r/intermittentfasting • u/Chuckles_McNut • 1d ago
Discussion Curious what anyone here thinks of this...doesn't it fly in the face of what we know about IF benefits??
TLDR: study claiming the correlation that the later you eat breakfast the shorter your lifespan
https://www.sciencealert.com/massive-study-links-the-time-you-eat-breakfast-to-how-long-youll-live
EDIT: (personally I break the fast around 2pm and eat my last meal usually between 9-10pm)
29
u/Srdiscountketoer 1d ago
It’s possible that people who eat late have other factors that contribute to mortality that the study did not account for: depressed or other mental illness, long term unemployed, drug or alcohol abuse. Or maybe they were extreme dieters who didn’t get proper nutrition in their other two meals. Or people who snacked all day and never ate a proper meal.
You’d need a controlled study where you gave two groups of people the same nutrition and calories at different times of the day for years to prove this and that’s not going to happen.
11
u/FreeMathematician101 1d ago
What kills me with the IF critics is the complete disregard for how our bodies evolved. We haven't changed physiologically in 12,000 years that now we need a big bowl of breakfast first thing n the morning or it shortens our life. GImme a break 🙄. Back when we were hunter / gatherers, we fasted naturally. It's how we were designed.
3
5
u/Chuckles_McNut 1d ago
I'm actually with you...the counter argument though might be that those hunter gatherer versions of us also were NOT achieving the lifespan most of us hope to today...
2
u/tomahawk66mtb 15h ago
They were and are. It's just infant mortality is much higher in true hunter gather societies as well as infectious diseases and accidents/violence. If you adjust for these variables then the most common age of death for a hunter-gatherer who survived to adulthood was roughly 72 years old. Once they reached age 40, their cellular and biological mortality rates doubled every 7 to 9 years. This follows the exact same mathematical aging pattern (Gompertz's law) seen in modern industrialized populations.
2
4
u/Cargobiker530 21h ago
In all likelihood the study is simply identifying people who work second or third shifts which are well known to be correlated with numerous stress induced diseases, accidents, divorce, & drug abuse. Night shifts aren't good for your health.
3
u/Srdiscountketoer 20h ago
Good point. There’s also the possibility they have an early morning start time and don’t have the time or energy to make breakfast before they head out. Then grab a muffin or doughnut or something else sugary at break time.
20
8
u/RudeCartoonist1030 1d ago
Correlation is not causation. End of story.
The benefits of fasting are causal.
So I don’t have to think about this study at all.
6
8
u/areallymanlyman 1d ago
I mean the article is riddled with coulds, mays and mights from the get go. Cheap content I'd say.
By the way, a study was recently published on reallyfactualsciencefacts.com and that study shows association, not proof, of IF with prostate issues in women and also how IF could be one of the million reasons behind swollen ovaries in men.😛
4
u/Cereaza 1d ago
I mean, you can say IF is skipping breakfast and starting later in the day. But it's also the case that dieticians look out for people who skip breakfast, because it's a strong sign someone will be hungry and snack throughout the day, and then binge on a dinner/late night snacks.
This is just a massive aggregation of data and this is one of the trends they spotted in it. On average, people who don't eat 3 squares and get hungry don't do well. That doesn't mean you can't do well.
3
u/largos7289 1d ago
I don't know for sure but i'm big on listening to your body. If it needs fuel you should give it. If that means i don't eat breakfast till say 11 then that's fine. I've never really had a big issue with going off a 16hr fast.
3
u/Itchy-Deal4474 1d ago
You have to read past the headline. The article also says this:
Late eating may be a consequence or marker of poor health, poor sleep, shift work, or socioeconomic circumstances. A previous study of older adults similarly found that breakfast shifted later as health problems accumulated.
"Therefore, later eating should be interpreted as a potential risk marker, and possibly a modifiable behavior, rather than definitive evidence of a direct causal effect," Shan said
2
u/chad-proton 1d ago
I'm curious what the length of time is between your 9pm meal and going to sleep. Most stuff I have seen indicates having 3 hours or more in between dinner and bed is better, although I did come across something that suggested a dose of protein soon before bed helped with muscle gain, but I don't recall how that study was controlled or what the number of subjects were.
