Chefs: what did you learn in school about satiety?
Asked by
JLeslie (
65721
)
April 20th, 2011
With all the worries about how fat America is getting, I was curious to know what chefs are being taught these days about customers feeling satiated. I recently went to a cooking demonstration, which was a lot of fun, and the chef put butter on the pasta before the red sauce. Ugh. It just drives home to me that when you eat out, you never know what hidden fat is in the dish.
From what I understand foodies not only focus on taste and presentation, but also how the food feels in your mouth, and how filling it is. I guess the presumption is people do not like dry foods, and want to feel full before they get up from the table. I actually hate when my food is swimming in sauce, and I don’t like dressings on sandwiches.
What is the current teaching? Is there really no care in the world about calories and fat content for professional chefs? Unless they specifically focus on healthy foods and diet?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
7 Answers
It’s the freakin’ portion sizes that are out of control.
I got my training in french schools and kitchens. The food I learned was extremely calorific—loads of cream, butter and foie gras. But the expectation was that the client would only eat small portions, and that the meal would extend over hours, not minutes.
In the States, you’d be pilloried if you tried to serve french-style portions. The expectation is that you’ll stuff yourself at the restaurant, then take home enough leftovers to get you through another meal. Otherwise, you feel robbed.
When the whole meal is reduced to that huge plate of food, it gets consumed quickly. There are no enforced pauses as there are between the many small courses of the french meal. That means that much more food gets consumed before the physiological mechanism that registers satiety can kick in.
Then there’s the problem of mindfulness. Americans, as a rule, do not pay attention to their food. They just stuff. There is a psychological component to satiety: savoring food attentively makes it more satisfying. In fact, studies have found that the mere act of intensely imagining eating a desired food can satisfy cravings. But for the most part, we lack the culture whereby eating is a near sacred ritual, to be undertaken with respect and attention.
@thorninmud Thanks for your answer. I agree portion size is disgusting in America, and I wish they were smaller so I could have three courses, let alone four. My husband and I frequently order a starter of some sort (might be a salad, soup or hor d’ouevres) an entree, and rarely, but sometimes dessert, and split everything.
Your point about everything being on one plate is a good one. I think Americans are in a hurry in general, so all the food at once fits that lifestyle.
Is it possible the chain restaurants purposely do this, so they can turn more tables? Discouraging long drawn out meals?
Sure. Quicker turnover, fewer dishes to wash, easier tickets to expedite in the kitchen, less work for the wait staff.
Funny, I have always wondered why a waiter pushes desserts or even appetizers when there is a line out the door of customers waiting. Won’t the waiter earn more by turning that table and serving more entrees? I guess the restaurant earns more selling a little appetizer for $8 or a dessert for $6 which seems crinimal. The whole cake didn’t cost $6 to make.
The more the server sells to you, the bigger tip they get. If those people are in the door, they’re more likely to wait than to leave. If it’s me, I’m offering you dessert. As well, some restaurants offer bonuses to servers for successfully selling things that the restaurant needs to sell before they have to throw it out.
@tedibear It seems better to turn 5 tables 5 times with entrees than 5 tables 3 times with dessert. But, I guess maybe the insentives you mention add up.
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
