Paleo Diet and Paleolithic Diet Questions & Answers

Question

4

1

here's something i've noticed: if i scramble or just fry three eggs in coconut oil or butter, they fill me up much less than if i eat three hard boiled eggs without the added fat. there's something about hard boiled eggs that's uniquely filling, at least as far as eggs go.

but is there a larger meaning here in terms of satiety? are we more filled by 'firmer' foods, rather than looser foods? could this concept be of aid to people looking to feel fuller, or get in tune with their appetite?

flag	asked Aug 18 2011 at 16:57 delete me

random egg thoughts: i eat a ton of eggs. can't afford pastured organic beef all the time, so i'll go with leaner cuts and then 'supplement' them by cooking in kerrygold pastured butter, and eating the best quality eggs i can get. seems like the butter and eggs are affordable even at the super high-end levels, much more so than the meat. i also like to lift weights, and i think that eggs almost have an anabolic effect. it's strange, and i doubt there's much (if any!) science to back this up, but i feel like eggs help with muscle building almost more than meat. – delete me Aug 18 2011 at 16:59

2

I have made the same observation about hard boiled eggs. – Carl_Stawicki Aug 18 2011 at 17:17

3

I also experience the exact same thing. I don't know why it is but it surely is. I think perhaps the scrambled eggs are just too soft and pass through the stomach more quickly as I have the same experience with other "soft" foods. I had to give up eating soup because I could ingest a gallon of it and not feel full. ANd for me fat really doesn't do much for my satiety. Otherwise I have no explanation. I'm interested to see if anyone has ideas on this phenomenon. – Shari Bambino Aug 18 2011 at 17:34

2

Not that I've done any kind of rigorous n=1 experiments here, but your observation accords with my own sense. I don't know how to explain it. I don't think it's a solid-versus-runny thing, since consuming foods served as soup has been shown to be more satiating than consuming the exact same foods served as solids with a glass of water. The butter certainly makes eggs more palatable, so maybe this is support for the idea that palatability can affect satiety. – maurile Aug 18 2011 at 17:44

2

This would be one of those times when a poll would be fun! – sherpamelissa Aug 18 2011 at 18:46

show 2 more comments

Dylan · Answer 1 · 2011-08-18 17:34:41Z UTC

3

Sounds like food reward to me. Make something taste better and you'll want to eat more of it. For example, take steak, how fast do you think you'd get full eating very well done steak compared to medium rare (or however you like it, I like it rare).

answered Aug 18 2011 at 17:34

Dylan
1,505●2●6

i'm not sure i follow. i like my steak medium rare. i would fill up on it much, much quicker though if it was well-done, and this i know from experience. the more i have to chew, maybe, the more i fill up? – delete me Aug 18 2011 at 18:07

The concept I'm trying to relay is that better tasting food is easier to eat, or eat in greater quantity, than food that doesn't taste as good. I suppose I'm assuming hard boiled eggs are not as tasty as eggs cooked in butter, but that's safe to do, right? – Dylan Aug 18 2011 at 18:12

Furthermore, I really don't think it's about texture or chewing unless those things particularly add to or detract from how enjoyable it is to eat particular foods that you're comparing. – Dylan Aug 18 2011 at 18:13

2

I don't know. He says he's eating three cooked either way so it's not like it's an issue of quantity. I don't see the food reward theory talking about increase hunger but just about eating more because it tastes good volume hence more calories with weight gain to follow. – Shari Bambino Aug 18 2011 at 19:48

So you think that eating more because it tastes good doesn't have anything to do with a feeling of hunger or lack thereof? The fact that he's eating three eggs regardless is completely missing the point, because if he eats three hard boiled eggs, he doesn't want to eat anymore and if he eats three scrambled eggs, he's more likely to still be hungry. The three eggs is the control, it's not the result(s). If you aren't making the connection, maybe you're not getting the all that the food reward theory has to postulate. – Dylan Aug 18 2011 at 23:34

show 2 more comments

James · Answer 2 · 2011-08-18 17:52:30Z UTC

1

Hrm, I've experienced the opposite. Scrambled eggs last me longer than hard boiled.

answered Aug 18 2011 at 17:52

James
7,892●4●13

Yeah, ditto. Two plain hardboiled eggs and I'm hungry again in a few minutes- I don't even feel like I ate. Two eggs scrambled in fat and I'm good to go until lunch. I thought it was the warm vs cold thing- a warm, cooked meal makes me feel more sated than a cold one (well, cooked, but served cold). – Lizzish 0 secs ago – Lizzish Aug 18 2011 at 18:33

sage_ · Answer 3 · 2011-08-18 18:23:30Z UTC

1

why don't you try slicing the 3 hard boiled eggs and putting a dab of butter on each slice?

answered Aug 18 2011 at 18:23

sage_
10.3k●1●5●22

and i will try that! – delete me Aug 18 2011 at 18:53

Good suggestion! I like my hardboiled eggs warm so usually cut them in half and add some butter to each half and eat them that way. Delicious! – Shari Bambino Aug 18 2011 at 19:44

That's exactly what I've been eating for dinner this week along with a can of sardines. It's AWESOME when the eggs are still warm...little salt, little pepper, dab of cold butter... mmm mmmm! – Rick Aug 19 2011 at 13:33

1

my thought was to see if the added fat made the eggs seem less filling. that would answer the initial question somewhat. – sage_ Aug 19 2011 at 19:13

egg cooking methods and satiety

3 Answers