• Low energy density foods help you feel full with fewer calories as well as improving nutrient density per calorie.
• Some people who benefit from an LCHF approach initially may, as their blood glucose and insulin levels normalise, also benefit by decreasing the energy density and increasing the nutrient density of their diet.
• These low energy density foods will provide the nutrients you need with fewer calories.

context

Human appetite is an intriguing, multifaceted and complex system that works to keep us alive and drives us to obtain fuel to survive and nutrients to thrive.  Three key drivers of appetite are:

1. metabolic flexibility,
2. satiety, and
3. satiation.

Someone who is metabolically flexible can easily switch between available fuel sources.  Their insulin levels are lower, and when food is not available, they can easily transition to using body fat for fuel and not be as compelled by their appetite to eat as often.

You can develop metabolic flexibility through intermittent fasting (which is the most effective thing to lower insulin levels) and by tailoring the insulin load of your diet to optimise your blood glucose levels (which we looked at in the last article).

Satiety is a longer term process that occurs when we have obtained adequate nutrients (vitamins, minerals, amino acids and fatty acids).  We looked in detail at how we can maximise the nutrient density of the food we eat in the Building a Better Nutrient Density article.  Satiation occurs when we have had a good meal and feel full and no longer feel like eating.

If you want a more thorough discussion of these topics, I recommend checking out J. Stanton’s excellent series on satiety, satiation and hunger.  This article focuses on how we can identify and prioritise foods that maximise satiety (increasing nutrient density to reduce cravings) and satiation (feeling of fullness with fewer calories) for people who are metabolically flexible (i.e. reasonable blood glucose level) but still have some more weight to lose.

vegetarian / HCLF context

The message to reduce our intake of high-fat foods is not new.  It has been the cornerstone of much of the ‘conventional nutritional wisdom’.  We are told not to consume too much fat because it contains more than twice as many calories per gramme as carbohydrates and protein.^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]}

People who promote a vegan lifestyle point out that high-fat foods are not as filling as fruits and vegetables as shown in the diagram below from forksoverknives.com. ^[7]   This makes sense intuitively but appears initially to be at odds with the low carb high-fat approach.

Plant based diet advocates like Joel Fuhrman^{[8] [9]} and Neal Barnard^{[10] [11]} talk about low energy density as a key element of the effectiveness of their program.

Professor Barbara Rolls has also published the Ultimate Volumetrics Diet^[12] based on her research into low energy density foods.^{[13]  [14] [15] [16] [17] [18]}

The logic is that people typically eat a constant weight of food and hence if we can decrease the calories per gramme we will decrease overall energy intake.^[19]

While I’m not sure I agree that 100g of celery will leave you as satisfied as 100g of butter, it’s worth noting that you would need to eat more than four kilogrammes (or 9lbs) of celery to get as much energy as you would from the 100g of butter.  So if the theory is partly true, it could make for an interesting ‘hack’ to limit energy intake (satiation)

It’s also worth noting that the nutrient density for these non-starchy veggies are very high per calorie (high satiety) while the net carbs and insulin load are still quite low.   Most people would need to eat a lot of these to significantly affect their blood glucose or insulin levels (maintaining metabolic flexibility).

food	ND	% insulinogenic	net carbs/100g	insulin load (g/100g)	calories/100g
celery	2.63	88%	1	4	17
broccoli	1.21	86%	4	9	42
beef steak	0.16	28%	0	21	305
butter	0.09	0%	0	1	734

A low-fat dietary approach, however, has its own challenges.  In the process of avoiding fat people often end up eating highly processed, highly insulinogenic foods which tend to be problematic for people.  These foods can drive people to become less metabolically flexible which in turn will affect appetite control.

People tend to try to ‘game the system’ eat foods with higher energy density and more food reward, regardless of the approach.

“Replacement of saturated fat by carbohydrates, particularly refined carbohydrates and added sugars, increases levels of triglyceride and small LDL particles and reduces high-density lipoprotein, cholesterol, effects that are of particular concern in the context of the increased prevalence of obesity and insulin resistance.”^[20]

Most people agree that highly processed low nutrient density carbohydrates are bad news as they will drive appetite and lead to obesity.

low carb/keto context

In low carb circles, some people hear the ‘don’t fear the fat’ and ‘butter is back’ message a little too loud and get caught overdoing added dietary fat.

It’s not uncommon to see messages along the lines of “I’m keeping to the keto macros but still not losing weight” or “I’ve hit a stall” on LCHF forums and Facebook groups.

