Stop eating after 5:00 p.m.?
chris_in_cal
Posts: 2,520 Member
Tuesday an interesting study was published.
October 04, 2022
Eating Late Increases Hunger, Decreases Calories Burned, and Changes Fat Tissue
Obesity afflicts approximately 42 percent of the U.S. adult population and contributes to the onset of chronic diseases, including diabetes, cancer, and other conditions. While popular healthy diet mantras advise against midnight snacking, few studies have comprehensively investigated the simultaneous effects of late eating on the three main players in body weight regulation and thus obesity risk: regulation of calorie intake, the number of calories you burn, and molecular changes in fat tissue. A new study by investigators from Brigham and Women's Hospital, a founding member of the Mass General Brigham healthcare system, found that when we eat significantly impacts our energy expenditure, appetite, and molecular pathways in adipose tissue. Their results are published in Cell Metabolism.
"We wanted to test the mechanisms that may explain why late eating increases obesity risk," explained senior author Frank A. J. L. Scheer, PhD, Director of the Medical Chronobiology Program in the Brigham's Division of Sleep and Circadian Disorders. "Previous research by us and others had shown that late eating is associated with increased obesity risk, increased body fat, and impaired weight loss success. We wanted to understand why."
"In this study, we asked, 'Does the time that we eat matter when everything else is kept consistent?'" said first author Nina Vujovic, PhD, a researcher in the Medical Chronobiology Program in the Brigham's Division of Sleep and Circadian Disorders. "And we found that eating four hours later makes a significant difference for our hunger levels, the way we burn calories after we eat, and the way we store fat."
Vujovic, Scheer and their team studied 16 patients with a body mass index (BMI) in the overweight or obese range. Each participant completed two laboratory protocols: one with a strictly scheduled early meal schedule, and the other with the exact same meals, each scheduled about four hours later in the day. In the last two to three weeks before starting each of the in-laboratory protocols, participants maintained fixed sleep and wake schedules, and in the final three days before entering the laboratory, they strictly followed identical diets and meal schedules at home. In the lab, participants regularly documented their hunger and appetite, provided frequent small blood samples throughout the day, and had their body temperature and energy expenditure measured. To measure how eating time affected molecular pathways involved in adipogenesis, or how the body stores fat, investigators collected biopsies of adipose tissue from a subset of participants during laboratory testing in both the early and late eating protocols, to enable comparison of gene expression patterns/levels between these two eating conditions.
Results revealed that eating later had profound effects on hunger and appetite-regulating hormones leptin and ghrelin, which influence our drive to eat. Specifically, levels of the hormone leptin, which signals satiety, were decreased across the 24 hours in the late eating condition compared to the early eating conditions. When participants ate later, they also burned calories at a slower rate and exhibited adipose tissue gene expression towards increased adipogenesis and decreased lipolysis, which promote fat growth. Notably, these findings convey converging physiological and molecular mechanisms underlying the correlation between late eating and increased obesity risk.
Vujovic explains that these findings are not only consistent with a large body of research suggesting that eating later may increase one's likelihood of developing obesity, but they shed new light on how this might occur. By using a randomized crossover study, and tightly controlling for behavioral and environmental factors such as physical activity, posture, sleep, and light exposure, investigators were able to detect changes the different control systems involved in energy balance, a marker of how our bodies use the food we consume.
In future studies, Scheer's team aims to recruit more women to increase the generalizability of their findings to a broader population. While this study cohort included only five female participants, the study was set up to control for menstrual phase, reducing confounding but making recruiting women more difficult. Going forward, Scheer and Vujovic are also interested in better understanding the effects of the relationship between meal time and bedtime on energy balance.
"This study shows the impact of late versus early eating. Here, we isolated these effects by controlling for confounding variables like caloric intake, physical activity, sleep, and light exposure, but in real life, many of these factors may themselves be influenced by meal timing," said Scheer. "In larger scale studies, where tight control of all these factors is not feasible, we must at least consider how other behavioral and environmental variables alter these biological pathways underlying obesity risk. "
Funding: This study was funded by R01DK099512, UL1TR001102 and UL1TR002541. F.A.J.L.S. was supported by NIH grants R01DK099512, R01HL118601, R01DK102696, and R01DK105072 and R01HL140574. M.J.P. and M.J.B. were supported by DK020595. M.G. was supported by The Spanish Government of Investigation, Development and Innovation (SAF2017-84135-R) including FEDER co-funding; The Autonomous Community of the Region of Murcia through the Seneca Foundation (20795/PI/18), and NIDDK R01DK099512. S.L.C. was supported by the Alexander Von Humboldt Foundation. J.Q. was supported by the American Diabetes Association (Award 1-17-PDF-103) and by the NIH (Grant K99HL148500 and R01DK102696).
