Deleterious effects of omitting breakfast on insulin sensitivity and fasting lipid profiles in healthy lean women

Centre for Integrated Systems Biology and Medicine, Institute of Clinical Research & School of Biomedical Sciences, Queen's Medical Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (Impact Factor: 6.77). 02/2005; 81(2):388-96.
Source: PubMed


Breakfast consumption is recommended, despite inconclusive evidence of health benefits.
The study's aim was to ascertain whether eating breakfast (EB) or omitting breakfast (OB) affects energy intake, energy expenditure, and circulating insulin, glucose, and lipid concentrations in healthy women.
In a randomized crossover trial, 10 women [x+/-SD body mass index (BMI; in kg/m2): 23.2+/-1.4] underwent two 14-d EB or OB interventions separated by a 2-wk interval. In the EB period, subjects consumed breakfast cereal with 2%-fat milk before 0800 and a chocolate-covered cookie between 1030 and 1100. In the OB period, subjects consumed the cookie between 1030 and 1100 and the cereal and milk between 1200 and 1330. Subjects then consumed 4 additional meals with content similar to usual at predetermined times later in the day and recorded food intake on 3 d during each period. Fasting and posttest meal glucose, lipid, and insulin concentrations and resting energy expenditure were measured before and after each period.
Reported energy intake was significantly lower in the EB period (P=0.001), and resting energy expenditure did not differ significantly between the 2 periods. OB was associated with significantly higher fasting total and LDL cholesterol than was EB (3.14 and 3.43 mmol/L and 1.55 and 1.82 mmol/L, respectively; P=0.001). The area under the curve of insulin response to the test meal was significantly lower after EB than after OB (P<0.01).
OB impairs fasting lipids and postprandial insulin sensitivity and could lead to weight gain if the observed higher energy intake was sustained.

Download full-text


Available from: Ian Macdonald, Nov 25, 2014
  • Source
    • "CRP concentrations were reduced by 23% after PB despite groups were weight stable. Previous studies of the effects of eating breakfast on health mainly explored the effect of eating breakfast per se compared with skipping breakfast, suggesting that omitting breakfast both in the short-term [3] and long-term [5] increases LDL-C and fasting insulin concentrations. However, in a six month parallel designed randomized study, investigating the effects of high-versus low GI cereal breakfast, or a MUFA rich breakfast in subjects with type 2 diabetes, no significant differences between groups in fasting LDLcholesterol , triglycerides, glycaemia or body weight were observed [12]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: It is unclear whether advising a prudent breakfast alone is sufficient to improve blood lipids and cardiometabolic risk factors in overweight hypercholesterolemic subjects. The aim of this study was to investigate whether a prudent low-fat breakfast (PB) rich in dietary fiber lowers low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and other cardiometabolic risk factors in subjects with elevated LDL-cholesterol levels. In a parallel, controlled, 12-week study, 79 healthy overweight subjects (all regular breakfast eaters) were randomly allocated to a group that received a PB based on Nordic foods provided ad libitum or a control group that consumed their usual breakfast. The primary outcome was plasma LDL-C. Secondary outcomes were other blood lipids, body weight, sagittal abdominal diameter (SAD), glucose tolerance, insulin sensitivity and inflammation markers (C-reactive protein [CRP] and tumor necrosis factor receptor-2 [TNF-R2]), and blood pressure. The PB was in accordance with national and Nordic nutrition recommendations and included oat bran porridge with low-fat milk or yogurt, bilberry or lingonberry jam, whole grain bread, low-fat spread, poultry or fatty fish, and fruit. No differences were found in LDL-C, other blood lipids, body weight, or glucose metabolism, but SAD, plasma CRP, and TNF-R2 decreased more during PB compared with controls (p < 0.05). In the overall diet, PB increased dietary fiber and β-glucan compared with controls (p < 0.05). Advising a prudent breakfast for 3 months did not influence blood lipids, body weight, or glucose metabolism but reduced markers of visceral fat and inflammation. The trial was registered in the Current Controlled Trials database (; International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN): 84550872.
    Clinical nutrition (Edinburgh, Scotland) 04/2014; 34(1). DOI:10.1016/j.clnu.2014.04.009 · 4.48 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "In an observational study, food consumed in the morning, as compared with food consumed later in the day, was associated with lower total daily energy intake, suggesting that food eaten at breakfast is particularly satiating.32 In addition, eating breakfast has been associated with significant decreases in serum total-and low-density lipoprotein (LDL)–cholesterol levels, increased insulin sensitivity,33 possible improvement in performance on cognitive tasks,34,35 and a lower incidence of gallstones.36 "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Dietary recommendations should be individualized for each patient, but certain basic principles apply to most people. A healthful diet should include a wide variety of whole, unprocessed foods that are free of additives and, if possible, grown without the use of pesticides, herbicides, and other potentially toxic agricultural chemicals. For people who do not have specific food intolerances, such a diet generally includes liberal amounts of fresh fruits and vegetables, whole grains, nuts, seeds, and legumes. For most people, animal foods such as eggs, fish, chicken, beef, and dairy products can be healthfully consumed in moderation. It is not necessary to consume animal foods to maintain good health. In fact, compared with omnivores, vegetarians have a lower risk of developing a number of chronic diseases. However, vegetarians must carefully plan their diet so as not to develop nutritional deficiencies.
    01/2013; 2(1):58-63. DOI:10.7453/gahmj.2013.2.1.010
  • Source
    • "Only few intervention studies into the effects of breakfast consumption have been performed. One study suggested a beneficial effect of breakfast consumption on insulin sensitivity and plasma levels of total cholesterol and LDL (Farshchi et al., 2005b). Furthermore, in developing countries, school performance improves in children who consume breakfast regularly (Jacoby et al., 1998; Powell et al., 1998). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Life on earth has evolved under the daily rhythm of light and dark. Consequently, most creatures experience a daily rhythm in food availability. In this review, we first introduce the mammalian circadian timing system, consisting of a central clock in the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN) and peripheral clocks in various metabolic tissues including liver, pancreas, and intestine. We describe how peripheral clocks are synchronized by the SCN and metabolic signals. Second, we review the influence of the circadian timing system on food intake behavior, activity of the gastrointestinal system, and several aspects of glucose and lipid metabolism. Third, the circadian control of digestion and metabolism may have important implications for several aspects of food intake in humans. Therefore, we review the human literature on health aspects of meal timing, meal frequency, and breakfast consumption, and we describe the potential implications of the clock system for the timing of enteral tube feeding and parenteral nutrition. Finally, we explore the connection between type 2 diabetes and the circadian timing system. Although the past decade has provided exciting knowledge about the reciprocal relation between biological clocks and feeding/energy metabolism, future research is necessary to further elucidate this fascinating relationship in order to improve human health.
    Progress in brain research 08/2012; 199:359-76. DOI:10.1016/B978-0-444-59427-3.00020-4 · 2.83 Impact Factor
Show more