Chicken breast is almost pure protein. Raw, skinless and boneless, 4 oz (113 g) has 25.4 g of protein, 3 g of fat and no carbohydrates, so protein supplies 79% of its 136 kcal. It also has 10.8 mg of niacin (vitamin B3), 68% of the daily value, and on this site only 2 of 132 foods have more niacin gram for gram. Every nutrition number on this page is for raw, skinless, boneless breast (USDA), so cooked weights will differ.
The breast on your plate is far bigger than it used to be. In a University of Alberta study, chicks from a 2005 commercial strain and from strains left unchanged since 1957 and 1978 were raised on the same modern diet. From 1957 to 2005, growth rose by over 400%, breast muscle yield at 42 days was 79% higher in males and 85% higher in females, and abdominal fat fell. In the US, chicken also passed beef in 2010, when USDA data showed 58 pounds of chicken against 56.7 pounds of beef available per person.
Chicken is also the meat where handling matters most. The CDC says raw chicken can carry Salmonella and Campylobacter, and that about 1 in 25 packages at the grocery store carries Salmonella. Cooking to 165 °F (74 °C) kills them, while washing raw chicken can spread them. Below are the food-safety findings next to the nutrition evidence, including how white meat compares with red meat in blood fat trials and cohorts.
Health benefits of chicken breast
The top findings from 28 studies, strongest evidence first
What the stars mean
- Strong. Several randomized trials, pooled in a meta-analysis, point the same way, or regulators (FDA or EFSA) have approved the claim.
- Moderate. Good randomized trials support it, but there are fewer of them, or their results vary.
- Limited. Small, short or single trials, or mixed results. Promising, but it needs confirmation.
Population and lab studies get no stars: they show a link or a mechanism, not proof.
How we rate evidence →- ★★LDL cholesterol similar to red meatIn healthy adults, 4 weeks of white meat raised LDL as much as red meat, and more than nonmeat protein. In people with high LDL, lean white meat (poultry and fish) and lean red meat gave nearly identical levels (3.99 and 4.01 mmol/L).
- ★★Slightly more weight lost on higher-protein dietsAcross 24 trials, calorie-cut diets higher in protein (from mixed sources) led to 0.79 kg more weight loss. In 61 women on a calorie-cut diet, chicken led to 6.0 kg lost in 12 weeks, about the same as beef (5.6 kg).
- ★★Small lean mass gains with extra proteinIn healthy adults doing resistance training, extra protein, often from supplements, added small gains in lean body mass. The effect on handgrip strength was unclear.
- ★Chicken-meat extract preserved recall in older adultsIn 39 healthy volunteers aged 60 to 78, 1.0 g a day of anserine and carnosine from chicken meat preserved delayed recall over 3 months. The powder is not the same as eating chicken breast.
- ★Less filling than fish protein in six menIn a very small study of six lean men, fish protein left them fuller than chicken or beef protein. No fullness difference was reported between beef and chicken.
All 28 studies, strongest evidence first
Four weeks of white meat raised LDL cholesterol as much as red meat, and more than nonmeat protein did
Randomized trial in healthy adults who each ate red meat, white meat and nonmeat protein diets for 4 weeks in random order, with either high or low saturated fat (61 and 52 people finished). LDL cholesterol and apoB were higher with red and white meat than with nonmeat protein, mostly from large LDL particles, and did not differ between red and white meat. The authors say blood fats give no reason to choose white over red meat to lower heart disease risk. It was funded by the US National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.
Replacing red meat with legumes, soy or nuts lowered LDL cholesterol by 0.198 mmol/L, but not by swapping it for fish or refined carbohydrates
Meta-analysis of 36 randomized trials (1803 people) that compared red meat with other diets. Red meat did not differ from all comparison diets combined for total, LDL or HDL cholesterol or blood pressure. Against high-quality plant protein, red meat gave lesser drops in total cholesterol and LDL. One comparison group was poultry only, but the abstract gives no separate poultry result, and results varied between studies.