Paper cited: Vujovic, N et al. "Late isocaloric eating increases hunger, decreases energy expenditure, and modifies metabolic pathways in adults with overweight and obesity" Cell Metabolism DOI: 10.1016/j.cmet.2022.09.007
October 04, 2022
Eating Late Increases Hunger, Decreases Calories Burned, and Changes Fat Tissue
Obesity afflicts approximately 42 percent of the U.S. adult population and contributes to the onset of chronic diseases, including diabetes, cancer, and other conditions. While popular healthy diet mantras advise against midnight snacking, few studies have comprehensively investigated the simultaneous effects of late eating on the three main players in body weight regulation and thus obesity risk: regulation of calorie intake, the number of calories you burn, and molecular changes in fat tissue. A new study by investigators from Brigham and Women's Hospital, a founding member of the Mass General Brigham healthcare system, found that when we eat significantly impacts our energy expenditure, appetite, and molecular pathways in adipose tissue. Their results are published in Cell Metabolism.
"We wanted to test the mechanisms that may explain why late eating increases obesity risk," explained senior author Frank A. J. L. Scheer, PhD, Director of the Medical Chronobiology Program in the Brigham's Division of Sleep and Circadian Disorders. "Previous research by us and others had shown that late eating is associated with increased obesity risk, increased body fat, and impaired weight loss success. We wanted to understand why."
"In this study, we asked, 'Does the time that we eat matter when everything else is kept consistent?'" said first author Nina Vujovic, PhD, a researcher in the Medical Chronobiology Program in the Brigham's Division of Sleep and Circadian Disorders. "And we found that eating four hours later makes a significant difference for our hunger levels, the way we burn calories after we eat, and the way we store fat."
Vujovic, Scheer and their team studied 16 patients with a body mass index (BMI) in the overweight or obese range. Each participant completed two laboratory protocols: one with a strictly scheduled early meal schedule, and the other with the exact same meals, each scheduled about four hours later in the day. In the last two to three weeks before starting each of the in-laboratory protocols, participants maintained fixed sleep and wake schedules, and in the final three days before entering the laboratory, they strictly followed identical diets and meal schedules at home. In the lab, participants regularly documented their hunger and appetite, provided frequent small blood samples throughout the day, and had their body temperature and energy expenditure measured. To measure how eating time affected molecular pathways involved in adipogenesis, or how the body stores fat, investigators collected biopsies of adipose tissue from a subset of participants during laboratory testing in both the early and late eating protocols, to enable comparison of gene expression patterns/levels between these two eating conditions.
Results revealed that eating later had profound effects on hunger and appetite-regulating hormones leptin and ghrelin, which influence our drive to eat. Specifically, levels of the hormone leptin, which signals satiety, were decreased across the 24 hours in the late eating condition compared to the early eating conditions. When participants ate later, they also burned calories at a slower rate and exhibited adipose tissue gene expression towards increased adipogenesis and decreased lipolysis, which promote fat growth. Notably, these findings convey converging physiological and molecular mechanisms underlying the correlation between late eating and increased obesity risk.
Vujovic explains that these findings are not only consistent with a large body of research suggesting that eating later may increase one's likelihood of developing obesity, but they shed new light on how this might occur. By using a randomized crossover study, and tightly controlling for behavioral and environmental factors such as physical activity, posture, sleep, and light exposure, investigators were able to detect changes the different control systems involved in energy balance, a marker of how our bodies use the food we consume.
In future studies, Scheer's team aims to recruit more women to increase the generalizability of their findings to a broader population. While this study cohort included only five female participants, the study was set up to control for menstrual phase, reducing confounding but making recruiting women more difficult. Going forward, Scheer and Vujovic are also interested in better understanding the effects of the relationship between meal time and bedtime on energy balance.
