ライフサイエンスコーパス: breakfast

1 (P = 0.0285) than did the high-carbohydrate breakfast.

2 t included breakfast with a day that omitted breakfast.

3 l catheter followed by a standardized liquid breakfast.

4 the specific characteristics of an adequate breakfast.

5 onsistent breakfast consumers ate or skipped breakfast.

6 ls in post-basal state for each intervention breakfast.

7 eliciting greater increases than did the NP breakfast.

8 om visual analog scales before and after the breakfast.

9 rtment of grain products mainly consumed for breakfast.

10 les, normally only occurs a few hours before breakfast.

11 safinamide or placebo as 1 tablet daily with breakfast.

12 than did the high-carbohydrate and high-fat breakfasts.

13 m fasting (>12 h) blood samples drawn before breakfast (0 h) and at 24, 48, and 72 h and from postpra

14 Participants consumed one of the following breakfasts: 1) a very-low-carbohydrate high-fat breakfas

15 ydrate breakfast than after the carbohydrate breakfast (11.0 +/- 0.4 and 12.1 +/- 0.4 mmol/L, respect

16 nd academic performance and energy intake at breakfast, 11 provided the same information for the macr

17 ydrate breakfast than after the carbohydrate breakfast (13% +/- 10% compared with 10% +/- 8%; P = 0.0

18 rvention week 1) in either a skewed (10 g at breakfast, 20 g at lunch, and 60 g at dinner; n = 20) or

19 ay) and were randomized in an EVEN (16.7% at breakfast, 32.8% at lunch, 31.3% at dinner, 19.2% at sna

20 19.2% at snacks; N.=23) or UNEVEN (15.4% at breakfast, 36.6% at lunch, 34.9% at dinner, 12.4% at sna

21 e III (n = 67) criteria, consumed a standard breakfast (540 kcal: 36% fat, 15% proteins, 49% carbohyd

22 kfast, lunch, and dinner) and snacks (before breakfast, after dinner, and after 2000 h), intermeal in

23 .0146) for white bread than did the high-fat breakfast and a lower II value (P = 0.0285) than did the

24 3, ad libitum energy intake was assessed at breakfast and by weighed food records.

25 ined by calculating the midway point between breakfast and dinner times, and dietary composition was

26 bloating, nausea, gas, and fullness) before breakfast and every 30 minutes, up to 240 minutes after

27 to-vigorous physical activity, more frequent breakfast and family meals, less frequent fast food and

28 The causal nature of associations between breakfast and health remain unclear in obese individuals

29 significantly reduced on the CRHP diet after breakfast and lunch by 11% and 31% compared with the CR

30 s and EF, and glucose and lipid responses to breakfast and lunch were determined; and 32 participants

31 crossover trial of clarithromycin 500mg with breakfast and lunch, in patients with hypersomnolence sy

32 fferences in 24-h energy intakes between the breakfast and no-breakfast day were 247 and 187 kcal, re

33 ut not the causal relation, between skipping breakfast and obesity (final cumulative meta-analysis P

34 h isoenergetic CRHP or CR diets comprising a breakfast and subsequent lunch meal.

35 of a day's intake did not differ between the breakfast and the no-breakfast day, breakfast skippers m

36 , the first postprandial insulin peak (after breakfast) and the iAUC for insulin were elevated for th

37 rmation for the macronutrient composition of breakfast, and 1 investigated both the aspects.

38 1.06, and -0.71 +/- 1.17 kg for the control, breakfast, and NB groups, respectively.

39 1.26, and -0.61 +/- 1.18 kg for the control, breakfast, and NB groups, respectively.

40 ssociated with lower postprandial glucose at breakfast, and the intake of soluble fiber from food and

41 He had eaten nattou for breakfast at 7:30 am.

42 -CNS quartile was associated with purchasing breakfast at a later time (P = 0.01), skipping breakfast

43 avoid all animal source foods (ASF) and skip breakfast at least up to lunch time.

44 d assays.The consumption of the high-protein breakfast before the white-bread challenge attenuated th

45 ospective food consumption (P = 0.03) at the breakfast buffet at 16 wk compared with baseline.

46 icantly reduced energy intake at the week 16 breakfast buffet in 11- and 12-y-olds (P = 0.04) but not

47 s translated into reduced energy intake in a breakfast buffet in older but not in younger children.

48 tite included energy intake at an ad libitum breakfast buffet, 3-d food records, and fasting satiety

49 between being an evening person and skipping breakfast, but not vice versa.

