Can a volume eater de-volumize?

[f00die]

Clarifying the 50/50 Guideline
Thanks JeffN
for that specifically

[landog]

Human Vegetable: what you're saying, I believe is wrong. Here's why:

Everyone needs a certain amount of calories per day. If you eat low-calorie foods, you will need to eat more of those foods than you would high-calorie foods, to get your daily requirement of calories.

By analogy, imagine you were required to deliver 100 pounds in boxes every day. If the boxes were filled with tissue paper, you would need a lot of boxes to reach that weight. But if the boxes were filled with rocks, you would need many fewer boxes. Because rocks are denser than tissue paper.

Same with food. If the food has a lot of calories, you could eat less of it by volume to reach your daily calorie needs. If the food is very low in calories, you would need to eat more of it to hit your calorie requirement.

You could eat high calorie dense foods and meet your 'required' energy needs and be hungry all the time.

Foods high in calorie density are generally low in satiety.
Foods low in calorie density are generally high in satiety.

...all of which does not address the original question.

[landog]

Is being a volume eater truly a physical need? I eat a lot with this way of eating.

I think of myself as a volume eater. It takes me 45 minutes to eat lunch. Yes, sometimes that is inconvenient.
I've been at this for 10 years. I'm not sure if you can change.

[f00die]

Is being a volume eater truly a physical need? I eat a lot with this way of eating.

I think of myself as a volume eater. It takes me 45 minutes to eat lunch. Yes, sometimes that is inconvenient.
I've been at this for 10 years. I'm not sure if you can change.

in a lot of places ive worked
lunch is 30 min or "go eat and come back"
usually thats 10 minutes travel, 20 to eat, or less
even my kids elementary schools have 30 min lunches
45 minutes is long
a luxury

[PJK]

Human Vegetable: what you're saying, I believe is wrong. Here's why:

Everyone needs a certain amount of calories per day. If you eat low-calorie foods, you will need to eat more of those foods than you would high-calorie foods, to get your daily requirement of calories.

By analogy, imagine you were required to deliver 100 pounds in boxes every day. If the boxes were filled with tissue paper, you would need a lot of boxes to reach that weight. But if the boxes were filled with rocks, you would need many fewer boxes. Because rocks are denser than tissue paper.

Same with food. If the food has a lot of calories, you could eat less of it by volume to reach your daily calorie needs. If the food is very low in calories, you would need to eat more of it to hit your calorie requirement.

You could eat high calorie dense foods and meet your 'required' energy needs and be hungry all the time.

Foods high in calorie density are generally low in satiety.
Foods low in calorie density are generally high in satiety.

...all of which does not address the original question.

Actually, it does answer the original question. Because high-calorie density foods are HIGHER in satiety than low-calorie foods. Compare a bowl of potatoes (high calorie density) with a bowl of salad (low). It's obvious that the former is more filling than the latter.

Also, my example with oil was just an example, to illustrate the main point. No one is advocating a diet of olive oil! But the original question was "how can I eat less volume?" And the answer is, with higher-calorie-density foods. Of course these would be whole foods with lots of fiber, which is one of the markers for satiety.

[Chumly]

Potatoes do not have a high calorie density. They have roughly 400 calories per pound. That is on the low end of the scale. There is some truth to what you say in that if you go too low, it doesn't satisfy, but if you eat too many foods with a high calorie density (I think 1000 calories/lb or greater), it becomes more difficult to eat what you desire and lose/maintain weight, unless you're someone who exercises a lot.

Michael

[f00die]

JeffN was trying to maximize satiety
when he came up with the 50/50 guideline
like all these things we are trying to optimize:
calorie density, satiety, blah, etc
50/50 is his answer after 30 years of
looking at the issue
it works.
i think he has video on this as well
that really makes things obvious
its like watching the 6 blind men with
the elephant...
will it even matter if i tell them what it is?

[human vegetable]

To further muddle the waters, and to reply to landog:

I agree that as a rule of thumb, most high kcal density foods provide less satiety per calorie than low density foods, i. e. in general it will be easier to overeat on a high density fare.

