Big Breakfast Eaters Drop Weight

New research from Virginia Commonwealth University found that a high-protein breakfast (containing 40 grams of protein) is one key to weight loss.

In this eight-month study, obese individuals who ate a 600-calorie breakfast (and a small lunch and dinner) lost an average of 40 pounds, which is huge when you compare it to the weight loss results in typical diet studies.

This is very much in keeping with all the other research showing that protein for breakfast (indeed eating breakfast period) is a great weight loss strategy, especially when that breakfast is part of an overall program. Simply adding eggs to your pancakes and syrup and toast and changing nothing else about your diet does nothing, as I reported a couple of weeks ago.

So far so good.

It gets tricky in the details.

The researchers actually compared a "low-carb" breakfast (of 290 calories) with the 600-calorie "mixed" breakfast. Both breakfasts were high in protein, but one of them was also low in carbs while the other was not. A typical 290-calorie low-carb breakfast was a cup of milk, one egg, three slices of bacon and two teaspoons of butter-- no bread. (Yes, I checked. If you use a small egg and skim milk, all that food is indeed less than 300 calories.) The typical 600-calorie "mixed" breakfast was- get this- cup of milk, turkey, cheese, two slices of bread, mayonnaise, 1 ounce of chocolate candy, and a protein shake.

Both groups stayed on the diet for four months (the weight loss phase) and then switched to "maintenance".

The low-carb breakfaster's actually lost more weight in the first four months. (Not surprising- the breakfast was both low-carb and low-calorie.)

But during the next four months, things changed. When everyone went on "maintenance" the low-carber's gained a big chunk of the weight back and the "mixed" breakfast group continued to lose.

What I want to know is two things:

One: Why on earth didn't the researchers test a low-carb breakfast and a "mixed" breakfast of equal calories? When there are two big variables that differ (the composition of the breakfast- i.e. low-carb vs. mixed- and the calorie content- i.e. 290 vs. 600) it's impossible to tell what's responsible for what.

Two: What in the heck was "maintenance"?

See, the problem with "weight gain" after a low-carb diet is simply this: people take their fabulous low-carb breakfast that they lost weight on and keep eating it but add back bread and pancakes. They think as long as they're eating the protein and fat they can add back the junk that made them fat in the first place. This has been found time and again, and I believe it's the bugaboo behind all those reports of low-carber's "gaining the weight back".

When they stay on low-carb- even relatively low-carb- they keep weight off. When they don't, they gain it back.

It's worth noting that both groups in the study were eating under 1200 calories during their weight loss phase.

Still, I can't help wondering if the researchers could have gone further, and what would have happened if "maintenance" had been more carefully controlled, and if the breakfasts of the two groups had been more on a level playing field. For example, maybe eating a "big" breakfast contributes to weight loss- but why not give a "big" breakfast to the low-carb group as well?

But let's be grateful for small blessings. I'm glad this study was reported as showing that high protein at breakfast contributes to weight loss. And I'm glad it was reported as showing that eating breakfast helps fight obesity. Both are true, and both are lessons well learned.