I believe that this is not a one-size-fits-all world, and that every diet doesn't work for everyone, but every diet works for someone.

That said, I'll admit that I have my own personal biases and prejudices. I've written about them here and there in various articles here on DietHobby, and you can find them in the Archives section. 

Personally, I'm strongly opposed to the concept of Intuive Eating as a means to lose weight or maintain weight-loss. I've read many books about it. I've attended seminars on it.I've experimented with it. I've spent a great deal of time observing others who try it out.

My conclusion is that ... for anyone who has a long-term problem with obesity ...Intiutive Eating as a weight-loss or maintenance of weight-loss diet is simply "wishful thinking", and it almost never works.

I am a great believer in using a computer software program to daily track one's food intake ... forever. I've written a very great deal about that, and although my own personal favorite is DietPower, any such software program that you can learn and use will work well. 

I've experimented quite a lot with various low-carb diets, and with alternate day eating, and I frequently incorporate elements of those plans into my own eating plans. 

One Diet that I am quite taken with, is the No S Diet.  While I do not follow it myself, I have incorporated many of its concepts. It is a simple plan, and its theme of moderation is a sound one.  Although it is ineffective for many, as a stand-alone-diet, It can be a behavior base for many other diets, and with a few modifications can become an excellent plan for almost everyone. 

The book, The No S Diet is simple, well-written, and quite excellent. I've read it many times, and have purchased copies for friends. You can find an extensive review of it here.

Here is a recent testimonial from a long-time user of the No "S" diet.  

I'm nervous and excited about finally writing this because I love No S so much and want to sing it to the high heavens, and not after just the honeymoon phase of success. At age 58 and two years, this marriage is going to last! 

I can’t be a source of hope for anyone who is trying to get into the low end of his/her BMI range, but there are others who can. However, No S HAS SAVED MY EATING LIFE AND MY SANITY AROUND FOOD. In 2 years, I’ve gone from 185 to 161 (13% of my weight) and am still losing. Not the huge drops some have, but I had some setbacks, and yet I’m stronger now than ever, unlike most people who follow traditional diets; they are usually heavier 2 years later. Plus, I look good in my clothes and I feel confident and peppy. I wasn’t even sure I would lose weight on No S, but I knew I had to do something about my insane compulsion to overeat, mostly sweets, and mostly in private. If you want freedom from the tyranny of food as much as or even (as I did) more than weight loss, I ecstatically recommend it! 

(BTW, the National Weight Loss Registry reports that it takes 2-5 years of compliance for the likelihood of relapse of overeating to drop to 25%, and this is only in the 3-15% who actually do lose weight in the first place. And those people do not usually get thin, just thinner. Sobering news, and more reason not to choose radical plans, in my opinion. Consistent moderation forever!) 

• I no longer worry about the pull of fattening or processed foods/ carbs/sugar. I can have small amounts without going overboard-- or none. 

• I don’t fear restaurants or social eating situations where lots of food is available. 

• I don’t feel deprived or in food prison. 

• I’m completely happy with the program. I’m not afraid that there’s a better, faster way to get lean and mean that will last. 

• I love my three meals a day and love getting hungry. I overeat some on the weekends, but less and less, and I enjoy all that I do eat. 

• I stuck it out even when I was bingeing on weekends much longer than many and it has paid off. Don't fear the weekends! 

• Thank you, thank you, thank you, Reinhard and all the long-term No S-ers here. 

The challenge for anyone with disordered eating is to find the right balance of ordered eating to counteract it. As I see it, the major problem is too many random decisions to eat a lot of calorie-dense food, especially in the face of promises to self not to eat. No S has been the best of both worlds for this recovering disordered secret “emotional” binge eater, even though it was not designed for it: a program that promotes flexible food choices with ordered limited access to food, and free eating on weekends to promote more independent judgment. Jackpot! I found that it didn’t matter what the reason was for my wanting to eat during the week. I just didn’t do it between meals. So freeing. And two years of mostly compliant weekdays tamed my weekends enviably. 

History for those who need to hear if it matches their problems: I started eating sweets secretly when I was about 10 years old and was told at 12 to lose 10 pounds (I weighed 120 at 5’4”). I did not and weighed 145 after high school when I went on my first real diet for a gymnastics class (even though I was in my normal BMI range). I managed over 40 years to stick to diets and lose weight for probably about 3 years total in that time. The rest of the time, I agonized over eating and my body, never able to stick to my attempts to cut eating sweets, especially at night. My disordered eating got progressively worse so that my weight rose from mostly in the 140-150’s before my 40's to eventually to over 200 for a short time.