50 afternoon and evening with fasting than with breakfast by the final week of the intervention (CV: 3.9

51 research about the proposition that skipping breakfast causes weight gain, which is called the propos

52 ure the acute metabolic response of a cereal breakfast (CB) and an egg and ham breakfast (EHB).

53 better sensory acceptance (70.6%) than wheat breakfast cereal (41.18%).

54 olic content and decreased TBARS and EC50 of breakfast cereal (p<0.05).

55 to utilise ATE by fortification in rice bran breakfast cereal (RBC).

56 able fractions were observed for wheat-based breakfast cereal and chocolate respectively.

57 gh daily consumption of half a bowl (65g) of breakfast cereal and four slices of toasted (122g) or un

58 larly, semolina was the highest contaminated breakfast cereal for OTA (3.90 mug/kg), while cornflakes

59 The sorghum breakfast cereal had better sensory acceptance (70.6%) t

60 approach is illustrated through a simulated breakfast cereal manufacturing firm procuring grain, con

61 The breakfast cereal produced under these conditions had pro

62 gards to the sensory analysis, the evaluated breakfast cereal received average acceptance scores rang

63 ) and zearalenone (ZEN) were analysed in 237 breakfast cereal samples collected from central areas of

64 Results showed that 96% of the analysed breakfast cereal samples were contaminated with several

65 Thus, consumption of whole sorghum breakfast cereal should be encouraged, since it had good

66 860) to identify genetic variants related to breakfast cereal skipping as a proxy-phenotype for break

67 ype genome-wide association study (GWAS) for breakfast cereal skipping, a commonly assessed correlate

68 ological risk and acceptance of the selected breakfast cereal with the best physical quality were ass

69 n alternative for the production of extruded breakfast cereal.

70 nt was 78.6% higher in wheat than in sorghum breakfast cereal.

71 tioxidant activity (87.9% higher) than wheat breakfast cereal.

72 , sweet wine, balsamic vinegar, beer, bread, breakfast cereals and biscuits) and their antioxidant ca

73 also detected in cereal-based foods such as breakfast cereals and bread toasted to a brown color (me

74 nergy products significantly decreased among breakfast cereals and savory spreads (both p < 0.01).

75 Bread and breakfast cereals are a major constituents of the human

76 herefore, it can be concluded that bread and breakfast cereals contains Cr(VI) which does not exceed

77 ty-one mycotoxins and metabolites present in breakfast cereals primarily marketed for children in Por

78 Chromium(VI) content in breakfast cereals ranged between 20.4+/-4mugkg(-1) and 4

79 e compounds of whole-sorghum and whole-wheat breakfast cereals were compared.

80 The results have shown that 53% samples of breakfast cereals were found contaminated with ZEN and 8

81 vinegar, sweet wine, biscuit, chocolate, and breakfast cereals) were submitted to an in vitro digesti

82 Fries, chips, chicken nuggets, onions rings, breakfast cereals, biscuits, crackers, instant coffee an

83 sed products, wheat flour, corn flour, oats, breakfast cereals, legumes and potatoes) and to estimate

84 Complex samples like cinnamon, tea, breakfast cereals, milk rice, jam, cinnamon stars and bu

85 (in beverages, milks and milk-based drinks, breakfast cereals, sweet baked products, and sweet and s

86 eal products were analysed: bread, biscuits, breakfast cereals, wheat flour, corn snacks, pasta and i

87 nes and flavanones were not detected in both breakfast cereals.

88 lted-wheat (MLT) and whole-grain wheat (CON) breakfast cereals.

89 , 42% for sausages, and 54% for ready-to-eat breakfast cereals.

90 mperature on the physical characteristics of breakfast cereals.

91 sauces, desserts, jams, jellies, sweets and breakfast cereals.

92 ibility (99.6%) was observed for wheat-based breakfast cereals.

93 umed 350-kcal NP (13 g protein) cereal-based breakfasts, consumed 350-kcal HP egg- and beef-rich (35

94 The time of peak MVPA differed between breakfast consumers and nonconsumers on weekends.

95 es in log MVPA on days when 570 inconsistent breakfast consumers ate or skipped breakfast.

