More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
David Katz, M.D.

GET UPDATES FROM David Katz, M.D.
 

Scientists Engineering Foods To Make You Feel Full On Less Calories

Posted: 02/07/11 09:21 AM ET

There is a range of opinions regarding almost everything about weight loss. People differ on what diet is best, what supplements are best, how important exercise is, which lotions, potions, pills or programs work and which don't. (By and large, my own opinions on all such topics are a matter of public record.) Even the relevance of calories has been challenged, although as I have noted on other occasions, that's an argument with Einstein, Newton, and the laws of physics. While considerable allowance should be made for variation in personal vulnerability to weight gain at any given calorie level, I would certainly tread carefully on such hallowed ground as the laws of thermodynamics.

There is, though, one area of universal agreement. If you want to lose weight, you need to eat less. On some diet plans, it's just plain less food. On others, it's less of certain foods. But inevitably, something about dietary intake has got to give.

The basic problem with eating 'less' has to do with the obvious issue: less than what? In general, the answer comes down to: less than you want! Ah,there's the rub.

In a nut shell, that is why all diets tend to work in the short term, and almost none tends to work in the long term. People are willing to ride the draft of a New Year's resolution, or tough it out, or aim for a special event over the span of a few weeks. But few people are willing to practice lifelong asceticism. And that, along with a constant state of hunger, is what eating less than you want for the rest of your life is.

This may be the very reason that personal weight control, and control of the obesity epidemic, have proven so elusive. The choice has been between thin, but hungry and unsatisfied; or full and satisfied, but not thin. Mick Jagger put it to music for us all: we're not happy when we can't get no satisfaction!

There is one way to fix this problem, though: fill up on fewer calories. This would allow for satisfaction with both portion size, and dress size. The means to this elusive goal comes down to one word: satiety.

Satiety refers to achieving, and maintaining, a feeling of fullness. Satiety is generally what makes us decide we've had enough to eat.

We've long known that the inner workings of satiety are complicated, and in fact, researchers are finding more complications all the time. There are stretch receptors in the stomach, for instance, that provide a satiety signal based solely on the food volume. But the stomach is also an endocrine (hormone producing) organ, and releases the hunger-stimulating hormone, ghrelin. A whole cascade of hormones influences hunger, appetite, and satiety -- with the stomach, esophagus, intestines, pancreas, liver, the hypothalamus brain region, and to some extent adrenal glands all in on the act.

With expanding knowledge of the cascade involved in producing, and preventing, satiety, it was just a matter of time before the food industry started applying this knowledge in earnest to new product development. According to the Wall Street Journal, that's just what the Nestle company plans to do.

Scientists at Nestle, one of the world's largest food companies, are at work designing foods to interact with the hormones that underlie appetite, and get the system to register "full" on fewer calories.

As we begin to ponder the food industry's capacity to engineer foods with satiety in mind, we should acknowledge their long history of doing just that. Unfortunately, most prior efforts seem to have been in the opposite direction, namely, maximizing the number of calories it takes to achieve fullness. The business advantage of this is clear enough. Food engineering to maximize appetite was the subject of a Chicago Tribune exposé a few years ago; I have written a book on the topic; and former FDA Commissioner, Dr. David Kessler, is currently touring the country making that very case.

Besides which, the food industry told us to our faces what they were up to. Remember the ad: "bet you can't eat just one!" They really meant it.

Now, let's consider the food industry taking us and our appetites in the opposite direction. Since I am a staunch defender of the concept that weight control is fundamentally about calories in versus calories out, I am very much a proponent of finding ways to help people fill up on fewer calories. But I am not equally enthusiastic about all means to those ends.

Nestle, for example, is exploring modifications to oils that would make us digest them more slowly; and modifications to foods that cause them to delay stomach emptying. These reformulations could be helpful to satiety, but we will need to know about any unintended consequences. Would such oils be heart-healthy, or not? The best known "modified" oils we have in our food now are hydrogenated oils, which are the source of the now notorious trans fat. This could be a precautionary tale. Will foods that delay gastric emptying be entirely safe for the lining of the stomach? What will oils we digest slowly do to the lining of our blood vessels?

Time will tell, but we should be cautious about greater satiety through 21st century food engineering until we see both proven benefit, and proven lack of harm.

On the other hand, we should be open to the promise of it as well. I am aware, for example, of a product called PGX®, made by Natural Factors, a Canadian supplement company. The product is just a slightly modified kind of dietary fiber, called glucomannan. But the slight modifications make very small amounts of PGX produce the same fullness as much larger amounts of glucomannan. In addition, studies show that PGX stabilizes blood insulin and glucose. The science available thus far suggests a product like PGX could be extremely useful in making functionally enhanced foods that offer a short cut to satiety, and health benefits into the bargain. I see real potential promise in strategic use of this product.