Calorie-cut diets higher in protein led to 0.79 kg more weight loss than standard-protein diets
Meta-analysis of 24 trials (1063 people, 12.1 weeks on average) of weight-loss diets with the same calories and fat but more protein. Fat mass fell 0.87 kg more, triglycerides fell 0.23 mmol/L more, and fat-free mass fell 0.43 kg less. Greater satiety was reported in 3 of 5 studies. The protein came from mixed sources, not chicken alone.
Eating more protein added small gains in lean body mass in healthy adults who did resistance training
Meta-analysis of 74 randomized trials in healthy, non-obese adults, most of them testing extra protein (often as supplements, so the source is mixed) on top of resistance training. Lean mass gain was small (standardized difference 0.22, 62 studies), and the effect on handgrip strength was unclear. Some authors report ties to protein and food companies.
Over 36 weeks, lean white meat and lean red meat gave nearly identical LDL cholesterol in people with high cholesterol
Randomized trial in 191 men and women with raised LDL who ate a cholesterol-lowering diet with 170 g of lean meat a day, at least 80% of it either red meat (beef, veal, pork) or white meat (poultry and fish). LDL was 3.99 and 4.01 mmol/L in the two groups, 1% to 3% below baseline. The white meat group ate fish as well as poultry.
In a crossover trial, LDL cholesterol was 4.02 on white meat and 4.01 mmol/L on red meat
Randomized crossover trial in 145 men and women with high LDL, who ate at least 80% of 170 g of daily meat as lean red meat or lean white meat (poultry and fish) for two 36-week phases. Both phases lowered LDL by about 2% from baseline and raised HDL by about 2% to 3%, with no difference between them.
Eating chicken three times a week for 5 weeks changed cholesterol no differently than lean lamb
Open-label randomized crossover study in thirty-six nuns who ate lamb or chicken three times a week for 5-week periods, with their usual diet. Neither meat changed total cholesterol, LDL or triglycerides from baseline, and the two did not differ. A small, short study in women living in convents.
On a calorie-cut diet, women who ate chicken lost 6.0 kg in 12 weeks, about the same as women who ate beef
Randomized trial in 61 overweight women who cut 500 kcal a day, walked for fitness and ate lean beef or chicken as the main protein. The beef group lost 5.6 kg. Body fat, total cholesterol and LDL fell in both groups with no difference between them.
In six men, fish protein left people fuller than chicken or beef protein
Very small crossover study in six lean men who ate meals of beef, chicken or fish protein. Satiety was greater after the fish meal, where blood amino acids also took longer to peak. Insulin and glucose did not differ between the three meals, and the abstract reports no difference in fullness between beef and chicken.
1.0 g a day of anserine and carnosine from chicken meat preserved delayed recall memory in older adults over 3 months
Double-blind randomized trial in 39 healthy volunteers aged 60 to 78 who finished. The powder, made from chicken meat, is not the same as eating chicken breast. A second trial reported in the paper pointed the same way. NH Foods Ltd. prepared the supplement, and Japan’s agriculture ministry and a science-promotion society supported the work.
The highest fifth of white meat intake went with 25% lower risk of death from any cause, with red meat higher
Cohort of 536,969 US adults aged 50 to 71 followed for 16 years. White meat meant poultry and fish together, compared with the lowest fifth at the same total meat intake. The highest fifth of red meat went with a 26% higher risk of death (hazard ratio 1.26). Funded by the US National Cancer Institute.
In 22 cohorts, the most white meat went with 6% lower risk of death from any cause but no clear change in heart disease deaths or events
Meta-analysis of 22 prospective cohort studies comparing the highest with the lowest white meat intake. The pooled odds ratio was 0.94 for death from any cause, 0.95 (not significant) for cardiovascular death and 0.99 for non-fatal heart events. A food-company foundation, the Barilla Center for Food and Nutrition Foundation, funded the analysis and the paper says it had no role in it.
Each extra 2 servings of poultry a week went with a 4% higher risk of cardiovascular disease but no change in risk of death
Pooled analysis of 6 US cohorts with 29,682 adults followed for a median of 19.0 years. Poultry went with a hazard ratio of 1.04 for cardiovascular disease and 0.99 (not significant) for death from any cause. Red meat and processed meat went with a higher risk of both.
