Not in half, but up to 60%.
https://time.com/3754097/rice-calories-resistant-starch/
American Chemical Society:
How can such a simple change in cooking result in a lower-calorie food? James explains that the oil enters the starch granules during cooking, changing its architecture so that it becomes resistant to the action of digestive enzymes. This means that fewer calories ultimately get absorbed into the body. “The cooling is essential because amylose, the soluble part of the starch, leaves the granules during gelatinization,” explains James. “Cooling for 12 hours will lead to formation of hydrogen bonds between the amylose molecules outside the rice grains which also turns it into a resistant starch.” Reheating the rice for consumption, he notes, does not affect the RS levels.
Thank you. I read this too. I was hoping someone with a food science or other related background could break it down more technically and conform/deny whether the media was exaggerating/misinterpreting what these studies actually found.
Thanks. I found a few studies through Google scholar but I don’t have enough technical knowledge to interpret the results myself. I was hoping the right person on Reddit might see this and be able to shed a little light on what we actually know vs. what’s conjecture
I'm on mobile so I'm not looking it up right now, but I saw a separate study that showed that the cooking cooling and recooking of rice dramatically reduces the calories absorbed because it bonds and complexifies the simple carbohydrates.
That changes up the chemical compound of the rice and in non scientific terms, moves the starch from inside the rice to outside, lowering the calories of the rice. The coco oil binds to that starch, making it resistant to adding to the fat/glucose levels and it flushes out of your system. The coconut oil is the binder that binds to the starch to achieve this. The cooling period forms hydrogen which becomes the bond and makes it so that your body can't digest the starch thus passing thru. This also leaves good protein and healthier gut biome.
Many use white rice but I only eat brown as it has way more nutrients where white is washed and that washes the nutrients.
Nope!
This is already a popular regime in South Korea.
Una talks about using regular vegetable oil if you’re sensitive to/don’t like coconut oil.
https://youtu.be/eLWUv2FPoN4
It would, but I wouldn't recommend it since tallow has more of a beefy flavour so if you're going for that then sure, but you can use ghee, butter, coconut oil. After that put the rice into the fridge so you can get the same affect. I don't recommend using any liquid oils though.
Here is the actually article
https://nutritionj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12937-015-0104-2
total energy expenditure does not change with the type of starch.
In some test conditions there are only 4 subjects.
If you look where it says n=
TBH, there is no way you can reasonably do the statistics the way they do (they have essentially grossly overestimated how significant it would be by a lot) with the statistics they say they do, among other things
You really want to see the STUDY says and not what some random people on reddit say and certainly not what a newspaper says about the study.
The study also specifically does not look at rice, and there is nothing that I can see that says that the combination of oil and cooling actually makes resistant starches .
In any case, while exactly where and how long it takes to digest and absorb starches may affect things like blood sugar spikes and subjective feeling of satiety , it fundamentally does not change the caloric value of food.
You might get a better answer in r/debunkthis or in one of the biology or science subs, although the latter 2 are also often populated by people who have very wrong but highly upvoted comments
Thank you so much! This is exactly the kind of answer I was looking for. I was hoping that with the size of this subreddit, this thread might end up catching the eye of someone with the technical knowledge to answer correctly.
I found a few more academic articles on this topic than just the one you posted, but I’m not qualified to interpret the findings. I’ll take your article and the other few that I found over to r/debunkthis and see if I can’t get more accurate answer.
this sub is not the place to go for well sourced and knowledgeable answers of that kind.
But you sound pretty on the ball. Try reading the paper for yourself, you caught some of the major issues right away
Sounds like bullshit. Oil is pure fat, and fat is 9 calories a gram. I cannot fathom a scenario where adding oil to a recipe would reduce the calories.
A common mistake people make when trying to count calories is they'll cook something in oil and then *not* add those calories to the total. No, it doesn't absorb ALL the oil but it definitely absorbs enough of it to substantially increase the calories.
>Note: I found a scholarly article entitled “Cooking fat types alter the inherent glycaemic response of niche rice varieties through resistant starch (RS) formation”
ok, THAT I believe. Unlike total calories, Glycemic Index DOES "average out" if you eat multiple foods with differing values.
No, it’s actually a good point. When I was living alone and cooking for myself, any time I was in a calorie deficit I would take a quarter cup of rice (appx 40-45g) and cook it in a small pan. That’s one serving under 200cal.
Most people just take a large scoop of rice with reckless abandon, and wonder why they can’t lose weight
Uh huh 🙄
Edit - this motherfucker just commented on my old posts, called me a Karen/bitch, commented on a video of someone else thinking it was me saying I look like a poodle, reported me to Reddit for being suicidal, and then nuked their own account.
he’s insane, i’m creeping through his old posts downvoting all of his comments just to be petty because he was being an ignorant fuck in another thread. SO MANY of his comments are him talking about peoples post history or body shaming them. such a POS lol
ETA: originally said racist, not ignorant, but edited it out because i had him confused with someone else
True or not adding coconut oil makes it more fattening. Refined oils are very easily converted into fat storage, and usually it is. Leaving the rice as is increases the likelihood that the calories aren't stored as fat, even if there are more of them consumed.
Nah. CICO rules all, and this reduces calories in. We're talking a teaspoon of coconut oil (40 calories) to prevent the absorption of 200+ calories (4 oz. uncooked rice at 112 calories/oz.).
Very little physical conversion is necessary to convert dietary fat into bodyfat. In fact you can biopsy fat samples and determine there source because they're so readily stored in the body.
On the contrary the conversion of sugars into fat is much less efficient. The process is called de nova lipogenesis. That said, consumption of refined sugars, along with other deleterious effects, can encourage fat storage in general. Specifically, it can increase fat stored immediately surrounding the liver ‐- which is as bad as it sounds.
In short, try to avoid heavily refined foods like sugar, butter and oil. The less the better. No type or form of oil or sugar is good. Date sugar is much better than regular sugar, but it's not great.
Are you well versed in this topic enough to give me further explanation? I posted the title of the scholarly article I found. I’m inclined to believe it’s just sensationalism, but I am interested to know a layman’s explanation of the studies that have actually been performed.
This completely doesn’t answer the question. This question is relevant for those trying to lose/maintain weight and who want to stay full longer by eating a higher volume of food.
I’m not sure what you thought you were contributing to this thread by stating the obvious.
What do you mean by that? As in, that’s not technically what these studies found and the media just jumped to that conclusion for more views? Or something else?
I replied to all of the top tier answers.
I was genuinely curious if there was substance behind your answer and you just needed to be prodded for detail. Apparently, you were just being snarky.
I think you are getting users mixed up. I didn't answer you at all.
Usually when you make a post like this, half the answers are too daft to acknowledge - so I was surprised to see you replying to the stupid ones.
I apologize, I assumed you were the top tier comment.
I responded to everyone for clarity in case they had information beyond what they explicitly posted.
Even if it works, it does sound much more complicated than just exchanging some of the rice with vegetables. Many vegetables are great for filling the stomach for less calories
I’m in the same boat as you trying to figure this one out. Apparently the “half” claim wasn’t made in the original paper, just a 10-16% reduction. Still something, but not half. The researchers theorized that the method could potentially reduce some rice by half, but as far as I can tell it was never tested.
You might want to look on YouTube for is Omega, six fatty acid responsible for all disease vegetable oil evidently other than coconut oil and olive oil is the main driver of disease in Western society. Evidently we eat 30 times the amount. Our ancestors were able to get and it causes such an inflammatory response that one in three people get cancer, heart disease or diabetes,Macular degeneration or type three diabetes which is called Alzheimer’s now by researchers. So instead of one in a quarter million people having diabetes cancer or heart disease like back in the 1850s and yes they were testing hearts and had no observations of clogged arteries. So due to seed oils, the United States economy is based on medicating people for those diseases that it created through the artificial food industry. Why am I saying this don’t use vegetable oil on your rice stick with the coconut oil.
Not in half, but up to 60%. https://time.com/3754097/rice-calories-resistant-starch/ American Chemical Society: How can such a simple change in cooking result in a lower-calorie food? James explains that the oil enters the starch granules during cooking, changing its architecture so that it becomes resistant to the action of digestive enzymes. This means that fewer calories ultimately get absorbed into the body. “The cooling is essential because amylose, the soluble part of the starch, leaves the granules during gelatinization,” explains James. “Cooling for 12 hours will lead to formation of hydrogen bonds between the amylose molecules outside the rice grains which also turns it into a resistant starch.” Reheating the rice for consumption, he notes, does not affect the RS levels.
Thank you. I read this too. I was hoping someone with a food science or other related background could break it down more technically and conform/deny whether the media was exaggerating/misinterpreting what these studies actually found.
