Yes. The most significant effect of boiling chicken, or any kind of meat, is a reduction in its fat content. Some of the fat in the meat is dissolved into the water, which is then called broth. If you discard the broth or save it for another meal, as soup for example, the caloric content of that serving of meat is reduced. Fat, water, and other compounds are drawn out of meat when it is boiled. The percentage of fat relative to the amount of water in chicken increases during the boiling process, because more water is drawn out than fat. Thus is the reason why boiled meats tend to be somewhat drier than meat cooked in other ways. However, the total number of grams of fat in the chicken carcass is reduced, because some is dissolved into the broth. This can be seen when the broth is chilled: a thin layer of fat congeals on the surface, above the liquid and gelled layers. Meat is a source of saturated fatty acids. Fat provides more energy than any other source of food: one gram of fat produces about nine calories ["Nutrition Almanac", Kirschmann and Dunne]. It also acts as a carrier for the fat-soluble vitamins A, D, E, and K. Reducing the fat content in meat reduces the potential energy available to the body. Although reducing animal fats may be necessary for weight control or for other health concerns (e.g., cholesterol), individuals who perform heavy physical labour, especially in the cold, can benefit from the energy available in animal fats. In conclusion, all meats lose some of their nutritional value when they are cooked. Not only do we accept these losses, but they may be desirable, particularly where a reduction in the fat content can be achieved (e.g., grilling). A reduction in the amount of animal fats we consume is heavily promoted for health reasons. Boiling meat allows some fat to be recovered for use in a another meal and is, therefore, somewhat more cost-effective than other cooking methods. However, boiling dries meat out and makes it stringy, reducing its appeal. Perhaps the only way to avoid nutritional losses is to develop a taste for raw "country meat". Fresh seal blubber, anyone? .

No. Boiling of chicken causes a greater loss of water than roasting but no loss of fat so that as a proportion of dry matter, fat is highest in the boiled product. http://www.fao.org/documents/show_cdr.asp?url_file=/docrep/T0562E/T0562E02.htm ----------- While some fats are good fats saturates are not and should be kept to a minimum. Health professionals today will give you the required daily fat intake amounts and saturates must be kept at manageable levels. If you boil chicken and allow the broth to cool you can skim off the solid fats. Saturates are the biggest dietary cause of LDL cholesterol. This fat is mostly found in animals. ------------ Chicken breast, meat only, boiled 140 calories. Chicken breast, meat & skin, boiled 150 calories. Chicken drumstick, meat only, boiled 150 calories. Boiling chicken means no fat added so that’s a good thing. Reduction in fat can save your life and that should always be remembered. http://www.annecollins.com/calories/calories-chicken.htm If you eat chicken with the skin, you'll more than double the amount of fat and saturated fat; chicken skin derives 80% of its calories from fat, 23% of them from saturated fat. Dark-meat chicken supplies about the same amount of fat as light meat with the skin--about 10 grams of fat in 3 1/2 ounces roasted--and dark meat is slightly higher in cholesterol as well. Dark meat with the skin is the fattiest of all, with 16 grams of fat per 3 1/2 ounces roasted, deriving 56% of its calories from fat. http://www.wholehealthmd.com/refshelf/foods_view/1,1523,86,00.html

simple answer. No!

Just a bit of advice to go along with this. It is not always how you cook it that counts. General wisdom says these days that boiling, roast, or grilling (except for the carcinogens from char and searing.) chicken, or any protein for that matter, is a good deal better for you than frying it. However, it can be what you eat with your protein that counts. I do not totally know what your orientation may be: Whether you feel you'll be missing out on the available protein or some of the other nutritional content. I will say what I know and that is to be wary of your food combining more than your cooking method. For example. Combining proteins with sugars and/or starches in the same meal, neutralizes the enzymes needed by each for digestion. Drinking milk with protein neutralizes the acid needed to break down the protein. In fact, milk is pretty much bad to combine with anything because the fat from milk curdles in the stomach, the curd coagulates (makes food well, semi-solid, so reverses your the whole chewing process.) around food particles and keeps them from proper exposure to gastric juices. That actually goes for pretty much all other fats too. So yeah you're losing some nutrition when you cook chicken. But what's to consider eating it raw (No seal blubber for me thank you! lol!)? Due to food borne illnesses, I cannot foresee a reason to lose sleep over it. However, combining your chicken with starches, sugar, milk, and sweet fruits even, may put you a few more steps back. Also, ice cold drinks too. Aim for room temp or warm. Good dinner = Poached (boiled) chicken (fat trimmed), steamed brocolli, carrots, green/red bell pepper, and yellow onion, small salad (colorful though), fresh cup of green tea (cooled to how you like it of course.) = Protein, fiber, nice assortment of vitamin and minerals, chlorophyll, phytochemicals, phytoestrogen, polyphenols, ectogallocatechins (ECGC), and anti-oxidants (including beta-carotene.) Season how you like it. Be creative. I use organic sauces, sometimes simmered, and coat my protein in it. Want some beneficial fat, down a 1/2 teaspoon of olive oil or coconut oil a little later. I hope this helps. And I also hope it gives you some ideas.