Does chewing satiation offset bulk surface area?

A place to get your questions answered from McDougall staff dietitian, Jeff Novick, MS, RDN.

Moderators: JeffN, Heather McDougall, carolve

Does chewing satiation offset bulk surface area?

Postby Doug_ » Wed Aug 05, 2020 11:13 am

Jeff,

A very minor, perhaps completely unimportant issue, but I'm curious.

Studies suggest chewing food well significantly increases satiation. But I wonder if it is enough to offset the increased surface area of fibrous bulky foods that would otherwise pass through the gut mostly intact as-swallowed, especially fruit, even somewhat for intact whole grains like brown rice and oatmeal. Leaving their yet-contained calories within mostly inaccessible. If that even happens.

For foods that are going to fully break down regardless like potatoes or whole grain pasta, my point above wouldn't apply.

But as someone who has never made an effort to chew up a mango or spoonful of rice more than comes naturally, I'm just a little curious about which "method" would win out. I would think that a fairly intact chunk of fruit isn't going to get broken down much more in the intestines and expose much of those contained calories within. But I am completely guessing.
Doug_
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2014 9:23 am

Re: Does chewing satiation offset bulk surface area?

Postby JeffN » Wed Aug 05, 2020 11:35 am

When I refer to the issue that chewing increases satiety, this is not comparing foods chewed “naturally” vs increasing this natural experience to something much greater. It is comparing foods chewed as you would naturally to liquid foods, blended foods, emulsified foods, puréed foods and situations where people can’t even chew food naturally due to oral/dental issues.

Chewing increases satiety as compared to liquid, blended, emulsified and puréed foods

In Health
Jeff


Doug_ wrote:Jeff,

A very minor, perhaps completely unimportant issue, but I'm curious.

Studies suggest chewing food well significantly increases satiation. But I wonder if it is enough to offset the increased surface area of fibrous bulky foods that would otherwise pass through the gut mostly intact as-swallowed, especially fruit, even somewhat for intact whole grains like brown rice and oatmeal. Leaving their yet-contained calories within mostly inaccessible. If that even happens.

For foods that are going to fully break down regardless like potatoes or whole grain pasta, my point above wouldn't apply.

But as someone who has never made an effort to chew up a mango or spoonful of rice more than comes naturally, I'm just a little curious about which "method" would win out. I would think that a fairly intact chunk of fruit isn't going to get broken down much more in the intestines and expose much of those contained calories within. But I am completely guessing.
User avatar
JeffN
 
Posts: 9199
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:56 am


Return to Jeff Novick, RD

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest



Welcome!

Sign up to receive our regular articles, recipes, and news about upcoming events.