1

votes

Why aren't pork rinds more satiating?

Answered on August 19, 2014
Created October 28, 2011 at 12:31 AM

I've been experimenting with different breakfast foods while on the leptin reset. According to the nutrition label, pork rinds should be very satiating as they are high in protein and fat. However, I ate half a bag (approximately 30 grams of protein) for breakfast this morning along with 4 eggs, and I was hungry two hours later. What's going on? When I eat 30 grams of protein in the form of steak, I feel full until dinner. I'm perplexed. Has anyone had a similar experience?

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8

(5152)

on October 29, 2011
at 06:56 AM

The hunger u feel is not for any other food but for more pork rinds. It's a conditioned response that seems to prove the food reward / hyperpalatability theory of obesity, and disprove carb/insulin hypothesis. I feel full when I have a sip of bone broth; with pork rinds, I'm not done until I've wolfed down 2 bags. Both are fat and protein only, zero carbs. Why is the response so different? One is bland, the other is hyperpalatable with impunity.

3c6b4eed18dc57f746755b698426e7c8

(5152)

on October 29, 2011
at 06:51 AM

It's the salt, grease, the frying, which induce crispiness, crunchiness, easy swallowing. Seth Roberts says hyperpalatility stems from a melange of sugar/salt, easy texture plus spice/fat/grease help. This has no sugar but the palatability is incroyable. Try Seth's experiment: have a tablespoon of EVOO and H2O in lieu of pork rinds. You'll be overcome by the blandness and lose, not gain, pounds. Gueyenet is right: it's in between your ears, not in insulin. This is all fat, and you're not having any insulin response. So why would you feel hungry for mo pork rinds if Taubes is right? Oink.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 28, 2011
at 07:05 PM

Not forbidden by all world religions and a perfectly healthy food. And by the way "anon" a totally useless comment. You've made me dumber for reading it. -1.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 28, 2011
at 07:02 PM

Same kind of protein as gelatin. I.E. Not significantly bio-available. They are delicious, but don't count the protein in them.

F1b39d4f620876330312f4925bd51900

(4090)

on October 28, 2011
at 05:57 PM

I don't agree with you in the Eww or should not be eaten department. But pork rinds in general -blech! In the last, and long ago, bag I had- found lots of attached thick hairs and even blackheads. -dry heaves-

93ae9f2d376e5426e891a9b58d8302fa

(2936)

on October 28, 2011
at 05:53 PM

Pork was a disaster for oasis-based agricultural regions like the Mideast, but nowhere else. If you've ever seen how quickly a pig can root up a lawn or pasture and turn it into a wallow, you'll understand exactly what sort sort of threat they pose where arable land is limited. The Jews in diaspora clung to that taboo as a matter of tribal identity, but the Muslims in Indonesia love pork because their identity is not under siege. As far as disease is concerned, hogs ain't too bad, and their unclenliness gets way overplayed.

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5

on October 28, 2011
at 04:41 PM

My whey protein powder also says that it is not suitable for (full) meal replacement b/c it lacks sufficient tryptophan.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad

on October 28, 2011
at 03:49 PM

lol the ones I buy have a warning on them that says "not a complete source of protein" maybe someone tried to survive on them and died????

3aea514b680d01bfd7573d74517946a7

(11996)

on October 28, 2011
at 01:28 PM

The liquid protein diet that killed a few people in the 80s was made of horse and cow skin, it's rumored; I read somewhere a long time ago that this form of protein is not very usable. Maybe all these skin products are deficient in a similar way.

072fd69647b0e765bb4b11532569f16d

(3717)

on October 28, 2011
at 01:16 PM

Namby Pamby has some insight on this exact topic. Maybe he/she will weigh in. Some discussion here: http://paleohacks.com/questions/69999/are-quest-bars-considered-paleo/70037#70037

220994a1bcff1923ef0388192bdba8d4

on October 28, 2011
at 01:07 AM

HAH! That must be it. Fascinating. Too bad though. That was by far the cheapest form of protein I've found. $1 for 60 grams. What a shame.

Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

7 Answers

3
Af005ec9a8e028f2b04bf5367b64e0d6

on October 28, 2011
at 12:43 AM

Notice how they (typically) say "Not a significant source of protein" on the back even though the gram amount is high? There's something about the actual protein (i.e. amino acids) in pork rinds that your body does not absorb it.

