HOME
Breakfast: The Most Important Meal of the Day
Part 2: Weight control
Breakfast is also important for weight loss. In 1989 there was an important meeting of the Forum on Food and Health that discussed a number of aspects of the various common breakfast meals.[3] One of the contributors, Dr F. Belleisle of Paris, told of a study of French schoolchildren which showed that fat children ate breakfasts that contained, on average, seventy-five fewer calories and ate significantly more in the evening than their slimmer peers. 'Statistically,' he stated, 'the energy value of breakfast was inversely related to corpulence.' In other words, the less you eat for breakfast, the more weight you put on.
In 2002 another study also showed that overweight children were less likely to have eaten breakfast.[4] And in the following year yet another study showed that people who skipped breakfast were four and a half times as likely to be overweight.[5]. And in 2008 yet another study supported having breakfast as a way of controlling weight in teenagers [6]
Stress
But, whatever the breakfast, most recent studies show that eating something is better than eating nothing for a range of health issues. Scientists at the Cancer Research UK Health Behaviour Unit, University College London, investigated associations between stress and dietary practices in teenagers from a wide range of socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds.[7] They found that those who were stressed were less likely to have eaten breakfast and were also more likely to have other unhealthy eating patterns.
Breakfast for brain power . . .
If you are to perform at your best and be bright and alert, breakfast is a must. Missing breakfast has consequences as far as both mental and physical work are concerned. Energy intake at breakfast affects the performance of creativity tests, memory recall and voluntary physical endurance in children before lunch, and food craving during the whole day.
In 1995, Dr Ernesto Pollitt, Professor of Human Development in the Program in International Nutrition at the University of California's School of Medicine, conducted a review of papers published in refereed journals since 1978 on the differences in children's abilities after breakfast compared to fasting.[8] He concluded, on the whole, that children performed better after having breakfast. But there were some notable exceptions. In some, breakfast made no difference to performance and in one study children did better when they did not have breakfast. It is significant that in all the cases where breakfast was ineffective, those breakfasts were almost entirely carbohydrate based: cornflakes, semi-skimmed milk, sugar, wholemeal toast with margarine and marmalade.
Doctors at the Massachusetts General Hospital, Division of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition and at Harvard Medical School, wanted to know whether a recently introduced, universal, free school breakfast programme aimed at children who were at nutritional risk would help their academic abilities and psychosocial functioning.[9] After six months, students who improved their nutritional status with the school breakfasts provided showed not only the expected decreases in hunger, but significant improvements in attendance, and improvements in mathematics and behaviour.
A French study of teenage boys and girls set up to assess the adequacy of breakfast energy supply and energy expenditure in adolescents during a school day with either no exercise or with a two hour physical education lesson in the morning confirmed the American results.[10] With no Physical Education (PE) lesson, it needed nearly a quarter of the day's energy at breakfast to do it, so a simple bowl of cereal wouldn't do.
. . . and physical work
That French study above also demonstrated that a level of energy intake at breakfast of only a quarter of the day's total energy was not enough if the two-hour PE lesson were involved. The study stressed the need for a heavier breakfast for children and adolescents on the days with PE in the morning.
Similarly, Canadian scientists conducting a study of hill walkers to examine the effects of breakfasts with different energy intakes — either 616 calories or 3,019 calories — also found that energy intake was important on a range of responses that were relevant to the walkers' safety.[11] The group who'd eaten the smaller breakfasts showed significantly slower one- and two-finger reaction times, were not able to balance as well, and were compromised in their ability to maintain body temperature, when compared with the bigger-breakfast group. The researchers say that this 'impaired performance (particularly with respect to balance) and thermoregulation during the [lower energy intake] condition may increase susceptibility to both fatigue and injury during the pursuit of recreational activity outdoors'.
Related Articles
