food

"I don't eat breakfast, and there's nothing wrong with that."

This morning, like every other morning, I didn’t eat breakfast.

I have never, ever been a breakfast person. When I wake up I’m too busy scrambling to get ready in the 20 minutes I’ve left myself after waking up late, and deeply regretting the hour I spent scrolling Reddit instead of sleeping, to think about eating.

Believe me, I’m always thinking about eating. Literally the only time I’m not thinking about eating or actually eating is for the couple of hours after I wake up in the morning. And for years, health messaging around the importance of breakfast has added yet another layer to my guilt about my diet, despite my penchant for eating Weet-Bix at other times of the day.

Apparently to be successful, you’re meant to do these 14 things before you even have breakfast. So. Much. Guilt. Post continues after video. 

But a recent article in the New York Times has questioned our belief in the power of breakfast, health-wise. Aaron Carroll argues that along with a great deal of nutritional advice, our obsession with breakfast is based on biased studies and misinterpreted research.

Essentially, while there’s a substantial body of literature to support the relationship between eating breakfast and positive health outcomes, when this literature is placed under any level of scrutiny, it emerges that the findings are not so clear cut.

In 2013, a group of researchers published a study titled, ‘Belief beyond the evidence: using the proposed effect of breakfast on obesity to show two practices that distort scientific evidence. Lead by Dr Andrew Brown, they analysed all the research on breakfast and health, and came to the following conclusions.

ADVERTISEMENT

Skipping breakfast is associated with ill-heath, but there’s no evidence that it causes it. 

Take for example a 2013 study that found men who didn’t eat breakfast had a higher risk of coronary heart disease than those who did eat breakfast.

As with almost all breakfast research, these findings are evidence of correlation, but not causation. While skipping breakfast and heart disease might be associated, the research doesn’t prove that skipping breakfast causes heart disease. Another host of factors, such as sleeping habits, appetite, or food choices, could be at play.

ADVERTISEMENT

Skipping breakfast is associated with, but does not cause, ill-heath. Image via iStock.

We only want to publish and read research that's exciting. 

Academic literature suffers from a well-known issue called 'publication bias'. There's a tendency for journals to only publish studies with significant findings, which means we might end up with an evidence base saturated by results testifying to the relationship between eating breakfast and health, when this simply isn't the case. Meanwhile, studies that might not detect significant findings are relegated to file drawers in supervisors' offices.

Nutrition researchers love to publish findings about breakfast and healthy outcomes. It's exciting. It's something to talk about. It's something to write about. Non-significant results, however, are far less appealing. But this means we end up with an incredibly biased research base.

The language we use around breakfast and health is not factually correct.

According to Brown and his colleagues, there have been major flaws in the reporting of findings on breakfast eating and healthy outcomes. Researchers tend to incorrectly use language that implies causation, when we have little evidence that this is the case. Studies also tend to cite others' results in a misleading manner, making it appear that there is far more supporting evidence than there actually is.

ADVERTISEMENT

"There have been major flaws in the reporting of findings on breakfast eating and healthy outcomes." Image via iStock. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Carroll cites a 2014 study that found that when people who typically ate breakfast stopped, and people who typically didn't eat breakfast started, it made no difference to their weight.

He also argues that much of the research supporting the need to eat breakfast is funded by the food industry. For those not well-versed in research methods - this is known as a serious conflict of interest.

Essentially, the evidence for eating breakfast to improve your health is messy at best. You can read more here to learn about the intentional and unintentional factors that influence the scientific research in this area. Significant findings are exciting for researchers - so it's these findings the public are going to hear about. We're not going to hear about the studies that show that the effect of nutrition on health is complicated and differs depending on the individual.

Of course, there's absolutely no evidence that eating breakfast is bad for you. A nutritious breakfast is a healthy choice, and for many people, it's a crucial part of maintaining a balanced diet.

But if you don't eat breakfast, and you don't feel like it's having an impact on your energy or eating choices throughout the day, don't stress. You might be doing the right thing for you and your body - and that's what matters. And who says you can't eat cereal for dinner? I'm not judging.