“Eat fat to satiety” is useful advice for people who are insulin resistant and starting out on a low carb approach to manage blood glucose levels.  Eating adequate fat while minimising processed carbohydrates will decrease insulin levels and allow body fat stores to be used for energy which will, in turn, lead to improved metabolic flexibility and better appetite regulation.

However, it’s still possible to over consume high-fat foods, particularly for people who have a history of struggling to control their appetite.   Weight loss involves some level of energy restriction, especially if you are approaching your “goal weight”.  The sad reality is that there is no magic macro nutrient or food (other than perhaps indigestible fibre) that you can eat in unlimited quantities and still lose weight.  The key is to find what how we can manage appetite while minimising the feeling of hunger.

The Godfather of the ketogenic diet Dr Steve Phinney points out that in weight loss a significant proportion of energy comes from our body fat.^[21]

In the “adapt phase” of the ketogenic diet scenario shown below 75% of the person’s energy is from fat, however, most of this fat is actually coming from body fat.

One benefit of a low carbohydrate dietary approach to weight loss is the reduction in blood sugar spikes meaning that people are often less “hangry” with less processed carbs.  Smoothing out the blood glucose swings means that people often can more easily extend the period between meals without feeling compelled to snack.

Some people hear the message that having high blood ketones means that the body is burning fat, and so they load up on dietary fat to attain high ketones.

In the video below Dr Eric Westman points out that on his ADAPT program

“very high calorie foods and drinks like cheese and cream are limited so your body will draw on its own store of fat energy”.

energy density and satiety

One of the most interesting pieces of research into the area of satiation is a 1995 paper by Susanne Holt, Jennie Brand-Miller and Peter Petocz, “A satiety index of common foods”.^[22]  (Incidentally, this is the same team that did the original research into the insulin index a couple of years later.^[23])   This research indicates that how much we eat at subsequent meals tends to be influenced by how much our stomach stretches, not just the calorie content of our food.

The chart below shows SELFNutritionData.com‘s analysis of the data from the 1995 paper which they have used to develop their Fullness Factor^[24] parameter which is associated with energy density (i.e. calories per 100g), protein content and fibre.  Fat appears to be negatively correlated with satiety.

As we can see from the ‘building a better nutrient density index’ article, ranking foods by nutrient density per calorie gives us very high levels of fibre and protein, so we only need to add energy density to the system to improve satiety.

another step on the journey towards health

Does this mean that everyone looking to lose weight or normalise their blood glucose should adopt a low energy density approach?

Not necessarily.  Context matters.

Chris Gardner’s recent pilot study provides some useful guidance as to which approach might be best for a particular person.^[25]

The chart below summarises the results of this study indicating that:

• everyone does better with nutrient dense whole foods;
• people who are insulin resistant do better on a reduced carbohydrate approach; while
• people who are insulin sensitive do better on a low-fat, low energy density

It’s debatable where this cut over between insulin resistant and insulin sensitive lies, but the take home message seems to be that if you are achieving normal blood glucose levels then increasing your non-starchy veggies in exchange for added fat might be a good idea if you want to keep losing weight.

is blood glucose management the only consideration?

As we’ve seen previously in many charts like the one below,^{[26] [27]} managing your blood glucose levels and improving your insulin sensitivity may be the most important thing you can do for your health.^[28]  Having an HbA1c less than 5.0% significantly reduces your risk of heart attack and a range of other common diseases.

Simply eating more fat won’t automatically lead to more weight loss.  It’s the reduction in non-fibre carbohydrates that leads to decreased blood glucose and insulin levels, not the consumption of higher levels of fat.

Once you normalise your blood glucose and insulin levels, you will need to make sure make sure fat is coming from your body rather than your food if you want to continue your weight loss journey.

As someone loses weight improves their insulin sensitivity, they may then benefit by incorporating more foods with a lower energy density to ensure that their weight loss and improvement in insulin sensitivity continue.

So, if you’ve had success on an LCHF approach that has enabled you to normalise your blood sugars but you’re not achieving everything you’d hoped for you could consider incorporating more foods that have:

1. reduced energy density (i.e. fewer calories per 100g),
2. a higher nutrient density, and
3. high fibre.

Ideally, this transition would be guided by regular monitoring to ensure that you’re still achieving excellent blood glucose levels.   If your blood glucose levels start to drift up, you might retreat to the higher fat options, ideally with some intermittent fasting.

on a personal note

On a personal note, I have had some success recently following the intermittent fasting protocol detailed in the how to use your blood glucose as a fuel gauge article.  My blood glucose levels are consistently lower, down from an average in the mid 5s to typically under 5.0mmol/L.

