- Email: [email protected]
What do we mean when we say palatable food: Conclusion
Appetite, 1990, 14, 180
Response to Commentaries
What Do We Mean When We Say Palatable Conclusion ISRAEL
Food:
RAMIREZ
Monell Chemical Senses Center, Philadelphia
Kissileff (1990), Rogers (1990), and Booth (1990) explored the implications of three different interpretations of palatability. Within their own assumptions, what they say is largely pertinent and correct. I apparently misunderstood KissiletYs (1986) statements about intrinsic palatability as a property of foods. Replacing the word “intrinsic” with a more neutral word (e.g. estimated, measured) may prevent future misunderstandings. Rogers (1990) identifies some of the limitations of the studies of Naim et al. (1985, 1986). Nevertheless, the work of Naim et al. is still the only methodologically adequate study of the influence of sensory variety on long-term intake. Although all three commentators grant that response to foods may be influenced by both learning and innate factors, none of them acknowledge the practical implications of the distinction. If Booth is correct and palatability is largely a learned response to the post-ingestive effects of foods then, attempts to develop better tasting foods by manipulating only the sensory attributes of foods, attempts to treat obesity by providing low-energy foods that taste like conventional foods, and attempts to stimulate farm animal growth by manipulating the flavor of foods, are all likely to fail. It seems more likely that we will have to take the time to identify the relative roles of learned and innate factors (Ramirez & Sprott, 1978). REFERENCES
Booth, D. A. (1990) How not to think about immediate dietary and postingestional influences on appetites and satieties. Appetite, 14, 171-179. Kissileff, H. R. (1990) Some suggestions on dealing with palatability-Response to Ramirez. Appetite, 14, 162-166. Kissileff, H. R. (1986) Quantitative relationship between palatability and food intake in man. In M. R. Kare & J. G. Brand (Eds.), Interaction of the chemical senses with nutrition. Pp. 293-3 17. NY: Academic Press. Naim, M., Brand, J. G., Christensen, C. M., Kare, M. R. & Van Buren, S. (1986) Preference of rats for food flavors and texture in nutritionally controlled semi-purified diets. Physiology and Behavior, 37, 15-2 1. Naim, M., Brand, J. G., Kare, M. R. & Carpenter, R. G. (1985) Energy intake, weight gain and fat deposition in rats fed flavored, nutritionally controlled diets in a multichoice “cafeteria” design. Journal of Nutrition, 115, 1447-1458. Ramirez, I. & Sprott, R. L. (1978) Genetic mechanisms of drinking and feeding. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 2, 15-26.
Rogers, P. J. (1990) Why a palatability construct is needed. Appetite, 14, 167-l 70. Address reprint requests to: I. Ramirez, Monell Chemical Senses Center, 3500 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104-3308, U.S.A. 01954663/90/030180+ 01 %03.00/O
0 1990 Academic Press Limited
Response to Commentaries
What Do We Mean When We Say Palatable Conclusion ISRAEL
Food:
RAMIREZ
Monell Chemical Senses Center, Philadelphia
Kissileff (1990), Rogers (1990), and Booth (1990) explored the implications of three different interpretations of palatability. Within their own assumptions, what they say is largely pertinent and correct. I apparently misunderstood KissiletYs (1986) statements about intrinsic palatability as a property of foods. Replacing the word “intrinsic” with a more neutral word (e.g. estimated, measured) may prevent future misunderstandings. Rogers (1990) identifies some of the limitations of the studies of Naim et al. (1985, 1986). Nevertheless, the work of Naim et al. is still the only methodologically adequate study of the influence of sensory variety on long-term intake. Although all three commentators grant that response to foods may be influenced by both learning and innate factors, none of them acknowledge the practical implications of the distinction. If Booth is correct and palatability is largely a learned response to the post-ingestive effects of foods then, attempts to develop better tasting foods by manipulating only the sensory attributes of foods, attempts to treat obesity by providing low-energy foods that taste like conventional foods, and attempts to stimulate farm animal growth by manipulating the flavor of foods, are all likely to fail. It seems more likely that we will have to take the time to identify the relative roles of learned and innate factors (Ramirez & Sprott, 1978). REFERENCES
Booth, D. A. (1990) How not to think about immediate dietary and postingestional influences on appetites and satieties. Appetite, 14, 171-179. Kissileff, H. R. (1990) Some suggestions on dealing with palatability-Response to Ramirez. Appetite, 14, 162-166. Kissileff, H. R. (1986) Quantitative relationship between palatability and food intake in man. In M. R. Kare & J. G. Brand (Eds.), Interaction of the chemical senses with nutrition. Pp. 293-3 17. NY: Academic Press. Naim, M., Brand, J. G., Christensen, C. M., Kare, M. R. & Van Buren, S. (1986) Preference of rats for food flavors and texture in nutritionally controlled semi-purified diets. Physiology and Behavior, 37, 15-2 1. Naim, M., Brand, J. G., Kare, M. R. & Carpenter, R. G. (1985) Energy intake, weight gain and fat deposition in rats fed flavored, nutritionally controlled diets in a multichoice “cafeteria” design. Journal of Nutrition, 115, 1447-1458. Ramirez, I. & Sprott, R. L. (1978) Genetic mechanisms of drinking and feeding. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 2, 15-26.
Rogers, P. J. (1990) Why a palatability construct is needed. Appetite, 14, 167-l 70. Address reprint requests to: I. Ramirez, Monell Chemical Senses Center, 3500 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104-3308, U.S.A. 01954663/90/030180+ 01 %03.00/O
0 1990 Academic Press Limited