large or small breakfast to lose weight?

Whatever! Just like your source "MAY" help those who skip breakfast to lose weight

There have been reports of an inverse relationship between meal frequency (MF) and adiposity. It has been postulated that this may be explained by favourable effects of increased MF on appetite control and possibly on gut peptides as well. The main goal of the present study was to investigate whether using a high MF could lead to a greater weight loss than that obtained with a low MF under conditions of similar energy restriction. Subjects were randomised into two treatment arms (high MF = 3 meals+3 snacks/d or low MF = 3 meals/d) and subjected to the same dietary energy restriction of - 2931 kJ/d for 8 weeks. Sixteen obese adults (n 8 women and 8 men; age 34.6 (sd 9.5); BMI 37.1 (sd 4.5) kg/m2) completed the study. Overall, there was a 4.7 % decrease in body weight (P < 0.01); similarly, significant decreases were noted in fat mass ( - 3.1 (sd 2.9) kg; P < 0.01), lean body mass ( - 2.0 (sd 3.1) kg; P < 0.05) and BMI ( - 1.7 (sd 0.8) kg/m2; P < 0.01). However, there were NS differences between the low- and high-MF groups for adiposity indices, appetite measurements or gut peptides (peptide YY and ghrelin) either before or after the intervention. We conclude that increasing MF does not promote greater body weight loss under the conditions described in the present study

Where do you see such a statement?

I never stated that your article included such statement. The point is it is implied because studies are just that studies. The results are not ment to imply that the results will be the same for everyone.

http://www.livestrong.com/article/292033-side-effects-of-not-eating-breakfast/

And you post yet another non peer-reviewed source... did you go to school?

Did you go to school?

You do realize it's ok to admit you're wrong? We'll never know everything and when someone points out we're wrong it's an opportunity to learn.

You're devolving into 6 year old fighting tactics and it's destroying your credibility to argue your point. It's ok to say this is what works for me, but something else may work better for you.

Whatever! Just like your source "MAY" help those who skip breakfast to lose weight

There have been reports of an inverse relationship between meal frequency (MF) and adiposity. It has been postulated that this may be explained by favourable effects of increased MF on appetite control and possibly on gut peptides as well. The main goal of the present study was to investigate whether using a high MF could lead to a greater weight loss than that obtained with a low MF under conditions of similar energy restriction. Subjects were randomised into two treatment arms (high MF = 3 meals+3 snacks/d or low MF = 3 meals/d) and subjected to the same dietary energy restriction of - 2931 kJ/d for 8 weeks. Sixteen obese adults (n 8 women and 8 men; age 34.6 (sd 9.5); BMI 37.1 (sd 4.5) kg/m2) completed the study. Overall, there was a 4.7 % decrease in body weight (P < 0.01); similarly, significant decreases were noted in fat mass ( - 3.1 (sd 2.9) kg; P < 0.01), lean body mass ( - 2.0 (sd 3.1) kg; P < 0.05) and BMI ( - 1.7 (sd 0.8) kg/m2; P < 0.01). However, there were NS differences between the low- and high-MF groups for adiposity indices, appetite measurements or gut peptides (peptide YY and ghrelin) either before or after the intervention. We conclude that increasing MF does not promote greater body weight loss under the conditions described in the present study

Where do you see such a statement?

I never stated that your article included such statement. The point is it is implied because studies are just that studies. The results are not ment to imply that the results will be the same for everyone.

You did... scroll up. You quoted what I had said and replied as such.

Then you must be referring to yourself because you are the one that spewed that another poster and I were wrong for our opinions which placed you at the bottom of the stack of class in my opinion.

So if you're opinion is wrong, and I correct your misinformation that makes me classless? Seems legit. :noway:

Rigger

But you haven't corrected anything and that is the point. I am still waiting for you to throw the book at me.

Just did in a previous post, also pointed out several studies posted by others.

Here we go again.

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/71/6/1511.full

Maybe that's not your speed though, I could probably find something on the Livestrong blog if you like?

Rigger

BTW - Your research article is date for the year 2000 and mine 2013...but maybe that is your speed though:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/oby.20460/abstract?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false

This study was done on people with metabolic syndrome, so while it is a useful study for people WITH metabolic syndrome, it is not generalizeable to all adults.

I would read the whole study by I don't have access to it, not even through my university library.

Neither is your source!

Poor, poor OP! 5 hours of responses, no real answer. Seriously, 4 hours ya'll!?! Take a step into adult hood, stop fighting with people on the internet, you all have your own opinion. How about you all just walk away?

Eat whatever size breakfast works for you. If a small breakfast gets you through until your next meal, do that. If you need something bigger to avoid feeling starved. DO that! It's a personal choice, and has no real affect on weight loss.

I can see someone here has way too much time on their hands and thinks they know better than those here who have done years of their own research on this, as well as having success to prove that meal timing is irrelevant.

To the OP, do whatever fits your lifestyle best. I do not have breakfast and have not done so since I was a child.
I even did intermittent fasting and ate all my food between 6pm and 2am.
Certainly did not do me any harm and I lost bodyfat and weight while doing so.

I see someone has too much time on their hands for not having the balls to direct her post to the appropiate poster. The timing of meals are as relevant to some as it is irrelevant to others.

A lot of studies show that skipping meals, especially morning meals is dangerous long term. For those who exercise regularly is not recommended at all. Losing weight can be achieved without having to skip meals "purposely". As for the meal size I'd suggest a balanced portion of not too much and not too little. If you take proper sleep that would mean that your body has been fasting for up to 8hr. So upon waking up its storage is empty. In my diet I strive for more quality rather than quotanty. Maybe a preparation of meals beforehand, or careful planning might help you as well.