However, rules of thumb do come with exceptions. And I have personally found that some McDougall compatible high density foods which are quite dry and hard to chew, high-carb and high-fiber, but low fat (whole grain crisp bread, roasted chickpeas) are about as satiating as their low-density equivalents (grain porridge/boiled chickpeas). Whether this is due to the nutrient composition stated above, or merely due to their dryness and the long time it takes to chew and swallow these foods, remains speculative, but the end result is that I've got a handy plan B when bringing a large lunch box or a pot is not an option.

Whether these foods are as satiating for other members as for me is yet uncertain; if you are one of those trying to de-volumize without sacrificing satiety, you may want to test them in order to evaluate their effect on your own metabolism.

[landog]

Foods high in calorie density are generally low in satiety.
Foods low in calorie density are generally high in satiety.

high-calorie density foods are HIGHER in satiety than low-calorie foods. Compare a bowl of potatoes (high calorie density) with a bowl of salad (low). It's obvious that the former is more filling than the latter.

Also, my example with oil was just an example, to illustrate the main point. No one is advocating a diet of olive oil! But the original question was "how can I eat less volume?" And the answer is, with higher-calorie-density foods. Of course these would be whole foods with lots of fiber, which is one of the markers for satiety.

You compared two foods low in calorie density. Also, this statement is just plain wrong:

high-calorie density foods are HIGHER in satiety than low-calorie foods

You have a misunderstanding of calorie density and satiety. You may benefit from reviewing this information from Jeff Novick:

The Calorie Density Approach to Nutrition and Lifelong Weight Management

Here's an excerpt:
"Foods low in calorie density also tend to be higher in satiety so by consuming foods lower in calorie density, one can fill up on much fewer calories without having to go hungry and without having to weigh, measure or portion control our food. "

This is an hour well spent:
Jeff Novick explains calorie density

Again, this does not address the original question, which was about volume eating, although if you are a volume eater, you can get away with it by choosing low calorie density foods.

[geo]

I wasn't going to get involved in this thread because the subject is really a difficult one when it comes to satiety. But as to the thread question, Yes, a volume eater can de-volumize their eating pattern. Why? Because like any other learned behavier (habit) it can be un-learned (and I dare say that for many/most it is a learned behavier).

But what causes a person to be a volume eater may have 101 different reasons and each individual is different. Maybe it starts early in life with possible episodes of constantly being hungry and developing a mental condition to over eat when food is available. Or maybe it starts at home when your constantly told to eat everything on your plate or your not leaving the table. Or maybe you just love the taste/texture/smell of a particular food and just want to gorge on it whenever you have it. Or maybe the hyper-palatable mad made foods make you volume eat. Thats a few basic examples and there are far far more.

As to satiety, again there are many, many factors that go into why a person may feel satiated or not. Things like calorie density, bulk, volume, fiber, water, tastes, palatability, learned behaviers, stomach size, body size, illness, drugs/medications, stomach stretch sensors, improper functioning fullness mechanisms, mental problems, metabolism, etc...Some don't feel satiated until their stomach is bloated or bursting at the seams.

And of course theres always the question of time. You can be satiated eating a whole head of iceberg lettuce or a lb of nuts or 2 ibs potatoes or ... well you get the idea. But how long will that satiation last? Travel time through the gut is another factor as is speed of digestion or stomach emptying.

But what studies have shown...starchy foods (that are relatively low in calorie density 400-500 kcal/lb) can be very satiating over time. Things like potatoes and oatmeal and rice and such can all be satiating. Also we know that most people eat between 3-5 ibs of food a day, no matter what the food is. So weight can effect satiation as well.

Only you can really determine what makes you full (satiation) and for how long. Thats one of the interesting things about this way of eating. You will learn so much more about you, what you eat and why, what satisfies you and what doesnt, what you like and what you don't, what makes you feel good and what doesn't, what improves your health and what holds you back.

I say follow the program, experimnt within its almost limitless boundries and learn what works for you. You don't need to know any of the science. Just follow the program and revel in the infinite choices you have...it is that easy... and hey if you are a volume eater following the program, who cares! You can still reach health nirvana...I know...I did...and so can you.

[f00die]

from https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2009nl ... ionate.htm

Starches Are Appetite Satisfying.