96 Peak hourly MVPA differed for breakfast consumers compared with nonconsumers on weeken

97 Inconsistent breakfast consumers did more MVPA on days when they ate

98 Among breakfast consumers, mean (+/-SD) baseline weight-, age-

99 Among irregular breakfast consumers, women with a higher eating frequenc

100 asting (FAST; 0 kcal until 12.00 h) or daily breakfast consumption (BFAST; >/=700 kcal before 11.00 h

101 e and vigorous physical activity (MVPA)] and breakfast consumption (diet diary) were measured simulta

102 We investigated the associations between breakfast consumption (frequency and content) and risk m

103 We assessed the associations between breakfast consumption and dietary intake, physical activ

104 %, 58.1%; P = 0.139) of the relation between breakfast consumption and percentage body fat.

105 The association between breakfast consumption and physical activity (PA) is inco

106 udies have investigated the relation between breakfast consumption and various domains of cognitive f

107 Breakfast consumption at weekends is worth additional in

108 Breakfast consumption had no short-term effect on neurop

109 y associations and hourly patterns of PA and breakfast consumption in British adolescents.

110 Regular breakfast consumption may protect against type 2 diabete

111 Short-term impacts of breakfast consumption on diet quality and cognitive func

112 Hourly patterns of MVPA by breakfast consumption status were displayed graphically,

113 Public health authorities commonly recommend breakfast consumption to reduce obesity, but the effecti

114 Associations between MVPA and breakfast consumption were assessed by using a multileve

115 Three patterns of breakfast consumption were studied: high-energy breakfas

116 e prospectively associations between regular breakfast consumption, eating frequency, and T2D risk in

117 ived an intraduodenal infusion 150 min after breakfast, containing quinine (bitter), rebaudioside A (

118 CI: 1.23, 1.75) than did women who consumed breakfast daily and ate 1-3 times/d.

119 not eat breakfast relative to those who ate breakfast daily were adjusted for adiposity, the differe

120 mong 4,116 children studied, 3,056 (74%) ate breakfast daily, 450 (11%) most days, 372 (9%) some days

121 Children who ate breakfast daily, particularly a high fibre cereal breakf

122 5% CI 3%-10%) than those who reported having breakfast daily; these differences were little affected

123 akes at the lunch meal were higher on the no-breakfast day (202 kcal in men and 121 kcal in women), a

124 he lunch meal provided more energy on the no-breakfast day than on the breakfast day.

125 energy intakes between the breakfast and no-breakfast day were 247 and 187 kcal, respectively.

126 not differ between the breakfast and the no-breakfast day, breakfast skippers may need encouragement

127 fruit and whole grains were reported on the breakfast day, but the energy and macronutrient density

128 e energy on the no-breakfast day than on the breakfast day.

129 2 interventions (over 90 min) (day 7: after breakfast; day 9: after lunch and dinner).

130 dietary intervention, 6 volunteers were fed breakfast doses of 0, 1, 2, 4, or 6 egg yolks.

131 ered masked capsules, once daily, 1 h before breakfast during the treatment phase.

132 loss was effective at changing self-reported breakfast eating habits, but contrary to widely espoused

133 omization was stratified by prerandomization breakfast eating habits.

134 and there was no interaction between initial breakfast eating status and treatment.

135 Eating habits, including breakfast eating, were assessed in 1992 in 26 902 Americ

136 belief, there was no metabolic adaptation to breakfast (eg, resting metabolic rate stable within 11 k

137 f a cereal breakfast (CB) and an egg and ham breakfast (EHB).

138 daily fullness compared with BS, with the HP breakfast eliciting greater increases than did the NP br

139 nalog scales before and after a standardized breakfast (energy content = 50% of basal metabolic rate)

140 cemia later in the same day, indicating that breakfast enhances the liver's role in glucose disposal

141 onsumers did more MVPA on days when they ate breakfast [exponentiated beta coefficients (95% CIs): 1.

142 A recommendation to eat or skip breakfast for weight loss was effective at changing self

143 Graded associations between breakfast frequency and risk markers were observed; chil

144 Differences in nutrient intakes between breakfast frequency groups did not account for the diffe

145 Participants provided information on breakfast frequency, had measurements of body compositio

146 ce with the recommendation was 93.6% for the breakfast group and 92.4% for the NB group.

