Higher Fat Ration Formulations Minimize Energy Deficit During a Short Field Training Exercise.
M Alan Dawson, Adrienne Hatch-McChesney, Tshinanne V Ndou et al.
✦ AI-curated · Sources linked
In 30 seconds
This parallel, single-blinded randomized trial compared higher-fat, lower-volume Close Combat Assault Rations (CCAR) with First Strike Rations (FSR) in active-duty service members during a 5-day field training exercise. Energy expenditure was similar between groups, while daily energy intake was higher with CCAR (2,194 ± 539 kcal·day-1 vs 1,914 ± 611 kcal·day-1). The resulting energy deficit was lower with CCAR (32% ± 12% vs 42% ± 11%). Lower-body power, shuttle sprint time, and peak pull force did not differ between groups.
Key findings
- Daily energy intake was higher with CCAR than FSR: 2,194 ± 539 kcal·day-1 vs 1,914 ± 611 kcal·day-1 (P = .001).
- Energy deficits were lower with CCAR than FSR: 32% ± 12% vs 42% ± 11% (P = .003).
- Energy expenditure was similar between groups (P = .68), and measured physical performance outcomes did not differ (P ≥ .05).
- Commonly reported reasons for underconsumption included food dislike, lack of time, and lack of appetite.
Why it matters
Energy deficits can arise during short military training when expenditure is high and food availability is constrained. This trial suggests that a higher-fat, lower-volume ration can increase intake and reduce—but not eliminate—the deficit without detectable differences in the measured performance outcomes. The reported barriers to eating also indicate that ration composition alone may not address underconsumption.
What to keep in mind
The trial assessed one 5-day field exercise and measured performance before and after it; the findings do not establish effects beyond this short-term setting.