As children, most of us were castigated for eating too quickly. “Stop wolfing that down!” I was frequently told, despite the danger that my older siblings would pilfer anything on my plate worth stealing.
Although I tend to be sceptical of folk wisdoms about food, there’s an increasing body of evidence that our parents might have been on to something. It appears when food is eaten quickly, it leads to overconsumption and a host of related issues.
UPFs speed up eating
We are extremely unlikely to see ‘eat slowly’ health advice replacing 5-a-day messaging anytime soon – just imagine the ‘nanny state’ accusations that that would entail.
However, there’s a theory emerging that suggests eating rate might be a factor in many of the issues related to ultra-processed foods. Could it be that the connection between UPF consumption and health harms seen in so many epidemiological studies is largely caused by the proportion of UPFs that are soft-textured and calorie-dense, making them easy to eat quickly?
It’s an important question, and one that a major experimental study by researchers in Wageningen in the Netherlands recently set out to answer. In the hugely ambitious Restructure trial, 41 subjects were fed all their meals for two consecutive 14-day periods, comparing a diet designed to have a slow eating rate with one that was easier to eat quickly.
Crucially, the diets were matched for calorie density, and both were almost entirely composed of ultra-processed foods, meaning that any observed differences were independent of the level of processing.
The results were striking. Participants on the harder-textured diet ate an average of 5,000 fewer calories across the 14-day period, despite not reporting any reduced preference for the foods being consumed. Without the slightest instruction or guidance, almost everyone ate considerably less.
Tactics with texture
There are very few interventions that have such a significant impact on consumption, and most require the subject to be a willing participant in a weight loss strategy. Here, the differences were incredibly consistent, yet none of the participants were aware of what was happening. People ate far less food, without even realising they were on a diet.
The implications for policy and food design are obvious. With eating rate being such an important driver of consumption, there is a strong argument it should be included into nutrient profiling models.
It is also a potentially useful strategy in the development of clinical weight loss advice, and for any companies wanting to improve the healthfulness of their food offering without impacting on enjoyment. The study also adds to an increasing body of evidence suggesting the use of UPF as a definitive measure of healthfulness is flawed and incomplete.
For anyone genuinely interested in making food healthier, it is welcome news that modifications to manufactured foods can reduce calorie consumption without impacting enjoyment. We will only ever improve population health if we can make the foods people desire better for them, and the Restructure trial provides us with new strategies to do just that.
Perhaps with a little help and some clever product development, we will finally start heeding our parents’ advice, even if we don’t know we are doing it.
Anthony Warner, development chef at New Food Innovation
No comments yet