It is well established that the consumption of medium-chain triglycerides (MCT) can increase satiety and reduce food intake. Many media articles promote the use of coconut oil for weight loss advocating similar health benefits to that of MCT. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of MCT oil compared to coconut oil and control oil on food intake and satiety. Following an overnight fast, participants consumed a test breakfast smoothie containing 205kcal of either (i) MCT oil (ii) coconut oil or (iii) vegetable oil (control) on three separate test days. Participants recorded appetite ratings on visual analogue scales and were presented with an ad libitum lunch meal of preselected sandwiches 180min after consumption of the breakfast. The results showed a significant difference in energy and macronutrient intakes at the ad libitum meal between the three oils with the MCT oil reducing food intake compared to the coconut and control oil. Differences in food intake throughout the day were found for energy and fat, with the control having increased food intake compared to the MCT and coconut. The MCT also increased fullness over the three hours after breakfast compared to the control and coconut oils. The coconut oil was also reported as being less palatable than the MCT oil. The results of this study confirm the differences that exist between MCT and coconut oil such that coconut oil cannot be promoted as having similar effects to MCT oil on food intake and satiety.

Consuming medium-chain triglycerides (MCT) may reduce subsequent energy intake and increase satiety compared to long-chain triglycerides (LCT) but this may be dependent on the physical form in which MCT is ingested. Twenty-nine participants completed four trials where they consumed a breakfast containing either LCT or MCT in solid (Con-S and MCT-S, respectively) or liquid (Con-L and MCT-L, respectively) form. Appetite ratings and gastric emptying (GE) were taken at baseline and at 15 min intervals for 4 h. Energy intake was assessed at an ad libitum meal and via weighed food records for the remainder of the day. Ad libitum energy intake was highest in Con-L (4101 ± 1278 kJ vs. Con-S, 3323 ± 1196; MCT-S, 3516 ± 1058; MCT-L, 3257 ± 1345; p = 0.001). Intake over the whole day was significantly lower in MCT-L (7904 ± 3244) compared to Con-L (9531 ± 3557; p = 0.001). There were significant differences in GE times (p < 0.05), with MCT breakfasts delaying GE to a greater extent than LCT, and MCT-L having the longest GE times. There were no differences in appetite sensations. MCT reduce subsequent intake without affecting subjective sensations of appetite when consumed in liquid form.