Swapping 1 serving a day of red meat for poultry went with a 19% lower risk of heart disease in women
Nurses’ Health Study of 84,136 women followed for 26 years. Higher poultry intake went with lower risk of coronary heart disease, and higher red meat intake with higher risk. The 19% figure comes from a model that swaps poultry for red meat, and the confidence interval is wide (3% to 33%).
In 13 cohorts, white meat was not linked to death from any cause or heart disease
Meta-analysis of thirteen cohort studies with 1,674,272 people. Processed meat went with 22% and 18% higher risk of death from any cause and from cardiovascular disease, and red meat with a 16% higher risk of cardiovascular death. Results varied a lot between studies, and residual confounding is possible.
Across 7 cohorts, poultry intake was not linked to stroke risk
Meta-analysis of 7 prospective cohort studies with 354,718 people. The pooled relative risk for the highest versus lowest poultry intake was 0.92 (95% confidence interval 0.82 to 1.03), and each extra weekly serving made no difference. A lower risk in US participants and women should be read with caution.
Each extra 100 g a day of poultry went with 8% higher risk of type 2 diabetes, a weaker link than for red or processed meat
Pooled analysis of 31 cohorts in 20 countries (1,966,444 adults, 107,271 new cases of type 2 diabetes). The hazard ratio for poultry was 1.08, against 1.10 for 100 g a day of unprocessed red meat. The poultry result was weaker under other modeling assumptions. Funded by the EU, the UK Medical Research Council and a UK health research institute.
People who ate more poultry gained more weight over about 5 years
EPIC study of 103,455 men and 270,348 women aged 25 to 70 in 10 European countries. Total meat went with weight gain: 250 g more meat a day matched about 2 kg more gain after 5 years. Positive links were also seen for red meat, poultry and processed meat. The abstract gives no separate poultry size.
Each extra 30 g a day of poultry went with a 17% higher risk of acid reflux and a 17% lower risk of iron deficiency anemia
UK Biobank cohort of 474,985 adults followed for a mean of 8.0 years, tested against 25 common conditions. Poultry also went with higher risks of gastritis, diverticular disease, gallbladder disease and diabetes (hazard ratios 1.10 to 1.14). Much of the increase faded after adjusting for body mass index, so excess weight may explain part of it.
Each extra 50 g a day of poultry went with an 11% lower risk of colorectal cancer, but not lower cancer deaths
Dose-response meta-analysis of 16 prospective studies on colorectal cancer cases and 4 on deaths (13,949 cases and 983 deaths). The relative risk was 0.89 per 50 g a day for new cases and 0.97 (not significant) for deaths. The authors say poultry may be moderately linked to lower risk.
No link between poultry and colorectal cancer, while beef and lamb went with higher risk
Meta-analysis of prospective studies, 19 of them on poultry. Beef went with a relative risk of 1.11 and lamb with 1.24 for colorectal cancer, but no association was seen for poultry and colorectal cancer or adenomas.
In 474,996 adults, no cancer was clearly linked to poultry once chance findings were corrected for
UK Biobank cohort followed for a mean of 6.9 years, with 28,955 people diagnosed with cancer, checking 20 common cancers. A link between poultry and cancers of the lymphatic and blood-forming tissues did not survive correction for multiple testing. Red and processed meat went with colorectal cancer.
Men who ate at least 45 g of poultry a day had 31% lower risk of fatal prostate cancer than men who ate under 5 g
Pooled analysis of 15 cohorts with 842,149 men and 52,683 prostate cancer cases. The relative risk was 0.69 for fatal and 0.83 for advanced cancers, but the trend tests were not significant and the pattern held only in North American studies, so the result is not firm.
The highest poultry intake went with 14% higher risk of pancreatic cancer in cohort studies
Meta-analysis of 25 cohort and case-control studies. The pooled relative risk for the highest versus lowest poultry intake was 1.14 (95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.26) in cohorts, while fish showed no link. The authors say the finding needs more research.
The most white meat went with 20% lower risk of gastric cancer, but the per-serving trend was not significant
Meta-analysis of 43 studies (11 cohort and 32 case-control, 16,572 cases). White meat meant poultry and similar meats, not chicken alone. The relative risk was 0.80 for highest versus lowest intake and 0.86 (not significant) per 100 g a day. Red meat (1.41) and processed meat (1.57) went with higher risk.
