Re: Ketogenic Diet - Path To Transformation?
hlat said:
MB said:
In any case, high palatability - low satiety foods appear as though they may pathologically disrupt brain mechanisms, an observation that is not lost on the processed food industry.
Is high palatability - low satiety only processed foods, or does high palatability - low satiety also include foods from nature?
The worst of the low-satiety foods tend to be processed foods that are specifically designed for high palatability. Most natural foods will produce a "stop" signal after a while. Guyenet's book talks about hunter-gatherers consuming large quantities of honey, and honey would seem to be low satiety, but I find that I don't need to have a lot of it before I don't want any more. For quite some time. Some processed foods, however, can trigger gorging in some people. That's low satiety!
Satiety is personal. A person with a genetic defect that inhibits leptin synthesis will eat virtually non-stop. There is no stop signal because the signaling pathways are broken. Fortunately, that condition is very rare.
There seems to be a complex relationship between palatability and satiety. The book
The Dorito Efffect goes into quite a bit of detail on this subject. In the livestock feed industry, "palatants" are added to the food to help fatten the animals. In the processed food industry, these same chemicals are euphemistically called "natural and artificial flavors," and they serve the same purpose. There is no distinction between the natural and artificial ones, other than that the natural ones must be produced from foods, and the artificial ones can be synthesized more directly. The chemical end result is the same.
When palatants are added to food, they signal the sense of taste that the food contains important nutrients. It may be that when we eat food that has been tampered with in this way, we are driven to eat by the taste, but we are not satiated because the foods may contain very little actual nutrition, and the actual nutrient value is part of satiety.
But wait, there's more. Our senses of taste are not hardwired to detect nutrients. Instead, we detect trace chemicals that our tastes become trained to associate with nutritious foods. In experiments with laboratory animals, it is possible to associate "good" taste with things that are not good to eat. Outside the lab, we are the animals and the food processors capitalize on the way our tastes are already trained. They add chemicals to their processed, nutrient-deficient crap that they have identified in natural foods and that serve as taste triggers. We eat, thinking the foods are nutritious, and then we eat more when they fail to deliver.
The Dorito Effect dwells a lot on chicken. The kind of chicken you find in stores has been bred to mature quickly and produce lots of the kinds of meat that people want (or at least have been taught that they want) to buy. Along the way, the taste has largely been bred out. As foods become more nutrient-deficient, they tend to become more tasteless as well. No problem, though. It's Ranch Dressing to the rescue. Loaded with palatants, of course. With just the right combination of certain key ingredients, such as salt, fat, and sugar, and preferably an unhealthy dose of palatants, we can be happy to gorge on food that is nutritionally almost worthless. And more importantly, cheap to produce.
It is important to become aware of how your reward pathways work. Books like these can help, but we also need to self-observe, both to the learn the general principles and how the pathways look and feel (so to speak), and also to discover our personal quirks, both the detrimental ones and those that can be useful for conscious control.
This isn't just about food. Reward pathways influence many things, from buying behaviors to making minute-to-minute choices about how we use our time. Becoming more (and more) aware of what's going on with this in our brains (as well as of who is trying to influence it externally) can be key to changing behaviors and moving on.