fasting

We have been believing for years that intermittent fasting is the definitive weapon to lose weight. Science has another idea

by

During the last years, the intermittent fasting has gone from being something exceptional to becoming a nutritional strategy that there is more and more talk and that it has more followers behind it. And it is no wonder, since the promise is quite seductive as it does not focus on what you eat, but on when you eat, activating different metabolic switches to accelerate fat burning. Although there are also detractors behind. New data. The Cochrane library, considered a great world reference, published a few days ago a great review about intermittent fasting that acts as a bucket of cold water, since it suggests that this diet does not offer superior benefits to conventional weight loss diets. The backup. We are not talking about a small study whose validity can be questioned, but in this case the Cochrane researchers analyzed 22 randomized controlled trials that added up to a total of 1,995 participants. overweight or obesity. The objective here was to compare different fasting modalities, such as going 16 hours without being able to eat with eight hours of eating, fasting on alternate days or 5:2 diet compared to classic calorie restriction or inaction. What they found is that, when pitting intermittent fasting against regular dietary advice, the difference in weight loss is virtually zero. The data. Getting into the matter, when intermittent fasting was compared With standard calorie-restricted diets, the mean difference in weight change was a minuscule -0.33%. This difference can translate into that intermittent fasting may result in little to no difference in weight loss with the traditional method. Regarding quality of life, such as the feeling of energy, no difference was seen and, regarding the levels of total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and triglycerides, fasting did not prove to be a panacea either, yielding results of “little or no difference” compared to the control diets. The small print. One of the most critical points of the Cochrane review is the certainty of the evidence, which they rated mostly as “low” or “very low.” This does not mean that the studies are poorly done, but rather that there are important limitations, such as risk bias, inconsistency in results, and lack of precision. But there is one fact that should worry anyone who decides to opt for this diet independently, without medical advice, since, although the evidence is uncertain, some studies pointed to associated side effects specifically to fasting. These include headaches, nausea, cold intolerance or even insomnia and lack of concentration. What is not yet known. Perhaps it is the most revealing thing about this scientific study, since there are still many unknowns surrounding intermittent fasting that invite further research. In this case, none of the 22 studies included data on “patient satisfaction,” which is important because we don’t know if people prefer to go hungry for a few hours in exchange for eating more later, or if they hate the process. And being comfortable with a diet is essential so that you don’t abandon it halfway through. In addition to this, none of the studies pointed to the relationship that may exist in chronic diseases that require significant dietary control, such as diabetes, and which is very common in the population. But one of the big problems in science today is duration, since most studies lasted less than 12 months. We don’t know if fasting is sustainable or safe beyond a year. It is not a miracle diet. What we do know is that intermittent fasting works, but the key point is that It is not superior to the tools we already had as a calorie restriction accompanied by a balanced diet and exercise. For the average patient, this is actually good news: it means that the The best diet is the one you can stick to. If someone finds it easier to skip breakfast with a 16:8 fast than to count calories at each meal, fasting is a valid tool. But if fasting causes headaches, you’re not missing out on any “magic” metabolic benefits from eating three times a day. Although in this process the most important thing is always to be advised by personnel who are qualified in nutrition to be able to have the best dietary plan, to have real objectives and, above all, not to get frustrated along the way. Images | VD Photography In Xataka | We believed that a vegetarian diet guaranteed longevity. In extreme old age, the data says just the opposite

Some scientists have reviewed 99 studies on intermittent fasting. Its results are not very optimistic

by

The popularity of intermittent fasting has grown over the last years, partly by a series of scientific studies that endorsed their potential when helping us lose weight. However, sometimes the results of individual studies do not agree with the global image of the matter. Not so effective. A new study has in doubt The ability of intermittent fasting as a superior way of losing weight. The analysis concluded that, although some forms of intermittent fasting could offer a slight advantage, the results obtained with these were not significantly better than those obtained with the simple caloric restriction. The intermittent fasting. The concept intermittent fasting It refers to a series of diets based on a temporary caloric restriction. We cannot speak of a single flash form since this temporary restriction can occur in several ways. Conventional forms of intermittent fasting imply not consuming any food during a specific time window, more or less broad, in certain days, which can be alternate or successive and in different proportions. It can also refer to drastically restricting the calories we consume in certain days of the week. Sometimes a non -intermittent hourly restriction is also included in these diets, that is, a more conventional fast. Review and meta -analysis. Evaluating the effect of these diets is not easy, but over the last decades, various teams of researchers have launched to it, obtaining very diverse results and sometimes even contradictory. Solving this type of discrepancies is what is sought with the tool we call meta -analysis. Metaanalysis start from a systematic review of literature in which the team compiles all studies in the field in a specific time interval. Metaanalysis consists in the statistical evaluation of the results obtained in compiled quantitative studies to obtain an average effect through a broader sample which allows strength to the conclusions. In other words, solve discrepancies. 6,582 participants. In this case the meta -analysis included 99 studies individuals that added in total 6,582 participants. As explained by the team responsible for the new study, among these participants, the average body mass index was 31 and about 90% had some health disease or condition. The results showed that fasting on alternate days (restricting our food consumption to alternate days) was the only option that showed an observable benefit in weight reduction. However, this reduction (1.29 kg on average) did not exceed the 2 kg threshold defined by the study responsible for the study. The details of the study were published In an article In the magazine BMJ. 99 studies, and we still need more. Metaanalysis usually serve to settle scientific knowledge in one subject, but at least in this case it is still more to investigate, admits the responsible team. The heterogeneity of dietary strategies, the small size of the samples and the limited evidence are limiting factors indicated by the team. “The evidence today provides some indication that diets based on intermittent fasting have continuous energy restriction benefits for weight loss and cardiomethabolic factors. Explain the team. In Xataka | What if we are doing the bad intermittent fasting? Some experts propose to focus only on carbohydrates Image | Xataka with Gemini / I Yunmai

