Branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs) are important nutrient signals that have direct and indirect effects. Frequently, BCAAs have been reported to mediate antiobesity effects, especially in rodent models. However, circulating levels of BCAAs tend to be increased in individuals with obesity and are associated with worse metabolic health and future insulin resistance or type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). A hypothesized mechanism linking increased levels of BCAAs and T2DM involves leucine-mediated activation of the mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1), which results in uncoupling of insulin signalling at an early stage. A BCAA dysmetabolism model proposes that the accumulation of mitotoxic metabolites (and not BCAAs per se) promotes β-cell mitochondrial dysfunction, stress signalling and apoptosis associated with T2DM. Alternatively, insulin resistance might promote aminoacidaemia by increasing the protein degradation that insulin normally suppresses, and/or by eliciting an impairment of efficient BCAA oxidative metabolism in some tissues. Whether and how impaired BCAA metabolism might occur in obesity is discussed in this Review. Research on the role of individual and model-dependent differences in BCAA metabolism is needed, as several genes (BCKDHA, PPM1K, IVD and KLF15) have been designated as candidate genes for obesity and/or T2DM in humans, and distinct phenotypes of tissue-specific branched chain ketoacid dehydrogenase complex activity have been detected in animal models of obesity and T2DM.

Dietary protein provides essential amino acids (EAAs) for the synthesis of new proteins plus an array of other metabolic functions; many of these functions are sensitive to postprandial plasma and intracellular amino acid concentrations. Recent research has focused on amino acids as metabolic signals that influence the rate of protein synthesis, inflammation responses, mitochondrial activity, and satiety, exerting their influence through signaling systems including mammalian/mechanistic target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1), general control nonrepressed 2 (GCN2), glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1), peptide YY (PYY), serotonin, and insulin. These signals represent meal-based responses to dietary protein. The best characterized of these signals is the leucine-induced activation of mTORC1, which leads to the stimulation of skeletal muscle protein synthesis after ingestion of a meal that contains protein. The response of this metabolic pathway to dietary protein (i.e., meal threshold) declines with advancing age or reduced physical activity. Current dietary recommendations for protein are focused on total daily intake of 0.8 g/kg body weight, but new research suggests daily needs for older adults of ≥1.0 g/kg and identifies anabolic and metabolic benefits to consuming at least 20-30 g protein at a given meal. Resistance exercise appears to increase the efficiency of EAA use for muscle anabolism and to lower the meal threshold for stimulation of protein synthesis. Applying this information to a typical 3-meal-a-day dietary plan results in protein intakes that are well within the guidelines of the Dietary Reference Intakes for acceptable macronutrient intakes. The meal threshold concept for dietary protein emphasizes a need for redistribution of dietary protein for optimum metabolic health.

Scientific progress depends on the quality and credibility of research methods. As discourse on rigor, transparency, and reproducibility joins the cacophony of nutrition information and misinformation in mass media, buttressing the real and perceived reliability of nutrition science is more important than ever. This broad topic was the focus of a 2016 plenary session, "Scientific Rigor and Competing Interests in the Nutrition Research Landscape." This article summarizes and expands on this session in an effort to increase understanding and dialogue with regard to factors that limit the real and perceived reliability of nutrition science and steps that can be taken to mitigate those factors. The end goal is to both earn and merit greater trust in nutrition science by both the scientific community and the general public. The authors offer suggestions in each of the domains of education and training, communications, research conduct, and procedures and policies to help achieve this goal. The authors emphasize the need for adequate funding to support these efforts toward greater rigor and transparency, which will be resource demanding and may require either increased research funding or the recognition that a greater proportion of research funding may need to be allocated to these tasks.

While conventional nutrition research has yielded biomarkers such as doubly labeled water for energy metabolism and 24-h urinary nitrogen for protein intake, a critical need exists for additional, equally robust biomarkers that allow for objective assessment of specific food intake and dietary exposure. Recent advances in high-throughput MS combined with improved metabolomics techniques and bioinformatic tools provide new opportunities for dietary biomarker development. In September 2018, the NIH organized a 2-d workshop to engage nutrition and omics researchers and explore the potential of multiomics approaches in nutritional biomarker research. The current Perspective summarizes key gaps and challenges identified, as well as the recommendations from the workshop that could serve as a guide for scientists interested in dietary biomarkers research. Topics addressed included study designs for biomarker development, analytical and bioinformatic considerations, and integration of dietary biomarkers with other omics techniques. Several clear needs were identified, including larger controlled feeding studies, testing a variety of foods and dietary patterns across diverse populations, improved reporting standards to support study replication, more chemical standards covering a broader range of food constituents and human metabolites, standardized approaches for biomarker validation, comprehensive and accessible food composition databases, a common ontology for dietary biomarker literature, and methodologic work on statistical procedures for intake biomarker discovery. Multidisciplinary research teams with appropriate expertise are critical to moving forward the field of dietary biomarkers and producing robust, reproducible biomarkers that can be used in public health and clinical research.