I first joined No S in October of 2008 (age 55), probably weighing 180, had brief success, but fell off after Thanksgiving and didn’t return in earnest until Dec. 26, 2009 at 185. I WAS DESPERATE AND KNEW THAT MY DISORDERED EATING WOULD ONLY GET WORSE AND BE WITH ME MY LAST YEARS ON THIS PLANET IF I DIDN'T DO SOMETHING. I knew that eating 5-6 meals a day as I had been for 7 years was not stopping it. I knew that though intuitive eating had helped me get rid of a lot of food prejudices against supposedly fattening foods, I hadn’t been able to use it to lose weight. I knew that though I had actually learned a lot about what combinations of whole foods I enjoyed and actually satisfied me on traditional diets, I wouldn’t follow one, nor track calories forever. And I believed that at least for me, there was no food I couldn't learn to eat in moderation. No S was and remains my best bet, and I am so grateful I found it! I may alter what I eat at meals or how much on weekends but I will never go back to snacking, tracking, or sweets every day. This is it! 

May we all find peace with food soon.

_________________

Ht. 5'6" 

SW 12/26/09 185 lbs.

10/11/11 166 lbs.

1/08/2012 161 

Sun Jan 08, 2012 9:33 am    
Post subject: controlling disordered/emotional eating

NOTE:  Originally posted on 1/10/12, Reposted for New Viewers

 One should read the book “The No S Diet” by Reinhard Engels  even if only to access his wisdom, common sense, and Habit concepts. 

Reinhard Engels is a software engineer who created the diet for himself and lost 40 pounds.

His diet has just three rules and one exception: No Snacks, No Sweets, No Seconds, Except (sometimes) on days that start with "S" (Saturday, Sunday and Special Days).

The No S Diet is incredibly simple. It has just three rules.
These three rules   focus attention on the three primary areas that affect a person’s diet.

No Seconds…means you have to use portion control. 
                All of the food in your meal must fit on one normal sized plate (the one-plate rule).
No Snacks..…means you have to eat at mealtimes only..no food in-between meals.
No Sweets......means you have to avoid foods that have sugar as the principal ingredient.

All of these rules apply on all normal (N) days.

 None of these rules apply on (S) days, i.e. weekends, holidays, and special occasions..
However, you are advised to normally stay with your normal-N day- habit and only SOMETIMES use your allowable exceptions. Just because it is an "S" day, doesn't mean sweets or snacks or seconds are REQUIRED. It just means there's no RULE against them. It isn't permission to binge. Following N day principles on S days is appropriate behavior.

Reinhard's No S is: ..."except SOMETIMES on S days".
Reinhard’s basic warning is: "Don't be an IDIOT".
Putting all of your food on one plate in front of you at the same time is meant to help you see how much you are actually eating, and keep you from deceiving yourself about that issue. Both the "No Snacks" rule and the "One Plate" rule are meant to keep one from DECEIVING oneself about how much one is actually eating. Reinhard hopes that the REALITY of seeing the food all together will jolt one into choosing to eat less. However, this depends on one's subjective beliefs about the size of "normal" food portions. 

The one-plate rule (no seconds) can be helpful information for a "normal" person, who is struggling in the "overweight" category if they understand how little food-intake they actually need, and have simply allowed their weight sneak up on them.
But it isn't very helpful for a person well into obesity, who thinks of large portions of high-calorie food as a normal amount.

No S is a simple, straightforward diet that is non-restrictive in nature. There are very few rules that must be followed. It allows people to occasionally eat foods that are normally restricted. It will fit into any lifestyle, and can be used together with other diet plans. It also is very affordable.

The No S diet relies strongly upon the concept of Habit, and the plan is based on getting people to cultivate habits that are sustainable for life…Habits which are intended to result in weight loss, or at least, result in the maintenance of one’s current weight.

There isn’t any fixed step-by-step plan, which could be an advantage to some, and a disadvantage to others. No S diet does initially demand huge amounts of self-control when it is used by people who have lifestyle habits that normally involve large amounts of between-meal eating, or large amounts of food at meals. You might suffer from hunger pains until your body adjusts to the No S way of eating.
You are the one who decides whether to make healthy food choices while eating within those rules. The No ‘S’ diet plan asks people to stick to a healthy diet plan. That’s it. Nothing more, nothing less! The only food problem one needs to address, is the snacking, portions, and sweets part of their diet.

