1

Abbey Haynes

Elizabeth King

NUTR-1020 Summer 2020

19 July 2020

Diet Research Paper - Volumetrics

DIET SUMMARY:

Volumetrics is the diet I wanted to research and learn more about. Since learning about it, I

have learned the pros, cons, and reasoning for this diet. The core purpose of the Volumetrics diet is

to consume more water-based foods to fulfill satiety on a daily basis. Water-based foods, such as

fruits, vegetables, and broth-based soups are more filling and fewer calories. This tactic is used in

this diet because “Results show that when participants in the study ate a first course of soup before

a lunch entree, they reduced their total calorie intake at lunch (soup + entrée) by 20 percent,

compared to when they did not eat soup” (Penn State’s “Eating Soup Will Help Cut Calories At

Meals” on ScienceDaily). Consuming the water-based foods can be done as snacking on fruits

throughout the day, or eating a small bowl of broth-based soup or salad prior to the entree, as a

couple of examples.

Few foods are excluded, rather, there are categories each type of food belongs in.

“Category one (very low-density) includes nonstarchy fruits and vegetables, nonfat milk, and

broth-based soup. Category two (low-density) includes starchy fruits and veggies, grains, breakfast

cereal, low-fat meat, legumes, and low-fat mixed dishes like chili and spaghetti. Category three

(medium-density) includes meat, cheese, pizza, french fries, salad dressing, bread, pretzels, ice
 2

cream, and cake. And category four (high-density) includes crackers, chips, chocolate candies,

cookies, nuts, butter, and oil”. How much food that should be limited during the use of this diet

will be determined by whichever category it is in (US News).

THE THEORY:

As mentioned above, the theory behind this diet is to consume low-energy foods to have

higher satiety, so that you feel more full for longer periods of time. This is to lessen cravings and

overeating. From USnews.com: “Diets rich in low-energy-dense foods have been shown to

promote fullness on fewer calories and deliver weight loss, according to the Centers for Disease

Control and Prevention” (US News).

THE CLAIM:

The Volumetrics diet’s main aim is to help with weight loss, both in the short term and long

term. It’s good for long term weight loss (keeping the weight off for two years or more) because

there is little restriction on what can be eaten, which makes it easier to avoid overeating if proper

portion control is followed. In the short term, it’s easy to see results fast because fruits and veggies

are filling but lack dense calories, thus filling more full for longer. There are also added benefits -

from USnews.com, the Volumetrics diet is also good for heart health, as well as managing or

preventing diabetes because it lowers fasting insulin levels. Because the diet is light on salt and

fats, it’s good for the heart and cardiovascular health (US News).

NUTRITIONAL ADEQUACY

When it comes to macronutrients, the Volumetrics seems to measure up quite well. Because

there are few limitations on amounts of food, it is rather easy to consume macros for any given day.

I took an example meal plan from US News and put it into NutritionCalc to get an idea of what
 3

macros it would calculate. Based on the one-day Diet Analysis on NutritionCalc for the

Volumetrics diet, the daily intake of protein was 143%. With that, it’s easy to see that you can go

overboard one way or another. An easy fix to lower daily protein intake would be to consume

more fruits, veggies, and grains. The intake for carbohydrates was 98%, which is pretty much right

on target. For fats, it was 105% of the daily recommended intake, which is a little high, but again

can be easily mitigated by less fatty foods. If this was the exact same intake day after day, the high

protein can affect the kidney, heart, and other organs to work harder than needed, leading to health

problems down the road.

When it comes to micronutrients (vitamins and minerals), some are well over the daily

recommended intake, and others fall short. For example, Vitamin C came in at 308% of the daily

intake based in NutritionCalc, but Vitamin D came in at 20%. Sure, you could use a vitamin

supplement, or eating an orange would bring that percentage right up while keeping calories low.

Vitamin E came in at a very low 2% for the day, which can easily be fixed by a leafy green salad,

or some peanut butter. There isn’t much concern to have a high intake of Vitamin C, as it is

water-soluble and will be excreted out. Having too low of intake for many vitamins can cause a

slew of problems later in life, including poor bone, organ, skin health, etc.

