The study found that a popular intermittent cut-off method was of little use.

A diet called intermittent cut-off is currently popular, mainly because it is associated with a biological process called autophagy and the programme’s so-called ability to improve various categories of health. However, intermittent fasting is also popular as a way to lose weight, and past animal model studies have shown that eating the same number of calories on the same day can lead to more fat loss by limiting the amount of time you eat. But a new study challenges that claim.

The study found that a popular intermittent cut-off method was of little use.

A study from Sapk University found that two groups of mice fed the same number of calories experienced varying degrees of weight loss, and those placed on a 16:8 intermittent fasting program lost more weight than the other group. The findings could help promote intermittent fasting as a weight loss trend.

The new study at the University of California, San Francisco, builds on the study, but focuses on humans rather than mice. A total of 116 people with BMI between 27 and 46 were randomly assigned to a normal diet throughout the day or to eat food for only eight hours a day, known as 16:8 break.” After 12 weeks, the fasting group lost an average of 2 pounds and the non-fasting group lost an average of 1.5 pounds.

Ultimately, the differences in weight loss between the two groups were almost identical, with the researchers explaining that 16:8 intermittent break-ups ‘are not effective in themselves as a means of losing weight or improving key metabolic health markers.’ The 3d refers to markers such as HbA1C levels, lean meat quality, air-abdominal insulin, fat quality, and similar.

According to the study, the differences between the two groups of health markers were not significant, and ultimately suggested that calorie restriction throughout the day or intermittent fasting was unlikely to have any specific metabolic benefits. Studies have shown that the weight loss observed in those who adhered to the 16:8 cut-off program was only the result of eating fewer calories overall.