We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
NEW RESEARCH HAS found that skipping breakfast doesn’t necessarily have an adverse effect on a person’s weight and calorie intake.
Its findings show that breakfast may not, in fact, be the most important meal of the day – a widely believed and promoted stance.
Research, published in the British Medical Journal, analysed the results of 13 randomised trials, mainly from the US and UK, which looked into the effects of skipping breakfast.
Weight and energy intake were measured objectively at study visits in 11 studies, while the remaining two studies measured outcomes through participants self-reporting.
The studies ranged in duration from two to 16 weeks when examining the effect on weight loss (with some trials also looking at energy intake).
Trials exclusively looking at calorie consumption to examine the effect on total daily energy intake ranged in duration from two 24-hour periods or two eight-hour periods up to six weeks.
Analysis of the results found there was a small difference in weight favouring participants who skipped breakfast (mean difference of 0.44 kg), but there was some inconsistency across trial results.
Participants who ate breakfast had a higher total daily energy intake than those assigned to skip breakfast (mean difference 259.79 kcal/day), despite substantial inconsistency across trial results.
The researchers said there were risks of bias in the trial, noting they only had short-term follow-ups (mean period of seven weeks for weight; two weeks for energy intake). As such, they recommended the findings be interpreted with caution.
Discussing the research, Tim Spector, professor of genetic epidemiology at King’s College London, stated: “The disadvantages of skipping breakfast have now been debunked by several randomised trials.”
Spector said “reasonable evidence now suggests that skipping breakfast can actually be a useful strategy to reduce weight”. However, he warned there is no “one size fits all“.
Traditional beliefs about food
Spector said there are “several possible reasons, linked to traditional beliefs about nutrition” people believe skipping breakfast is bad for weight loss.
“We are told to eat little and often — “grazing” rather than “gorging” to avoid “stress” on the body from having to digest large meals, especially later in the day when glucose peaks are higher and metabolic rates lower.”
He said this rationale was based on multiple studies, noting that the concept of over-compensation later in the day is correct, adding: “People who skip breakfast do eat more lunch and slightly reduce their activity — but importantly not nearly enough to make up the lost energy intake.
The other reason that experts were misled was because multiple observational studies have shown that obese and diabetic people skipped meals more often than thin people. This mindset became ingrained in nutritional dogma. But these observational studies were flawed by bias.
“People who skipped breakfast were more likely on average to be poorer, less educated, less healthy, and to have a generally poorer diet. Overweight people were more likely to try and diet, and after a binge were more likely to feel guilty and skip a meal.”
Spector said some people are programmed to prefer eating food earlier in the day and others later, something which may be based on our unique personal metabolism. “While waiting for guidelines to change, no harm can be done in trying out your own personal experiments in skipping breakfast,” he stated.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
I generally don’t eat breakfast during the week as it is just shovelling food in for the sake of it. Pre agriculture humans wouldn’t have had access to breakfast as they didn’t or couldn’t store food. If you think about it hunger signals would have been a signal to go hunt. Breakfast is just pushed by cereal companies like Kellogs trying to sell their fake foods and fake research on a bloated population for $$$.
If anyone has weight or food issues look into Intermittent fasting, time restricted eating , eating in a 8/16 window for example is awesome in terms of seeing yourself in control of your food and appetite, not the other way round.
@Dave Dublin: I had to.lose weight and tried to find the best thing that worked for me. Without reading articles or following any advice I started eating on a small much and dinner in the evening coupled with plenty of walking. I lost weight really well and kept it off but I feel so much better and not eatingbfor the sake of it. I do indulge a bit at the weekends but overall I think I was just eating meals and snacks at set times because that’s what we are told to do. The human body has evolved to have to work to eat
@Dave Dublin: I started intermittent fasting (16:8) on Jan 2nd and have lost 1 stone as of today. No exercise involved, other than a 30 minute walk each day. I’ve more energy and I’m sleeping better. It’s a lot more manageable than people would believe….just simply eat (sensibly) between 12 – 8pm.
@Fergus Murphy: I did that fasting two years ago, combined with very low carb on the days I was eating. No weight loss for a couple of weeks, but then the eight began to fall off me. I lost a stone in a year, even though I wasn’t seriously overweight to begin with. The weight has stayed off even though I don’t fast anymore. I just watch watch eat and exercise. By exercise I mean walk or cycle to the shops instead of driving, and I cycle commute. So I’m not losing any time out of my day, in fact cycling is faster than driving most days.
@Fergus Murphy: well done!, I only heard about the concept a year ago, yet in hindsight its so obvious and intuitive. The nutritional industrial complex have done a good brain washing job.
In my experience it works well with low carb as the food is less likely to cause cravings.
@Dave Dublin: Sounds interesting, what is a 8/16 window?
@Bi88les: I’m guessing eat within an 8 hour window and no eating within the remaining 16 hrs.
@Bi88les: eating during 8 hours and fasting the other 16
@Bi88les: eat 12pm to 8pm for example, it could even be 10am to 6pm. Relying on calorie counting alone I think just leads to failure as it tends not to be sustainable. Obviously you still have to be mindful about what you eat. Eat real foods, don’t be afraid of fat from natural foods (not seed oils) and good quality protein.
@Bi88les: Depends on your lifestyle / schedule but it works so long as it’s a 16 hour fast.
