I disagree with this article but wanted to share...

Cindyinpg

There's nothing easier to do than skew statistics to favour ANY argument. Does anyone remember this one?

Proof that tomatoes are bad for you.
1. More than 90% of all cancer and heart disease patients have consumed tomatoes at some point in their lives.
2. 99.9% of everyone born before 1900, who have eaten tomatoes, are now dead! Of the ones who still survive: they are in terrible shape and do not have much longer to live.
3. 98% of all serial killers have admitted to eating tomatoes. Sometimes daily!
:laugh:

Juliejustsaying

Please read between the lines and understand what the "study" is truly measuring. The increased risk of heart attack isn't because individuals skip breakfast. The increased risk of heart attack is due to the already well known behavior associated with skipping breakfast - OVEREATING. Overeating, in conjunction with a sedentary lifestyle, leads to obesity, which increases the risk of heart attack.

"Researchers believe that people who skip breakfast tend to eat larger, more calorically dense meals later in the day, often late into the night, to compensate for the lack of an early morning meal."

Skipping breakfast doesn't increase the risk of having a heart attack. Many people who skip breakfast, and DON"T track their caloric intake or nutrition, tend to over eat during the day. Meal timing doesn't play a role in weight gain or loss. Caloric intake does. If skipping breakfast is part of an overall "diet" plan, and the individual is tracking calories and consuming within healthy ranges, the risk of heart attack does not increase. Take an individual that consumes maintenance calories and follows intermittent fasting. This individual doesn't break their fast until 2pm, then eats within an 8 hour window until 10pm. They haven't increased their chance of having a heart attack just because they skipped breakfast (or ate late at night, which is another asinine claim in the study).

Bottom line is obesity, sedentary lifestyle and othe factors increase the risk of a heart attack. Breakfast has nothing to do with increasing heart attack risk.

YOU STOP THAT RIGHT NOW!! I see what you're doing trying to be all rational and ****...geez.

:grumble:

tedrickp

Seems similar to the Omega-3 and prostate cancer study from a few (maybe less) weeks ago in the fact that you can't draw anything conclusive from it, just tells us more research needs to be done.

bcattoes

Please read between the lines and understand what the "study" is truly measuring. The increased risk of heart attack isn't because individuals skip breakfast. The increased risk of heart attack is due to the already well known behavior associated with skipping breakfast - OVEREATING. Overeating, in conjunction with a sedentary lifestyle, leads to obesity, which increases the risk of heart attack.

"Researchers believe that people who skip breakfast tend to eat larger, more calorically dense meals later in the day, often late into the night, to compensate for the lack of an early morning meal."

Skipping breakfast doesn't increase the risk of having a heart attack. Many people who skip breakfast, and DON"T track their caloric intake or nutrition, tend to over eat during the day. Meal timing doesn't play a role in weight gain or loss. Caloric intake does. If skipping breakfast is part of an overall "diet" plan, and the individual is tracking calories and consuming within healthy ranges, the risk of heart attack does not increase. Take an individual that consumes maintenance calories and follows intermittent fasting. This individual doesn't break their fast until 2pm, then eats within an 8 hour window until 10pm. They haven't increased their chance of having a heart attack just because they skipped breakfast (or ate late at night, which is another asinine claim in the study).

Bottom line is obesity, sedentary lifestyle and othe factors increase the risk of a heart attack. Breakfast has nothing to do with increasing heart attack risk.

Does the study say the breakfast skippers ate more calories overall? The bit I read seemed to think that the large meal, not more overall calories could be a factor because it placed stress on the body.

bcattoes

Seems similar to the Omega-3 and prostate cancer study from a few (maybe less) weeks ago in the fact that you can't draw anything conclusive from it, just tells us more research needs to be done.

That was the second study to show that correlation. But yes, that's what most studies do. Show the need for more study.

tedrickp

Seems similar to the Omega-3 and prostate cancer study from a few (maybe less) weeks ago in the fact that you can't draw anything conclusive from it, just tells us more research needs to be done.

That was the second study to show that correlation. But yes, that's what most studies do. Show the need for more study.

Well what I meant to imply is that people should probably not lose sleep over this or the prostate study.

SpeSHul_SnoflEHk

This article says that skipping breakfast is tied to heart attack and heart disease. While I never skip breakfast...or any meal for that matter, I think that if you were to look at the other factors of the 27%/55% respectively at higher risk I'd have to imagine that not eating breakfast played a smaller role in increasing their risk. I dislike the number of articles that portray something as good/bad by only looking at one part of the equation...for example, of the people at higher risk, did they exercise regularly? Did they eat healthy overall? Was their diet mostly processed foods? etc...