Initially, these rules tend to commonly result in weekend binge eating. This binge eating lessens over time for some people, but for other people weekend binge eating becomes habitual.

The primary problem with the basic No S Plan (known as “vanilla” No S) is that it won’t necessarily result in weight-loss. As Reinhard says,

"The No S Diet is not designed to get you "trim trim;"
it's designed to help you eat moderately (and see what happens)."

People differ in their energy requirements. The energy requirements for large, active males are far different than for small, sedentary females. This distinction is not addressed in the No S diet, and under the basic No S rules, it is easy for small, sedentary females to eat more than their body requires which, over time, can actually result in weight-gain.

The No S diet is based on the principle of Moderation. For people who don’t want to count calories, carbs, or keep track of points or food-exchanges and want something simple, then the No ‘S’ diet can be a good plan. It is simple, but not necessarily easy. The primary problem is whether you can actually follow the restrictions underlined in the diet.

I am very interested in the No S diet’s Habit concepts, and have watched many others on the No S diet for several years. My personal observation is that "vanilla" No S tends to activate the "binge/fast" cycle for many people, and my observation over the past couple of years, has been that, time alone,does not seem to stop "IDIOT" behavior for obese people who tend to binge. It seems clear to me that these people need additional eating restrictions on "S" day eating.

Reinhard makes some good suggestions on some additions and modifications that might help resolve this problem for some people.My personal version of No S greatly differs from Reinhard's basic plan.
My opinion is that the brilliance of The No S Diet is not in the specific rules of the diet,
but instead in the philosophy of cultivating eating habits that are sustainable for life. 

NOTE:  Originally posted on 3/30/11, Reposted for New Viewers

If I am "building castles in the air"
I am dreaming grandiose dreams without any foundation.

Building castles in the air is NOT however to be confused with dreaming big dreams and then planning through the steps necessary to make those dreams a reality.

A member of a forum I frequent, recently asked:

“Just curious. What about No S vs. Intuitive Eating?”

Here is my take on these two concepts.

No S accepts that it is a diet, and gives specific and objective (although flexible) rules...such as:  "No snacks, no sweets, no seconds except ..sometimes..on days beginning with S".

Intuitive Eating is one of those diets that refuses to admit it is a diet, and gives vague and subjective rules...such as:  "Eat only when hungry, eat what you want, stop when you're full".

No S relies on the principle that: when a person who is interested in moderation, sees and actually realizes the amount of food they are eating, they will choose to reduce that amount,and through that behavior, they will achieve and maintain a more normal bodyweight.

Intutive Eating relies on the principle that: when a person gets rid of outside rules,....except for the Intuitive Eating rules about eating when hungry etc....and relies on their BODY to tell them what and how much to eat, that their own body signals will cause them to reduce the amounts they eat  and eventually acheive and maintain a normal bodyweight.

 (Note: "Intutive Eating"  is a diet (labeled non-diet) used by many "eating disorder experts", although it has absolutely zero scientific basis, as well a dismal success rate.)

No S is objective and primarily based on common sense.
Intutitive Eating is subjective and primarily based on magic.

Those of you who are unfamiliar with the No S Diet, and/or the diet-that-says-it-isn’t-a-diet concept known as “Intitutive Eating” can learn more about these from reading some of my past articles which are contained here in the ARCHIVES of DietHobby.

Some specific links are:

"The No S Diet” (2008), by Reinhard Engels is a book and diet plan that I’ve discussed and reviewed previously. Click here to see my review and viewer comments.

Here is one of my past articles about the Concepts of Intitutive Eating.

The two concepts together, were the basis of a previous article posted in December 2011. See:  Intuitive Eating and the No S Diet.

NOTE: Originally posted on 11/1/12. Reposted for new viewers.

Lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater
....which means... 
Be careful not to discard something of value
with something that is of no value.

I see and share various thoughts and ideas here at DietHobby that come from many different sources.  If an idea or article is posted here, I’ve found some of its concepts interesting, enjoyable or valuable to me in some way.
 It does NOT mean that I agree with all of that author’s basic food beliefs or way-of-eating philosophies.

