Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are the leading cause of death in middle- and high-income countries, according to data from the World Health Organization (WHO). Epidemiological studies have associated low water intake and underhydration with diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and an increased risk of CVD. Similarly, the prevalence of chronic metabolic dysfunction is increasing dramatically worldwide, becoming both a significant public health concern and a global economic burden. Reports from the WHO indicate that the number of people with diabetes worldwide has risen from 108 million in 1980 to 422 million in 2014, representing 8.5% of adults. Therefore, there is an urgent need to identify modifiable risk factors that could help prevent metabolic dysfunction and mitigate the epidemic of type 2 diabetes (T2D). Evidence suggests that the hormone arginine vasopressin (AVP) may play a key role. AVP is the primary hormone responsible for regulating body fluid balance; however, increased AVP secretion, such as under conditions of low water intake, appears to be a risk factor for developing diabetes. Increasing water intake may represent a simple and cost-effective way to improve glucose regulation and cardiovascular health. However, many individuals do not prefer drinking plain water, and although beverages with high sugar content may promote greater fluid intake, they also contribute additional calories that can negatively impact body weight and overall health. Thus, the central research question of this study is whether improving hydration with non-sugar-sweetened beverages can provide equivalent benefits for hydration and health outcomes in adults. Aim 1: To explore the association between habitual fluid intake and fluid preferences (water and non-sugar-sweetened beverages), hydration biomarkers, and health outcomes in normal-weight and obese adults. Aim 2: To compare the impact of increased total water intake, provided as plain water or non-sugar-sweetened beverages, on hydration, cardiovascular health, and glucose regulation in normal-weight and obese adults.
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Flow-mediated dilation %
Timeframe: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 weeks of the intervention
Area under the curve for glucose
Timeframe: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 weeks of the intervention
Insulin area under the curve
Timeframe: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 weeks of the intervention
glucagon area under the curve
Timeframe: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 weeks of the intervention
Cortisol area under the curve
Timeframe: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 weeks of the intervention
Mean glucose
Timeframe: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 weeks of the intervention
Glycemic Variability
Timeframe: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 weeks of the intervention
Serum copeptin
Timeframe: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 weeks of the intervention
Plasma Sodium
Timeframe: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 weeks of the intervention
Plasma Osmolality
Timeframe: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 weeks of the intervention
Total Water Intake
Timeframe: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 weeks of the intervention
Urine volume
Timeframe: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 weeks of the intervention
Urine Osmolality
Timeframe: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 weeks of the intervention
Reaction time
Timeframe: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 weeks of the intervention
Accuracy of cognitive test
Timeframe: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 weeks of the intervention
Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance
Timeframe: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 weeks of the intervention based on the baseline (0 minutes) fasting blood sample.