"This study shows the impact of late versus early eating. Here, we isolated these effects by controlling for confounding variables like caloric intake, physical activity, sleep, and light exposure, but in real life, many of these factors may themselves be influenced by meal timing," said Scheer. "In larger scale studies, where tight control of all these factors is not feasible, we must at least consider how other behavioral and environmental variables alter these biological pathways underlying obesity risk. "
Funding: This study was funded by R01DK099512, UL1TR001102 and UL1TR002541. F.A.J.L.S. was supported by NIH grants R01DK099512, R01HL118601, R01DK102696, and R01DK105072 and R01HL140574. M.J.P. and M.J.B. were supported by DK020595. M.G. was supported by The Spanish Government of Investigation, Development and Innovation (SAF2017-84135-R) including FEDER co-funding; The Autonomous Community of the Region of Murcia through the Seneca Foundation (20795/PI/18), and NIDDK R01DK099512. S.L.C. was supported by the Alexander Von Humboldt Foundation. J.Q. was supported by the American Diabetes Association (Award 1-17-PDF-103) and by the NIH (Grant K99HL148500 and R01DK102696).
Paper cited: Vujovic, N et al. "Late isocaloric eating increases hunger, decreases energy expenditure, and modifies metabolic pathways in adults with overweight and obesity" Cell Metabolism DOI: 10.1016/j.cmet.2022.09.007
Tagged:
3
Replies
-
There is no question in my mind that this works. When I eat excess calories, it's always in the evening.7
-
I am in a "not successful" phase. Back when I was in a "successful phase" this is exactly what I did too.
Last night I worked up my courage and didn't eat late. I'm going to try it again tonight.6 -
So what do you do if you come home from work past 5? Not eat anymore? What do you do when you go on vacation to a different time zone or even more there? Don't get me wrong: I usually eat at around 5, but usually have another snack after running to refill my glycogen stores6
-
Interesting but - There were 2 studies cited in the article. The first included a total of 16 participants and the 2nd was 137 firefighters (90% male) working 24 hour shifts. Not a lot of people in these studies and who knows if the info is applicable to people working "regular" hours. More study is needed.11
-
paints5555 wrote: »Interesting but - There were 2 studies cited in the article.
@paints5555 What I posted up above was only about one study, and it was all during daytime "normal" hours. Participants last meal was at 5:00 p.m.
You are right, more study is needed.
0 -
Here's the actual study.
https://cell.com/cell-metabolism/fulltext/S1550-4131(22)00397-7
Late isocaloric eating increases hunger, decreases energy expenditure, and modifies metabolic pathways in adults with overweight and obesity
1 -
Thanks @neanderthin
It says, in essence, three parts to getting to a healthy weight and all three of them are better if a 'typical' persons last meal is at 5:00 p.m., and no later.0 -
Eh. I eat well into the night because by morning I want to have enough carbs in me for my morning workout. My first meal is after 12pm.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
6 -
Anecdotes are anecdotes, of course. But I gained weight eating late, lost weight while eating late and currently maintaining weight while eating late.
I ate more than 1000 calories after 5PM yesterday, quite representative of most of my days.
Eating breakfast is what really gets my hunger going.
So perhaps the effect, if there is one, is only a small factor countered by other factors. I didn't have trouble losing weight, once I started counting calories. If anything, I lost weight faster than expected.
5PM as a cutoff seems odd to me too: aside from excluding evening snacking, doesn't a whole chunk of the population eat dinner after 5? Most people I know (Belgium) eat dinner after 5, even after 6pm or later. In France people commonly eat dinner after 8, and even later in Spain for example. Not sure what habits are elsewhere in the world.
If eating 'late' (after 5) was a major factor in weight gain, I'd expect to see obesity rates in line with cultural eating habits, specifically dinner time.18 -
chris_in_cal wrote: »Thanks @neanderthin
It says, in essence, three parts to getting to a healthy weight and all three of them are better if a 'typical' persons last meal is at 5:00 p.m., and no later.
Well, maybe but this was for acute metabolic responses and not about long term, so those studies would need to be done. Personally I think they missed the boat for not having a group that ate ad libitum and with no food selection bias which I believe would represent more real world data. The p values were very good for the outcomes that represented hunger signaling, energy expenditure, and adipose storage. This study really doesn't add anything to the literature and just mostly confirms the mechanisms for these expressions, which have been known for quite a while.