“PROS” ABOUT THE DIET

From USnews.com, the Volumetrics diet says that a “pro” of the diet is the feeling more full

for longer, more likely to decrease overeating. Also, no foods are off-limits, but there are some that

are limited (US News). This diet is rated highly for both short term and long term weight loss.

Because of the intake of fruits and veggies, this diet is also good for heart health and preventing
 4

chronic illnesses. Another bonus is that it is relatively easy to get the daily recommended intake of

both macronutrients and micronutrients since you can easily change up what you eat, instead of

eating the same or similar items that other diets require, missing out on vital nutrients.

“CONS” ABOUT THE DIET

Again, from USnews.com, a couple “cons” include meal prep, and of course, if you’re not

a fan of fruits and vegetables, this diet isn’t for you (US News). Because brother-based soup is

recommended, I found that the diet could have higher levels of sodium because of these soups and

how they are processed and preserved.

DIET RESEARCH:

I was able to find a year-long trial on the website for the National Center of Biotechnology

Information. The trial is testing and comparing the Volumetrics diet (phrased as Reduced-Fat +

Fruits and Veggies, or ‘RF+FV’) to a Reduced Fat (‘RF’) diet and comparing the results of weight

loss of the two groups practicing the two different diets. The RF+FV group had similar instructions

as the RF group, but the RF+FV group had specific instructions from the facilitators to include

water-rich foods, such as fruits and veggies as a large part of their diet. Whereas the RF group was

just told to have reduced fat in their diet for this trial.

The trial started with 97 obese women, separated randomly into two groups. One half was

the RF+FV, the other was RF. After one year, 71 one of the women finished the trial. There were

two different phases for this trial. The first phase was six months and included a weekly

one-on-one meeting with a dietician. In the second phase, the participants met with the dieticians

once a month privately, but also in a small group setting as well. The dieticians would rotate seeing

each group to avoid bias. This was not a blinded study to ensure the safety of the participants. No
 5

daily food intake limits were given to either group. Both groups were taught to make food choices

that had reduced-fat (and heightened fruit and veggie intake for the RF+FV group). Both groups

knew there was another group, but did not know what the other group was practicing.

After the year trial, both groups lost weight. However, the RF+FV group lost a significant

amount more. At the end of the trial, the average weight loss for the RF group was approximately

14.1 lbs., whereas the RF+FV group lost on average 17.4 lbs. 49% of the RF+FV group was no

longer considered obese, whereas only 28% of the RF group was no longer considered obese per

BMI. In conclusion to this trial, a reduced-fat and higher intake of fruits and vegetables does

indeed help with weight loss when consistent.

One potential problem that could arise during this trial would be over-reporting the

consumption of fruits and vegetables in the RF+FV group. Another could be the under-reporting

of the consumption of food in both groups, however, the hope is to have minimized this with the

visits with the dieticians. Perhaps a two year follow up meeting with the participants who finished

could offer insight in the long term maintenance in the weight loss of this trial. (Ello-Martin et al.)

CONCLUSION:

In conclusion, I think the Volumetrics diet seems safe and effective for most people. The

diet looks to be well-rounded and inclusive of most if not all nutrients while maintaining a healthy

amount of macronutrients. It’s been tested through scientific studies and seems to be popular

online, with many articles written about it, as well as books published with recipes that fit well into

the diet.
 6

Works Cited

Ello-Martin, Julia A, et al. “Dietary Energy Density in the Treatment of Obesity: a

Year-Long Trial Comparing 2 Weight-Loss Diets.” National Center for Biotechnology

Information, Am J Clin Nutr., 1 June 2008,

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2018610/.

Penn State. “Eating Soup Will Help Cut Calories At Meals.” ScienceDaily, ScienceDaily, 2

May 2007, www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070501142326.htm.

US News. “Volumetrics Diet Reviews.” U.S. News & World Report, U.S. News & World

Report, 2020, health.usnews.com/best-diet/volumetrics-diet/reviews.

US News. “Volumetrics Diet.” U.S. News & World Report, U.S. News & World Report,

2020, health.usnews.com/best-diet/volumetrics-diet.