Skip to content

A comparison of the satiety effects of a fruit smoothie, its fresh fruit equivalent and other drinks

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Original languageEnglish
Article number431
Pages (from-to)1-14
Number of pages14
JournalNutrients
Volume10
Issue number4
DOIs
DateAccepted/In press - 26 Mar 2018
DatePublished (current) - 1 Apr 2018

Abstract

Energy-containing liquids are claimed to have relatively low satiating power, although energy in liquids is not without effect on appetite. Using the preload test-meal method, effects on fullness and energy intake compensation were compared across four drinks (water, blackcurrant squash, milk and fruit smoothie) and the fresh fruit equivalent of the smoothie. Preload volumes were similar, and the energy value of each preload was 569 kJ, except for water (0 kJ). Healthy, adult participants rated the preloads for liking, enjoyment, satisfaction, familiarity and how ‘food-like’ they seemed. The preload to test-meal interval was 2 min (n = 23) or 2 h (n = 24). The effects of the preloads on fullness varied with food-likeness and the rate at which they were consumed. In contrast, energy intake compensation versus water did not differ between the energy-containing preloads, although it decreased over time (from 82% at 2 min to 12% at 2 h). In conclusion, although fullness increased with food-likeness, subsequent energy intake compensation did not differ for energy/nutrients consumed in drinks compared with a food. The results also support the proposal that food intake is influenced predominantly by the immediate, but rapidly waning, post-ingestive effects of the previous ‘meal’ (rather than by changes in energy balance).

    Research areas

  • Eating rate, Eating satisfaction, Energy intake compensation, Energy-containing drinks, Fruit smoothie, Fullness, Liking

    Structured keywords

  • Brain and Behaviour
  • Nutrition and Behaviour

Download statistics

No data available

Documents

Documents

  • Full-text PDF (final published version)

    Rights statement: This is the final published version of the article (version of record). It first appeared online via MDPI at https://doi.org/10.3390/nu10040431 . Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.

    Final published version, 580 KB, PDF document

    Licence: CC BY

DOI

View research connections

Related faculties, schools or groups