Here is the third of three articles about the basic Intutive Eating Concepts by UK addiction counselor, Gillain Riley, who appears to share my point of view about the general ineffectiveness of this Diet. Ms. Riley states her professional knowledge about these concepts in a thoughtful and precise manner, and I am sharing this series here at DietHobby.

Advocates of Intutitive Eating insist that this diet / manner-of-eating / way-of-eating / lifestyle is "not a diet". My belief is that EVERY diet works for someone, and this includes Intutive Eating.

The other two of the three articles can be found at:
"Does Our Body Tell Us WHAT to eat - Intutive Eating 1"
“Eat When You’re Hungry? – Intutive Eating 2”

HOW TO END A MEAL
         by Gillian Riley, Author of Ditching Diets (Revised edition of Eating Less)

A great many people do most (if not all) of their overeating at meals, especially their evening meal. You may be one of those who consistently buys, prepares and serves what you know is way too much food but finds it impossible to contemplate cutting back. Or maybe your meals aren't too huge to start with but you find it tough to stop, taking second helpings, finishing off what others have left, picking on things in the kitchen while you're clearing up and then finding things to snack on for much of the evening.

The third principle of Intuitive Eating, suggesting that you 'stop eating when you're full', attempts to address this problem. As with the two other principles we've looked at over the past two newsletters (eat whatever your body tells you it needs and eat when you're hungry), it ASSUMES a reliable, innate wisdom in our bodies. Those who promote Intuitive Eating argue that it's your ignorance of this wisdom that makes you overeat. If you simply pay attention to it, your body will let you know when you've had enough.

Of the 5,000 or so medical academic journals that are published every month, a good number of them, as you might expect, are dedicated to issues concerning food, obesity and appetite. Over the past ten years I've made it my business to spend time in the (absolutely fabulous) British Library in London, hunting down the latest research. I've not found anything to convince me about the theory of Intuitive Eating, and in fact have found quite a bit of research that very much calls it into question.

One paper I've come across that seeks to promote Intuitive Eating reports that in surveys, 'normal eaters' (those who describe themselves as not having a problem with eating and weight) state that they stop eating when they feel full. It's then suggested that this is ideal; the goal overeaters should aim for. (1)

First of all, I suggest that 'fullness' is vague and entirely subjective;. It's a personal evaluation, specific to each individual. Whatever physical sensations are interpreted as 'fullness' by one person will feel like 'just getting started' to another. Research has shown that how 'full' people report feeling before eating doesn't show much relationship to how much they actually consume. (2)

I suspect that many of those who overeat also think they stop eating when they're full. Isn't that what you do? Don't you think that if you tried to eat less at meals, you wouldn't feel full, and that is precisely the problem? Saying that 'normal eaters' stop when they're full doesn't say anything at all about the process of change, about how an overeater becomes a 'normal eater'.

YUMMY FAT
In terms of this process of change, there are both physical and psychological elements that need to be taken into consideration. As for the physical side of things, the kind of food eaten has an effect on the feelings of fullness, in particular the amount of fat contained in the food.

It has been well established in research that higher fat content inevitably leads to greater consumption of calories. This is thought to be because fat contains more than twice the amount of calories than protein or carbohydrate, gram for gram. (3)

But fat, more than anything else, is what makes food so delicious. Fat is the dressing on the salad, the gravy on the roast and the butter in the cookie. We often think of sugar addiction, but few people compulsively eat sugar directly out of the packet. Add fat to that sugar, though, and you've got something entirely moorish. It's no fun at all to completely eliminate fat, so our challenge is to eat enough to make our food enjoyable but not so much as to make us unwell.

HOW FULL IS 'FULL'?
In a rare example of solid research confirming urban myth, feelings of fullness are delayed, developing around 20 minutes after eating. There are two ways to use this information: to do whatever you can to slow down how fast you eat and, most importantly, to accept that it's best not to feel full when you finish your meal. The way to deal with that is to consider waiting to see how you're feeling in a few minutes, and if you still feel hungry you can have some more. This will work best if you've already got that second helping included in your Plan (see Eating Less, Chapter 6).

The notion of being 'full' seems to make sense because we know, for example, that when we fill a cup there's a point at which it will not accept any more filling. It becomes undeniably full and will begin to spill over. Even something elastic, such as a balloon, at some point gets so full that it bursts. But our stomachs don't work quite that way - which may be a good thing or a bad thing! That nauseous, bloated, sleepy, overstuffed feeling of fullness is WAY BEYOND the appropriate stopping point.

