Trustworthy satiety claims are good for science and society. Comment on 'Satiety. No way to slim'

Research output: Contribution to journalEditorialAcademic

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In their short communication against satiety claims, Booth and Nouwen (2010) neglect dozens of well designed studies that show consistent relations between satiety, energy intake and body weight. Satiety, intake and weight are separate concepts, that need different claims and evidence to support them. Satiety can be measured reliably. A repeated higher satiety response to a specific food compared to an appropriate control food may be valuable to consumers who want to avoid hunger. This is good for society. The development of the psycho-biological knowledge to achieve this is good for science. The lawmaker should provide the frame of reference for trustworthy satiety claims. It is then up to the consumer to decide the value of these claims.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)778-783
JournalAppetite
Volume57
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011

Keywords

  • sugar-sweetened beverages
  • libitum food-intake
  • body-weight
  • energy-intake
  • artificial sweeteners
  • eating patterns
  • dietary fiber
  • appetite
  • humans
  • fat

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Trustworthy satiety claims are good for science and society. Comment on 'Satiety. No way to slim''. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this