147 g conditions with random allocation to daily breakfast (>/=700 kcal before 1100) or extended fasting

148 g conditions with random allocation to daily breakfast (>/=700 kcal before 1100) or extended fasting

149 trolled trial examining causal links between breakfast habits and all components of energy balance in

150 rolled trial to examine causal links between breakfast habits and components of energy balance in fre

151 risk factors, and compared with high-energy breakfast, habitual skipping breakfast was associated wi

152 Men who skipped breakfast had a 27% higher risk of CHD compared with men

153 ed; children who reported not usually having breakfast had higher fasting insulin (percent difference

154 Children eating a high fibre cereal breakfast had lower insulin resistance than those eating

155 fast daily, particularly a high fibre cereal breakfast, had a more favourable type 2 diabetes risk pr

156 ion of genetic variation to food timing, and breakfast has been determined to exhibit the most herita

157 njected Monday, Wednesday, and Friday before breakfast (IDeg 3TW(AM)) in the AM trial (94 sites in se

158 ream eating behaviors subsequent to skipping breakfast in free-living individuals.

159 Breakfast increased daily fullness compared with BS, wit

160 esting a possible beneficial role of regular breakfast intake as part of a healthy lifestyle.

161 ffects of specific eating patterns: skipping breakfast, intermittent fasting, meal frequency (number

162 For many older adults, breakfast is a carbohydrate-dominated lower-protein meal

163 Skipping breakfast is associated with an increased odds of preval

164 Breakfast is associated with lower body weight in observ

165 e evidence on the positive effects of having breakfast is becoming more robust, interest may shift to

166 Daily breakfast is causally linked to higher physical activity

167 Skipping breakfast is considered a frequent and unhealthy habit a

168 Popular beliefs that breakfast is the most important meal of the day are grou

169 However, characteristics of breakfast itself may induce metabolic and hormonal alter

170 akfasts: 1) a very-low-carbohydrate high-fat breakfast (LCBF; <10% of energy from carbohydrate, 85% o

171 ein (HP) compared with a normal-protein (NP) breakfast leads to daily improvements in appetite, satie

172 In obese adults, daily breakfast leads to greater physical activity during the

173 Breakfast led to beneficial alterations in the appetitiv

174 number of generic meals for each meal type: breakfast, light meals, main meals, snacks, and beverage

175 The consumption of a high-phenol VOO-based breakfast limited the increase of lipopolysaccharide pla

176 A very-low-carbohydrate high-fat breakfast lowers postbreakfast glucose excursions.

177 centage of short-duration sleepers mentioned breakfast, lunch (women only), and dinner in the recall

178 Identical mixed meals were ingested during breakfast, lunch, and dinner at 0700, 1300, and 1900 h i

179 Typical breakfast, lunch, and dinner meals are difficult to dist

180 to 68 mug during a simulated day (including breakfast, lunch, and dinner preparation interspersed by

181 ng: reporting of and energy from main meals (breakfast, lunch, and dinner) and snacks (before breakfa

182 0 g at dinner; n = 20) or even (30 g each at breakfast, lunch, and dinner; n = 21) distribution patte

183 Three meals (breakfast, lunch, dinner) were given at 5-hr intervals,

184 unaffected by either of the treatments, but breakfast maintained more stable afternoon and evening g

185 hammer meal (73.1-73.5%) was higher than in breakfast meal (64.3-69.3%) after 4months of storage; ho

186 ntrol smoothie (PS) together with a high-fat breakfast meal challenge.

187 ignificant (P >/= 0.004) differences between breakfast meal consumption and fasting for any of the ne

188 The breakfast meal often results in the largest postprandial

189 ght to determine the short-term effects of a breakfast meal on the neuropsychological functioning of

190 eight (MW) and, hence, viscosity of OBG in a breakfast meal on the primary endpoint of food intake at

191 The breakfast meal provided a mean of 508 kcal in men and 37

192 Subsequently (days 1-4), a standardized breakfast meal was followed midmorning by a 90-min infus

193 ts of 1-d duration that differed only in the breakfast-meal composition (carbohydrate or no carbohydr

194 The subjects received each of 3 isocaloric breakfast meals (i.e., high carbohydrate, high fat, or h

195 The crossover treatments were frozen breakfast meals containing 100 g of liquid (~2) whole eg

196 Eleven studies considered breakfast meals differing in glycemic index/load.

197 Participants consumed, in random order, breakfast meals equivalent in weight, energy, and macron

198 Patients consumed isocaloric breakfasts (mean +/- SD: 369.8 +/- 9.4 kcal) with high a

199 Diets consisted of 3 consecutive meals (breakfast, morning tea, and lunch), matched for macronut

200 ld to eat breakfast or to skip breakfast [no breakfast (NB)].

