Meal timing strategies appear to lower appetite, improve fat burning

"Researchers at the University of Alabama at Birmingham have discovered that meal timing strategies — like intermittent fasting or eating earlier in the daytime — appear to help people lose weight. This approach was also shown to lower appetite rather than burn more calories, according to a report published online today in the journal Obesity, the flagship journal of The Obesity Society."

https://www.uab.edu/news/health/item/10627-meal-timing-strategies-appear-to-lower-appetite-improve-fat-burning

"Meal‐timing interventions facilitate weight loss primarily by decreasing appetite rather than by increasing energy expenditure. eTRF may also increase fat loss by increasing fat oxidation."

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/oby.22518

Replies

  • pierinifitness
    pierinifitness Posts: 2,226 Member
    Agree @ccrdragon but, not surprising is that the appetite suppression aligns with many at the MFP Intermittent Fasting Group sharing their experiences with IF. One member follows a 9:00 am to 3:00 pm feeding window with great success in appetite control.
  • lgfrie
    lgfrie Posts: 1,449 Member
    I do IF seven days a week. Combined with careful calorie deficit eating and logging, by the way. IF has been outstanding for me in terms of appetite suppression and eating discipline. A true game changer.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,422 MFP Moderator
    ccrdragon wrote: »
    I think it is an interesting study. It does highlight that some people might actually benefit from IF.

    The drawback to the study is that results from 11 people over a 4 day period can hardly be classified as conclusive proof of the efficacy of IF (or TRE as they call it in the study). It's a good starting point, but any applicability to the population in general will require a longer study period and lot more participants.

    Agree. Also, it doesn't get into compliance rates or changes over periods of time.


    It should also be noted that increase fat oxidation =/= increased fat loss because net fat lost is a combination of fat oxidation and fat storage.
  • Addictead
    Addictead Posts: 66 Member
    I've tried IF for years and always end up over eating after awhile because I end up getting over hungry at some point even if my calories are on point, So it doesn't seem to work for me. I prefer to eat every 3-4 hours throughout the day
  • sardelsa
    sardelsa Posts: 9,812 Member
    Dinner at 2pm? Yikes. Is that sustainable for most people, especially those with families? I am just curious. What do they do when the rest of the family is eating and the rest of the night?
  • Phirrgus
    Phirrgus Posts: 1,894 Member
    Meal timing absolutely affects my appetite. I do IF probably twice a month depending on nothing more than mood and if I feel like it, but usually a week at a time.

    Repeatable, every time, if I eat breakfast, even a large lunch leaves me wanting a filling snack before dinner. If I forego breakfast (which usually means about 15-17 hours between meals/snacks) then a large lunch holds me just fine until dinner. Every single time

    The primary reason I don't do IF as a regular Woe is that, like this morning, I simply enjoy the heck out of a good breakfast sandwich.

    Based on personal experience alone I can see validity in the study.
  • jjpptt2
    jjpptt2 Posts: 5,650 Member
    My n=1 experiences align with what the study suggests.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    I can agree that the eating the food all at night before bed doesn't end well either, on those days that turn into a 23:1 fast.

    I'll have to try the eating earlier - my concern is the workouts that occur after work - and eating the big meal more during the day.
    Going to have to think this out.
  • Phirrgus
    Phirrgus Posts: 1,894 Member
    heybales wrote: »
    I can agree that the eating the food all at night before bed doesn't end well either, on those days that turn into a 23:1 fast.

    I'll have to try the eating earlier - my concern is the workouts that occur after work - and eating the big meal more during the day.
    Going to have to think this out.

    Every day lol. My schedule seems to change day by day and it's difficult to nail a solid workout vs mealtime strategy.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    I was shocked last year trying IF for first time with exercise, and that was after the evening workouts, so not eating until 10 pm on long bike ride nights, which followed a lifting workout.
    The shock was having the energy for the workouts.

    That was rather simple which I liked - no thinking required except to confirm I had enough food in house.
  • whoami67
    whoami67 Posts: 297 Member
    I didn't read the study, but based on the title of the post, I'd agree, at least in my experience. I had a bad experience with IF, but I do know that if I eat most of my food earlier in the day, I'm not hungry later in the day. And if I eat either equally throughout the day or save more of my food for the afternoon or evening, I'm hungrier and eat more.
  • Phirrgus
    Phirrgus Posts: 1,894 Member
    heybales wrote: »
    I was shocked last year trying IF for first time with exercise, and that was after the evening workouts, so not eating until 10 pm on long bike ride nights, which followed a lifting workout.
    The shock was having the energy for the workouts.

    That was rather simple which I liked - no thinking required except to confirm I had enough food in house.
    Now you're talking :D

    I much prefer fasted workouts/early am, but working later at night these days means I need sleep too. And the work varies, as does the family schedule. Trying to nail a timing strategy just doesn't work most days. I would love to have regular hours on everything for a sustained period of time so I could actually test and measure the results for myself. I would also think an awful lot of folks face that issue to one extent or another. We're just busier these days it seems...