Copied from online article, link at the bottom:

Here's a good reason to eat breakfast every morning: It could keep your heart risks low, according to a new study.

Research published in the journal Circulation shows an association between regularly skipping breakfast and having a higher risk of experiencing a heart attack or having fatal heart disease.

That's because "skipping breakfast may lead to one or more risk factors, including obesity, high blood pressure, high cholesterol and diabetes, which may in turn lead to a heart attack over time," study researcher Leah E. Cahill, Ph.D., a postdoctoral research fellow in the Department of Nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health, said in a statement.

For the study, researchers examined food frequency questionnaires taken over a 16-year period by 26,903 men between ages 45 and 82. Over that time period, 1,572 men experienced a cardiac event for the first time.

Researchers found an association between skipping breakfast and having a 27 percent higher risk of dying from coronary heart disease or experiencing a heart attack. This held true after taking into account other heart risk factors including sedentary activity, exercise, sleep, alcohol intake, smoking status, diet, body mass index and medical history.

There was also a link between timing of eating and heart disease. Specifically, they found that those who ate right before bedtime had 55 percent higher risks of coronary heart disease.

Skipping breakfast isn't uncommon; a recent survey from the NPD Group showed that approximately 10 percent of Americans don't eat breakfast, with men being more likely to skip breakfast than women.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/22/skipping-breakfast-heart-attack-disease_n_3635145.html?utm_hp_ref=healthy-living

This is why I hate these "articles". Is it that the skipping breakfast is the problem, or are people who skip breakfast less likely to care for themselves in other ways. It's pure manipulation, and trying to show causality in a correlation. All this shows is there needs to be more study, to find out what the causal agent is. Yet, John Q will look at this and say.. OMG. I need to eat breakfast. Then I will never have a heart attack.

AJ_G

This is why I hate these "articles". Is it that the skipping breakfast is the problem, or are people who skip breakfast less likely to care for themselves in other ways. It's pure manipulation, and trying to show causality in a correlation. All this shows is there needs to be more study, to find out what the causal agent is. Yet, John Q will look at this and say.. OMG. I need to eat breakfast. Then I will never have a heart attack.

That's the problem I have with articles like this. I guarantee you less than 5% of the people who read the Huffington Post article are going to then read the published scientific paper to get some answers. Journalists just scare people into doing things without any reason, especially when it comes to exercise and nutrition.

bcattoes

This is why I hate these "articles". Is it that the skipping breakfast is the problem, or are people who skip breakfast less likely to care for themselves in other ways. It's pure manipulation, and trying to show causality in a correlation. All this shows is there needs to be more study, to find out what the causal agent is. Yet, John Q will look at this and say.. OMG. I need to eat breakfast. Then I will never have a heart attack.

That's the problem I have with articles like this. I guarantee you less than 5% of the people who read the Huffington Post article are going to then read the published scientific paper to get some answers. Journalists just scare people into doing things without any reason, especially when it comes to exercise and nutrition.

Now this I agree with 100%.

GiddyupTim

I think it is worth noting that the study involved is a very large study that is highly respected and has been going on a long time. Yes, it is just a survey of a group of individuals -- in this case physicians and other male health professionals -- but it has been done prospectively. That means, they did not sign people up and then ask them what they did five years ago. That tends to be unreliable. Instead, they signed them up, and then they surveyed them about present habits every year.
That makes it much more reliable.
Also, the subjects are doctors, mostly, I believe. So, they are very sophisticated about what is being done, and, therefore, understand that they have to be as truthful as humanly possible. That too increases the credibility of the answers -- the data -- the study gathers.
Furthermore, the study is being conducted at one of the world's premier research institutions and it has been going on for decades! That means a lot of highly qualified people have seen it and worked on it and improved it over the years.
The statistics that are used to establish the kind of finding we are discussing are the most sophisticated available.
That said, I am sure the researchers would tell you freely that they have not shown that no breakfast or eating late is going to kill you. They would not say those things "cause" the problem.
Rather, they would say they found an "association." That means that, if you see a guy who eats late or skips breakfast, he may be more likely to die sooner from a heart attack or stroke. But, it could be for any reason -- perhaps something else entirely that is associated with skipping breakfast, including obesity or too much coffee or some disease that takes away morning hunger, etc.
Moreover, i am sure they would admit that these kinds of studies have had wrong findings in the past. But, they would also say that, of this kind of study, this one is among the best.
So, what's the beef with the study? You just don't like the finding?

tmpecus78

nonsense.