After reading Keto Clarity and living in the low carb/diabetes head space for a while, I have come to enjoy snacks like peanut butter with cream, cheese or butter.  These foods are satiating and yummy.  I find they turn off my appetite more than the simple carbs that would spike my blood glucose levels and make me feel hungrier.  When I’ve been active (e.g. riding to work which burns about 1200 calories in a day) or fast from a time energy dense foods can be an effective way to refuel quickly.

However, now my blood glucose levels seem to have now stabilised I’m now making an effort to snack on less calorie dense foods like the ones listed below and fill up on celery, spinach, broccoli, carrots and other green leafy veggies m that don’t spike my blood glucose levels.

comparison of approaches

The table below shows a comparison of the macro nutrients, percentage insulinogenic calories and the energy density for the highest ranking 1000 for different approaches.

approach	% protein	% fat	fibre (g)	% insulinogenic	weight (g) / 2000 cals
all foods	25%	30%	19	55%	933
nutrient dense foods	34%	25%	60	31%	1118
nutrient dense low carb foods	26%	55%	22	30%	621
low energy high nutrient density	38%	19%	70	54%	1841

• The most nutrient dense foods have a lower energy density than the average of all the foods (i.e. weight per 2000 calories).
• Low carb foods have a higher energy density due to the higher fat content.
• The low energy density foods have half the energy density of the average of all foods and a third of the energy density of the low carb foods.
• The low energy density foods are also very high in indigestible fibre which will make it very hard to over consume these foods.
• While the low energy density foods may have a higher percentage of insulinogenic calories, it will also be harder to eat as much of these foods, so the insulin load will likely still be quite low.

The chart below (click to enlarge) of the nutrients provided by each approach shows that focusing on lower calorie density foods enables us to increase nutrient density per calorie even more!

The chart below (click to enlarge) compares the nutrient density of this low energy density approach compared to all 7000+ foods in the USDA database and the moderated nutrient density approach (see the building a better nutrient density index article) as well as the average minus 0.8 times the standard deviation.  In both of these measures, the low energy density high nutrient density approach outperforms the other two approaches.

Low-calorie density high nutrient density foods for weight loss

Listed below is a summary of the top 1000 foods in the USDA foods database using this low energy density high nutrient density approach.

The list of vegetables is long as always.  However, the list of animal products is also significant, with a particular emphasis on seafood which provides essential fatty acids which are hard to obtain in large quantities from other sources.

You may also be interested in this interactive analysis of nutrient density versus energy density using Tableau that I think is pretty snazzy!

Notably absent from this list of low energy density foods are dairy and nuts.   Many people find that they do better in terms of weight loss when they cut out dairy and nuts.

If you have type 1 diabetes or are very insulin resistant, you may not do so well with the cereals, fruit, legumes, sweet potato or sweet corn, though you may find some of the other higher ranking foods useful.   As always you should ‘eat to your metre’.

vegetables

You can see from the data below that the energy density (i.e. calories per 100g) of these vegetables is very low.  It would be physically difficult to overeat these foods.    If you’re managing your blood glucose levels, you will notice that the amount of non-fibre carbohydrates is also meagre.

The charts below from Nutrition Data Self show that broccoli has an extensive distribution of vitamins and minerals and would give you 92% of your DRI for vitamins and minerals and 83% of your protein in 1000 calories.

The only ‘problem’ here is that you will need to eat five bunches of broccoli to get 1000 calories!   You can see how you might be able to drastically drop your energy intake if you only ate low energy density high nutrient density foods.

food	ND	% insulinogenic	net carbs/100g	insulin load  (g/100g)	calories/100g
celery	2.63	49%	1	2	17
rhubarb	1.46	57%	3	3	21
lettuce	1.34	52%	2	2	17
turnip greens	1.31	39%	1	4	37
winter squash	1.22	80%	7	8	39
broccoli	1.21	57%	4	6	42
asparagus	1.12	46%	2	3	27
Chinese cabbage	1.02	60%	1	2	16
summer squash	1.00	65%	2	3	19
okra	0.94	57%	4	5	37
bamboo shoots	0.90	52%	3	4	28
bell peppers	0.86	64%	6	7	43
artichokes	0.83	33%	3	4	54
cabbage	0.81	53%	3	4	30
kale	0.75	74%	8	10	56
snap green beans	0.74	47%	4	5	40
seaweed (kelp)	0.74	43%	4	5	50
parsnip	0.73	38%	7	7	76
radishes	0.70	50%	2	2	19
peas	0.69	58%	5	7	51
mushrooms	0.65	70%	2	5	30
jalapeno peppers	0.52	54%	4	5	35
onions	0.52	77%	7	8	41
sweet potato	0.51	82%	17	18	87
collards	0.44	46%	2	5	40
dill	0.42	30%	2	4	52
pinto beans	0.44	60%	16	21	142
sweet corn	0.43	47%	10	13	111
eggplant	0.39	67%	7	7	41
mung beans	0.33	46%	1	3	26
beets	0.34	44%	4	5	48
mustard greens	0.27	45%	2	3	30
chives	0.27	34%	1	3	37
Brussels sprouts	0.24	54%	5	7	52
carrots	0.20	55%	5	5	39
shallots	0.27	60%	46	56	377
banana pepper	0.17	41%	3	4	39
parsley	0.15	49%	3	5	44
thyme	0.27	21%	14	19	359