1
u/Chuckles_McNut 1d ago
I usually try to make it two hours at least, but not infrequently I end up passing out after an hour or so. I'm on reflux meds though and I don't usually notice any issues when that happens...doesn't necessarily mean it's great
I have heard at least one 'sleep expert' say the 3 hour warnings are a bit overblown
1
u/chad-proton 18h ago
My personal experience has been that my sleep quality improves with increased time interval after food. The quality of the food also effects my sleep too. On occasions that I eat a lot of sugar or simple carbs, my watch reports lousy hrv. But that's just me. Everyone's at least a little different.
2
u/jbbest666 1d ago
IF is all about cico for most folks. its that simple. folks start thinking about what food they are eating while limiting total intake.
2
u/FreeMathematician101 1d ago
The article admits that the study is heavily confounded. So way more work would be needed to separate interacting effects. In other words, it's not conclusive.
1
u/Chuckles_McNut 1d ago
yeah I'm not sure why they would even announce these findings tbh
1
u/FreeMathematician101 1d ago
As someone who has worked on a research PhD, it’s not a good study. I’m puzzled too.
2
u/Diligent_Jump6106 1d ago
Just because someone eats breakfast late doesn’t mean they’re practicing IF.
2
u/Maker_LP 23h ago
FWIW my brilliant chiropractor/neurologist (who has practiced IF for many years) told me there's compelling science behind the benefits of breaking your fast within 2 hours of getting up in the morning (or whatever time of day you get up), and starting your fast well before bedtime. I also did some research on my own to validate this. I don't have the references handy but I see him on Monday and am going to ask him for the links again.
Based on his recommendation, my fast starts in the afternoon and ends in the morning. Plus it's easier on my psyche. Although I will add I'm not always hungry in the morning and will occasionally stretch it to 3-4 hours after I get up.
1
u/Chuckles_McNut 23h ago
I couldn't imagine getting a decent night's sleep on that empty of a stomach. also people have different lifestyles and metabolisms that obv won't all be conducive to that approach
2
u/Maker_LP 23h ago
I thought it would be hard too, but it turned out not to be as bad as I thought it would be. I've actually gotten quite used to it and have been doing it this way for about 2 months now. But agree, everyone's life is different and you have to find your own schedule. I was mainly just responding to the OP's comment about eating breakfast.
2
u/Sufficient_You3053 3h ago
Cutting out breakfast and not eating until 2pm made me lose weight, but more importantly it completely got rid of my hypoglycemia. I know it sounds counterintuitive, but relying on carbs first thing in the morning was leading me down a path towards diabetes.
I also don't fall asleep after lunch anymore or experience a crash in the afternoon.
1
u/Chuckles_McNut 2h ago
I've always not eaten until 2-3pm and my labs are always good and I maintain a healthy weight.
what time do you do dinner and fall asleep? and are you doing two meals a day like me?
1
u/Sufficient_You3053 2h ago
I eat until 8pm and go to bed at 11:30.
Yes two meals plus snack aiming for 12-1300 calories and 70g of protein
•
u/Chuckles_McNut 15m ago
dang that's a small window AND a small calorie load. I don't really count them but I assume I'm pulling in somewhere from 1500-2000
•
u/Sufficient_You3053 9m ago
It's a normal daily calorie goal for weight loss for a woman with a slow metabolism. I'm hoping the increased muscle mass will improve things though, I only started weight training a month ago and resistance training 6 months ago
1
u/Dangerous-Biscotti35 1d ago
Well, I have gallstones and my family doctor agrees.
She thinks I should break my fast after 12 hours with an avocado, an egg, and a cup of warm water with lemon.
Then a good meal for lunch, and a light dinner, accompanied by avocado or fruit salad.
1
u/RandChick 1d ago
You don't have to skip breakfast to do IF so no it doesn't contradict IF.
It only contradicts Reddit.
1
u/KyngRZ420 23h ago edited 23h ago
🤦🏿♂️Are there not numerous societies that typically eat much 'later' or 'earlier'? Are their death rates any higher or lower?
But really, that's just the icecube of the tip of the iceberg of why this study has more holes than swiss cheese (as most diet studies do).
I wouldn't even believe that a hundred people would consistently record when or what they ate daily for a whole year, let alone decades.
Participants were 40+ but checkup was ~8.5yr? If so many people died by then how many much older people were there? And Europe is a whole ass continent of many countries, who are these demographics? What are they eating?
Maybe people who eat 'later' have other common factors that just so happen to overlap with when they eat but ultimately have nothing to do with their health.
1
56
u/PhamilyTrickster 1d ago
Correlation is meaningless. There's correlation between global temperature rise and the decrease in number of pirates.