Study offers another reason to eat breakfast: preventing heart attack
By The Associated Press
Published: Monday, July 22, 2013, 5:54 p.m.
ATLANTA — Skipping breakfast may increase chances of a heart attack.
A study of older men found those who regularly skipped breakfast had a 27 percent higher risk of a heart attack than those who ate a morning meal. There's no reason why the results wouldn't apply to other people, too, the Harvard researchers said.
Other studies have suggested a link between breakfast and obesity, high blood pressure, diabetes and other health problems called precursors to heart problems.
“But no studies looked at long-term risk of heart attack,” said Eric Rimm, one of the study authors at the Harvard School of Public Health.
Why would skipping breakfast be a heart attack risk?
Experts aren't certain, but here's what they think: People who don't eat breakfast are more likely to be hungrier later in the day and eat larger meals. Those meals mean the body must process a larger amount of calories in a shorter amount of time. That can spike sugar levels in the blood and perhaps lead to clogged arteries.
“We don't know whether it's the timing or content of breakfast that's important. It's probably both,” said Andrew Odegaard, a University of Minnesota researcher.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Obama, House Republicans trade accusations in thwarting immigration reform
- Denver wife killed 12 minutes into 911 call, sparking inquiry
- Vermont Senate OKs GMO labels as industry insists genetically modified crops are safe
- Hoax bomb case causes concerns in Boston
- Tea Party flap averted fraud probe by IRS, Justice, emails show
- Federal judge strikes down North Dakota abortion ban
- ‘Godfather’ of runaway salaries for elected officials sentenced in California
- US Airways’ pornographic tweet won’t cost anyone a job
- New York Police Department commissioner disarms post-9/11 intel program
- Bloomberg to spend$50M on gun-control initiative
- Census director defends changes, denies questions altered to inflate Obamacare success