'Some' contradictory evidence concerning the benefit of fasting on a 5:2 ratio

Welcome to The Fast Diet The official Fast forums Body Science of intermittent fasting
'Some' contradictory evidence concerning the benefit of fasting on a 5:2 ratio

This topic contains 5 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by  Musical 7 years ago.

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)

  • https://www.omicsgroup.org/journals/anthropometric-and-biochemical-effects-of-the-5-and-2-diet-a-case-study-2473-6449-1000103.php?aid=68396

    Very very interesting read……. I’m glad at least for diabetics that the outcome was positive. Can anyone counter these findings ? The only thing I question is this was only done on one person; all be it extremely thoroughly. Done on a larger scale could produce strong evidential material for or against, hopefully!

    One person, five weeks! I think I’d like to see a bigger, longer study!

    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.


    Sorry but the study is not worth the paper it is written on. A case study of one healthy adult male for 5 weeks published in an open access journal. Really?? Take home message, pointless study, even for the male concerned. A study of several hundred people across a variety of socio/economic and cultural backgrounds which also encompasses a longitudinal study and you might have something to talk about. One sports scientist working for Bankstown rugby club is not a study, its a homework assignment.

    HDL and LDL in and of themselves are neither bad nor good. They perform specific functions. If your cardiovascular system is in good condition then trigs, LDL and HDL play a minor role in causing distress. You need to have inflammatory markers measured such as hsC-RP, ESR and PV to measure the state of your “plumbing”.

    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.

    I’m so glad I put that post on ! As your average joe/Joanna I know nothing about ‘markers’ dexa scans or LDL molecule ratios I was glad you’ve come back with your comments explaining the ‘errors’ the study showed. Many thanks to all that replied. Musical

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)

You must be logged in to reply.