201 ntal groups told to eat breakfast or to skip breakfast [no breakfast (NB)].

202 Breakfast omission is known to be associated with lower

203 n were lower after lunch but unaltered after breakfast on CRHP; beta-cell function and insulin cleara

204 ontribute to the negative impact of skipping breakfast on dietary habits and body weight and the long

205 needed to quantify the protective effect of breakfast on emerging type 2 diabetes risk.

206 inferences about long-term impacts of school breakfast on indicators of school engagement and academi

207 gain, which is called the proposed effect of breakfast on obesity (PEBO) in this article.

208 Most studies that assess the effects of breakfast on subsequent mental abilities compared perfor

209 of nutrient composition or energy intake at breakfast on the accomplishment of school-related tasks

210 ctiveness of a recommendation to eat or skip breakfast on weight loss in adults trying to lose weight

211 sunrise when the forest is still dark) when breakfasting on very ephemeral fruits, especially when t

212 lucose) techniques to examine the impact of "breakfast" on hepatic glucose metabolism later in the sa

213 Breakfast options differed in terms of included foods an

214 fluence on appetite-related sensations after breakfast or after meal consumption (all P > 0.3).

215 ight loss in experimental groups told to eat breakfast or to skip breakfast [no breakfast (NB)].

216 es design among children who either consumed breakfast or were fasting.

217 rls with higher MVPA were more likely to eat breakfast [OR (95% CI): boys, 1.78 (1.30, 2.45) (P < 0.0

218 .776 (95% CI 1.379-2.287)], frequent lack of breakfast [OR - 2.145 (95% CI 1.688, 2.725)], quick eati

219 50-kcal HP egg- and beef-rich (35 g protein) breakfasts, or continued breakfast skipping (BS) for 6 d

220 tly reduced postprandial hyperglycemia after breakfast (P < 0.01) and did not adversely affect glycem

221 eakfast at a later time (P = 0.01), skipping breakfast (P = 0.03), and not preparing breakfast (P = 0

222 ping breakfast (P = 0.03), and not preparing breakfast (P = 0.04) or lunch (P = 0.01) at home.

223 eses that a BIC program would improve school breakfast participation at the school level, school atte

224 The BIC program was linked with increased breakfast participation during the academic year (F10,41

225 to the evidence that BIC can increase school breakfast participation substantially and suggest that i

226 These data suggest that the addition of breakfast, particularly one rich in protein, might be a

227 e than 70% of toddler meals, cereal bars and breakfast pastries, and infant-toddler grain- or dairy-b

228 st commercial toddler meals, cereal bars and breakfast pastries, and infant-toddler snacks and desser

229 to explore the association between different breakfast patterns and CV risk factors and the presence,

230 ower probability of adherence to prudent and breakfast patterns.

231 We found "prudent" and "breakfast" patterns in Homescan and NHANES, "ready-to-ea

232 -MS/MS) depending on the edible oil used for breakfast preparation.

233 cells, as compared with the consumption of a breakfast prepared with the same oil but with low or int

234 Olive oil-based breakfasts prepared with virgin olive oil (VOO) with hig

235 ant plasma activities than the intake of the breakfasts prepared with VOO, SOP and SOX.

236 l School Lunch Program (NSLP) and the School Breakfast Program (SBP) than in nonparticipants.

237 in the National School Lunch Program, School Breakfast Program, or both have lower dietary quality th

238 The Bath Breakfast Project is a randomized controlled trial with

239 The Bath Breakfast Project is a randomized controlled trial with

240 better and more sustained performance with a breakfast providing >20% daily energy intake still needs

241 % CI -0.1 to 29.0]; P = 0.03), later time of breakfast purchases (15.0 minutes later [95% CI 1.5-28.5

242 The consumption of breakfast reduced daily hunger compared with BS with no

243 The intake of SFO-breakfast reduced plasma GSH levels and the GSH/GSSG rat

244 -glucose-tolerance test over time with daily breakfast relative to an increase with daily fasting (P

245 omes, but insulin sensitivity increased with breakfast relative to fasting.

246 ve protein for those who usually did not eat breakfast relative to those who ate breakfast daily were

247 The high-protein breakfast resulted in a lower insulin AUCi (P = 0.0146)

248 Breakfast resulted in greater physical activity thermoge

249 The 3 breakfasts resulted in similar serum lipid responses to

250 ocessed meat products, beef patties and pork breakfast sausages, fortified with CoQ10.