@Dave Dublin: I’ve carbs restricted to about an average of 120grms per day I try to have fat as 50% of my calories (mostly healthy fat of course) and the rest is protein and fiber etc. It’s working and doesn’t really feel like dieting. It’s just sensible meals choices, correct potion sizes coupled with intermittent fasting.
@Dave Dublin: I think it’s a bit much to suggest that breakfast is only there due to the likes of Kelloggs pushing it. I’d say people were eating stuff in the morning long before cornflakes arrived. Not everything is a sinister plot.
It’s all down to what works for the individual. If you don’t need breakfast that’s grand. If I skipped breakfast I’d be a teary hypoglycaemic mess by 08:30.
@Fergus Murphy: Good for you, but three hours of walking that you were not doing previously is “exercise” by definition.
That said, what ever works for anyone to gain control over their eating and wellbeing should be explored, once it has no obvious negative health impacts.
Positive results from making relatively small changes to lifestyle and eating habits, are a great motivator to continue doing so.
@Dave Dublin: Kelloggs are responsible for chemtrails . Makes you crave poptarts
@Dave Dublin: Joe rogan… Is that you?!!
Everything in moderation. Surely it’s not hard to understand.
What, you mean a bowl of cocoa pops is not the most important meal of the day? Who knew?!!
doesnt matter what time of day you first eat – your first meal is your breakfast — it is the meal that breaks your fast — you may call it lunch ,bruch ,dinner ,tea or supper – but your first meal of the day is your breakfast !!
@Eric Davies: I like what you did there! Ha Ha
I disagree with this article. Breakfast, no matter what it is you eat, kick starts the body’s metabolism and helps the body to regulate and function properly during the day. The later you have breakfast after you’ve been fasting (sleeping) the later the body starts to burn calories. Makes sense to me.
@Geralyn Early: And I disagree with the notion that 2 + 2 = 4.
The study doesn’t claim to be conclusive, but disagreeing with it with or without rationale is a logical fallacy “This makes sense to me, so it doesn’t matter what data suggests”.
@Gerard: Gerard. I don’t claim to know what makes sense to other people and I don’t honestly care either and having now found out that that scientific research was conducted by a university in Melbourne, I am definitely sticking with my tried and trusted routine of eating a healthy breakfast in the morning! I exercise regularly too so my body doesn’t allow me to get away with not eating in the morning. Far too hungry.
@Geralyn Early: nonsense Geralyn… your hunger in the morning after not eating breakfast is just in your head. Work through it and you will discover the ability to become fat adapted.
Y
I never eat breakfast. I do however have about four strong coffees during the morning to speed up my metabolism so can burn off last nights intake of calories
A yummy hot meal just before bed to make me sleep a good 9 hours always works for me.
As ever the devil in the detail. It’s been known for years that breakfast isn’t the most important meal of the day, with one caveat: if you’re not growing.
While adults (who are fully grown) can skip breakfast without any major issues, it is a very important meal for children. Growing a body optimally requires regular feeding.
Kids who don’t eat breakfast also have difficulty concentrating in school. If you are trying to grow muscle or play a lot of sport, I would also recommend not skipping breakfast, once you stay within the recommended calories for your size.
It’s important when looking at such research that you look at the gender and age profile of the subjects in the experiments. Marketing companies promoting a product will deliberately exclude this information to suit their agenda. The arguments used by companies to promote breakfast have used research on children (who do benefit from breakfast) in their health claims (but then omit the fact that the studies were on kids). Sports supplement companies also use the exact same trick, except they use studies almost solely based on young men aged between 18 and 24. At this age men will experience the most muscle growth with the least effort, so claims that X product will give you X% muscle growth doesn’t work if you are in your 30’s, etc.
This is not a ‘new study’. This topic has been exhausted.
It’s all about monitoring total calorie intake over the 24 hours and stop eating like an a$$hole. Likely to be perceived as toxic 8.8/10.
@Earl of Daventry: surely the function of an a$$hole is not to eat -but to pass the waste from what we eat ! only 5.3 toxicity level !!
@Eric Davies: I know a few a$$holes out there that consume a fair bit of sausage. 6.0/10 toxicity.
Wouldn’t mind trying this in the 16:8 format, but wondering if itll be possible working a mixture of days and nights on 12 hour shifts?
@PauLFC: There are multiple time ranges for fasting. You can fast for 48 hours, 24 hours, 20 hours, 16, etc. The shortest fast is 12 hours. The next factor is frequency. If you fast for 48 hours, then you only do this once every 2 weeks. If you fast for 20-24 hours, then it is recommended that you do this 1-2 times a week (never more than 2). 16 hour fasts should be done 3 – 5 times a week and 12 hour fasts should be 7 days a week. You find the fast that works best with your lifestyle. Your goal will also help you work out how many fasts a week. If you are trying to lose weight then I would opt for the higher number of fasts. If you are trying to maintain weight then I would go for the lower frequency.
If you are new to fasting I would start with a 16 hour fast, 3 times a week. Play around with the times and frequencies until you find what works best for you.
Personally I find a 18-20 hours fast, twice a week, works best for me.
I have been fasting on and off since 2013 and have tried all versions, except the 48 hour, which is too hardcore and is really for supervised laboratory experiments.
What I like most about fasting is that you don’t have to change your diet to see the benefits. On the days I’m fasting I’m saving both time and money (€ by not buying food and time spent on preparing and eating meals).
have your say