As well, this is not about getting to a healthy weight but how certain gene expressions, hormones, cell signaling pathways may disrupt metabolic balance leaning towards weight gain and again long term studies would need to be done, which is difficult especially conforming to the rigorous parameters this study employed, which was as good as it gets imo. There's more immediate action that could be taken to try and begin to turn the current trend downward and get the vast majority of people healthier than worrying whether eating after 5pm is causing weight gain, most of the western civilizations eat after 5.
Personally, and from my observations from the literature I've digested on this subject over time is that the down time for the body to assimilate the foods like digestion, nutrient uptake, breakdown, repair and build or rejuvenate on a cellular level is very taxing on the body to get back to the starting line the next day. I believe keeping the body in a rhythm it can count on is important and as it pertains to this study a difference that I think is important is the amount of time the body is in this rejuvenation stage and eating late means that the digestion and nutrient uptake part is still happening to the group that ate later which may compromise the total time during the sleep cycle in comparison to the group that ate earlier. Does that time make a difference, don't know, just asking the question.
We need to realize these are mostly scientists with PhD's that ask specific question and sometimes it's a simple as asking another question to assess a situation in more detail, but that doesn't fall into those parameters but I'm sure among them they talk about that sort of thing all day long. Cheers.
1 -
I would love to get into some type of routine like this, but it is just too hard with working two jobs. I would like to transition to eating a small meal or even just a snack when I get home at 10:30 PM though.2
-
chris_in_cal wrote: »paints5555 wrote: »Interesting but - There were 2 studies cited in the article.
@paints5555 What I posted up above was only about one study, and it was all during daytime "normal" hours. Participants last meal was at 5:00 p.m.
You are right, more study is needed.
You are correct - the news article I saw referenced the one above as well as the 2nd study.0 -
I know it's not the actual study results but in my own personal life I tend to go to bed around 10pm and find that if I eat too closely to that time I also wake up hungry. I try to be finished with any dinner, snacks, etc by 8pm at the latest and then I can go until 10am or later before hunger really hits again. If I eat within an hour of going to bed I wake up hungry.
I really need to have about 2 hours between my last bite and going to bed without any food or it seriously messes up how hungry I am the next day.3 -
Anecdotes are anecdotes, of course. But I gained weight eating late, lost weight while eating late and currently maintaining weight while eating late.
I ate more than 1000 calories after 5PM yesterday, quite representative of most of my days.
Eating breakfast is what really gets my hunger going.
So perhaps the effect, if there is one, is only a small factor countered by other factors. I didn't have trouble losing weight, once I started counting calories. If anything, I lost weight faster than expected.
5PM as a cutoff seems odd to me too: aside from excluding evening snacking, doesn't a whole chunk of the population eat dinner after 5? Most people I know (Belgium) eat dinner after 5, even after 6pm or later. In France people commonly eat dinner after 8, and even later in Spain for example. Not sure what habits are elsewhere in the world.
If eating 'late' (after 5) was a major factor in weight gain, I'd expect to see obesity rates in line with cultural eating habits, specifically dinner time.
Ditto.0 -
I regularly eat around 7-8 pm, and am losing weight. It doesn't make me more hungry. If I ate at 5 however, I would probably be hungry again by 9 pm. These small studies don't prove much.8
-
musicfan68 wrote: »I regularly eat around 7-8 pm, and am losing weight. It doesn't make me more hungry. If I ate at 5 however, I would probably be hungry again by 9 pm. These small studies don't prove much.
I have this same reaction... my wife has to eat a couple of hours before bed or she gets really bad reflux, so she usually eats early - like around 5. I prefer to eat later at 6:30 to 7. If I eat early, I am hungry again before going to bed between 9 and 10. We make it work by cooking the evening meal early and I just heat it up when I am ready to eat.
Oh and when I say I am hungry again before bed - I mean HANGRY, like feed me now type hungry - which means that I am more tempted to eat anything and everything before going to bed.4 -
kshama2001 wrote: »Anecdotes are anecdotes, of course. But I gained weight eating late, lost weight while eating late and currently maintaining weight while eating late.
I ate more than 1000 calories after 5PM yesterday, quite representative of most of my days.
Eating breakfast is what really gets my hunger going.
So perhaps the effect, if there is one, is only a small factor countered by other factors. I didn't have trouble losing weight, once I started counting calories. If anything, I lost weight faster than expected.
5PM as a cutoff seems odd to me too: aside from excluding evening snacking, doesn't a whole chunk of the population eat dinner after 5? Most people I know (Belgium) eat dinner after 5, even after 6pm or later. In France people commonly eat dinner after 8, and even later in Spain for example. Not sure what habits are elsewhere in the world.