The hunger drive keeps you and the whole human race alive. You will not fool your hunger drive by pushing yourself away from the table, putting your fork down between bites, eating from a small plate, or counting calories. It will always hurt to be hungry and you can never train yourself to not feel that pain, even if you practice until you are 90 years old. So give in and eat, you must satisfy this basic survival need. The control you do have is the composition of the foods that are on your plate. Choose wisely. Meat, dairy, and oils for meals will mean overweight and sickness. Starches, vegetables, and fruits will mean a trim fit body and lifetime of excellent health.

You may have heard that “all calories are the same when it comes to body weight.” This is incorrect, especially in terms of efficiency of appetite satisfaction and ease of fat accumulation. Three substances—protein, fat, and carbohydrate—can provide fuel for the body, measured as calories. Starches, like corn, beans, potatoes, and rice, are abundant in carbohydrates, dietary fiber, and are very low in fat. Appetite satisfaction begins with physically filling the stomach. Compared to cheese (4 calories per gram), meat (4 calories per gram), and oils (9 calories per gram), starches, at only one calorie per gram, are very calorie dilute. In the simplest terms, starches physically will fill you up with a fraction—one-fourth—of the calories as will cheese, meat, and oil.2 Furthermore, research comparing the impact of eating carbohydrates and fats on the appeasement of our appetite shows carbohydrates lead to long-term satiety, enduring for hours between meals; whereas the fats in a meal have little impact on satiety—people are left wanting more food when they eat fats and oils.3,4

My early eating experiences taught me this lesson well. Before I understood the importance of starch-centered meals my diet consisted of red meat (no carbohydrates), chicken (no carbohydrates), fish (no carbohydrates), cheese (2% carbohydrates), and animal fats and vegetable oils (no carbohydrates). After finishing my first full plate of these foods I was still starving. My second plate left me with a sense of physical fullness in my abdomen, but still very hungry. After my third plate of carbohydrate-deficient foods I received two signals that the time had come to stop eating—I felt overstuffed and in pain. But I remember thinking, because I was still not satisfied, that “if I had room, I would like to stuff into my stomach one more pork chop.” At times I wondered if I had emotional issues with food because I was never content. Maybe I was a compulsive overeater? Fortunately, my “mental illness,” my compulsiveness, was completely cured once I began eating sufficient amounts of appetite-satisfying carbohydrates, plentiful in starches.

limit appetite stimulants
which are high caloric density foods

[f00die]

thought id add this, its one of the cited references in the newsletter above

J Nutr. 2000 Feb;130(2S Suppl):268S-271S. doi: 10.1093/jn/130.2.268S.
The role of energy density in the overconsumption of fat.
Rolls BJ
Abstract
In recent years, research has focused on why fat is so readily overconsumed. Although the palatability of many high fat foods can encourage overconsumption, another possibility is that fat is not very satiating. A number of studies have compared the effects of fat and carbohydrate on both satiation (the amount eaten in a meal) and satiety (the effect on subsequent intake), but have found little difference between these macronutrients when the palatability and energy density were similar. On the other hand, the energy density of foods has been demonstrated to have a robust and significant effect on both satiety and satiation, independently of palatability and macronutrient content. It is likely that the high energy density of many high fat foods facilitates the overconsumption of fat. An understanding of the role that the energy density of foods plays in the regulation of food intake should lead to better dietary management of hunger and satiety in conditions associated with both over- and underconsumption of energy, such as obesity and anorexia.

a volume eater is trying to increase satiety
so that their next meal is "smaller"
and they have to continue the process that yields satiety
so that their volumes decrease over the long-term
in JeffN's calorie density video he says that
eating vegetable soup reduced subsequent intake by 20%
my intake started to really go down
after regular eating of snap-style hearty soups
early and often
went from eating 4 cups per meal
to 2 or less
plus the loss of inches on my waist
and the loss of obsessing over specific foods/tastes
etc
note also the effect of energy density on satiety
hence 50/50
Clarifying the 50/50 Guideline
super helpful info at that link

[John McDougall]

See: https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2005nl ... 100vol.htm

John McDougall, MD

[Daydream]

Aww, it warms my heart to see Dr. McDougall still posting here once in awhile. Thank you, Dr. McDougall!

[John McDougall]

See my thoughts on over-eating and volume eaters:

https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2005nl ... 100vol.htm

John McDougall, MD