The impact of food viscosity on eating rate, subjective appetite, glycemic response and gastric emptying rate

Abstract

Understanding the impact of rheological properties of food on postprandial appetite and glycemic response helps to design novel functional products. It has been shown that solid foods have a stronger satiating effect than their liquid equivalent. However, whether a subtle change in viscosity of a semi-solid food would have a similar effect on appetite is unknown. Fifteen healthy males participated in the randomized cross-over study. Each participant consumed a 1690 kJ portion of a standard viscosity (SV) and a high viscosity (HV) semi-solid meal with 1000 mg acetaminophen in two separate sessions. At regular intervals during the three hours following the meal, subjective appetite ratings were measured and blood samples collected. The plasma samples were assayed for insulin, glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (GIP), glucose and acetaminophen. After three hours, the participants were provided with an ad libitum pasta meal. Compared with the SV meal, HV was consumed at a slower eating rate (P = 0.020), with postprandial hunger and desire to eat being lower (P = 0.019 and P<0.001 respectively) while fullness was higher (P<0.001). In addition, consuming the HV resulted in lower plasma concentration of GIP (P<0.001), higher plasma concentration of glucose (P<0.001) and delayed gastric emptying as revealed by the acetaminophen absorption test (P<0.001). However, there was no effect of food viscosity on insulin or food intake at the subsequent meal. In conclusion, increasing the viscosity of a semi-solid food modulates glycemic response and suppresses postprandial satiety, although the effect may be short-lived. A slower eating rate and a delayed gastric emptying rate can partly explain for the stronger satiating properties of high viscous semi-solid foods.

Figure 1. The viscosity of the standard viscosity meal (SV) and the high viscosity meal (HV).

Figure 2. Hunger (A), fullness (B), preoccupation with food (C) and desire to eat (D) after consuming a standard viscosity meal (SV) and a high viscosity meal (HV).

Main effect of treatment was significant on hunger, fullness and desire to eat (P = 0.019, P<0.001, P<0.001 respectively).

Figure 3. Plasma concentrations of glucose (A), insulin (B), GIP (C) and acetaminophen (D) after consuming a standard viscosity meal (SV) and a high viscosity meal (HV).

Main effect of treatment was significant on glucose (P<0.001), GIP (P<0.001) and acetaminophen (P<0.001). * indicates a significant difference between treatment conditions at the same time point.