Is "Not Eating Time" Good for Your Health? Pitfalls to Know Before Trying Intermittent Fasting

Is "Not Eating Time" Good for Your Health? Pitfalls to Know Before Trying Intermittent Fasting

"Just by creating periods of not eating, you can lose weight, rejuvenate, and even keep diseases at bay." This enticing promise is how intermittent fasting has been portrayed.


The "5:2" method involves drastically reducing calorie intake for just two days a week while eating normally on the other days. The "16:8" method restricts eating to an 8-hour window each day. There are even more variations, including alternate-day fasting, and these methods have spawned a market for apps, wearables, and supplements.


So, is intermittent fasting truly a "phenomenon" beyond just a fad? To conclude,it can be a tool for weight loss but is often overrated as a universal health hack. The hype is fueled by the flashy effects seen in animal experiments and the gap between those and the reality in human bodies.


Where did intermittent fasting originate?

One of the catalysts for the widespread adoption of intermittent fasting was the idea introduced in 2013 of having "almost no-eating days twice a week." In animal experiments, extreme short eating windows or alternate-day eating sometimes yield "favorable results" for lifespan, cancer, diabetes, and cognitive functions.


The explanation behind this is that during "non-eating periods," blood sugar drops, the body switches to using fat as fuel, and cells enter a repair and cleaning mode. Autophagy, the process of breaking down and recycling unwanted cellular components, is often highlighted and spread as a metaphor for "body cleaning."


However, it's important to note thatmice have faster metabolisms than humans, so the speed and intensity of what happens in their bodies during "fasting-like" conditions differ. Success stories in animals are not easily transferable to humans.


The "weight loss" effect—Is it ultimately about calories?

The main selling point of intermittent fasting is that it's "easier to lose weight than with regular dietary restrictions."
However, human studies have accumulated evidence showing that "special weight loss bonuses are not clearly evident in the data." Weight loss does occur in some cases, but this is often explained bythe increase in non-eating periods leading to a decrease in total calorie intake.


There are also issues with the quality of research. Smaller, shorter, and methodologically flawed studies tend to yield "better results," while more rigorous studies often lean towards "little to no difference."


So, does it mean "there's no point at all"? Not exactly. This is where it gets complicated.
The value of intermittent fasting lies not in being a "magic weight loss solution," but infunctioning as a system for managing meals for some people.
For those tired of counting calories at every meal, simplifying rules like "fixing meals to twice a day" or "cutting out late-night snacks" can lead to reduced overeating and weight loss. In other words, it works for those it suits.


Effects on metabolism—Many good stories might be because of "weight loss"

Improvements in metabolism, such as "better blood sugar levels," "improved fatty liver," and "reduced medication," are often discussed. Indeed, there are such reports.


However, it's important to remain calm here as well.Metabolic improvements are often explained more as "effects of weight loss" rather than "special effects of fasting itself".


Moreover, there can be drawbacks depending on the method. Some studies, including alternate-day fasting, suggest that while weight loss is similar, muscle loss may be more pronounced on the fasting side. Since muscle mass is related to basal metabolism and ease of movement,"a lower number on the scale doesn't always equal success.".


Does brain concentration improve?—The story changes with "short fasting"

On social media, there are often anecdotes like "skipping breakfast makes me more alert" and "I work better when hungry."
However, research needs to be organized. In animals, results suggest that cognition and behavior are activated during fasting to "find food," while in humans, cognitive benefits are only hinted at withstrong fasting over several days.


Thus, expecting "16:8 to drastically boost concentration" is risky. Perceived concentration can be significantly influenced by other factors such as sleep, caffeine, blood sugar fluctuations, stress, and diet (especially protein and fiber).


Cancer is a "different possibility"—from the perspective of reducing treatment side effects

One of the most misunderstood themes of intermittent fasting is "it works against cancer."


This is a sensitive area, so definitive statements are avoided, but it's interesting that research is focusing more onpotentially reducing treatment side effects (nausea, effects on bone marrow, nerve damage) rather than "directly attacking tumors." If side effects are reduced, it may become easier to continue treatment as planned.


However, these studies are also small-scale and vary greatly in conditions, so generalization is premature. Repeated extreme fasting based on self-judgment is dangerous, and especially during treatment, supervision by a primary doctor is essential.


Reactions on social media (between "expectations" and "reality")

This topic tends to divide social media reactions into three typical sentiments.

1) "It's not magic. It's ultimately about calorie balance" group

In medical communities and among those experienced with dieting, "calm summaries" have been shared quite early on.
For example, on Reddit's medical boards, comments like "It's not pseudoscience, but it doesn't work like magic compared to other calorie restrictions" and "The method that can be sustained is the key" have gained support.
This is crucial becausethe success of fasting lies in "whether it can be sustained as a system," not in "fasting making you lose weight in a special way.".

2) "It worked for me. Two meals are easier" group

On the other hand, success stories are also persistent. A common sentiment is that "having two meals a day makes it easier to increase satisfaction per meal, making it sustainable."
In Reddit's weight loss communities, experiences like "Having two meals means less strict restraint" and "Once accustomed, you don't feel hungry outside eating times" are shared.
For people of this type, intermittent fasting functions not as a "willpower theory" but asa life hack to organize appetite and daily routines.

3) "If it doesn't suit you, it's hell. A loop of overeating and guilt" group

And then there are the "it didn't work for me" voices, which are less visible but certainly exist.
In Reddit posts, there are detailed accounts of enduring strong morning hunger leading to near-binge eating during meal times, and then intensifying restrictions out of guilt—creating a vicious cycle.

 
What can be learned here is thatintermittent fasting can amplify "one's eating behavior tendencies." People with a tendency to overeat, strong guilt about food, lack of sleep, or high stress should handle it cautiously.


So, how should you try it? (A safer, realistic approach)

Finally, let's organize a "less likely to fail" approach without getting swept up in the trend.

  • Start small, like "cutting out late-night snacks" or "fixing snack times"

  • If doing 16:8,prioritize meal quality (protein and fiber)to prevent binge eating

  • Use indicators like health, sleep, concentration, and exercise performance rather than just weight

  • If you're doing strength training or are active, be cautious of protein deficiency and muscle loss

  • If "endurance continues," "thoughts about food dominate," or "binge eating increases," retreat is also a valid choice

  • Do not attempt on your own if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, in a growth phase, have a history of eating disorders, or are undergoing diabetes treatment


Intermittent fasting is neither a faith nor an enemy.For those it suits, it's a convenient tool; for those it doesn't, it's a risk—that's all.
Prioritizing a "sustainable realistic diet" and not raising expectations too high is the wisest choice in the midst of the trend.


Sources

Related Articles