To think it quite normal to skip breakfast

[McHappyPants2012]

Settle an argument for me.

My dh thinks it is not normal for people to skip breakfast, he thinks I am weird because I have never had breakfast.

WorraLiberty The study is only about children who don't eat breakfast, and how those children are the ones at risk of obesity. And as you and greeneyes have shown again the parents who care about their kids - even those who don't have breakfast themselves - insist that their children do still have it. So the only children who are not having breakfast (so those in the observational study who have the increased risk of obesity) are those with parents who don't follow that same parenting policy.

I think you've taken my comment as a criticism of you - it was never intended, I'd alrady posted this afternoon encouraging people to eat when they were hungry and saying it was perfectly normal and expected for a fit adult to survive much later than breakfast on their liver stores (but also not unfit or unhealthy to need breakfast) It was purely a criticism of the observational study highlighting variables which can't be controlled for easily or likely at all.

Ahh I see

No, I didn't take it personally as such because I'm confident in the way I do things IYSWIM.

It was just the line 'as you can see from this thread' that threw me.

And me

I don't think I've ever skipped a meal in my life - I eat three meals a day automatically (plus snacks) regardless of whether I am hungry or not - no wonder I am overweight, I admire people who skip meals if they are not hungry.

YABU. I didn't eat breakfast when living alone at university and later working, because I love sleep more than food and preferred sleeping an extra half hour to having breakfast. I only got back into having breakfast after having DC.

Still, I know that it is not "normal". The body needs energy and you are running on empty without breakfast.

ragwort "no wonder I am overweight, I admire people who skip meals if they are not hungry"

Please don't. Being overweight is NOTHING to do with how many meals you eat in a day - it's to do with the calories/saturated fat in the food that you do eat.

This is what's bugging me a little about this thread if I'm honest. There seems to be an underlying bravado about who can go without food the longest, and it's just not healthy.

Ultimately if people go without breakfast, then that's their decision, but I don't like the idea that it should be something to aspire to. It's generally not healthy.

NoWayNoHow no, there's nothing unhealthy with going without breakfast if you're not hungry, it simply means your liver stores and requirements through the night are different to others who are hungry and eat. Missing meals as a way to control weight and trying to fight through the low blood sugar probably is unhealthy (although such fasting generally actually possibly does lead to a longer life - calorie restricted rats and mice live a lot longer than those who eat as much as they like) But if you don't enter the low blood sugar state then there's nothing unhealthy about it.

You are not running on empty if you don't eat breakfast, you might be, but not necessarily. Simplisticly - People use sugar and fat for energy, the brain uses sugar, intense exercise uses sugar, everything else uses fat. When you're asleep it's just the brain to feed with sugar and it's not doing much, so lots of people can go for a long time on the hundreds of calories of sugar stored in the liver. Others don't store as much, and they'll get hungry sooner. Someone used the car analogy above about putting fuel in - the liver is your fuel tank, if it's still half full, there's no point putting more in.

If your liver gets very empty you can be desperate for food and eat anything sugary and fatty as it thinks there's not enough. That can be bad.

Also if you eat a very sugar-y breakfast you can get a rapid spike in insulin as the body builds up to process the sugar and then when all the sugar is processed the insulin is still there and that's why you may get a crash and be starving again shortly after - thats what can lead to type II diabetes of course. Exercise (which reduces insulin sensitivity and encourages your body to use less sugar for every day energy needs and store more for when you're exercising) is the best thing for avoiding that, but so can your diet.

If I ate breakfast I would just eat all day constantly so I dont I eat from about lunch time onwards constantly. I am healtthy although you would not want to talk to me much inthe morning

there should have been a full stop after the I dont.

I don't think it's anything to do with 'bravado'

Just people explaining their appetites and habits are different to other people's.

We all eat how we eat and it affects no-one but ourselves.

