Benefits or risks? The study raises questions about heart health

The interrupted fasting has become the diet trend of the decade.

It promises to hack biology without encountering calorie counting or carbohydrate cutting: just change when you eat, not necessarily what you eat. Tech Moguls swear in it, the Hollywood stars insist on supporting them. The former Prime Minister of Britain Rishi Sunak He once talks about the start of his week with a 36-hour post.

So far, science has seemed supportive. Studies show that prolonged speed overnight can improve metabolism, help repair cells, and may even prolong life. Nutritionists, however, have long warned that missing dishes is not a magic bullet – and may be risky for those with basic conditions.

The interrupted starvation compresses, eating in a short daily window, often eight hours, leaving a 16-hour gap without food. Other time -limited diets, such as 5: 2 planLimit calories on certain days, not hours.

Now, A first -scale study It raises a more serious red flag. Researchers, analyzing data from more than 19,000 adults, find that those who have limited their diet to less than eight hours a day are faced with 135% higher risk of dying from dying from Cardiovascular diseases – problems with the heart and blood vessel – from people who ate over 12-14 hours.

Increased cardiovascular risk means that, on the basis of health, lifestyle and medical data, they are more likely than others in the study to develop heart-related problems, such as heart attack or stroke.

The connection with the general mortality – death for every reason – was worse and inconsistent, but cardiovascular risk continues to be at age, gender and lifestyle even after strict tests.

In other words, the study found only a weak and inconsistent link between the time -limited eating and the overall death. But the risk of dying from cardiovascular disease was sharply higher.

The authors emphasize that the study is not a cause and effect. But the signal is striking enough to challenge tells about fasting as a risk-free path to better health.

Researchers have traced adult American for more than eight years. To understand their eating habits, the participants were asked on two separate days – about two weeks from each other – to recall everything they ate and drank. From these “nutritional reminders”, scientists have evaluated each person’s middle window and treated it as a representative of their long -term routine.

Those who ate within an eight-hour window face a higher risk of dying of cardiovascular disease than those who spread dishes over 12-14 hours, the study found.

They have found that increased cardiovascular risk is consistent in socio -economic groups and most strongly among smokers and people with diabetes or existing heart disease -which suggests that they should be particularly cautious about long -term, narrow -eating windows. The connection is held even after adjusting the quality of the diet, the frequency of nutrition and breakfast and other lifestyle factors, open researchers.

I asked the researchers how we should read the finding that heart -related death is increasing so drastically, but the overall death does not do it – biology or bias in data?

The diet is a major driver of diabetes and heart disease, so the association with higher cardiovascular mortality is not unexpected, said Victor Wenze Jong, a leading author of the reviewed study in diabetes and metabolic syndrome: clinical trials and examinations.

“The unexpected finding is that adhering to a short feeding window less than eight hours for years was associated with an increased risk of death from cardiovascular disease,” says Prof. Jong, an epidemiologist at the University Medicine School in Shanghai Jia Tong in China.

This contradicts the conventional belief – supported by short -term studies that lasted only a few months year – This time -limited meal improves health and metabolic health.

In an accompanying editorial in the same magazine Anoop Misra, a leading endocrinologist, weighed the promise and pitfalls of periodic fasting.

On top, according to him, multiple tests and analyzes suggest that this can promote weight loss, improve insulin sensitivity, lower blood pressure and enhance lipid profiles, with some evidence of anti -inflammatory benefits.

This can also help people manage blood sugar without firm calorie counting, easily fit into cultural or religious fasting practices and is easy to follow.

“However, potential disadvantages include nutrient deficiency, elevated cholesterol, excessive hunger, irritability, headache and decreased adherence over time,” says Prof. Missra.

“For people with diabetes, unconized fasting risks dangerous blood sugar declines and encourages garbage intake during a meal window. For adult adults or chronic conditions, prolonged fasting can worsen the fragility or accelerate muscle loss.”

This is not the first time the periodic post has been faced with control.

Strict TrialPublished in Jama Internal Medicine in 2020, it found that participants had lost only a small amount of weight, many of which may have come from the muscles. Other exploration He pointed out that periodic fasting could lead to side effects such as weakness, hunger, dehydration, headache and concentration difficulties.

The new study, says Prof. Mira, now adds a more alarm warning -a possible connection with a higher cardiovascular risk, at least in certain groups.

I asked Prof. Jong what would advise clinicians and the public to take away from recent discoveries.

He said people with heart disease or diabetes should be cautious from taking an eight -hour dining window. The findings indicate the need for “personalized” dietary advice based on health and evidence.

“Based on the evidence from now on, focusing on what people eat seems more important than focusing on the time they eat. At least people may plan not to take an eight-hour meal window for a long time or to prevent cardiovascular disease or to improve longevity.”

It is clear that so far the message is less to abandon the fasting and more to adjust it to the individual’s risk profile. Until the evidence becomes more clear, the most secure bet may be to focus less on the clock and more on the plate.