251 10 IU per day, then titrated weekly to a pre-breakfast self-measured plasma glucose target of 4.0-5.5

252 y lower lipid oxidation (LO) compared to the Breakfast Session.

253 ests more in the direction of the next day's breakfast sites with ephemeral fruit compared with break

254 ast sites with ephemeral fruit compared with breakfast sites with other fruit.

255 (Pan troglodytes verus), arrived earlier at breakfast sites with very ephemeral and highly sought-af

256 ween the breakfast and the no-breakfast day, breakfast skippers may need encouragement to consume fru

257 rich (35 g protein) breakfasts, or continued breakfast skipping (BS) for 6 d.

258 Concomitantly, a longer fasting period with breakfast skipping also increased the inflammatory poten

259 ast cereal skipping as a proxy-phenotype for breakfast skipping and applied several in silico approac

260 natural experiment to evaluate the effect of breakfast skipping and avoidance of ASF for 55 days.

261 causal links between genetically determined breakfast skipping and higher body mass index, more depr

262 ohydrate, fat, and protein, respectively): a breakfast skipping day (BSD) and a dinner skipping day (

263 The aim of this study was to elucidate breakfast skipping genetic variants through a proxy-phen

264 empted validation of our approach in smaller breakfast skipping GWAS from the TwinUK (n = 2,006) and

265 association of our signals in an independent breakfast skipping GWAS in another British cohort (P = 0

266 conclusion, animal source food avoidanceand breakfast skipping has a significant desirable health ef

267 ld investigate the effect of ASF fasting and breakfast skipping on micronutrient intake and determine

268 centrations and increased fat oxidation with breakfast skipping suggest the development of metabolic

269 asting (avoidance of animal source foods and breakfast skipping) on lipid profiles, fasting blood sug

270 otype GWAS identified 6 genetic variants for breakfast skipping, linking clock regulation with food t

271 and evening snacking in overweight or obese breakfast-skipping girls.

272 es in plasma levels following consumption of breakfasts supplemented with lipids.

273 formation or down at a piece of toast at the breakfast table.

274 At the ad libitum breakfast test meal, all patients with bvFTD had increas

275 Patients participated in an ad libitum breakfast test meal, and their total caloric intake and

276 ignificantly lower after the no-carbohydrate breakfast than after the carbohydrate breakfast (11.0 +/

277 gnificant 22% less after the no-carbohydrate breakfast than after the carbohydrate breakfast (13% +/-

278 I]) in healthy individuals with higher SI at breakfast than at dinner.

279 gy intake was not significantly greater with breakfast than fasting (difference: 338 kcal/d; 95% CI:

280 ivity thermogenesis was markedly higher with breakfast than with fasting (442 kcal/d; 95% CI: 34, 851

281 After breakfast, the incremental area under the curve (iAUC) f

282 ce that wild chimpanzees flexibly plan their breakfast time, type, and location after weighing multip

283 As breakfast timing and skipping are not routinely measured

284 ed in cross-sectional observations that link breakfast to health, the causal nature of which remains

285 r insulin resistance than those eating other breakfast types (p for heterogeneity <0.01).

286 0 h, whereas the CD group ate regularly from breakfast until the end of the day.

287 ith high-energy breakfast, habitual skipping breakfast was associated with a higher prevalence of non

288 Eating breakfast was associated with higher MVPA on weekends.

289 On day 2, a standardized breakfast was consumed, with plasma concentrations of ac

290 Gmax over 5 h after breakfast was significantly lower after the no-carbohydr

291 intake (70% of the population); and skipping breakfast, when consuming <5% of total daily energy (3%

292 y intake (27% of the population); low-energy breakfast, when contributing between 5% and 20% of total

293 akfast consumption were studied: high-energy breakfast, when contributing to >20% of total daily ener

294 n, one of the 3 daily meals was presented as breakfast, whereas in the other session, a nutritionally

295 istics of individuals on a day that included breakfast with a day that omitted breakfast.

296 rom fat, 15% of energy from protein) or 2) a breakfast with dietary guidelines-recommended nutrient p

297 Breakfasts with a high-carbohydrate/protein ratio increa

298 Across two studies, we show that breakfasts with different macronutrient compositions mod

299 wPP following administration of a medium-fat breakfast, with additional paired sampling between mater

300 stigate whether restricting carbohydrates at breakfast would be a simple and feasible strategy to red