So we should all look on with both interest, and caution, as Nestle, and other food industry giants, explore ways to help us fill up on fewer calories. But there is no need to wait for the products of their R&D to start applying the basic strategy right now.

Foods with a high fiber content help us fill up on fewer calories. So do foods with a high water content, and volume. Foods that keep flavors simple, avoid an excess of sugar or salt, and avoid combinations of sweet, salty, and savory also foster satiety. So do foods with a low glycemic load, and foods with high quality protein.

Many of the most nutritious foods, direct from nature, provide most or all of these attributes: vegetables, fruits, beans, lentils, nuts, seeds, whole grains, fish, lean meats, eggs, and so on.

Filling up on fewer calories means portion control and satisfaction can coexist -- and that makes lasting weight control much more accessible. In fact, it's pretty much having your cake, and eating it, too!

Modern food science may be able to bake this cake in the form of functionally enhanced foods, and it will be interesting to see how they do. But don't overlook the fact that nature has had this recipe all along -- and her bakery is open for business right now.

Dr. David L. Katz; www.davidkatzmd.com

www.turnthetidefoundation.org

 

Follow David Katz, M.D. on Twitter: www.twitter.com/DrDavidKatz

There is a range of opinions regarding almost everything about weight loss. People differ on what diet is best, what supplements are best, how important exercise is, which lotions, potions, pills or p...
There is a range of opinions regarding almost everything about weight loss. People differ on what diet is best, what supplements are best, how important exercise is, which lotions, potions, pills or p...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 54
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
12:47 AM on 02/10/2011
Let's just eat real food. Apples, Oatmeal, chicken, eggs, whole grain bread, beans, brown rice, quiona, almonds, cheese, ect...

Food science gets it wrong a lot more frequently than it gets it right.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tomteboda
12:29 AM on 02/10/2011
As someone who has consumed less than 1200 calories / day for years, and yet is still fat (I just don't lose weight at all), I know intimately the anguish of being constantly hungry and unsatisfied. I wouldn't wish this on anyone. I want to say I do it for health, but it would be lying. I starve myself because I hate fat clothes. I hate the way people look at fat people. I hate the way they talk about fat people. I hate the fact that fat women will earn on average 30% less than their thin peers. And I don't want to be THAT fat woman. But I wouldn't wish this on anyone. Its awful, a terrible way to live, with hunger constantly gnawing at the gut. For me, it hasn't gone away.

If there was a food that filled me up and left me full without costing much of my precious calories (and therefore limited nutrient budget), I would be ecstatic. After living hungry for so many years of my life, I am tired. I am grumpy. So if Nestle can make something that will alleviate the near-constant growling of my stomach, I will be very happy, even if it royally cheeses off all the true believers in the modern cult of asceticism. While I don't buy into it myself, I hate being judged more than I hate being hungry.
03:56 PM on 02/09/2011
Read the science! Eat less calories, starve yourself, is not the way to lose weight. Check out Why We Get Fat by Gary Taubes, proving science can provide the answer: not by re-inventing food, but by actually studying how people eat, how weight loss happens!
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
CintiBlue
12:16 PM on 02/09/2011
There's a big difference between feeling full and the body being nourished. Your whole food list at the end is the answer. Put some real butter on those veggies and whole grain toast (with your egg cooked in butter) and you will truly satisfy your body. It will be the beginning of losing the food cravings that can drive a person nuts.
photo
HerrMonk
Son of Apollo
12:06 PM on 02/09/2011
I don't want food that's been "engineered" for anything, thank you very much.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
CintiBlue
12:18 PM on 02/09/2011
Agree. I wonder how many items on those grocery shelves have the Nestle name.
06:04 PM on 02/08/2011
The doctor's statement that all diets require eating "less than you want" is incorrect.

Carbohydrate-restricted diets are unrestricted in total calories. The followers of such diets can eat as much as they want of protein and fat.

One of the effects of the belief that obesity is caused by a "perverted appetite" is the assumption that all that one "wants" will always be more than all that one needs.
photo
HerrMonk
Son of Apollo
12:09 PM on 02/09/2011
Hunger is not only driven by how full or empty you are, but by how deprived of nutrients (macro and micro) your body is.

Someone could eat a 4000 kcal diet of grains and soy and still be malnourished, and therefor hungry.
photo
Euterpe360
I'm just a little bi-partisan
01:25 PM on 02/08/2011
People just need to figure out what their BMR is. The focus shouldn't be on satisfaction. It should be based on the science of your body. If you're still not satisfied and you've eaten an additional 1,000 calories over your needs, then the problem isn't your stomach. It's you!

I love food, and once in a while I eat a lot of food, but I know that's ok once in a while and isn't sustainable.

Check out www.caloriesperhour.com

I love this site. It's quick information that people should know. If you educate yourself about your body and stick to it you can't lose. It's science!
05:42 AM on 02/08/2011
The problem with discussing satiety is partially in the definition. If you are satiated after eating or drinking, you are already overfed for that moment.