fruit

The net carbs, energy density and percentage of insulinogenic calories is higher for the fruit in comparison to vegetables.  It is possible to overeat fruits, particularly if you are insulin resistant.

food	ND	% insulinogenic	net carbs/100g	insulin load  (g/100g)	calories/100g
cherries	0.72	84%	10	11	54
orange	0.49	77%	10	11	55
apples	0.48	77%	10	10	53
grapes	0.45	80%	15	15	77
figs	0.37	81%	16	17	82
mandarin oranges	0.31	63%	9	9	59
blueberries	0.32	72%	16	16	91
honeydew melon	0.30	88%	8	9	40
passion fruit	0.24	54%	13	15	109
litchis	0.20	80%	14	15	73
pear	0.14	69%	11	11	64

 grains and cereals

The net carbs, energy density and proportion of insulinogenic calories for the cereals and grains are higher than for the vegetables.  If you are insulin resistant make sure you eat to your metre.

food	ND	% insulinogenic	net carbs/100g	insulin load  (g/100g)	calories/100g
oatmeal	0.77	58%	8	10	67
teff	0.70	54%	11	14	101
spelt	0.58	54%	14	18	135
rice noodles	0.54	87%	22	23	105
quinoa	0.45	55%	14	16	120
millet	0.34	76%	20	22	118
oat bran bread	0.35	57%	29	38	264
rye bread	0.30	64%	37	45	282
rice bran bread	0.25	54%	31	37	273

legumes

Similar to grains, the legumes have a moderate energy density so are a good option to provide additional calories if you have filled up on the vegetables.

food	ND	% insulinogenic	net carbs/100g	insulin load  (g/100g)	calories/100g
lima beans	0.56	71%	16	23	129
navy beans	0.47	55%	15	20	143
lentils	0.35	62%	12	18	118
hummus	0.26	32%	8	14	175
tofu	0.17	28%	2	8	112

seafood

It is important to prioritise either regular fish intake or supplementation of omega 3 fatty acids.   I’ve included the insulin load rather than net carbs for the fish animal products which may be of interest if you are injecting insulin.

food	ND	% insulinogenic	insulin load (g/100g)	calories/100g
oyster	0.31	57%	14	98
lobster	0.30	69%	14	84
anchovy	0.34	42%	21	203
tuna	0.30	50%	17	137
white fish	0.27	67%	17	102
salmon	0.28	50%	15	122
crab	0.26	69%	13	78
halibut	0.27	63%	16	105
mackerel	0.28	45%	17	149
Pollock	0.27	66%	17	105
rainbow trout	0.28	43%	17	162
shrimp	0.26	66%	19	113
swordfish	0.28	41%	17	165
sturgeon	0.26	47%	15	129
snapper	0.25	64%	15	94
octopus	0.26	69%	27	156
haddock	0.24	67%	18	110
caviar	0.30	32%	22	276
crayfish	0.21	64%	12	78
herring	0.26	34%	18	210
haddock	0.21	69%	15	85
abalone	0.21	76%	19	99
whiting	0.21	63%	17	109
sardine	0.24	36%	18	202
mussel	0.22	61%	25	165
clam	0.20	71%	24	135
cod	0.17	67%	17	99
perch	0.16	59%	13	91

animal products  

Similar to sea food, the energy density of the animal products is moderate.  Not as low as the non-starchy veggies but similar to the fruit, grains and legumes.

food	ND	% insulinogenic	insulin load (g/100g)	calories/100g
beef liver	0.46	58%	24	169
chicken liver	0.43	48%	20	165
ham	0.26	55%	20	146
pork	0.25	54%	21	154
emu	0.24	63%	25	159
veal (leg)	0.25	56%	25	174
turkey breast	0.22	70%	22	127
chicken breast	0.22	56%	25	178
beef	0.22	50%	25	197

so how does it work?

