4.7 Review

Effectiveness of Intermittent Fasting and Time-Restricted Feeding Compared to Continuous Energy Restriction for Weight Loss

期刊

NUTRIENTS
卷 11, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu11102442

关键词

weight loss; alternate day fasting; meal timing; obesity

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health
  2. Eastern Colorado VA Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center [P30 DK048520, UL1 TR002535, KO1 DK113063, KL2 TR002534, R21 DK117499, RO1 DK111622, RO1 DK114272]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The current obesity epidemic is staggering in terms of its magnitude and public health impact. Current guidelines recommend continuous energy restriction (CER) along with a comprehensive lifestyle intervention as the cornerstone of obesity treatment, yet this approach produces modest weight loss on average. Recently, there has been increased interest in identifying alternative dietary weight loss strategies that involve restricting energy intake to certain periods of the day or prolonging the fasting interval between meals (i.e., intermittent energy restriction, IER). These strategies include intermittent fasting (IMF; >60% energy restriction on 2-3 days per week, or on alternate days) and time-restricted feeding (TRF; limiting the daily period of food intake to 8-10 h or less on most days of the week). Here, we summarize the current evidence for IER regimens as treatments for overweight and obesity. Specifically, we review randomized trials of >= 8 weeks in duration performed in adults with overweight or obesity (BMI >= 25 kg/m(2)) in which an IER paradigm (IMF or TRF) was compared to CER, with the primary outcome being weight loss. Overall, the available evidence suggests that IER paradigms produce equivalent weight loss when compared to CER, with 9 out of 11 studies reviewed showing no differences between groups in weight or body fat loss.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据