I have lost an amazing amount of weight recently. One of the several strategies I’ve used is to focus on high-protein low-calorie foods. Specifically, I try to have meals [occasionally or frequently I’m not saying] that have at least 20-25 grams of protein, with less than 200-300 calories. (The calorie limit is a simple way to insure low fat and low carbs.) This is NOT a forum for opinions, so we are not going to debate the pros and cons of such a diet. I just want help finding some factual information.
I have noticed that these sort of foods are extremely filling. An 12 ounce drink with that much protein in it fills me up to the point where I have absolutely no desire for additional food for a few hours afterward. I used to think that fullness was directly related to the volume of food consumed, but this has taught me otherwise. That’s my opinion and experience, anyway.
My question is: Has anyone done objective research into this? If some researcher has been able to put actual numbers on how filling a food is, that would be very helpful for people who are trying to eat less. (For that matter, the other end of the scale would help people who are trying to eat more.)
Such research might be related to whatever work goes into developing appetite suppressant drugs, but I’m not sure. A person who enjoys food might eat even when he has little or no appetite. I’m talking about something beyond that - the sensation of not being able to stuff any more food in.
I would try looking it up, but I don’t know what words to use. Searching for “fullness” in Wikipedia brought me to a concept in Gnostic philosophy. And nothing in the “appetite” article seems on-target. Any suggestions? Thanks!
I actually just saw a documentary on ‘food’ and in one segment they fed training soldiers the same food in liquid vs. solid. Those who had the liquid were fuller after a few hours (as per how they felt and via ultrasound to check volume of the stomach). Another segment looked at the different ratios - i.e. high protein meal, high carb meal, etc. Those who ate the high protein meal felt fullest for longer.
I’ll do some digging and see if I can find it for you. It was really interesting.
That surprises me because I’ve found that solid tends to cut my hunger more than liquid. A chicken patty and a glass of milk can have similar amounts of protein, fat, carbs and calories yet the chicken patty does a lot to cut my hunger and the glass of milk does little.
A piece of cake will also cut my hunger more than a nutritionally similar moka coffee.
I have lost 118 pounds in the last 4 months. Ketogenic is it, period (for me). Fat is much better at satiating the appetite than protein, and ESPECIALLY better than carbs. The science is there.
Isn’t this the basis of the Atkins diet that was a big fad several years ago?
Basically, it was high protien, minimal carbs, some fat. The lack of carbs is what fools the body into thinking it’s starving and burning off the stored fat. That process happens but the “starvation mode” does not get triggered; where the body shuts down any excess calorie consumption, and reduces muscle mass to conserve calories.
Presumably then, the same applies - the level of anything - protein, carbs, fat - turns off the hunger switch.
My totally non-expert guess is that the triggers on these various processes evolved in the days before we had the surplus so we could manipulate our diet. Thus, the various mechanisms are triggered by traditional foods from evolution. Perhaps (like bears) we would find peak carbs in the “harvest season” like the fall, and this high carb diet would be a signal to store fat. lean months in the winter (or dry season?) would consist more of animal food and less plant food, so would be the trigger to use what stored reserves we had to supplement the protein.
The study referenced had soldiers eating the exact same meal, one the traditional way and the other with the ingredients blended together. The liquified version conforms to the stomach’s shape and stays conformed as the stomach shrinks back down after the meal. The irregular shape of the first meal caused those soldiers to get hungry sooner.