Is intermittent fasting useful or harmful? A recent study
Diagnostic fasting has become the diet prevailing for this contract.
This diet promises to burn fat without the hassle of calculating calories or reducing carbohydrates, by changing the dates of eating, and not necessarily the quality of food.
It is emphasized by the poles of technology, and Hollywood stars insist that they maintain their grace. Former British Prime Minister Rishi Sonak once talked about the start of his week with fasting for 36 hours.
Technology giants believe in its effectiveness, and Hollywood stars insist that they maintain their grace. Former British Prime Minister Rishi Sonak once talked about the start of his week with fasting for 36 hours.
Science supports this diet so far, as research indicates that the prolongation of the night fasting period may improve the metabolism, help repair cells, and may prolong age.
The most finished reading
However, nutritionists have always warned that missing meals is not a magic solution, and it may be fraught with risks to those who suffer from latent diseases.
The disrupted fasting is held in the daily eating period with a specific hours, often up to eight hours, leaving a 16 -hour time gap without food. As for the other diets that are trained in time, such as the 5: 2 diet, the food is eaten naturally for five days a week, then reduce the amount of calories for two days.
The first study of its kind sparked more serious warnings. By analyzing data for more than 19 thousand adults, researchers found that those who restricted their eating in less than eight hours a day faced a 135 percent higher risk for death due to cardiovascular diseases, compared to those who eat food for more than 12-14 hours.
The high risk of cardiovascular disease means that, based on a person's health, lifestyle, and medical data, it is more likely to develop heart -related problems such as a heart attack or stroke.
The study reached a weak and inconsistent relationship between eating restricted with a time and total deaths, but the risk of death due to cardiovascular disease was sharply higher.
The researchers assert that the study does not prove the relationship of "cause and result", but it challenges the narrative that depicts intermittent fasting as a risk -free path.
American adults have been traced over eight years. To understand their eating habits, the participants were asked in two separate days - about two weeks - remember everything they had eaten and drank - and based on what they mentioned, scientists estimated the average eating period for each person and considered it a representative of his long -term routine.
The study found that those who eaten during an eight-hour period were more likely to die in cardiovascular disease compared to those who divided their meals over a period of 12-14 hours.
It was found that the high risk of cardiovascular disease was consistent between the various social and economic groups, and the strongest among smokers and diabetics or heart disease was indicating the need to be careful in particular about eating during narrow and long periods of long -term.
The researchers also found that this connection remained existing even after adjusting the quality of the diet, frequent meals and snacks, and other lifestyle factors.
I asked the researchers how we can explain the result that indicates a significant increase in heart disease -related deaths, while the total public deaths do not rise, is it a biological factor or a bias in data?
Victor Winz Chung, the main researcher in the study and published in the magazine "Diabetes and metabolic syndrome: clinical research and reviews": that the diet is a major cause of diabetes and heart disease, so its association with high cardiovascular deaths is not surprising.
"The unexpected result is that a short period of time to eat less than eight hours over the years was linked to an increase in the risk of death to cardiovascular disease," said Professor Chung, Epidemologist at the University of Shanghai Jiao Tong, China.
This contradicts the prevailing belief, supported by short -term studies, not exceeding a few months to a year, that eating restricted food improves heart and metabolism.
In a separate opinion article accompanying the editorial of the same magazine, Anob Maysra evaluates the pioneering endocrine specialist, the advantages and risks of intermittent fasting.
Positively, he says that many experiments and analyzes indicate that it can enhance weight loss, improve insulin sensitivity, reduce blood pressure, and improve fat levels, with some evidence of its anti -inflammatory benefits.
Intermittent fasting may help control the level of blood sugar without the need for a strict calorie account, and it is easily compatible with cultural or religious fasting practices, and it is easy to follow.
"However, the possible negative aspects include deficiency of nutrients, high cholesterol, excessive hunger, emotion, headache, and low commitment over time."
"For diabetics, the uncomplicated fasting is exposed to the risk of serious blood sugar declines, and the intake of fast food is enhanced during eating period. As for the elderly or those with chronic diseases, it may be aggravated to their weakness or accelerate muscle loss."
This is not the first time that the disturbed fast has been subject to scrutiny.
A three -month accurate study, published in the "Gama" magazine of internal medicine in 2020, found that the participants lost only a small amount of weight, and most of it may be the result of muscle loss. Another study indicated that interrupted fasting may cause side effects such as weakness, hunger, dehydration, headache and difficulty concentration.
Professor Maysara explains that the new study now adds a more anxious warning, which is a possible connection with the high risk of cardiovascular disease, at least in specific categories.
I asked Professor Chung about what doctors and the public recommend in light of the latest results?
He said that people with heart or diabetes should be careful about following intermittent fasting, as the results indicate the need for "personal" nutritional advice based on the health condition of the individual.
He adds: "Based on the evidence available so far, it seems that focusing on what people eat is more important than focusing on eating time. At least, people should think not to follow intermittent fasting for a long time, whether for the purpose of preventing cardiovascular disease or to extend life."
It is clear, at the present time, that the message is not related to the abandonment of fasting completely, but by making it appropriate according to the risks that the individual is exposed to. Until the evidence becomes more clear, the perfect option may be to focus less on the dates of food and more on the quality of food.
.jpeg)
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق