Updated on 4/22/2022 3:11 p.m
- Keep your hands off food for 16 hours. Eight hours to eat.
- The 16:8 diet is a popular fasting method.
- However, a new study shows that the effect is not as great as some might hope.
Eat the entire daily ration within eight hours – and then stay away from food for 16 hours. This is the principle of the 16:8 diet. Unlike some other fasting cures, the method can also be implemented permanently – i.e. not limited to a week.
However, whether a 16:8 diet actually sheds the pounds depends on various factors. Then The interval fast Doesn’t lead to success if you don’t change your eating habits. This is shown by the results of a study that im “The New England Journal of Medicine” has been published.
It’s the total calories that count, not the intervals
The researchers, from Southern Medical University in Guangzhou, China, write in the study: “In patients with obesity, temporary eating restriction was no more beneficial than daily calorie restriction in terms of reducing body weight, body fat, or metabolic risk factors.”
For the study, they followed 139 people with obesity for a year. Some of the study participants were only allowed to eat for a limited time: between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. The other group was allowed to eat whenever they wanted. All participants followed a calorie-restricted diet that included 1,500 to 1,800 calories per day for men and 1,200 to 1,500 for women for 12 months.
A total of 118 patients completed the test. After the elapsed year, the scientists compared the two experimental groups. On average, the participants had lost eight kilograms – the group that ate in the 16:8 interval, a little more in comparison.
According to the researchers, however, “no significant difference” could be determined. The two test groups also performed similarly when comparing waist circumference, body fat and lean body mass. The same applied to risk factors such as blood sugar levels, insulin sensitivity, blood lipids or blood pressure.
“These results suggest that caloric restriction explains most of the beneficial effects observed with the time-restricted eating regimen,” quotes the “New York Times” the nutrition researcher Dr. Ethan Weiss from the University of California, San Francisco. The bottom line is: “There’s no point in eating in a narrow time window.”
Who is intermittent fasting good for?
Does intermittent fasting even make sense? “We don’t yet have a definitive answer as to whether this strategy will help people lose weight,” theNew York Times” Courtney Peterson, a researcher at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. And yet, for some, intermittent fasting can lead to desired weight loss success.
The reason is obvious: Small snacks throughout the day are taboo, just like them Treats in the evening in front of the TV – because the time of food intake is limited. Peterson suspects the diet could help people by restricting the number of calories they can eat each day.
also dr Christopher Gardner, director of nutrition studies at the Stanford Prevention Research Center, would not write off the 16:8 method just yet, despite the latest study results. “Just about every type of diet out there works for some people,” he says.
Also read: Expert analysis: No advantage of low-carb diets over similar diets
More intermittent fasting studies needed
The fact that intermittent fasting, as with the 16:8 method, can definitely have an effect German Nutrition Society (DGE) observed. The data so far indicated “that the intermittent – so with interruptions – Fasting can have a positive effect on health and weight loss, in particular the reduced reduction of fat-free mass”. Negative side effects are therefore not yet known. However, the experts also emphasize: “Whether compliance is greater compared to other forms of diet, remains to be seen.”
Further studies are needed to provide even more information about the trendy fasting method. According to the DGE, there are currently no studies on long-term consequences. And also to what extent intermittent fasting affects other parameters such as mood, physical resilience, cognitive performance or the risk of…
