If you correct the fairly obvious numeric transcrption error in Table 3 “left leg fat % post” (unless something really weird happened to that left leg) the fat % results will change significantly.

As the triglicerides were reduced significantly, the increase in LDLs may be due to increase in large LDL molecules, which are not considered harmful, LDL molecule ratio determination requires a special blood test rather than usual one used for blood lipids.

It appears the subject’s ‘feast day’ energy intake was 3500kj which is well below the Australian recommendation of 8700kj – however the food appendices are not included with the reprint to confirm this.

I am surprised that a ‘journal’ would publish an article which is statistically insignificant. I note that author 2 has a university affiliation and wonder if this one-person experiment had university ethics committee approval.

Val

This seems like a nonsense study to me.
* 1 person five weeks! Seriously lame.
* Likely a bogus measurement as noted above.
* They clearly used a DEXA scan. If you want to compare lean mass you have to be at similar hydration levels. That probably means waiting a week after fasting is stopped. If you compare non-fasted to fasted results you are going to get skewed results since there is a great deal of water content in lean body mass.

Overall this reads like someone doesn’t like 5:2 for some reason and is attacking it with a hack study.