This Company Shows An Equal Bias For Breakfast, Lunch, And Dinner: Fill & Download for Free

In a word...NoThe total quality/quantity of your food consumption throughout the day (and week/months) is what matters, this cannot be isolated to one meal being more important than another.There has never been a single registered controlled trial that showed the the distribution of those calories matters significantly.For example: A controlled trial of reduced meal frequency without caloric restriction in healthy, normal-weight, middle-aged adults.This is a good example of a calorie controlled study where one group ate 3 square meals a day, and another group ate all of their calories during one meal (between 5–9 PM).Meaning, one group had no breakfast. Assuming you’re using breakfast to describe your first morning meal and not what the word technically means, which is the first meal of the day that ‘breaks’ your ‘fast.’The names we’ve given meals are just names, they don’t really mean much.Anyway, the results of that paper?No significant differences in the outcomes. Actually the breakfast skippers in this case got slightly better results but I’d say it’s not particularly statistically relevant.What evidence does this provide?If this study can put all of a person’s calories late at night, and the outcomes are exactly the same as people who eat a staple 3 meals a day.Why would distribution of your meal calories matter in the slightest?If your body needs 2000 kcal in a day, and you eat 1000 at breakfast, 600 at lunch and 400 at dinner. The results you get will be similar to eating 1000 at night, 600 at breakfast, and 400 at lunch. Will be similar to eating 2000 only at night, like the paper above shows.Why would such minor deviations like that matter if I can put all 2000 kcal into one meal at night, and not see any difference?Answer: It probably won’t.I’m am not currently aware of any RCT research that supports that theory that one meal is more important than any other.Almost all the existing literature suggests that as long as the total intake is the same, distribution does not really matter.Now there are some papers suggesting there may be some circadian rhythm changes depending on when you eat, and some others suggesting nutrient timing can lead to small changes but total calories trumps all of that by a long shot.Research so far, and human physiology reveals that we are perfectly capable of going without food for extended periods of time. I'm not sure how this nonsense got started that one meal is more important than the other, but I'm pretty sure the big food companies had something to do with it.That's why the most popular 'breakfast' (if you can call it that) in North America these days, is breakfast cereal with milk. The other factor is a lot of loose science showing correlational data, such as 'people tend to eat fewer calories in a day' when they eat breakfast, but the research methods are often poor.The truth is that the majority of the population already eats breakfast (albeit probably poor food choices previously mentioned) and encouraging people to do so has not apparently done anything to reverse the obesity trend in North America, despite more people eating it.For example, when you look at higher quality RCT’s you just see more the same:A randomized controlled trial to study the effects of breakfast on energy intake, physical activity, and body fat in women who are non-habitual breakfast eatersFound that adding breakfast to habitual non-breakfast eaters did absolutely nothing good. It led to higher calorie intake and weight gain.If breakfast is so important, surely adding breakfast to someone’s routine would do something good!What do people base the ‘breakfast is the most important meal of day’ theory on?Bad correlational epidemiological data that is under powered to determine such a specific pattern of eating. For instance stuff like this:Skipping breakfast may increase coronary heart disease risk.This is a survey! Not a study. People try to pass this type of thing off as hard evidence, when it's loose evidence at best.How can you accurately account for lifestyle factors like smoking, excessive drinking or overall diet quality to determine anything useful about breakfast eating specifically?Answer: You can’t…The research often gets fuzzy though, because people don't understand the relevant importance of research and the hierarchy of what is considered 'good' research vs correlational or 'loose' research.Survey research is notorious for stretching the truth. It’s low quality. A lot of people will virtue signal even when the research is anonymous. There are numerous papers showing that people almost always embellish. Many people assume that all published research is the same, and it really isn't. RCT’s are what you should look at.Now more recent research indicates that we may not want to go longer than 72 hours without eating, but skipping a meal (any meal really) appears to have nothing but this loose correlational data surrounding it.Read this answer of mine on Quora for more.When you look specifically at actual studies, or meta-analysis of studies you get a mixed scientific view.For instance this review: Belief beyond the evidence: using the propose... [Am J Clin Nutr. 2013].We have shown that 1) the proposed effect of breakfast on obesity(PEBO) is presumed and stated as true despite equivocal evidence; 2) the gratuitous replication of associations between breakfast and obesity showed that numerous nonprobative