The key is to recognize the steps leading up to satiety and how to monitor/control them. Hundreds of factors can influence your state of mind but most are hormone driven. Once you better balance your hormones with less sugar, less salt, and more organic foods with plenty of quality water, you can begin to understand the process. Most really don't know what it's like to be hungry.

The key is to find your body's balance and constantly adjust it to lower the threshold of being satiated and narrow the excess foods that are needed to stay in your range that allows you to be healthy and fit. I find that I am more mentally alert and have more energy to work, play, exercise, or enjoy time with my wife, when I am on the verge of being hungry. I have begun to enjoy that feeling. It is at this point that my hormones feel better balanced. It is like that feeling of satisfaction I receive after a hard weight room session where my body feels somewhat exhausted, maybe slightly sore, but almost begging for more.

I have begun to enjoy that feeling when my body says it is time to eat but you will feel better if you postpone the snack/meal just another couple of hours. Those are very productive hours for me.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Brett Tonaille
Author and translator
03:12 AM on 02/08/2011
Confucius: "Who can go out but by the door? How is it that men will not walk according to these ways?" (Analects, XV)
09:01 PM on 02/07/2011
Why are we the only species on the planet that needs science to help us with what every other species seems to accomplish naturally. Us poor first worlders, "suffering" from too many choices of delicious foods to eat. I'm actually amazed that we have scientists working on this issue as opposed to the millions of pounds of food we throw out every year and how that can help feed those in our own back yard who actually have nothing to eat and would love to simply get their naturally occurring calories. I think we need to get our priorities straight.
03:44 PM on 02/07/2011
Here we go with more of the rubbish that insists that if we trick our stomach sac by filling it up with non-nutritious garbage we can fool our body into needing fewer nutrients to survive. This is the same as telling me I can fool my car into thinking it doesn't need gas by making it feel "full" with a gas tank full of water. (Funny, when you do that, IT MOVES LESS!!) And it's always embarrassing to hear people it the medical field talk about the laws of thermodynamics as if they know any goddamned thing about them at all. They don't. Neither Einstein nor Newton dealt with the laws of thermodynamics in open systems such as the human body (have you ever had diarrhoea? That's an OPEN system...in one end and out the other without much stopping inbetween. While humans are physiologically capable of diarrhoea etc the laws of thermodynamics as bandied about by medics do not apply), and in humans we have the complexity of hormones, the metabolic heat our body naturally uses to adjust itself to varying food intakes and the issues of dangerously chemicalized foodstuffs. Many obese people eat far too little, and the choices they make, based on bad information such as the "low fat" and "high fibre" fads only makes them fatter.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:40 PM on 02/07/2011
Really? This is just getting ridiculous. What's wrong with eating real foods? Vegetables, fruits, meats, grains...you know, those things? Those foods fill you up. Since those are already nutrient dense and filling what are we taking about here? Cheese Its, Oreos, Chicken Nuggets, and Hamburger Helper that will now fill you up without eating an entire box? How is engineering already crappy processed food to fill you up faster going to do anyone any good?

Eating food as close to it's natural state is the way to go, not rocket science.
photo
HerrMonk
Son of Apollo
12:10 PM on 02/09/2011
Grains are not a real food.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
03:08 PM on 02/07/2011
Too bad we can't trust big business not to poison us, and our democracy is bought, so no regulation there either.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jgarma
02:05 PM on 02/07/2011
Interesting, but alarming.

Goes hand-in-hand with the notion that there's no need to take responsibility for your own health cause there will be a pill at hand to make it right.'

Hey, rather than waiting for a new Frankenfood, consider some simple things to do to help get satiated:

-- Eat slowly and pause.

-- Eat soup first.

-- Drink a large glass of water before your meal, preferably with lemon squeezed in it, or try grapefruit juice.

-- Drink a cleansing glass of water, psyllium husk powder (filling fiber) and lemon juice before your meal.

-- Eat while standing on your head. (Yes, I jest.)

One or more of these should be helpful and put the control of your health where it belongs -- in your own hands!

Yep.
photo
HerrMonk
Son of Apollo
12:11 PM on 02/09/2011
Drinking large amounts of liquid prior to eating dilutes your stomach acid, and dramatically slows down the digestive process.

Staying well hydrated throughout the day is a better idea, as it's both generally healthy, and people often confuse dehydration with hunger.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jgarma
02:37 PM on 02/10/2011
Timing is everything... drinking during your meal does dilute digestive acids, but 10+ minutes before you eat should be OK. If in doubt, take a digestive enzyme along with your meal -- a good idea irrespective of one's meal drinking habits.
01:55 PM on 02/07/2011
Titles like 'Scientists Engineering Foods' make me nervous. Let's stick to engineering the tools. Nature did a good job engineering the product.