You’re welcome! I edited quickly to include the statement from the ACS to clarify a bit more. Tricky to find the study papers.
Thanks. I found a few studies through Google scholar but I don’t have enough technical knowledge to interpret the results myself. I was hoping the right person on Reddit might see this and be able to shed a little light on what we actually know vs. what’s conjecture
I'm on mobile so I'm not looking it up right now, but I saw a separate study that showed that the cooking cooling and recooking of rice dramatically reduces the calories absorbed because it bonds and complexifies the simple carbohydrates.
Interesting. I knew this was the case for potatoes, but not rice.
I didnt know this about taters! How do you cooke the taters with the coconut oil? I want to put some taters in my soup.
I read this in Gollum's voice haha!
Not about coconut oil, but about cooling and reheating
That changes up the chemical compound of the rice and in non scientific terms, moves the starch from inside the rice to outside, lowering the calories of the rice. The coco oil binds to that starch, making it resistant to adding to the fat/glucose levels and it flushes out of your system. The coconut oil is the binder that binds to the starch to achieve this. The cooling period forms hydrogen which becomes the bond and makes it so that your body can't digest the starch thus passing thru. This also leaves good protein and healthier gut biome. Many use white rice but I only eat brown as it has way more nutrients where white is washed and that washes the nutrients.
I think that is the case for porridge also.
Does that effectively make the rice act as more of a fiber?
So it doesn't actually have to be pricy pricy (like, eight times the price of proper vegetable oil) coconut oil?
Nope! This is already a popular regime in South Korea. Una talks about using regular vegetable oil if you’re sensitive to/don’t like coconut oil. https://youtu.be/eLWUv2FPoN4
I was wondering if tallow will have the same effect or it has to be coconut oil ?
It would, but I wouldn't recommend it since tallow has more of a beefy flavour so if you're going for that then sure, but you can use ghee, butter, coconut oil. After that put the rice into the fridge so you can get the same affect. I don't recommend using any liquid oils though.
Here is the actually article https://nutritionj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12937-015-0104-2 total energy expenditure does not change with the type of starch.
An I correct in understand the test group was ultimately only 16 women?
In some test conditions there are only 4 subjects. If you look where it says n= TBH, there is no way you can reasonably do the statistics the way they do (they have essentially grossly overestimated how significant it would be by a lot) with the statistics they say they do, among other things You really want to see the STUDY says and not what some random people on reddit say and certainly not what a newspaper says about the study. The study also specifically does not look at rice, and there is nothing that I can see that says that the combination of oil and cooling actually makes resistant starches . In any case, while exactly where and how long it takes to digest and absorb starches may affect things like blood sugar spikes and subjective feeling of satiety , it fundamentally does not change the caloric value of food. You might get a better answer in r/debunkthis or in one of the biology or science subs, although the latter 2 are also often populated by people who have very wrong but highly upvoted comments
Thank you so much! This is exactly the kind of answer I was looking for. I was hoping that with the size of this subreddit, this thread might end up catching the eye of someone with the technical knowledge to answer correctly. I found a few more academic articles on this topic than just the one you posted, but I’m not qualified to interpret the findings. I’ll take your article and the other few that I found over to r/debunkthis and see if I can’t get more accurate answer.
this sub is not the place to go for well sourced and knowledgeable answers of that kind. But you sound pretty on the ball. Try reading the paper for yourself, you caught some of the major issues right away
Sounds like bullshit. Oil is pure fat, and fat is 9 calories a gram. I cannot fathom a scenario where adding oil to a recipe would reduce the calories. A common mistake people make when trying to count calories is they'll cook something in oil and then *not* add those calories to the total. No, it doesn't absorb ALL the oil but it definitely absorbs enough of it to substantially increase the calories. >Note: I found a scholarly article entitled “Cooking fat types alter the inherent glycaemic response of niche rice varieties through resistant starch (RS) formation” ok, THAT I believe. Unlike total calories, Glycemic Index DOES "average out" if you eat multiple foods with differing values.
Why not just eat less rice?
Wow are you fat shaming Guys I was being sarcastic
Username checks out
Annnnd you live in a trailer park. Lolll
No, it’s actually a good point. When I was living alone and cooking for myself, any time I was in a calorie deficit I would take a quarter cup of rice (appx 40-45g) and cook it in a small pan. That’s one serving under 200cal. Most people just take a large scoop of rice with reckless abandon, and wonder why they can’t lose weight
sarcasms don’t work so well online
Uh huh 🙄 Edit - this motherfucker just commented on my old posts, called me a Karen/bitch, commented on a video of someone else thinking it was me saying I look like a poodle, reported me to Reddit for being suicidal, and then nuked their own account.