If eating 'late' (after 5) was a major factor in weight gain, I'd expect to see obesity rates in line with cultural eating habits, specifically dinner time.
Ditto.
Yeah, me too: Other than waiting to eat after waking as needed after taking my thyroid meds first thing, I've always eaten through the day when I feel like it, even different patterns on different days. Usually that involves eating close to bedtime - for sure after 5 routinely.
I admit I didn't pay much attention to these patterns before committing to weight loss, but the only thing I notice now (in long term maintenance) is that if I eat a lot late in the evening, I tend to be less hungry in the morning.
Since the main cited small study here was on overweight/obese people, I wonder if their metabolic responses differ from long- term healthy-weight (or quite active?) people?
I admit I'm to lazy to look up cites, but it seems like I've seen studies that hint that obesity itself changes some physiological/ biochemical responses.3 -
This study has nothing to do with weight loss or if eating past 5 puts on weight or how someone might find it inconvenient for whatever reason. Whether someone's schedule finds them eating late or they do shift work also has nothing to do with this study, it's just showing that certain factors (hormones) can elicit a possible negative outcome that over time if someone is obese could find their condition not improving or getting worse even though they're controlling their calorie intake. The two groups ate the same number of calories, which were not designed to put participants in a deficit, basically isocaloric conditions
This study looks at the differences in hormonal regulation and found that the group that ate later (8:00) saw certain hormones affected deleteriously which over time could find that group in a positive energy balance increasing obesity risk. No more, no less. Not eating after 5 somehow became the focus. Cheers.1 -
neanderthin wrote: »This study has nothing to do with weight loss or if eating past 5 puts on weight or how someone might find it inconvenient for whatever reason. Whether someone's schedule finds them eating late or they do shift work also has nothing to do with this study, it's just showing that certain factors (hormones) can elicit a possible negative outcome that over time if someone is obese could find their condition not improving or getting worse even though they're controlling their calorie intake. The two groups ate the same number of calories, which were not designed to put participants in a deficit, basically isocaloric conditions
This study looks at the differences in hormonal regulation and found that the group that ate later (8:00) saw certain hormones affected deleteriously which over time could find that group in a positive energy balance increasing obesity risk. No more, no less. Not eating after 5 somehow became the focus. Cheers.
Well, it is the title of this thread 😆
5 -
neanderthin wrote: »This study has nothing to do with weight loss or if eating past 5 puts on weight or how someone might find it inconvenient for whatever reason. Whether someone's schedule finds them eating late or they do shift work also has nothing to do with this study, it's just showing that certain factors (hormones) can elicit a possible negative outcome that over time if someone is obese could find their condition not improving or getting worse even though they're controlling their calorie intake. The two groups ate the same number of calories, which were not designed to put participants in a deficit, basically isocaloric conditions
This study looks at the differences in hormonal regulation and found that the group that ate later (8:00) saw certain hormones affected deleteriously which over time could find that group in a positive energy balance increasing obesity risk. No more, no less. Not eating after 5 somehow became the focus. Cheers.
Well, it is the title of this thread 😆
Hahaha, that's so true, that's hilarious. Cheers.1 -
So is this simply about hunger? Leading to excess eating?
Cause if you eat 2000 calories in one meal for breakfast or eat 2000 for dinner, you have still eaten 2000 calories, and if you are burning 2500 a day then you have created a deficit right?2 -
So is this simply about hunger? Leading to excess eating?
Cause if you eat 2000 calories in one meal for breakfast or eat 2000 for dinner, you have still eaten 2000 calories, and if you are burning 2500 a day then you have created a deficit right?
No. Time restricted eating is about giving your body enough time to rejuvenate and repair and if we're eating over a lot of hours say from 8 in the morning and still snacking late in the evening, then that repair time is reduced because we need to realize digestion is very taxing on the body and also lasts for a good 4 to 6 hours that creeps into that repair time. All this study proves is if someone shortens the time they eat that health markers improve. Actually, in the science of time restricted eating it's not adviseable to eat in a deficit because that will have an effect on lean mass and other factors. In the world of dieting this of course was never understood properly, and people believe it's a way to lose weight which was never, ever the purpose.0 -
neanderthin wrote: »So is this simply about hunger? Leading to excess eating?