This style of nutrient dense lower energy density approach is likely to be successful because it provides:

1. nutrient dense proteins that will improve satiety,
2. more fibre, water and bulk that will lead to increased satiation with lower levels of calories compared to a higher energy density,
3. negligible levels of processed carbs which will help to keep insulin and blood glucose levels at normal levels which will allow body fat to be accessed for fuel,
4. high levels of nutrition across the board (vitamins, minerals, amino acids and fatty acids) meaning that the body will be able to obtain adequate nutrition with a lower energy intake, and
5. lower levels of dietary fat which will allow body fat to be used.

While many people from the LCHF head space might think of this as heresy, you might be interested to see that once we take the body fat into account, this style of approach is actually quite high in fat.

The table below shows the macronutrient split for a low carb approach versus the low energy density high nutrient density approach.  The last column shows that if we apply a 40% deficit with 800 calories per day coming from body fat then the macro nutrients are quite similar to the LCHF approach, with more than half the energy coming from fat.

approach	nutrient dense low carb foods	low energy high nutrient density (2000 calories)	low energy high nutrient density (40% deficit)
% protein	26%	38%	23%
% dietary fat	55%	19%	11%
% net carbs	15%	29%	17%
% fibre	4%	14%	8%
fibre (g)	22	70	42
% insulinogenic	30%	54%	32%
deficit	0%	0%	40%
dietary energy (cal)	2000	2000	1200
body fat (cal)	0	0	800
total fat	55%	19%	51%

summary

If you have lost some weight on an LCHF approach and have normalised your blood glucose levels, you may benefit from transitioning to a lower energy density high nutrient density approach.

If you want to fine tune this a little further, it might be worth tracking your insulin load.  You can tweak it to the point that you achieve excellent blood glucose levels (i.e. HbA1c < 5.0%, average blood glucose less than 5.4 mmol/L or 100 mg/dL) while also maximising nutrient density and minimising energy density.

 

 

references

^[1] http://www.andjrnl.org/article/S2212-2672(12)00132-3/abstract

^[2] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B978012410540900003X

^[3] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18439712

^[4] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23128764

^[5] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14995052

^[6] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6303104

^[7] http://www.forksoverknives.com/the-calorie-density-approach-to-nutrition-and-lifelong-weight-management

^[8] https://youtu.be/XZGgeGHU1Bs?t=31

^[9] https://www.drfuhrman.com/library/eat_more_often_gain_weight.aspx

^[10] https://youtu.be/2UPQfdIlzaA?t=466

^[11] https://books.google.com.au/books?id=C6KTATgbTacC&pg=PA264&lpg=PA264&dq=neal+barnard+energy+density&source=bl&ots=JomyWaNJn7&sig=nAPHWYJL_V-NtSZeKl_82DigERU&hl=en&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjQjJqtiJvMAhVDHJQKHWe7AXsQ6AEIIzAB#v=onepage&q=neal%20barnard%20energy%20density&f=false

^[12] http://www.amazon.com/Ultimate-Volumetrics-Diet-Science-Based-Strategies-ebook/dp/B007JLK9HW/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1461080587&sr=1-1

^[13] http://health.usnews.com/wellness/slideshows/the-10-best-diets-for-healthy-eating

^[14] http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/67/3/412.abstract

^[15] http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/88/6/1459.abstract?sid=238201eb-6207-4843-886b-9e1410e5a716

^[16] http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/86/1/174.abstract?sid=238201eb-6207-4843-886b-9e1410e5a716

^[17] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14995052

^[18] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17490955

^[19] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4182946/

^[20] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2943062/

^[21] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KYYnEAYCGk

^[22] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/15701207_A_Satiety_Index_of_common_foods

^[23] http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/66/5/1264.abstract

^[24] http://nutritiondata.self.com/topics/fullness-factor

^[25] https://www.dropbox.com/s/n8tzuiixb1n1cxi/Weight%20Loss%20on%20Low-Fat%20vs.%20Low-Carbohydrate%20Diets%20by%20Insulin%20Resistance%20Status%20Among%20Overweight%20Adults%20and%20Adults%20With%20Obesity-%20A%20Randomized%20Pilot%20Trial%20%281%29.pdf?dl=0

^[26] http://optimisingnutrition.com/2016/03/21/wanna-live-forever/

^[27] http://optimisingnutrition.com/2015/03/22/diabetes-102/

^[28] http://diabetesupdate.blogspot.com.au/2007/05/misunderstanding-ukpds-7-is-not-good.html

 

post last updated July 2018