I’ve always trusted foods with anti nutrients more than less because of this
1 Like
Short answer: a tiny bit.
Back-of-envelope estimate
If you keep total grams the same (e.g., you eat 100 g of chestnut pieces with the pellicle on vs 100 g peeled):
The pellicle is ~6–10% of the nut and is mostly fiber; plus its tannins can inhibit starch digestion. Net effect ≈ 5–10% fewer absorbed kcal. Example: if 100 g peeled would be ~200 kcal, then 100 g “with pellicle” would land around ~182–186 kcal absorbed.
If you keep kernel amount the same (you eat the same kernels and just also eat their skins):
The skin adds a few low-energy grams, while tannins shave a few percent off digestibility. These mostly cancel, so net is within ~±2% of peeled (roughly −0.5% to +1.5% depending on tannin dose).
Why these numbers: the pellicle is ~6–10% of whole fruit (≈9–10% of the de-shelled nut), mostly fiber; tannins in the pellicle can inhibit α-amylase and other digestive steps, modestly lowering usable energy from the starch-rich kernel. Evidence for the inhibition is strong in vitro/animal models; the real-world effect in typical amounts is small.
If your goal is calorie control (and gentler glucose spikes), leaving some pellicle on helps a little—just don’t rely on it for big differences.