A blogger whom i actually LIKE has recently been twittering incessantly about how breakfast-skippers are more likely to weigh more. ...He's getting dangerously near the intolerable quality that keeps me from enjoying Authority Nutrition*!
Some people with weight problems actually have to rein themselves in dramatically to NOT eat, when they feel real hunger at inappropriate times. At the end of a good long sleep, when their bodies have effortlessly slipped into fat-burning mode and they're gliding happily along on their own stored energy SOME YOYOS WANT THEM TO BRING IT TO A SCREECHING HALT BY EATING BREAKFAST.
THIS! This is a perfect example of why i get so flaming mad at pseudo-scientific epidemiologically-based dietary recommendations.
People who have a difficult time NOT constantly eating are being told to eat when they're not hungry, because a bunch of skinny people from the 1970s always ate breakfast. Oh yeah -- makes perfect sense.
Epidemiological studies mean absolutely bupkis unless the subjects share significant similarities with you and your lifestyle. The college boys who most eagerly sign up for studies (to earn extra beer money their parents won't spring for) have NOTHING in common with any of the overweight people i know. ...Oh, except for the beer-habits of some of them -- but then those people aren't really trying to lose their paunches.
It would be far more constructive for the breakfast-pushers to observe that eating FREQUENCY is far more significant than eating QUANTITY -- check out this little nugget: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24668862. Meal number is a purely cultural phenomenon. Grazing is a stupid technique for health maintenance. Snacking is moronic -- especially in a carb-based plan, because of the ceaseless hyper-insulinism and -glycemia.
Individuals differ, but it is in NOBODY'S best interest to constantly add to the stomach's contents. Its design clearly shows that it works best when a "deposit" of food is delivered, and it is allowed to do a complete job of predigestion before releasing its contents to the rest of the system, giving it a rest, and then repeating the process.
Scarfing breakfast is an artifact of a purely artifical post-neolithic work schedule. Fuel yourself before you go to the office, school, factory or field, because you won't have an opportunity to actually eat when you become hungry -- you'll have to wait till the bell rings, like Pavlov's dogs. "People who skip breakfast eat more later" -- well OF COURSE. The problem is not THAT they eat, it's what and when. When the nutritionally-ignorant get hungry at 10 AM, they'll grab a pastry or candy bar instead of real food, and then eat again too soon when the lunch-whistle sounds. When the savvy breakfast-abstainer does, s/he will get a handful of nuts, cheese, or a boiled egg if anything, skip lunch, and repeat the mini-meal later. Big difference.
Me, i've only rarely been hungry upon awakening -- nausea attends any thought of eating! And why should i eat? I have ten pounds i could EASILY live on if i were thrust into a situation in which eating became problematic, like illness or emergency. If things got really bad, i could spare thirty before my health would significant be impacted. WHY should i worry about having a meal, when my body is happily running on storage? The more stored energy i burn, the more metabolic flexibility i promote.
Bill should know better.
* truth be told, the VERY NAME puts me off, let alone his writing style. ...and the ADVERTISEMENTS on both these guys' blogs. :-P