4 ms·
You're understanding is limited. For a nice review check out this one [1]. Although most of 16:8 effects are minor, they build up over time. [1]: https://exam
by ofou 5y ago
You're understanding is limited.
For a nice review check out this one [1]. Although most of 16:8 effects are minor, they build up over time.
[1]: https://examine.com/supplements/16-8-intermittent-fasting/ https://examine.com/supplements/16-8-intermittent-fasting/
- ofou 5y agoFor a nice coverage of the effects, here: https://examine.com/supplements/16-8-intermittent-fasting/research/ https://examine.com/supplements/16-8-intermittent-fasting/re...
- itake 5y agooo! thank you for this. I updated my comment.
- itake 5y ago> TRF 2826 ± 412.3 kcal/day, carbohydrates 53.2 ± 1.4 %, fat 24.7 ± 3.1 %, protein 22.1 ± 2.6 % > ND 3007 ± 444.7 kcal/day, carbohydrates 54.7 ± 2.2 %, fat 23.9 ± 3.5 %, protein 21.4 ± 1.8) Any ideas why the TRF group has less calories and more protein than the ND group in the linked study linked in the article [0]? _Maybe_ the TRF group has smaller humans than the ND group, but then why would TRF have a higher protein diet? > Some studies have found that 16:8 can preferentially reduce fat mass while sparing muscle, but further research is still required to confirm this Bro-Science Body Builders know that a high protein diet + calorie restrictions are perfect for cutting abdominal fat. I don't see what value IF provides here. [0] - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27737674/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27737674/