Cause if you eat 2000 calories in one meal for breakfast or eat 2000 for dinner, you have still eaten 2000 calories, and if you are burning 2500 a day then you have created a deficit right?
No. Time restricted eating is about giving your body enough time to rejuvenate and repair and if we're eating over a lot of hours say from 8 in the morning and still snacking late in the evening, then that repair time is reduced because we need to realize digestion is very taxing on the body and also lasts for a good 4 to 6 hours that creeps into that repair time. All this study proves is if someone shortens the time they eat that health markers improve. Actually, in the science of time restricted eating it's not adviseable to eat in a deficit because that will have an effect on lean mass and other factors. In the world of dieting this of course was never understood properly, and people believe it's a way to lose weight which was never, ever the purpose.
Is your definition of digestion very narrow (not concerning digestion from start to finish, but only part/the start of it?
According to the Mayo clinic:
"After you eat, it takes about six to eight hours for food to pass through your stomach and small intestine. Food then enters your large intestine (colon) for further digestion, absorption of water and, finally, elimination of undigested food. It takes about 36 hours for food to move through the entire colon. All in all, the whole process — from the time you swallow food to the time it leaves your body as feces — takes about two to five days, depending on the individual."
Considering the total duration of digestion, even while doing TRE we're always in the process of digesting food somewhere?6 -
neanderthin wrote: »So is this simply about hunger? Leading to excess eating?
Cause if you eat 2000 calories in one meal for breakfast or eat 2000 for dinner, you have still eaten 2000 calories, and if you are burning 2500 a day then you have created a deficit right?
No. Time restricted eating is about giving your body enough time to rejuvenate and repair and if we're eating over a lot of hours say from 8 in the morning and still snacking late in the evening, then that repair time is reduced because we need to realize digestion is very taxing on the body and also lasts for a good 4 to 6 hours that creeps into that repair time. All this study proves is if someone shortens the time they eat that health markers improve. Actually, in the science of time restricted eating it's not adviseable to eat in a deficit because that will have an effect on lean mass and other factors. In the world of dieting this of course was never understood properly, and people believe it's a way to lose weight which was never, ever the purpose.
IS your definition of digestion very narrow (not concerning digestion from start to finish, but only part/the start of it)?
According to the Mayo clinic:
"After you eat, it takes about six to eight hours for food to pass through your stomach and small intestine. Food then enters your large intestine (colon) for further digestion, absorption of water and, finally, elimination of undigested food. It takes about 36 hours for food to move through the entire colon. All in all, the whole process — from the time you swallow food to the time it leaves your body as feces — takes about two to five days, depending on the individual."
Considering the total duration of digestion, even while doing TRE we're always in the process of digesting food somewhere?
Thank you!
We might not be considering that it's very taxing on the body to create stomach acid and pushing food out of the stomach though. Much more than the whole passage through the intestines.
1 -
neanderthin wrote: »So is this simply about hunger? Leading to excess eating?
Cause if you eat 2000 calories in one meal for breakfast or eat 2000 for dinner, you have still eaten 2000 calories, and if you are burning 2500 a day then you have created a deficit right?
No. Time restricted eating is about giving your body enough time to rejuvenate and repair and if we're eating over a lot of hours say from 8 in the morning and still snacking late in the evening, then that repair time is reduced because we need to realize digestion is very taxing on the body and also lasts for a good 4 to 6 hours that creeps into that repair time. All this study proves is if someone shortens the time they eat that health markers improve. Actually, in the science of time restricted eating it's not adviseable to eat in a deficit because that will have an effect on lean mass and other factors. In the world of dieting this of course was never understood properly, and people believe it's a way to lose weight which was never, ever the purpose.
Is your definition of digestion very narrow (not concerning digestion from start to finish, but only part/the start of it?
According to the Mayo clinic:
"After you eat, it takes about six to eight hours for food to pass through your stomach and small intestine. Food then enters your large intestine (colon) for further digestion, absorption of water and, finally, elimination of undigested food. It takes about 36 hours for food to move through the entire colon. All in all, the whole process — from the time you swallow food to the time it leaves your body as feces — takes about two to five days, depending on the individual."
Considering the total duration of digestion, even while doing TRE we're always in the process of digesting food somewhere?
