Heather Bedard, C.H.E.
One of the biggest obstacles to people finding long-term, sustainable health is the never-ending supply of diet fads and “quick fixes”. It’s easy to want to take a pill or do a 30-day challenge to make up for poor eating habits or lifestyle choices, but the consequences of that is the constant disappointment of never actually achieving consistent health.
One of the most well-marketed diet tricks is intermittent fasting or IF. There are several ways to achieve IF and generally it consists of fasting for 16hrs and eating only during a four-hour window or skipping at least one meal. Proponents of this diet usually present many stories of weight-loss, studies of how IF slows aging and increases cellular health, or how our ancient ancestors must have certainly gone many long periods of time between eating opportunities due to the difficulty of hunting for food or lack of food availability. As with any health decision we make, let’s look at the other side of the story and the research so we can make the most informed decision possible.
Let’s take a look at the first argument, that being our ancestor’s enjoyment of excellent health. No one actually knows the state of our ancestor’s specific health and periods of time due to starvation have not been proven to be better for your health. It’s important to remember that just because they went long periods of time without eating due to necessity, doesn’t mean that was better for them. Our access to plentiful food is a detriment mainly because it consists currently of highly processed, sugar-filled, chemical laden options. Anemia, scurvy, and rickets are commonly avoided by ingesting and absorbing optimal levels of nutrients.
Another reason people are drawn to IF is that supporters claim that fasting can increase cell autophagy (death) and allow the body to detox. This is true. However, the body continues cell autophagy with or without fasting just to keep you alive. Your body’s detox pathways, which include the kidney, liver, lungs, and skin are there to detox you minute-by-minute. You can support these functions so that they operate at optimum efficiency by not feeding your body highly processed, high sugar, high fat foods and giving them the whole food nutrients that they need to work well. There isn’t one study that shows that IF is superior to a high carb, low-fat, whole food diet like the one I recommend. If you can have great health, while not being hungry, I, for one, am all for it!
This brings me to the weight-loss issue. Many people are interested in IF because it promises quick and easy weight-loss. This is dangerous for several reasons. If the root cause of your weight-gain is not addressed, the minute you decide to stop this diet, you most likely will gain all your weight back, and more. This causes the proverbial yo-yo diet. Most studies of this diet are small and short. It’s easy to show that a diet plan is effective for two to three months, but there aren’t many that show sustainable, consistent results at six to twelve months. There are only three randomized trials that include twenty-five or more people.[1] In a systematic review of 23 trials, the participants only experienced a 3% weight-loss. Let’s say you weigh over 250 pounds, that’s approximately a 7-pound loss…hardly a drop in the bucket for the amount of restriction you have to put into this diet.[2] Another analysis showed that participants who used IF only lost 1.9 pounds more than those who didn’t diet at all.[3] On top of that, the TREAT trial participants restricted their eating for 8hrs and had no change in outcome compared to the control group that ate 3 regular meals per day.[4]
Most people who participate in IF do so not because they don’t care about their health, but because they do! They want to give their body the edge it needs to stay lean and strong. Unfortunately, IF or time-restricted eating is not going to give them the outcome they are looking for over time. Two studies have shown that time-restricted eating can cause the loss of lean muscle mass,[5] skipping breakfast increases your risk of developing type 2 diabetes,[6] and severely restricting calories can also cause an increase in fat tissue and the reduction of metabolic rate.[7],[8]
Unless you are fasting purposely for religious reasons, treating cancer, or other serious health conditions, the average person will benefit more from engaging in an optimal dietary pattern that doesn’t include long periods of calorie restriction, counting calories, or the next health fad that overpromises and under delivers. Let’s find freedom in a simple, consistent, time-tested healthCARE approach.
---------------------
[1] Marlene Busko. Time-Restricted Eating Is Promising, But More Data Are Needed. Medscape June 26 2021 [2] Adafer R, Messaadi W, Meddahi M et al. “Food Timing, Circadian Rhythm and Chrononutrition: A systematic Review of Time-Restricted Eating’s Effects on Human Health.” Nutrients 2020 Nov;12(12):3770 [3] Moom S, Kang J, Kim SH et al. “Beneficial Effects of Time-Restricted Eating on Metabolic Diseases: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Nutrients 2020 Apr;12(5):1267 [4] Lowe DA, Wu N, Rohdin-Bibby BA et al. “Effects of Time-Restricted Eating on Weight Loss and Other Metabolic Parameters in Women and Men With Overweight and Obesity. The TREAT Randomized Clinical Trial.” JAMA Intern Med 2020 Sep;180(11):1491-1499 [5] Chow LS, Manoogian ENC, Alvear A et al. “Time Restricted Eating Effects On Body Composition and Metabolic Measures in Humans who are Overweight: A Feasibility Study.” Obesity (Silver Spring) 2020 May;28(5):860-869\ [6] Ballon A, Neuenschwander M, Schlesinger S. “Breakfast Skipping Is Associated with Increased Risk of Type 2 Diabetes among Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies.” J Nutr 2019 Jan;149(1):106-113 [7] Heshka S, Yng NU, Wang J, Burt P, Pi-Sunyer FX. “Weight loss and change in resting metabolic rate.” Am J clin Nutr 1990 dec;5(6):891-986 [8] Luke A, Schoeller DA. “Basal metabolic rate, fat-free mass, and body cell mass during energy restriction.” Metabolism 1992 Apr;41(4):450-456