220994a1bcff1923ef0388192bdba8d4

on October 28, 2011
at 01:07 AM

HAH! That must be it. Fascinating. Too bad though. That was by far the cheapest form of protein I've found. $1 for 60 grams. What a shame.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 28, 2011
at 07:02 PM

Same kind of protein as gelatin. I.E. Not significantly bio-available. They are delicious, but don't count the protein in them.

2
5ef574d7893bc816ec52e04139e9bc09

(6097)

on October 28, 2011
at 01:15 AM

I'm convinced food reward plays a larger role than macronutrient composition in satiation.

072fd69647b0e765bb4b11532569f16d

(3717)

on October 28, 2011
at 01:16 PM

Namby Pamby has some insight on this exact topic. Maybe he/she will weigh in. Some discussion here: http://paleohacks.com/questions/69999/are-quest-bars-considered-paleo/70037#70037

2
96bf58d8c6bd492dc5b8ae46203fe247

(37227)

on October 28, 2011
at 12:33 AM

The ones I've had have been way too dry; if you could fry your own up fresh, I'm sure they'd be highly satiating. In fact, I make my own crisp-fried poultry skins all the time. To enjoy commercial pork rinds, I'd need to heat/fry them in a healthy animal fat. But why bother?

BTW, the steak was satiating because it has a healthy fat content.

1
24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5

on October 28, 2011
at 10:43 AM

Here's the nutritiondata.com link: http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/snacks/5362/2

The protein appears to be low in tryptophan (of the 9 essential aminos).
A quick search on tryptophan and satiety yields many links!: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?gcx=c&q=tryptophan%20satiety&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&sa=N&tab=ws

3aea514b680d01bfd7573d74517946a7

(11996)

on October 28, 2011
at 01:28 PM

The liquid protein diet that killed a few people in the 80s was made of horse and cow skin, it's rumored; I read somewhere a long time ago that this form of protein is not very usable. Maybe all these skin products are deficient in a similar way.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad

on October 28, 2011
at 03:49 PM

lol the ones I buy have a warning on them that says "not a complete source of protein" maybe someone tried to survive on them and died????

24df4e0d0e7ce98963d4641fae1a60e5

on October 28, 2011
at 04:41 PM

My whey protein powder also says that it is not suitable for (full) meal replacement b/c it lacks sufficient tryptophan.

0
77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 28, 2011
at 05:44 PM

Ew gross pork. Forbidden by all world religions and not something anyone should eat.

93ae9f2d376e5426e891a9b58d8302fa

(2936)

on October 28, 2011
at 05:53 PM

Pork was a disaster for oasis-based agricultural regions like the Mideast, but nowhere else. If you've ever seen how quickly a pig can root up a lawn or pasture and turn it into a wallow, you'll understand exactly what sort sort of threat they pose where arable land is limited. The Jews in diaspora clung to that taboo as a matter of tribal identity, but the Muslims in Indonesia love pork because their identity is not under siege. As far as disease is concerned, hogs ain't too bad, and their unclenliness gets way overplayed.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on October 28, 2011
at 07:05 PM

Not forbidden by all world religions and a perfectly healthy food. And by the way "anon" a totally useless comment. You've made me dumber for reading it. -1.

F1b39d4f620876330312f4925bd51900

(4090)

on October 28, 2011
at 05:57 PM

I don't agree with you in the Eww or should not be eaten department. But pork rinds in general -blech! In the last, and long ago, bag I had- found lots of attached thick hairs and even blackheads. -dry heaves-

0
93ae9f2d376e5426e891a9b58d8302fa

(2936)

on October 28, 2011
at 03:12 PM

I've never found them to be filling. I tend to overeat them for the salt content, since I'm on a ultra-low salt diet, then I remind myself I can just take a pinch from the salt shaker and be done with it. They're damn dry without salsa. But the crumbs are good for sopping up meat juice on the plate. I save the hard unchewable ones for when I make pork hocks, I do them like bone broth, and the hard rinds add nice texture. Don't cook the rinds, just add them afterwards. Delicious.

Maybe the salt is what fires up your appetite?

Edit:

Try taking a pinch of salt, see if that cures your craving.

0
D117467bf8e8472464ece2b81509606c

(2873)

on October 28, 2011
at 12:49 AM

If you only ate them once with breakfast, give it more time before you assume they're not filling. Just my .02.

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!