Chicken and cattle were the main sources of Campylobacter infections in 1,231 people in England
DNA typing of 1,231 Campylobacter jejuni cases in Lancashire, matched to animal and environmental sources. The authors assigned 97% of sporadic disease to animals farmed for meat and poultry and 3% to wild animals and the environment. This points to the food chain as the main route.
14 of 18 raw chicken samples carried Campylobacter, and 12 of 18 home cooks washed the chicken
Researchers watched 18 households in Portugal prepare a chicken dish and swabbed the kitchens. Fourteen chicken samples (77.8%) carried Campylobacter, and twelve cooks (66.6%) rinsed the meat under the tap. Cross-contamination onto cutting boards, sinks or a cloth was found in four kitchens. Only five cooks washed their hands properly.
Charcoal-grilled chicken breast had 112 ng/g of heterocyclic aromatic amines, against 4 ng/g for roasted breast
Food-chemistry study that cooked chicken and duck breast by pan-frying, deep-frying, charcoal grilling and roasting and measured these heat-formed compounds. Pan-fried chicken breast had 27.4 ng/g and deep-fried 21.3 ng/g. It measured the compounds, not any effect on people.
Who should be careful with chicken breast
Most people can eat chicken breast freely once it is handled and cooked safely. Take a little care if one of these applies:
- Raw chicken and food poisoning. The CDC says raw chicken can carry Campylobacter, Salmonella and Clostridium perfringens. Cook it to 165 °F (74 °C), do not wash it (the UK Food Standards Agency says washing can splash Campylobacter onto hands, surfaces and clothing), and keep raw juices off other food.
- Kidney disease. A 4 oz portion has 25.4 g of protein, 51% of the daily value. The NIDDK says some people with chronic kidney disease need moderate protein, so ask a dietitian how much chicken fits.
- Charred chicken. High-heat cooking forms heterocyclic amines, but the National Cancer Institute says population studies have not shown a definite cancer link. The concern is small and easy to avoid by not charring the meat.
How to choose, store and eat chicken breast
- Cook to 165 °F (74 °C): use a food thermometer in the thickest part, because USDA says the color of cooked chicken is not a sign of its safety.
- Roast or pan-fry before you char: in one lab test, charcoal-grilled breast had 112 ng/g of heterocyclic aromatic amines, pan-fried 27.4 and roasted 4.
- Read the label: USDA says a “raised without antibiotics” claim needs documentation from the producer, and that federal rules already ban hormones in poultry, so “no hormones added” on chicken does not set one brand apart.
Keep raw chicken on the bottom shelf of the fridge in a sealed container so juices cannot drip, and use a separate cutting board for it. USDA says raw chicken parts keep 1 to 2 days at 40 °F or below, or 9 months in the freezer at 0 °F, and should be thawed in the fridge, in cold water or in the microwave, never on the counter. Do not wash it: cooking is what kills the bacteria.
Sources
- Chicken and food poisoning. CDC.
- Chicken from farm to table. USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS).
- Doneness versus safety. USDA FSIS.
- Washing food: does it promote food safety? USDA FSIS.
- Meat and poultry labeling terms. USDA FSIS.
- Campylobacter. UK Food Standards Agency. 2018.
- Healthy eating for adults with chronic kidney disease. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.
- Chemicals in meat cooked at high temperatures and cancer risk. National Cancer Institute.
- Liao GZ, Wang GY, Xu XL, Zhou GH. Effect of cooking methods on the formation of heterocyclic aromatic amines in chicken and duck breast. Meat Sci. 2010.
History of chicken breast
Every chicken descends from a jungle bird. A study of 863 genomes found that domestic chickens came mainly from one subspecies of red junglefowl, Gallus gallus spadiceus, which lives today in southwestern China, northern Thailand and Myanmar.
The first clear domestic chicken bones come from Ban Non Wat, a Neolithic site in central Thailand, dated to about 1650 to 1250 BCE. The authors of that review think rice and millet farming drew the jungle birds toward people, because stored grain was an easy meal. Chickens reached Ethiopia and Mediterranean Europe by about 800 BCE. Earlier dates have been claimed, and the origin is still debated.
