Hacker News Reader

Comment by jackmodern | Hacker News Reader

There's subtle differences here. What this title refers to is commonly referred to as "time restricted feeding" or in humans "time restricted eating" if you are curious to learn more, google for a pod cast with Sachin Panda and Rhonda Patrick. They get into the details of this style of dieting at a mechanistic level really well.

Basically doing this over the long run will make you live longer, have a healthier metabolic system, lose weight, have healthier glucose levels, etc.

I'm on a mixture of TRE and intermittent fasting, and let me tell you, it works. I do it for longevity and energy. Weight management is just a bonus since now I can eat more of what I want without gaining weight since I am doing it in a smaller number of hours in the day.

View on HN

I don't doubt any of that, I'm just confused on why 10/14 needs a special label or is defined as fasting.

If you goto sleep at 11pm and don't eat until 8am the next day, do you classify this as a 9 hour fast assuming you ate something 5 minute before sleeping?

At some point things are just "normal" based around your sleep schedule. Or to put it another way, if you drink water with breakfast at 8am but then don't drink anything for 3 hours, would you label that 3 hour time span as a "self imposed hydration cleanse"?

Maybe intention is the difference here. The "normal" people are simply running on routine with no designs to stick to that routine should a disruption appear. By actively intermittent fasting, you are declaring your intentions, likely with a specific goal in mind.

That's actually a selling point of this method. Another way to put it is: Skip breakfast. If you eat at 10 pm last, skip breakfast and eat again at 12pm lunch the next day that works.

with time restricted eating it is typically recommended to have your last meal by 6 or 7 if you intend to sleep by 10pm. There are a number of health consequences to eating so late. The one most people care about has to do with the pancreas receiving melatonin and slowly beginning to shut down for the night, so when you eat late it has a lower insulin response than it would otherwise leading to more calories being stored as fat instead of being used as energy. There are some metabolic consequences as well.

I don't understand your point. The study asked people to (typically) eat during 10 hours and not eat during 14 hours, hence the 10/14 labelling. This resulted in a moderate weight loss, about 8.6% less calories/day were consumed.

You're suggesting that other schedules might also work and that 10/14 is "normal". Whether it's normal in the statistical sense or not is an empirical question (the answer is probably "no"), and whether other schedules would have the same effect requires another study.

10/14 is the typical time restricted feeding window. the other most common is 8/16, and if you go lower you hit 6/18 which is considered intermittent fasting. These numbers matter in the context of clinical trials for various definitions. If you wish to remain naive to the subject feel free to ignore my initial comment. I gave you everything you needed there to figure it out for yourself.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com