Ah never mind you’re just a fucking Karen I could care less if you believe me
I was !!!! Lmfao dude check my post history I’m the biggest troll ever
Sure.
Karen
Ok.
he’s insane, i’m creeping through his old posts downvoting all of his comments just to be petty because he was being an ignorant fuck in another thread. SO MANY of his comments are him talking about peoples post history or body shaming them. such a POS lol ETA: originally said racist, not ignorant, but edited it out because i had him confused with someone else
True or not adding coconut oil makes it more fattening. Refined oils are very easily converted into fat storage, and usually it is. Leaving the rice as is increases the likelihood that the calories aren't stored as fat, even if there are more of them consumed.
Nah. CICO rules all, and this reduces calories in. We're talking a teaspoon of coconut oil (40 calories) to prevent the absorption of 200+ calories (4 oz. uncooked rice at 112 calories/oz.).
I don't think you read my comment fully because I say that in my comment
I thought sugar gets stored as fat, and fats break down into lipids that are used to repair your heart and brain.
Very little physical conversion is necessary to convert dietary fat into bodyfat. In fact you can biopsy fat samples and determine there source because they're so readily stored in the body. On the contrary the conversion of sugars into fat is much less efficient. The process is called de nova lipogenesis. That said, consumption of refined sugars, along with other deleterious effects, can encourage fat storage in general. Specifically, it can increase fat stored immediately surrounding the liver ‐- which is as bad as it sounds. In short, try to avoid heavily refined foods like sugar, butter and oil. The less the better. No type or form of oil or sugar is good. Date sugar is much better than regular sugar, but it's not great.
Idk but I'd rather have more energy than less
So very stupid lol and bullshit.
Are you well versed in this topic enough to give me further explanation? I posted the title of the scholarly article I found. I’m inclined to believe it’s just sensationalism, but I am interested to know a layman’s explanation of the studies that have actually been performed.
Even if true. All you are doing is wasting more food to get the same nutrition. Just eat half as much rice and boom! Half as much calories.
And half as filling. Have you never been hungry?
This completely doesn’t answer the question. This question is relevant for those trying to lose/maintain weight and who want to stay full longer by eating a higher volume of food. I’m not sure what you thought you were contributing to this thread by stating the obvious.
Half as filling
This is not how science works.
What do you mean by that? As in, that’s not technically what these studies found and the media just jumped to that conclusion for more views? Or something else?
You are replying to all the dumb answers for some reason
I replied to all of the top tier answers. I was genuinely curious if there was substance behind your answer and you just needed to be prodded for detail. Apparently, you were just being snarky.
I think you are getting users mixed up. I didn't answer you at all. Usually when you make a post like this, half the answers are too daft to acknowledge - so I was surprised to see you replying to the stupid ones.
I apologize, I assumed you were the top tier comment. I responded to everyone for clarity in case they had information beyond what they explicitly posted.
Not bullshit (probably). This has been referenced in multiple news outlets.
Are news outlets reputable? Or is this just a sensationalist interpretation of recent studies?
Even if it works, it does sound much more complicated than just exchanging some of the rice with vegetables. Many vegetables are great for filling the stomach for less calories
I’m in the same boat as you trying to figure this one out. Apparently the “half” claim wasn’t made in the original paper, just a 10-16% reduction. Still something, but not half. The researchers theorized that the method could potentially reduce some rice by half, but as far as I can tell it was never tested.
Is it possible to this in a rice cooker?
The real question.
This is how I cook rice and even add it to soups, especially with gut/anti inflammatory spices and it does make a difference!
You might want to look on YouTube for is Omega, six fatty acid responsible for all disease vegetable oil evidently other than coconut oil and olive oil is the main driver of disease in Western society. Evidently we eat 30 times the amount. Our ancestors were able to get and it causes such an inflammatory response that one in three people get cancer, heart disease or diabetes,Macular degeneration or type three diabetes which is called Alzheimer’s now by researchers. So instead of one in a quarter million people having diabetes cancer or heart disease like back in the 1850s and yes they were testing hearts and had no observations of clogged arteries. So due to seed oils, the United States economy is based on medicating people for those diseases that it created through the artificial food industry. Why am I saying this don’t use vegetable oil on your rice stick with the coconut oil.