
Limiting flies to specific eating hours protected their hearts against aging - Southron
http://universe.sdsu.edu/sdsu_newscenter/news_story.aspx?sid=75480
======
wbhart
Fly hearts are unrelated to mammal hearts. Flies belong to a completely
different phylum. Pretty much everything about the organs of flies is
different to humans. They don't have lungs, they don't have a brain, but a
cerebral ganglion, they don't have a full stomach, but a stomodaeum, etc. More
importantly, they don't have oxygen rich blood or red blood cells. I realise
that flies are often used for genetic studies that have implications for
humans, but I very much doubt this study says anything much about human heart
health.

~~~
brobdingnagian
They are analogous, and an analogy is what we're after.

------
jonathansizz
Similar research has been done in mice, with similar results. See e.g.
[http://www.cell.com/cell-
metabolism/abstract/S1550-4131%2814...](http://www.cell.com/cell-
metabolism/abstract/S1550-4131%2814%2900498-7)

Bottom line: try restricting calorie intake to a ~10 hour window for 5+ days
per week.

~~~
NhanH
That's interesting. Isn't one of the common "good advice" in diet was to have
a lot of multiple tiny meals throughout the day?

~~~
jonathansizz
I think that 'many small meals' is specific to calorie restricted diets, in
order to avoid feeling so hungry. A time restricted diet is a different
approach; although it could be combined with calorie restriction, this is not
a requirement.

Human trials should give us a better idea of how effective a time restricted
diet will actually be. Personally, I think that time restriction is more
realistic than calorie restriction for the majority of people, so that's why
I'm excited about this research.

~~~
cheald
For weight loss/management, it's recommended to eat your daily calories over 6
meals throughout the day. But, the general idea isn't to keep you from feeling
hungry, but rather to keep your blood sugar relatively constant, so the body
doesn't enter "hoard energy" mode (where muscle is preferred as an energy
source over fat) and you aren't spiking your bloodstream with huge surges of
glucose (and thus insulin, which is what prompts the storage of glucose as
fat) after binging.

~~~
graeme
Is there any empirical support for this idea?

I hear it repeatedly on fitness forums, but haven't seen it tested. I do
leangains myself, which is intermittent fasting + barbells. In the leangains
community the idea is widely derided. Martin Berkhan, the man who made
leangains, is pretty scrupulous with citing studies, so if something supported
the six small meals idea I suspect he would have mentioned it.

I did a few google scholar searches, but I'm not familiar with any specialized
terms that might be relevant. Are there studies I might be missing?

~~~
cheald
I don't know, actually. I've heard the idea repeated so regularly in diet and
exercise literature that I'm not sure I've ever looked for studies on it.

[1] is the closest thing I can find on the subject, which showed that high-
frequency diets substantially reduced insulin levels in the blood. This seems
to be the Ur-study from which the idea was spawned.

On the other hand, you have [2] which shows that even though glucose levels
fluctuated more on 3-meal plans, resting metabolism and satiation were both
higher, though there was no significant effect on fat oxidation.

[3] suggests that regular meals (as opposed to irregular meals) "have
beneficial effects on fasting lipid and postprandial insulin profiles and
thermogenesis."

Finally, [4] seems to sum up existing findings as "some for, some against,
most neutral, tl;dr eat fewer calories".

[1]
[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2674713](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2674713)

[2]
[http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal....](http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0038632)

[3]
[http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/81/1/16.short](http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/81/1/16.short)

[4]
[http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPag...](http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=879792&fileId=S0007114597000093)

~~~
graeme
Interesting, thanks.

I wish more studies and nutritionists would focus on satiation. "Eat fewer
calories" isn't practical, in a lot of cases, since it involves actively
fighting hunger. Ceteris parabis, the more satiating of two diets should lead
to more weight loss.

The diet and exercise popular literature is a mess. A lot of it is either
seventh hand knowledge repeated to the point of truth, or articles written for
SEO purposes to capture readers wondering "will food X burn fat/increase
gains"?

------
JoeMamma
Completely ridiculous conclusions based the information provided. Even if the
standard diet were quantity restricted, it does not indicated the amounts
actually ingested by each fly group. Timing as the sole controlled factor for
an actual scientific experiment, requires that each group ingests the same
amount. As such, the amount should be no more than that which can be ingested
in a 12 hour period. To relate the finding to circadian rhythm, the timing
should be varied based on normal sleep patterns.

------
kgc
Would like to see the effect of different time window sizes. Is there an
optimum? Does a 3 hour window work even better?

~~~
jonsen
Daily three-part cycle:

8 hour intake window (noon - 8pm)

8 hour rest (8pm - 4am)

8 hour excretion (4am - noon)

