Mitra
10-05-2006, 05:07 AM
While browsing around I came across this article (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/10/061003191537.htm).
I found this interesting:
The rats' optimal window for consumption was brief, however, as brain centers responsible for registering satiety--the feeling of being full or satisfied--switched on almost as soon as food hit their stomachs, Leng said.
One thing that I've found can be helpful in reducing the quantity of food I eat at a meal is to break it down into small courses, Italian style (not the Anglo-Italian mountain of pasta with garlic bread :rolleyes: but the little antipasto; small soup or pasta - well maybe we'll skip that one ;); moderate serving of meat; vegetable; salad; cheese; fruit). By eating the food serially instead of all on the plate at the same time, the meal takes a lot longer, and gives the satiety time to register. I don't often manage to serve meals this way, but there's something very satisfying about the lengthy process, just sitting around talking and eating, and it can be done without extra cooking if you plan carefully. Maybe I'll have to come up with some menus.
I was also struck by:
"The drive to eat is massively stimulated by the start of eating," said Gareth Leng of the University of Edinburgh, who co-led the new study with Louise Johnstone. "This shows the appetizing effect of food itself as hunger circuits are acutely switched on."
Maybe not eating at all is easier than eating just a small amount? Certainly when I tried reduced calories on alternate days, I was very hungry indeed :eek: , whereas several who have been fasting between their eating periods don't seem to have had that same overwhelming hunger that I experienced.
I found this interesting:
The rats' optimal window for consumption was brief, however, as brain centers responsible for registering satiety--the feeling of being full or satisfied--switched on almost as soon as food hit their stomachs, Leng said.
One thing that I've found can be helpful in reducing the quantity of food I eat at a meal is to break it down into small courses, Italian style (not the Anglo-Italian mountain of pasta with garlic bread :rolleyes: but the little antipasto; small soup or pasta - well maybe we'll skip that one ;); moderate serving of meat; vegetable; salad; cheese; fruit). By eating the food serially instead of all on the plate at the same time, the meal takes a lot longer, and gives the satiety time to register. I don't often manage to serve meals this way, but there's something very satisfying about the lengthy process, just sitting around talking and eating, and it can be done without extra cooking if you plan carefully. Maybe I'll have to come up with some menus.
I was also struck by:
"The drive to eat is massively stimulated by the start of eating," said Gareth Leng of the University of Edinburgh, who co-led the new study with Louise Johnstone. "This shows the appetizing effect of food itself as hunger circuits are acutely switched on."
Maybe not eating at all is easier than eating just a small amount? Certainly when I tried reduced calories on alternate days, I was very hungry indeed :eek: , whereas several who have been fasting between their eating periods don't seem to have had that same overwhelming hunger that I experienced.