studies exist in the PEBO literature; and 3) there is evidence of a bias with respect to the reporting of one's own and others’ research.Basically the majority of the literature highlighting the importance of breakfast when held under a high degree of scientific scrutiny falls flat. It’s poorly done, highly biased and presumed to be true, despite not having much evidence.The actual 'cause-and-effect--studies' show little to no change in things like weight and other health markers when comparing eating breakfast to not eating breakfast.As another example:Evaluating the Intervention-Based Evidence Surrounding the Causal Role of Breakfast on Markers of Weight Management, with Specific Focus on Breakfast Composition and SizeBased on the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Evidence Analysis criteria, there is limited evidence supporting the addition of breakfast for body weight management and daily food intake.Or read this RCT:The role of breakfast in the treatment of obesity: a randomized clinical trial.It showed that when people change what they typically do, they get better results. i.e. habitual breakfast skippers lose more weight when they start eating breakfast, and vice versa.If it’s the most important meal of the day, then explain how that result is possible?How did people who eat breakfast, start skipping in, and lose more weight?I’ll tell you how, it’s simple:They ate fewer calories throughout the day, which has without fail always been the main determinant in weight loss and most cardiometabolic changes.Of course this isn't a black and white issue; Eating enhances cognition on some level, because more glucose is available to the brain, but that's a separate issue from 'health.' If you're writing an exam, eating before hand might be a good idea.Another thing to consider is that eating before athletic performances is also advised, if performance is the objective, as this makes more energy available for performance.It also influences circadian rhythm. A good consideration for time zone changes. Some research into fasting is showing some interesting glucose management shift when the calories are shifted to the morning rather than the evening, but that’s really the only significant change I’ve found. I’m not sure it matters for the average person. And it still wouldn’t imply to breakfast being the most important meal of the day. There is only 1–2 meals in these cases anyway. Rather, such an eating pattern might help diabetics more than anything.On the flip size, eating regular meals may also be an effective strategy for diabetics (and potentially other illnesses too), because it's an effective way to manage blood sugar but if you're healthy, why should you eat like a diabetic?Furthermore, it may be advisable for growing children, high activity persons, and other populations that may need more energy overall to consider; Particularly how eating affects their growth, development and nutrition. I do not recommend fasting protocols for any of these populations, nor breakfast skipping.Though, one could still often argue that the quality (and not the frequency) of those meals is what matters most in the long run.Provided you are getting adequate nutrition, the displacement of high quality vitamins, minerals and macronutrients throughout the day is less important, outside of a few special scenarios. As long as you get everything you need through your diet on average.In fact intermittent fasting (IF) has opened up doors on a whole lot of new research that just drives the point home further.IF is one of the newer dieting trends, and one of the most popular forms of fasting is the 16-8 hour fast popularized by Martin Berkhan of Lean Gains. This is the very definition of 'skipping breakfast' and his clients all seem to have some success, both in weight loss and muscle mass gains.There are other examples where coaches and writers have built systems that involve skipping meals and are effective in altering health markers (cholesterol levels, triglycerides, inflammation, fat loss, etc...) in a positive way. Check out this free book on Intermittent Fasting to see some potential benefits of skipping meals or fasting for periods of time.Now this might all be very specific to a certain population. For instance, the already lean and physically active, simply getting more lean with more advanced strategies (I can't say for certain). However, there must be some validity to it, for some people, at some times, with certain objectives.I am not saying this to discourage people from eating breakfast (I eat breakfast every morning but I am also not currently seeking any significant bodily changes). It has value to me personally.I'm saying this because eating breakfast (like nearly anything else) is dependent on your objectives and in some cases it might be worth considering skipping if you always do it and you're looking for a new result.On the other hand, if you skip breakfast now, you may want to consider eating breakfast now. In other words, in some cases your objectives could benefit from skipping breakfast (or another meal), and in other cases your objectives would benefit from eating breakfast regularly.It's only the most important meal of the day if it supports your personal objectives more than others and I’m not sure we can say that it does definitively. Unless it somehow influences your total intake.Whether your eat breakfast or don’t is entirely up to you. You should experiment and figure out what works best for you.