Well I don't think you should skip breakfast but I also don't think you need to eat it as soon as you wake up in the morning. I often wake up at 7, work for a few hours, and eat breakfast around half 9 to 10, then lunch around 1 to 2. I think skipping breakfast is only really bad if you don't eat a healthy breakfast at home and then you just have a chocolate bar or something at work. But seeing as I usually work from home, I think it's good to wait to eat until you are hungry.

"calorie restricted rats and mice live a lot longer than those who eat as much as they like"

Skipping breakfast has nothing to do with calorie restriction, as we then compensate for those lost calories in the rest of the day.

"I admire people who skip meals if they are not hungry."

Why?
I don't eat if I am not hungry (breakfast excepted of course). If we have a huge Sunday roast dinner I tend not to bother much with tea, and will nibble on a sandwich at about 8pm because I am still too full from lunch to face any food before then.

I think there is definitely something in not eating breakfast makes you bigger all the girls at work who dont eat breakfast are doing slimming world and the ones that do are size 6/8.

I think its because if you have a breakfast you dont get as hungry and go crazy for food later on in day so overall you take in far less calories without being hungry at any time.

Maybe we should have a poll to see if those who do or don't eat breakfast are a healthy weight or struggle/ on recurring diets etc.

I eat breakfast and generally my weight is under control and not overweight.

Saying that, I do wonder if the breakfast was more important years ago. Folk generally went to bed early, were up early, maybe had a to walk a distance to work, had more heavy manual jobs etc. Can see how a breakfast was needed then to get you off to a good start.

I wonder if people are eating later the night before as well?

My weight is healthy (BMI about 20) and stable, and I sometimes eat breakfast, sometimes not. It depends whether I feel hungry or not, which in turn probably depends on various factors, including what time I get up, and how much I've eaten the day before!

I wouldn't skip breakfast as a way of trying to lose/maintain weight though, I don't think that's a sensible strategy and I can see how skipping meals despite being hungry probably just leads to overeating later. But equally I won't stuff food into myself when I'm really not hungry just because it's 'breakfast time'.

I don't struggle with my weight, I've never been overweight in my life, though I have been more than I'd like to weigh, I sort it very quickly. (No bigger than a size 10, 8st6 at 5'2)

I don't eat if I'm not hungry, and I never eat things I don't want to (unless to be polite, of course)

I understand why people think it's odd to go without breakfast, and in my case, lunch, but I'm really not hungry.
I also have IBS and can see no benefit in spending more time on the loo, or feeling sluggish all day, because I ate when the clock/general society dictated.

It works for me and my body, so that's what I do.

I eat very well, I have a balanced diet, and DD (10) knows, and understands why I eat the way I do.

Also I don't really see the problem with having a mid-morning snack instead of breakfast if that suits you better. It's not really any different from just having a late breakfast, surely? It doesn't have to be a chocolate bar or something 'unhealthy' (though a bit of chocolate won't do you any harm occasionally!)

Like Netto I have IBS and that is why I only eat a tiny breakfast. A huge breakfast would make me miss most of the morning.

I'd end up asleep on the loo!

Same with lunch. My last job was as a cleaner in a Care Home, obviously very active, and my workmates couldn't get that I didn't eat breakfast or lunch, but I feel energised on an empty stomach, and could run around all day, and did.
I do feel sluggish and tired after my evening meal, but that's fine, I'm finished for the day, and can slump in front of the TV.
I can't during the day, well, since I no longer work, I could, but I don't want to.

I just do what works for me.

I think it's a good idea to eat when you are hungry. One that I haven't quite managed to embrace, but I don't think it's necessary to eat first thing if you are not hungry.

Bunbaker - to answer your question, yes I do admire people who only eat when they are hungry - I eat automatically greedily three times a day and I wish I had learned to only eat when I am hungry ............ actually I can't really ever remember being hungry because I obviously eat far too much .

Oh I need my brekkie. I walk 2.5 miles walk to work. Need the energy breakfast gives me to shout at cyclists on the footpath.