As you probably know, our stomachs expand over time to accommodate larger amounts of food. This is why one kind of weight-loss surgery simply reduces the size of the stomach so that larger amounts of food cannot easily fit into it.

Your stomach is supposed to be the size of your fist, but for many people it's become larger due to years of overconsumption. To correct this and to overcome overeating, your goal would be to decrease the size of your stomach, preferably without the use of surgery. Surely, if you consistently eat until you feel full, you will not be working towards that goal. The aim, I would think, is very much not to feel full at the end of your meals.

This, however, presents the problem that few people are talking about, especially of course those who advise Intuitive Eating. How can you finish your meals when you don't feel full - and continue to do that for long enough to make any real difference? To a great many people this seems impossible and unrealistic, which is why it's so often ignored as a viable solution.

This is what's different about the work I'm doing. It addresses this very question and leads you towards a workable resolution of this difficulty. This is one aspect of what I refer to as managing your addictive appetite, the aspect here being the excess appetite, the feeling of not being full at the end of meals.

The truth is that hunger and fullness are very difficult to define and usually only experienced at their extremes. When you give up thinking that you should rely on your body's signals, then you can see that there is an entirely different solution, and one that is both powerful and empowering.

NOTES
1. "Development and psychometric evaluation of a measure of Intuitive Eating." Tylka TL Journal of Counselling Psychology (2006) 53 (2), 226-240
2. "Reproducibility, power and validity of visual analogue scores in assessment of appetite sensations in single test meal studies." Flint A, Raben A, Blundell JE International Journal of Obesity (2000) 24 (1): 38-48
2. "The role of energy density in the overconsumption of fat." Rolls, BJ The Journal of Nutrition (2000) 130: 268S-271S
See Chapter 6 in EATING LESS: "What to do about Wanting More
 

Here's a link to my book review of Ditching Diets (2013) by Gillian Riley.

Ms. Riley is a Counselor on Addiction, not a medical professional or Nutritionist. Her own personal way-of-eating appears to Paleo based.  Here’s a link to my previous book review of the Perfect Health Diet (2010) by Paul Jaminet, which is on her short recommended reading list.

NOTE: Originally posted on 3/17/13. Reposted for new viewers.

Recently I ran across a series of three articles about the basic Intutive Eating Concepts by UK addiction counselor, Gillain Riley, who appears to share my point of view about the general ineffectiveness of this Diet. Ms. Riley states her professional knowledge about these concepts in a thoughtful and precise manner, and I am sharing this series here at DietHobby. 

Advocates of Intutitive Eating insist that this diet / manner-of-eating / way-of-eating / lifestyle is "not a diet". My belief is that every diet works for someone, and this includes Intutive Eating.

The first of the three articles can be found at: "Does Our Body Tell Us WHAT to eat - Intutive Eating 1"

Are You Hungry? 
      by Gillian Riley, Author of Ditching Diets (Revised edition of Eating Less)

The assumption behind this advice is that hunger means you are depleted of energy or nutrients, and therefore in need of food. But it's considerably more complicated than that. For example, when people fast or follow extremely low calorie diets, their hunger doesn't become increasingly more intense as time goes on and nutrient stores dwindle. Any anorexic will tell you that after a short time without food, their hunger fades away. If hunger accurately reflected nutritional status, this wouldn't happen. The reverse would happen, and hunger would intensify day by day.

To make the same point in a different way, if hunger expresses genuine nutritional need, it would begin to subside after the first few mouthfuls of a meal. But this doesn't necessarily happen either, and most people have at least some experience of the reverse occurring. Many people can begin a meal not feeling especially hungry, and then, after just a few bites of tasty food, feel a strong sense of hunger suddenly arrive. It doesn't make sense that your body would signal depletion after those bites but not before. (1)

We often think of those first few bites as a way to stimulate hunger, to awaken it. After all, the whole point of the 'starter' course is supposed to be to awaken our appetite and get our 'gastric juices flowing'. But how can we rely on this hunger signal if it needs to be stimulated to appear in the first place?

Rather than a signal of nutritional need, hunger is, to a great extent, a response to cues, at least some of which will be learned. The cue prompts an expectation of eating, and it's this expectation that sets off all those hungry sensations in our stomach. The cue could be the time of day, or the sudden availability of food along with the sights and smells of its arrival. There may well be no problem at all in responding to this by eating.