For a long time chicken was not cheap food in the United States. In the 1800s it cost more than other meats, and it became more common during World War II, when beef and pork were short. After the war the USDA and a grocery chain ran a program to breed a “chicken of tomorrow”, and it led to the Cornish Rock Cross in the late 1940s, a bird that grew fast on little feed.
USDA data show chicken’s rise began in the 1940s and that US chicken availability per person more than doubled after 1970. Chicken passed pork in 1996 to become the second most eaten meat, and it passed beef in 2010, when beef had fallen from its 1976 peak of 88.8 pounds a person. These are food availability figures, which stand in for what people eat.
Sources
- Wang MS, Thakur M, Peng MS, et al. 863 genomes reveal the origin and domestication of chicken. Cell Res. 2020.
- Peters J, Lebrasseur O, Irving-Pease EK, et al. The biocultural origins and dispersal of domestic chickens. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022.
- Zuidhof MJ, Schneider BL, Carney VL, Korver DR, Robinson FE. Growth, efficiency, and yield of commercial broilers from 1957, 1978, and 2005. Poult Sci. 2014.
- U.S. consumption of chicken. USDA Economic Research Service, Amber Waves. 2012.
- Chicken as food. Wikipedia.
Frequently asked questions about chicken breast
Is chicken breast good for you?
For most people, yes. Raw skinless chicken breast has 25.4 g of protein and 3 g of fat in 4 oz (113 g), plus 68% of the daily value of niacin. It is not a cholesterol-lowering food: in a 4-week trial, white meat raised LDL cholesterol as much as red meat. Cohorts are mixed, with a lower risk of death in one pooled analysis of 22 cohorts and no link in a US pooled analysis of 29,682 adults, and none of this proves cause.
How much protein and how many calories are in chicken breast?
Raw skinless breast has 25.4 g of protein and 136 kcal in 4 oz (113 g), or 22.5 g and 120 kcal per 100 g. Protein supplies 79% of the calories, fat 21% and carbohydrate none, and the protein has every essential amino acid. These are raw weights for plain meat, and breading, skin, oil and sauce add calories.
Is chicken breast healthier than red meat?
For blood cholesterol, not clearly. In the 4-week Bergeron trial, LDL was the same after red and white meat, and in two 36-week trials in people with high cholesterol, lean white and lean red meat gave nearly identical LDL. Cohorts lean toward chicken, such as 25% lower risk of death for the highest fifth of white meat intake, but white meat there included fish, and people who eat more chicken may live differently.
Is it safe to eat pink chicken?
Only if a thermometer says so. USDA says the color of cooked chicken is not a sign of its safety, and the safe minimum is 165 °F (74 °C) in the thickest part. The UK Food Standards Agency adds that cooking thoroughly kills Campylobacter, and that is what makes chicken safe, not its color.
Should you wash chicken before cooking it?
No. The CDC says raw chicken does not need washing, USDA says washing raw poultry is not recommended, and the UK Food Standards Agency says washing can spread Campylobacter by splashing. In a Portuguese kitchen study, 12 of 18 cooks washed their chicken and cross-contamination turned up in four kitchens.
How long does raw chicken last in the fridge?
One to 2 days. USDA says raw chicken parts keep 1 to 2 days at 40 °F or below, or 9 months frozen at 0 °F, and the CDC says to refrigerate or freeze leftovers within 2 hours. Thaw in the fridge, in cold water or in the microwave, never on the counter.
Is chicken breast good for weight loss and muscle?
It can help, but chicken is not special. Higher-protein calorie-cut diets led to 0.79 kg more weight loss in a meta-analysis of 24 trials, and extra protein added small gains in lean mass in people lifting weights, but the protein sources in those trials were mixed. Women lost 6.0 kg on a chicken-based diet and 5.6 kg on a beef-based one. A large European cohort also linked more poultry to more weight gain, so portions still count.
Does chicken cause cancer?
The evidence is null or mixed. Meta-analyses found no link between poultry and colorectal cancer in one, 11% lower risk per 50 g a day in another, and 14% higher risk of pancreatic cancer in a third, and UK Biobank found no cancer clearly linked to poultry after correction for chance. High-heat charring forms heterocyclic amines, but the National Cancer Institute says human studies have not shown a definite link.