Yeah, and as it pertains to repair, recovery and reset for the following day for our circadian internal clocks which the stomach has it's own as do all other organs. Apparently right after digestion in the stomach about 10 % of the lining is damaged somewhat and is considered normal and it's the repair during the stomachs down time that recovery begins. The lions share or the majority of work is the initial energy for that immediate digestion which is normally the first 4 to 6 hours but of course the types of food we're eating will affect digestion time. Digestion increases our core temperature as well, it really is a very violent and disruptive environment so to speak breaking down foods that normally would take months to decompose if just left to their own devices in nature. Cheers
Just to add: We're either in the fed state or fasted state which is mostly dictated by our hormones and when Insulin comes back down to base line that's considered the beginning of the fasted state and that repair process begins and we can still have other metabolic processes occurring simultaneously and the later digestion process is one of them.....we can't be in a fed state, meaning anabolic for 3 or 4 days just for the completion of digestion process.
0 -
neanderthin wrote: »This study has nothing to do with weight loss or if eating past 5 puts on weight or how someone might find it inconvenient for whatever reason. Whether someone's schedule finds them eating late or they do shift work also has nothing to do with this study, it's just showing that certain factors (hormones) can elicit a possible negative outcome that over time if someone is obese could find their condition not improving or getting worse even though they're controlling their calorie intake. The two groups ate the same number of calories, which were not designed to put participants in a deficit, basically isocaloric conditions
This study looks at the differences in hormonal regulation and found that the group that ate later (8:00) saw certain hormones affected deleteriously which over time could find that group in a positive energy balance increasing obesity risk. No more, no less. Not eating after 5 somehow became the focus. Cheers.
Well, it is the title of this thread 😆
And the first word of the first sentence from the study is "Obesity."1 -
neanderthin wrote: »This study looks at the differences in hormonal regulation and found that the group that ate later (8:00) saw certain hormones affected deleteriously which over time could find that group in a positive energy balance increasing obesity risk. No more, no less. Not eating after 5 somehow became the focus. Cheers.
The lab's focus is understanding timing as it relates to food intake. Not exclusively obesity or weight loss.
I'm thinking at the highest level some people believe the time of the day which people eat has an effect. Others believe the time of day has no impact. This lab is trying to understand this.0 -
chris_in_cal wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »This study looks at the differences in hormonal regulation and found that the group that ate later (8:00) saw certain hormones affected deleteriously which over time could find that group in a positive energy balance increasing obesity risk. No more, no less. Not eating after 5 somehow became the focus. Cheers.
The lab's focus is understanding timing as it relates to food intake. Not exclusively obesity or weight loss.
I'm thinking at the highest level some people believe the time of the day which people eat has an effect. Others believe the time of day has no impact. This lab is trying to understand this.
I think you might be referring to meal frequency where some will argue it makes a difference and others say it doesn't, which time restricted eating is not that.
The science of Time Restricted Eating (TRE) is about an alternative to getting healthy or healthier that has nothing to do with what you eat, so the focus has nothing to do with the actual food, or, worrying about creating a caloric deficit by finding some kind of diet or strategy. The basic premise around TRE is allowing a minimum of 12 consecutive hours of not eating for the repair and rebuild process to work properly.
Creating a diet strategy for a caloric deficit is an altogether different strategy from TRE and where IF or intermittent fasting may be beneficial if again you don't want a diet that restricts food groups or other compliances that can be hard to adhere to.0 -
neanderthin wrote: »chris_in_cal wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »This study looks at the differences in hormonal regulation and found that the group that ate later (8:00) saw certain hormones affected deleteriously which over time could find that group in a positive energy balance increasing obesity risk. No more, no less. Not eating after 5 somehow became the focus. Cheers.
The lab's focus is understanding timing as it relates to food intake. Not exclusively obesity or weight loss.
I'm thinking at the highest level some people believe the time of the day which people eat has an effect. Others believe the time of day has no impact. This lab is trying to understand this.
I think you might be referring to meal frequency where some will argue it makes a difference and others say it doesn't, which time restricted eating is not that.
The science of Time Restricted Eating (TRE) is about an alternative to getting healthy or healthier that has nothing to do with what you eat, so the focus has nothing to do with the actual food, or, worrying about creating a caloric deficit by finding some kind of diet or strategy. The basic premise around TRE is allowing a minimum of 12 consecutive hours of not eating for the repair and rebuild process to work properly.
Creating a diet strategy for a caloric deficit is an altogether different strategy from TRE and where IF or intermittent fasting may be beneficial if again you don't want a diet that restricts food groups or other compliances that can be hard to adhere to.
