„热门：如何摆脱野心陷阱
事实上，我们鼓励人们吃到满足为止，饿了就吃零食，以后再也不要计算卡路里。这种计算卡路里的想法完全是妄想。没有人做得到。很明显，即使是受过训练的营养专家，也无法把每天的卡路里平衡计算到误差不超过350卡。”Trending: How to Break Free From the Ambition Trap
In fact, we encourage people to eat as much to feel satisfied, snack when hungry, and never count calories again. This whole calorie counting notion is a delusion. Nobody can do it. It’s quite clear that not even a trained nutrition expert can get their calorie balance to within 350 a day.
„只要给身体一点机会，它就能通过调节饥饿感和新陈代谢率，把体重控制得很好。
第一阶段旨在启动这种代谢变化、降低胰岛素水平并缓解慢性炎症。然后在第二阶段，我们会重新加入经过最低限度加工的全谷物，比如钢切燕麦、荞麦、藜麦和糙米。”If we give them half a chance, that controls our body weight perfectly well by adjusting hunger and our metabolic rate.
Phase 1 is designed to jumpstart this metabolic change, lower insulin, calm chronic inflammation. Then phase 2 we add back minimally processed whole kernel grains, like steel-cut oats, buckwheat, quinoa, brown rice.
„你的身体会开始反抗，饥饿感越来越强，新陈代谢也会变慢。如果你继续减少热量摄入，只会让情况更糟。这会让意志和新陈代谢之间展开一场我们注定会输的斗争。身体会进入饥饿模式。”Your body is going to start fighting back with increasing hunger, slowing metabolism. If you keep cutting back calories you only make that situation worse. That creates a battle between mind and metabolism we’re destined to lose. The body goes into starvation mode.
„研究结束后，参与者的体重会回升到起始水平，通常还会略高一些。
反过来的情况也成立。已经有几十项过量喂食研究：参与者被带到研究机构、限制行动，然后基本上被迫吃热量非常高的饮食。”Once the people end the study, their weight comes right back up to where it started, typically even a little higher.
The opposite is also true. There’ve been dozens of overfeeding studies where participants are brought into a research unit, locked down, and then basically forced to eat very high calorie diets.
„这听起来颇具挑衅性，但实际上，已有近一个世纪的研究，涉及数千篇文章，支持这样一种观点：体重更多受生物机制控制，而不是受意志力控制。
假设你正在对人类参与者进行一项营养研究。”That sounds provocative but there’s actually a century of research involving literally thousands of articles that support the argument that body weight is controlled more by our biology than our will power.
Let’s say you’re doing a nutrition study with human participants.
研究经费公司与其他机构共同 · National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), NARBHA Institute’s NARBHA Interdisciplinary Health Research Fund
结果: 经过为期4周的干预，有助于预防慢性病的饮食质量指标提高了28%，水果摄入量增加了63%，皮肤抗氧化水平提高了6.1%（Hedges g=0.16；平均差异0.33，95%偏差校正和加速法[BCa] CI 0.04-0.61；P=.03）。用户研究期间，整体直觉饮食没有变化；不过，“无条件允许自己进食”分量表得分有所提高（Hedges g=-0.28；平均差异0.28，95% BCa CI 0.07-0.49；P=.01，调整后 P=.07）。总体而言，使用应用程序后饮食失调也没有变化，但饮食限制有所减少（Hedges g=-0.23；平均差异0.30，95% BCa CI -0.61 至 -0.04；P=.04，调整后 P=.22）。In2Eat 应用程序的平均 SUS 得分为67.2（SD 15.5）。记录餐食的天数与 SUS 得分呈正相关（r=0.28；P=.06），记录餐食的总数与应用程序的易用性呈单调相关（ρ=0.31；P=.04）。
研究经费大学或基金会 · Seaver College of Science and Engineering at Loyola Marymount University
作者与公司有关联吗？有——作者已申报
生产商是否参与协助研究？是
研究类型人体临床研究
参与人数45
“未注明”并不代表无人出资——数据库并不总会记录。
观点与评论材料
以下内容为作者的观点、解读和假设，不与科学研究和系统评价同等看待。
Orthomolecular Medicine News Service 观点材料
„这项研究基于两份问卷，调查时间跨度约15年（2003—2018年），当时“间歇性禁食”或“限时进食/限时喂养”还没有成为流行说法。这些术语直到更晚些时候才流行起来。对调查人员和受访者而言，限时进食（间歇性禁食）的定义并不明确。这让人对调查结果的准确性和有效性产生疑问。该研究比较了414名受访者：他们在2003年至2018年间只接受过两次调查，并报告称每天的进食时间窗口在8小时以内。”The study was based on 2 questionnaires covering a period of ~15 years (2003 - 2018), before intermittent fasting or time-restricted eating/time restricted feeding became popular terms. These terms did not become popular until much later. The definition of time restricted eating (intermittent fasting) was not clear to both the surveyors and the respondents. This raises questions about the accuracy and validity of the survey results. This study compares a group of 414 people who were surveyed only twice during that period between 2003 and 2018 and who reported eating window within 8 hours a day.
„[45] 限时喂养或间歇性禁食（例如每天16至18小时不进食，或每周禁食2天且不减少总体热量摄入）可显著降低血液中的 hs/CRP 或 CRP。[46,47] 在不减少总热量摄入的情况下减少进餐次数，有助于减轻慢性炎症。慢性炎症是许多疾病和严重感染性疾病（包括败血症）的主要风险因素，因此间歇性禁食模式可能有助于显著降低死亡率和败血症风险。”[45] Time-restricted feeding or intermittent fasting (for example, no food intake for 16 to 18 hours per day, or fasting for 2 days per week without overall caloric restriction) significantly reduced hs/CRP or CRP in the blood. [46,47] Reducing the meal frequency without overall reducing calories helps to decrease chronic inflammation. Since chronic inflammatory processes are a leading risk factor for many diseases and severe infectious disease, including sepsis, intermittent fasting patterns may significantly help to reduce mortality and sepsis.
„研究发现，不同的间歇性禁食方式，例如隔日禁食和限时进食，有助于减重并改善心脏代谢风险因素（Zhu 2020）。通过提早限时进食，让饮食习惯与昼夜节律保持一致，也能改善代谢健康（Charlot 2021）。包括限时喂养在内的间歇性禁食方案，与血脂异常和血压改善有关（Vasim 2022）。”Different intermittent fasting approaches, such as alternate day fasting and time-restricted eating, have been found to be effective in weight loss and improving cardiometabolic risk factors (Zhu 2020). Aligning food habits with the circadian clock through early time-restricted feeding can also improve metabolic health (Charlot 2021). Intermittent fasting regimens, including time-restricted feeding, have been linked to improvements in dyslipidemia and blood pressure (Vasim 2022).
饮食与营养