Benefits or risks? Studying causes questions about heart health

The intermittent starvation has become a decade diet.

This promises to crack biology without counting calories and cutting carbohydrates: just change when you eat, not necessarily what you eat. Technological tycoons swear, Hollywood stars insist that they keep them. Former Prime Minister of the UK Rishi is a jog After talking about the start of their week with a 36-hour fast.

As long as science seemed support. Studies show that extending fast night can improve metabolism, help cellular recovery and may even extend life. Nutritionists, however, have long warned that the food band is not a charming bullet – and can be risky for those who have basic conditions.

The intermittent starvation squeezes the food into a short daily window, often eight hours, leaving a 16-hour gap without food. Other diets with limited time as 5: 2 PlanLimit calories on certain days, not hours.

Now, now, the first large -scale study A more serious red flag lifts. Researchers, analyzing data from more than 19,000 adults, found that those who limited food less than eight hours a day Cardiovascular disease – problems with the heart and blood vessel – than people who ate for more than 12-14 hours.

Increased cardiovascular risk means that, based on human health, lifestyle and medical data, they are most likely in the study to work out heart-related problems such as a heart attack or stroke.

The reference to the overall mortality – death from any reason – was weaker and inconsistent, but the cardiovascular risk was maintained by age, sexual and lifestyle even after strict testing.

In other words, the study revealed only a weak and contradictory connection between food, which is limited by sometimes and general death. But the risk of dying from cardiovascular disease was sharply higher.

The authors emphasize that the study is not the cause and influence. But the signal is enough to challenge the post as a path without risk for better health.

Researchers monitored American adults for eight years. To understand their eating habits, the participants were offered two separate days – about two weeks from each other – to remember everything they ate and drank. From these “dietary returns”, scientists estimated the average window of each person and regarded it as representatives of their long -term procedure.

The study shows that those who ate in an eight-hour window encountered a higher risk of dying from cardiovascular disease than those who spread food for 12-14 hours.

They found that the increased cardiovascular risk was consistent in the socio -economic groups, and the strongest among smokers and people suffering from diabetes or existing heart disease -believing that they should be especially careful in long -term and narrow windows. Researchers have found that the link is kept even after adjusting the quality of the diet, food and snack and other lifestyle factors.

I asked the researchers how we should read the conclusion that the death associated with the heart will rise so dramatically, but the general death does not – is biology or prejudice in the data?

The diet is the main engine of diabetes and heart disease, so the association with higher cardiovascular mortality is not unexpected, said Victor Venz Zhong, a lead author of a reviewed diabetes and metabolic syndrome: clinical studies and reviews.

“The unexpected conclusion is that following a short -lived food window for less than eight hours for many years was due to the increased risk of death from cardiovascular disease,” says Professor Zhong, the Epidemiologist of the Shanghai Jiao Tongo University Shanghai School of Medicine in China.

This is contradicted year – This time, limited by the time of diet, improves heart health and metabolic.

In the accompanying editorial staff in the same magazine Anoop Misra, a leading endocrinologist, weighs the promise and pitfalls of intermittent dizgers.

According to him, many trials and tests believe that this can contribute to weight loss, increase insulin sensitivity, decreased blood pressure and enhance lipid profiles with some testimonial preferences.

It can also help people manage blood sugar without hard calories counting, easily fits the cultural and religious practice of starvation, and just follow it.

“However, potential deficiencies include nutrient deficiency, cholesterol, excessive hunger, irritability, headaches and decreased preservation over time,” says prof.

“For people with diabetes, disobedient feet risk dangerous drop in blood sugar and contribute to the consumption of unhealthy foods during eating. For older adults or those who have chronic diseases, long -term post can aggravate or speed muscle loss.”

This is not the first time when the intermittent post collided with close attention.

Strict a three -month studyPublished at Jama Internal Medicine in 2020, it was found that participants lost only a little weight, most of which could come from muscles. Another study It is shown that intermittent starvation can cause side effects such as weakness, hunger, dehydration, headaches and concentration difficulties.

Prof.

I asked Professor Zhong that he would advise the doctors and the public to pick up in the last conclusions.

He said that people with heart disease or diabetes should be careful in taking an eight -hour food window. The conclusions indicate the need for “personalized” diet tips, justified in health and developing.

“Based on the evidence today, focusing on the fact that eating people seems more important than focusing on the time when they eat. At least people may consider the eight-hour nutrition for a long time either to prevent cardiovascular disease or to improve durability.”

It is clear that now the message is less about giving up fasting and more about adapting to a person’s risk profile. Until the evidence is more clear, the safest rate can be less focus on the clock and more on the stove.