The problem arises for those who have overeaten so much that the cues triggering feelings of hunger happen much too frequently. It's okay for the expectation of eating to produce a sensation of hunger, unless you expect to eat every 15 minutes or so. Trying to follow the advice to eat when hungry isn't helpful if you feel hungry all the time.

Then there are those who tend not to feel hungry, even though it would be a very good idea for them to eat something. I've had a number of clients attend my seminars who have told me similar stories when they previously participated in a seminar promoting Intuitive Eating. They complete the seminar, quite excited by the prospect of looking out for hunger signals before eating. They go past breakfast time and don't feel hungry. They don't feel hungry at lunchtime, so they don't eat anything then either. Then, by the end of the afternoon, they feel weak, faint, irritable and shaky. They can't concentrate on their work and there's no food available except chocolate and sweets.

One factor here could be stress, which can have the effect of blocking hunger signals. When an animal is genuinely stressed, perhaps because they are about to be attacked, the last thing they are going want to do is eat. Part of the automatic stress response is to direct blood to the limbs in order to fight or take flight. The digestive system shuts down until it's needed again when the animal is safe and the stress has subsided.

Our present day human stress, though, is usually a more chronic state. Stress builds throughout the day and many people, not feeling hungry, go for many hours without eating. Typically they eat something when they get home and then overeat throughout the evening, probably on food that is not the most nourishing.

A paper published in the medical journal Physiology and Behavior proposes a phenomenon called 'hedonic hunger', which is hunger specifically for the more desirable (but less nourishing) kinds of food. (2) 'Hedonic hunger' is one manifestation of what I call the 'addictive desire to eat'. For example, if you feel hungry for toast and jam while completely uninterested in cucumber, you've probably got some hedonic hunger (addictive appetite or desire). The crucial point is that it feels like hunger, so it's very easy to assume you have an entirely appropriate need of food.

Again, it helps us to take into consideration the food environment in which our bodies evolved. A paper from the Journal of the American Dietetic Association makes this point: "...there is no clear adaptive advantage for an organism to consume just enough food to maintain energy balance. Such a system would fail to protect against future gaps in food availability. A strong hunger drive would act to encourage overconsumption and promote energy storage for use during intermittent food shortages." (3)

The question remains, if we have such an unreliable experience of hunger, why is Intuitive Eating so widely recommended?

The reason is that Intuitive Eating is presented as an alternative to prohibitive thinking (restrictive eating). It's well known - both in research and in many people's everyday experience - that it is counter-productive to think prohibitively about food. Trying to follow rules to restrict and deny yourself may work initially but creates stress, a miserable sense of deprivation and eventually a rebellious return to overeating. So the idea is to replace prohibitions around food with Intuitive Eating; to wait, for example, until you are hungry before you eat.

But these two ideas are not mutually exclusive. There are plenty of people who will think prohibitively in order to prevent themselves from eating before they're hungry. 'I mustn't eat if I'm not hungry' is just another rule to obey - or not!

The alternative I teach is neither of these alternatives. I do encourage people not to think prohibitively because it certainly is destructive. And it's fine if you are hungry when you eat, so by all means make your best guess as to when you think you'll need food again. But the way that's done, I believe, is through intellectual evaluation. We can quite simply develop a fairly good idea of what, how much and how often to eat, put together by our grasp of our nutritional needs, our schedule and the availability of nutritious food throughout our day.

Of course you also need to be able to manoeuvre yourself around the addictive appetite you may well have for all that food you don't need. But don't trust your body to tell you what's addictive and what isn't. If your pattern of eating isn't producing weight loss (assuming you are overweight) it's likely that eating even less will deliver the result you're after.

NOTES
1. What can hunger teach us about drug craving? Kassel JD, Shiffman S Addictive Behaviors Research and Therapy (1992) 14: 141-167
2. Hedonic hunger: A new dimension of appetite? Lowe MR, Butryn ML Physiology & Behavior (2007) 91: 432-439
3. Appetite: Measurement and Manipulation Misgivings Mattes RD, Hollis J Journal of the American Dietetic Association (2005) 105 (5): S87-SS97
More on this topic in the chapter "The Trouble with Hunger" in EATING LESS.

Here's a link to my book review of Ditching Diets (2013) by Gillian Riley.

NOTE: Originally posted on 3/16/13. Reposted for new viewers.