Diabetics Benefit by Biggest Meal Early

A small study finds that diabetics who ate a big breakfast and small dinner had better glucose control than those who ate the opposite. Steve Mirsky reports

 

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


People with type 2 diabetes have to keep a close watch on their blood glucose levels. Now a small study finds that having the day’s biggest meal at breakfast and smallest meal at dinner offers much better glucose control than having a small breakfast and big dinner—even when the total intake during the day was exactly the same: 1,500 calories. The study, by researchers from Israel’s Tel Aviv University, Sweden’s Lund University and other institutions, is in the journal Diabetologia. [Daniela Jakubowicz et al, High-energy breakfast with low-energy dinner decreases overall daily hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetic patients: a randomised clinical trial]
 
Eighteen adult volunteers, 10 women and eight men all with type 2 diabetes, were assigned by a coin flip to either the big breakfast diet or the big dinner one. In the big dinner diet, participants spent a week having about a 200-calorie breakfast, a 600-calorie lunch and a 700-calorie dinner. The big breakfast diet was the reverse, with the 700-calorie meal in the morning, the 600-calorie lunch and a light, 200 calorie dinner.
 
After two weeks, the groups switched meal plans, so that the big dinner folks became the big breakfast folks and vice versa. And overall, various measures of blood glucose and insulin levels were significantly better in those who had their big meal in the morning.
 
The next steps are longer studies with more participants. But like a healthy breakfast, this research seems like a good start.

—Steve Mirsky

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
 

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe