|
|
|
|
|
|
by bhaney
1415 days ago
|
|
|
> Given the same energy intake > During fasting days, participants fasting for one day/week were allowed to consume 400 Kcal/day, while participants fasting for two consecutive days were allowed 500 Kcal/day. During non-fasting days the dietary regimen provided 1350 and 1700 kcals/day for women and men, respectively That seems like the first claim is just untrue and the 2-day-fasters are consuming fewer calories overall? If all the non-fasting days are the same for both groups like this says, then the 2-day-fasting men are consuming 1100 fewer calories per week (and 750 fewer for women). Even if intermittent fasting did nothing at all, I would expect that extra calorie deficit to result in more weight loss. |
|
|
I think that the logic of giving even less to those fasting is pretty obvious that it would lead to more weight loss.
You can read the full study here, but it seems to confirm a caloric defecit on the IF2 and IF group vs control.
https://nutritionj.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s1293...
...
IF1-P, 9058±692 kcals/week vs.
IF2-P, 8389±438 kcals/week
A proper methodology would be to have all 3 groups consume the same 7-day baseline diet for 2 weeks, then switch into the IF groups and monitor increases in rate-of-change for body weight vs net body weight difference before/after. There should also be similar caloric input for all groups before and after program to see if there is actually an additional benefit to intermittent fasting vs caloric input reduction.