Nearly 42% of Americans 20 and older are obese, and another 32% are overweight, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As slim bodies become a widespread goal, people struggle to keep up with their diets and refrain from eating their favorite foods. Health hazards are also a common reason for weight-loss. People who are obese are more likely to develop serious health problems like heart disease and type 2 diabetes.
A study shows a whopping 49% of Americans try to lose weight. That includes 56% of women and 42% of men.
The most common way to lose weight is to burn more calories than you consume. But preparing filling meals that are low-calorie and keeping track of portion sizes can be difficult and costly — it also requires discipline. Many cannot control their temptation for desserts or fatty foods. Now, a new method has emerged, one that does not require as much self-control.
In recent years, time-restricted eating (or TRE) has emerged as an alternative for weight loss. It works by compressing your “eating day” into 6 or 8 hours in order to reduce the insulin your body produces. Insulin prompts the body to store fat, meaning the less insulin, the less fat. This is certainly easier than counting calories, but does it have the same results?
To find out, Krista Varady, a nutrition researcher at the University of Illinois Chicago, recruited 90 people and assigned them to 3 groups.
The first group was asked to do all their eating between noon and 8 p.m., then fast for the next 16 hours. They were allowed to drink water, tea, coffee, or up to two diet sodas during the fasting period.
The second group was asked to reduce their calorie intake by 25% (about 500 calories). People in both groups met with dietitians for nutrition advice. The group counting calories also planned meals based on their food preferences.
The third group was asked to stay to their normal eating and exercise schedules. This served as a control group used to compare to the experimental groups.
After six months, the people in the TRE group lost an average of 8.8 pounds (4 kilograms) and those counting calories dropped an average of 11.2 pounds (5.1 kilos). The difference between the two groups wasn’t statistically significant, both results were accurate and not based on luck. Both groups fared much better than the control group, whose members gained weight.
Although counting calories is more efficient, TRE is easier and cheaper.
“It is a simple diet,” Varady says. “You don’t need to buy expensive products or change things out in your pantry. You just have to decide on a time window and stick to it for as long as you can.” This way requires less dedication and discipline and doesn’t differ much from counting calories. Thanks to science and medical studies, we now have an easier way to lose weight.
A study shows a whopping 49% of Americans try to lose weight. That includes 56% of women and 42% of men.
The most common way to lose weight is to burn more calories than you consume. But preparing filling meals that are low-calorie and keeping track of portion sizes can be difficult and costly — it also requires discipline. Many cannot control their temptation for desserts or fatty foods. Now, a new method has emerged, one that does not require as much self-control.
In recent years, time-restricted eating (or TRE) has emerged as an alternative for weight loss. It works by compressing your “eating day” into 6 or 8 hours in order to reduce the insulin your body produces. Insulin prompts the body to store fat, meaning the less insulin, the less fat. This is certainly easier than counting calories, but does it have the same results?
To find out, Krista Varady, a nutrition researcher at the University of Illinois Chicago, recruited 90 people and assigned them to 3 groups.
The first group was asked to do all their eating between noon and 8 p.m., then fast for the next 16 hours. They were allowed to drink water, tea, coffee, or up to two diet sodas during the fasting period.
The second group was asked to reduce their calorie intake by 25% (about 500 calories). People in both groups met with dietitians for nutrition advice. The group counting calories also planned meals based on their food preferences.
The third group was asked to stay to their normal eating and exercise schedules. This served as a control group used to compare to the experimental groups.
After six months, the people in the TRE group lost an average of 8.8 pounds (4 kilograms) and those counting calories dropped an average of 11.2 pounds (5.1 kilos). The difference between the two groups wasn’t statistically significant, both results were accurate and not based on luck. Both groups fared much better than the control group, whose members gained weight.
Although counting calories is more efficient, TRE is easier and cheaper.
“It is a simple diet,” Varady says. “You don’t need to buy expensive products or change things out in your pantry. You just have to decide on a time window and stick to it for as long as you can.” This way requires less dedication and discipline and doesn’t differ much from counting calories. Thanks to science and medical studies, we now have an easier way to lose weight.