Breakfast and cognition: sixteen effects in nine populations, no single recipe

There is a consensus regarding the universal significance of breakfast (BF) for health, wellbeing, and cognition. The success of free school BF programs (e.g., Hasz and Lamport, 2012), which reportedly improve academic performance, fortifies this belief. However, studies showing cognitive effects of BF vs. skipping BF in large mixed cohorts of children (e.g., Wesnes et al., 2012) are often lacking metabolic and nutritional specifics. This creates uncertainty regarding the metabolic consequences of BF. Another uncertainty exists regarding skipping BF, which has been argued to have universally negative cognitive consequences— a claim that was recently announced a “presumption” unsupported by scientific evidence (Casazza et al., 2013, p.1). Surprisingly, in discussions regarding skipping BF, the neuroprotective and cognitively beneficial effects of intermittent fasting (IF) (featuring skipping BF every other day), although well-documented, are never mentioned. Furthermore, the positive effect of free school BF on academic performance (previously unquestionable) was not supported in a randomized controlled trial (Mhurchu et al., 2013). In a metaanalytical review (Adolphus et al., 2013), behavioral results of school BF programs were considered lacking “scientific rigor.” Importantly, although it has been shown that the macronutrient content of BF “can exert small but reliable effects independent of energy value and oro-sensory qualities” (Lloyd et al., 1996, p. 1), this aspect is also unspecified in many of BF studies. In this opinion article, we argue against the prevalent viewpoint of the universal benefits of BF by selectively highlighting issues demonstrating the complexity of the cognitive effects: