>Is there enough evidence that fasting ultimately leads to better aging? There never is any evidence than anything leads to better aging because longevity stud

>Is there enough evidence that fasting ultimately leads to better aging? There never is any evidence than anything leads to better aging because longevity studies are notoriously expensive, hard to do, and prone to be inconclusive. like those diet studies that pinhole certain foods like chili peppers which supposedly reduce vascular disease. https://newsroom.heart.org/news/people-who-eat-chili-pepper-may-live-longer https://newsroom.heart.org/news/people-who-eat-chili-pepper-... "eating chili pepper has an anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, anticancer and blood-glucose regulating effect" Similar things have been said for fasting. But just like people who eat chili peppers in these studies, they differ from the normal population, most likely in more ways than just consuming chili peppers. even though there is significant consensus, like this article also affirms, that reducing inflammation might help you live longer. You could test the theory more conclusively if you had 100.000 people participating in fasting over entire generations but you'd also have to account for changes in their diet as response to such insane study. I bet everyone would think longer and harder over shoving high-sugar foods in their mouths after explicitly consuming nothing for a period of time.