This is not a disagreement with your interesting post, just a quote of it to continue the general line of conversation.
Around here, I think lots of us are implicitly looking for those maybe-mythical, much-marketed "weight loss hacks" that will make the process easy, or at least easier. Studies like the one cited are inevitably fodder for that impulse, even to the point of interpreting the studies out of their scientific context.
In most cases, in a practical sense, what's the harm (as long as risky behavior isn't induced)? The placebo effect is strong, and there's some evidence that it's strong enough to trigger physiological changes in things like satiation and appetite hormone levels.
Sure, more nuanced contextual understanding is better from an intellectual benefits perspective, but this isn't MyIntellectPal, so that's not going to be most threads' take on things, probably. Keep posting, though - it's a good thing.2 -
neanderthin wrote: »chris_in_cal wrote: »neanderthin wrote: »This study looks at the differences in hormonal regulation and found that the group that ate later (8:00) saw certain hormones affected deleteriously which over time could find that group in a positive energy balance increasing obesity risk. No more, no less. Not eating after 5 somehow became the focus. Cheers.
The lab's focus is understanding timing as it relates to food intake. Not exclusively obesity or weight loss.
I'm thinking at the highest level some people believe the time of the day which people eat has an effect. Others believe the time of day has no impact. This lab is trying to understand this.
I think you might be referring to meal frequency where some will argue it makes a difference and others say it doesn't, which time restricted eating is not that.
The science of Time Restricted Eating (TRE) is about an alternative to getting healthy or healthier that has nothing to do with what you eat, so the focus has nothing to do with the actual food, or, worrying about creating a caloric deficit by finding some kind of diet or strategy. The basic premise around TRE is allowing a minimum of 12 consecutive hours of not eating for the repair and rebuild process to work properly.
Creating a diet strategy for a caloric deficit is an altogether different strategy from TRE and where IF or intermittent fasting may be beneficial if again you don't want a diet that restricts food groups or other compliances that can be hard to adhere to.
This is not a disagreement with your interesting post, just a quote of it to continue the general line of conversation.
Around here, I think lots of us are implicitly looking for those maybe-mythical, much-marketed "weight loss hacks" that will make the process easy, or at least easier. Studies like the one cited are inevitably fodder for that impulse, even to the point of interpreting the studies out of their scientific context.
In most cases, in a practical sense, what's the harm (as long as risky behavior isn't induced)? The placebo effect is strong, and there's some evidence that it's strong enough to trigger physiological changes in things like satiation and appetite hormone levels.
Sure, more nuanced contextual understanding is better from an intellectual benefits perspective, but this isn't MyIntellectPal, so that's not going to be most threads' take on things, probably. Keep posting, though - it's a good thing.
Thanks Ann.
I believe when a person has more knowledge of a particular subject the more informed they are to make decisions to facilitate better outcomes or when outcomes or strategies don't work, they're better equipped to understand why. I believe myfitnesspal includes nutrition and health as topics for discussion although I know that most people have a limited knowledge and I do understand people may feel like they don't want to get involved or comment, it doesn't mean that they aren't interested or don't get anything out of it, well hopefully anyway. I think mostly people don't want to look uninformed, which is a shame because getting involved with the nuance is how we learn or correct misinformation or long held beliefs, confirmation biases, etc. I know I've learned alot from this site from people like yourself and many others. Basically, this effects our body more than simply our intellect, well hopefully anyway.
The problem I see are two-fold. First is the reductive approach to health and health care in as much as we have completely different disciplines regarding health of the body and mind. That will never work. Secondly nutrition, up until recently was a second-class discipline that never received any attention to speak of and when these two factors come together, we have what we see now with 75% of the population overweight, obese and sick with only about 6% of the population in the US with what would be considered a totally healthy metabolism. In simple terms the left hand doesn't know what the right is doing.
TRE is a strategy with an outcome that would benefit every single person's overall health and wellbeing with the complication of reducing the amount of hours a person consumes food during a 24 hour period to a minimum of 12 hours, basically a few hrs for most people and the person doesn't have to worry about a deficit or worry whether they ate too many carbs. The risk/benefit is stacked in favor of benefit. So when we don't eat after 5 becomes the talking point the overall message gets overlooked. Plus it's an easy strategy that a person can adhere to relatively easy for the rest of their lives.
Cheers.
1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions