soy protein decreased LDL2 cholesterol by 11% and increased plasma triacylglycerol by 40%, but neither HDL cholesterol nor ap o A-I increased. We identified 3 types of lipemic responses to dietary soy protein involving a reduction in atherogenic LDL and increase in antiathero genic HDL. In most subjects, the effects on both LDL and HDL were favorable , although fewer experienced either an increase in HDL or a decrease in LDL 2.