Intermittent fasting is the fashion diet. At least among scientists who study their effects on microbioma

by

Inside they coexist Billions of microscopic organismsmany of which have our Digestive tract set as a place of residence. Throughout the last decades we have been realizing the outstanding role that this internal ecosystem plays in our health, far beyond gastrointestinal health. There are many factors that can affect our microbiome, including our genetics, our place of residence, The people with whom we livethe drugs we consume or Our daily habits. And of course, our diet. Our diet can affect different ways to the microbiome of our interior. For example, the introduction of a pathogen such as the clostridium difficile bacteria can cause the Intestinal “ecosystem” balance Go to the fret due to the propagation of the bacteria. However, without reaching pathological extremes, the nutrients we consume, such as fiber, can also affect the microorganisms that reside there. What we eat affects, but this also implies that what we stop eating also matters. Following a diet leads us to make a series of decisions focused on achieving a goal, often (not always) this is that of losing weight, but the changes introduced will have diverse effects, including that of affecting, for better or worse, our microbiome. He intermittent fasting It is one of the most famous diets in recent years. That is why the diets that temporarily restrict our caloric intake and which are referred conventionally with the name of intermittent fasting have received Great attention by the Nutrition experts. Logically, this has led to various research groups to investigate How the intermittent fasting to our microbioma affectswhat are the potential benefits and what the risks of these changes. The problem is that, as usual, the results of these research are quite diverse. What seems true is that intermittent fasting affects our microbiota. One of the last studies in this regard has attracted the attention of some despite not having been published in a magazine after passing the pairs review process. The work was led by researchers at Anhui Medical University and it was Recently cited by the magazine Newscientist. The study, conducted with mice, suggested that intermittent fasting could damage the intestinal barrier and cause a disruption in the microbiota, increasing the risk of intestinal inflammation. However, the door also opened therapeutic roads that could avoid these problems, such as indolaletic acid administration. The manuscript detailing the analysis, available in repository Research Squareis still in the process of review for publication in the magazine Scientific Reports. That is why we must take these results with a certain degree of skepticism. In statements collected by the magazine itself NewscientistSathidananada Panda del Salk Institute for Biological Studies of California He raised some doubts Regarding the methodology, such as the fact that the manuscript did not point out the details of the diet to which it underwent mice or that these were of a very young age when starting with the diet. For better or worse Other studies have drawn a somewhat more optimistic perspective regarding the effects of intermittent fasting on our microbiota and with it on our well -being. Of course, I did it by introducing an additional element, combining the intermittent fasting with a protein dosing diet, which space in a balanced way the proteins that we consume throughout the day The studypublished almost exactly one year ago in the magazine Nature Communicationspointed out that intermittent fasting “It showed promise” in the improvement of intestinal health, and did precisely attending our microbioma. According to details the teamin addition to seeing an increase in their levels of certain proteins, such as cytokines, participants who followed the protocol marked by intermittent fasting also experienced an increase in the presence of beneficial microbes in their digestive system, microorganisms associated with lower body fat and better global health. The studies of Scientific Reports and of Nature Communications They are two of the most recent in the matter but not the only one. Last year a group of researchers published A systematic review of literature In the magazine Frontiers in Nutrition. This type of work compiles thoroughly the previous studies carried out by analyzing a specific relationship, in this case that of intermittent fasting and the gastrointestinal microbiota. What detected the team that led this “study study” is that there was a varied literature and a “substantial heterogeneity of the results” that made it difficult to validate results, although these seemed to suggest that intermittent fasting could improve the wealth and diversity of the microbiota. What seems increasingly evident is that this type of diets affects our microbioma and that we must continue studying the consequences of this relationship. In Xataka | We are increasingly clear that our microbiome is key to our health. Our protein sources can also alter it Image | Foodie Factor / Cats Coming

What if we are doing the bad intermittent fasting? Some experts propose to focus only on carbohydrates

by

Losing weight is not as simple as subjecting our body to a caloric deficit. Diets based on ingesting less calories than our body consumes work well in some contexts, but their medium and long term effects are limited by our metabolism and by our own constancy. That is why the intermittent fasting It has become one of the most popular diets for those who want to lose weight. Question of alternatives. Now, a group of researchers He has found A way to make these more affordable diets. The idea is based on making this diet less restrictive, limiting only carbohydrate intake in the days of temporarily limiting our caloric intake. Intermittent caloric restriction. Diets based on intermittent caloric restriction, which we often refer to as intermittent fasting Although they do not always imply fasting, they are based on limiting our food intake over time. There are different strategies to perform this fast, such as fasting 5: 2, in which we severely restrict the calories we eat for two days and eat normally the rest of the week. To understand the usefulness of This type of diets We have to remember how our metabolism, in an eagerness to protect ourselves from scarcity, can limit the success that conventional caloric restriction when weight loss. And our body reacts when we give less food, limiting our energy consumption to save resources, which ends up implying that when we ingest less calories, in the medium term our body also ends up consuming less energy. Cardiometabolic health. According to Adam Collins, co -author of the new study and researcher at the University of Surrey, In an article for The conversationintermittent fasting has an added advantage. It is about improving our “metabolic flexibility” since it allows us to balance the energy sources that our body, carbohydrates and fat reserves. This in turn implies a lower risk of problems such as cardiovascular diseases or type 2 diabetes. The new study signed by Collins and his team sought to inquire about the reasons why this improvement in our metabolism is given when we follow this diet. Since these types of diets focus on the idea that our body goes from using carbohydrates as a source of energy to consume fats, the team decided to study the implications of a limited carbohydrate restriction over time. 12 participants. The 12 participants In the study, overweight or obesity adults, they passed for two days of separate food restriction for five days of “rest.” One of the restriction days, the participants consumed a low diet in hydrates, while the other day they consumed a diet based on the chlorical reduction (consuming 75% less calories with respect to what would be common). The days following the restriction day the participants consumed a high ration in fats and sugars. What the team observed is that both diet forms showed similar results in each type of diet. The details of the study have been Published in an article In the magazine European Journal of Nutrition. Looking for answers. As explained by the team responsible for the analysis, new studies will be necessary to better understand this relationship and to strengthen this notion with a broader population. The team emphasizes that each of the diets (carbohydrate restriction and temporary restriction) entail Your own problemsbut perhaps combining them allows us to make these more bearable diets and with it more affordable and with a lower risk. In Xataka | The MIT investigated whether the intermittent fasting diet is really healthy. There is good news and another very worrying Image | Rosy Ko

Some scientists have tested the “fasting 4: 3”. The results have been quite positive

by

He intermittent fasting It is perhaps the diet that has won the most popularity in recent years. The idea in broad strokes is not to focus on limiting what we eat but to limit the hours to which we do it. From this basic idea, there are several ways in which to limit our consumption depending on the hours and days we dedicate to fasting. Positive results. The last study in finding evidence of the effectiveness of these forms of dietary restriction has made it focusing on fasting 4: 3. The team responsible for the experiment observed that this form of fasting, in the context of a broad intervention that also included promotion of physical activity, led to a higher average reduction of the body mass of the participants in the study. 4: 3. In this analysis, the participants of the experimental group underwent the call Intermittent fasting 4: 3 (4: 3 IMF). This form of fasting implies limiting our caloric intake by 80% for three non -consecutive days per week. The intervenion was accompanied by a high intensity exhaustive program for weight loss. This program included behavioral support and recommendations to increase the physical activity of moderate intensity up to 300 minutes per week, explained the team responsible for the study. 12 months. For the analysis, the participants, 165 adults overweight or obesity were divided into two groups. The experimental group, which underwent the restriction described and a control group that underwent a caloric but constant caloric restriction diet in which caloric intake was reduced by about 34.3%. Both groups had the support intervention and in both cases diet and program were carried out for 12 months. “Modest” results. Although the difference between one group and another was “modest”, the team in charge of studying it observed that the experimental group reduced its body mass to a greater degree compared to the control group. The experimental group reduced its body mass in 7.6% on averagewhile in the control group the reduction was 5%. In addition, a greater proportion of participants in the experimental group managed to reduce their weight by 5% or more. In kilos, the average difference between one groups was almost 2.9 kg. The details of the work were published In an article In the magazine ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE. More than a matter of weight. There are diverse reasons that can lead to a person to lose weight. Aesthetics usually weighs a lot but the fact that overweight and obesity are risk factors in various diseases and disorders may be the most relevant. The causal interconnections that unite both factor are complex, so a lower body mass is not a good indicator of a health improvement. Therefore, the team also examined the effect of the diet on cardiometabolic markers such as blood pressure, cholesterol levels, or fasting glucose levels. These markers showed an improvement, the team added. In Xataka | For many, skipping dinner is part of your intermittent fasting. It is not always a good idea Image | Xataka with Gemini

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.