Food intake influences human cognition, olfaction, hunger, and food craving. However, little research has been done in this field to elucidate the effects of different nutrients. Thus, the goal of our study was to investigate the effects of oral ingestion of different nutrient solutions on olfactory, cognitive, metabolic and psychophysical function. Twenty healthy men participated in our study employing a double-blind, cross-over, repeated measurement design. Participants were tested on four different study days. Each day participants received, in randomized order, one of three isocaloric (protein, carbohydrate or fat 600 kcal, 1,500 mL) solutions or a placebo. Olfactory and cognitive tests (monitoring only) were conducted three times, i.e., 60 min before the beginning of nutrient intake, following oral ingestion of the solution and 60, and 240 min after. Psychophysical and metabolic function tests (active grehlin, desacyl ghrelin, insulin, glucagon, glucose, triglyceride, urea) were performed 7 times on each examination day (observation period: −60 min, 0 = solution intake, +60, +120, +180, +240, and +300 min). Ratings of hunger and food craving significantly differed over the observation period with lowest ratings following application of the protein solution. Highest ratings of craving were found following placebo intake. We further observed a significant positive correlation of active grehlin with hunger and fat, protein and sweets craving for each nutrient solution. Active grehlin significantly correlated with carbohydrate craving for carbohydrate and fat solution and with vegetable craving for fat solution only. Hunger hormone levels, hunger and food craving ratings demonstrated that the hierarchical order that appears in satiating efficiencies of isovolumetric-isocaloric ingested macronutrients is protein > fat > carbohydrate. Our study reveals that the type of nutrient exerts a significant influence on metabolic parameters, hunger and food craving.

Stomach distension and energy per time are factors influencing satiety. Moreover, different rates of nutrient intake induce different stomach distension. The goal of our studies was to elucidate the influence of different oral rates of nutrient intake (normal rate versus slow intervalled rate; study I) and intravenous low rate macronutrient application (protein, carbohydrate, fat) or placebo (study II) on psychophysical function. The pilot studies investigated the effects of 1) study I: a mixed nutrient solution (1/3 protein, 1/3 fat, 1/3 carbohydrates) 2) study II: intravenous macronutrient infusions (protein, carbohydrate, fat) or placebo on psychophysical function (mood, hunger, food craving, alertness, smell intensity ratings and hedonic ratings) in human subjects. In study I 10 male subjects (age range: 21–30 years) completed the study protocol participating in both test conditions and in study II 20 male subjects (age range: 19–41 years) completed the study protocol participating in all test conditions. Additionally, metabolic function was analyzed and cognitive and olfactory tests were conducted twice starting 100 min before the beginning of the intervention and 240 min after. Psychophysical (mood, hunger, fat-, protein-, carbohydrate-, sweets- and vegetable-craving), alertness and metabolic function tests were performed seven times on each examination day. Greater effects on hunger and food cravings were observed for normal rate of intake compared to slow intervalled rate of intake and intravenous low rate macronutrient application. Our findings potentially confirm that volume of the food ingested and a higher rate of energy per time contribute to satiety during normal rate of food intake, while slow intervalled rate of food intake and intravenous low rate macronutrient application showed no effects on satiation. Our results motivate the view that a certain amount of volume of the food ingested and a certain energy per time ratio are necessary to reduce hunger and food craving.