If you’ve attempted to shed pounds in the past, it’s likely you’ve explored numerous methods.
Ultimately, most experts on weight loss concur that if you maintain a ‘calorie deficit’—consuming fewer calories than needed to sustain your current weight—you should observe progress.
However, while this concept appears straightforward theoretically, its application can be more challenging.
Indeed, studies are revealing that intermittent fasting—one of the various weight loss strategies you may have experimented with—could be more effective than merely cutting calories.
“Intermittent fasting typically involves alternating between eating periods and fasting,” explained the director of clinical education at Seca and registered dietician/nutritionist Nina Crowley to DailyMail.com.
She clarified that the common types of intermittent fasting encompass formats like 16:8 (where you refrain from eating for 16 hours and consume food during an eight-hour timeframe) or 5:2.
“These strategies aim to assist individuals in lowering their total energy intake without the need to tally every calorie,” she noted.
A study featured in the Annals of Internal Medicine implemented a variant known as 4:3 intermittent fasting.
Dietician and nutritionist Nina Crowley mentioned that intermittent fasting might be less daunting for some than daily calorie limitations
Crowley indicated that in this situation, participants adhered to an 80 percent calorie reduction on three (non-consecutive) days each week.
On the other four days, they were free to eat without calorie restrictions.
The control group practiced daily calorie reduction, yet both groups were equivalent in terms of overall weekly calorie deficit.
However, their methods diverged, demonstrating that intermittent fasting proved to be more effective.
“This method might seem less overwhelming for certain individuals when compared to everyday calorie restriction, as it provides more flexibility and less ongoing concentration on food,” Crowley stated.
The intermittent fasting participants experienced a 7.6 percent loss in body fat over 52 weeks, whereas the calorie deficit group recorded a five percent reduction.
Crowley suggested one reason could be that the intermittent fasting group wasn’t required to limit their eating every single day—thereby decreasing decision fatigue and enhancing adherence.
“The [intermittent fasting] group also had reduced dropout rates (19 percent compared to 27 percent), indicating it may have been more manageable for some,” Crowley remarked.
While standard intermittent fasting adheres to a 16:8 model, this research utilized a 4:3 framework (stock image)
“From a behavior change perspective, many might find intermittent fasting simpler to adopt, as it clearly delineates boundaries (fast vs. eat) instead of requiring continual moderation.
“Metabolically, alternating fasting and eating days may affect hormonal reactions relevant to hunger and fat burning.
However, Crowley emphasized that weight-loss approaches should be assessed in a more nuanced manner.
She noted that in this specific study, fat mass and fat-free mass weren’t directly measured, which can fluctuate based on whether individuals would prefer a method like intermittent fasting.
“Research indicates that extensive or aggressive energy reduction—even in structured programs—can lead to undesirable muscle loss, particularly without sufficient protein intake or resistance training,” Crowley cautioned.
To mitigate this in subsequent studies, she recommended combining any dietary method with monitoring of body composition.
“Evaluating fat mass, muscle mass, and hydration levels offers a much clearer understanding of a person’s health progression,” Crowley stated.
“Sustainable weight loss should conserve muscle while promoting energy and functionality—not merely lowering the numerical value on the scale.”
Crowley mentioned that this study did not consider body composition or muscle mass (stock image)
While she acknowledged that intermittent fasting could benefit some individuals, she emphasized the importance of evaluating how realistically it can be incorporated into daily life.
“Meals often fulfill social and emotional roles beyond just nutrition, and fasting times may not always sync with family schedules, social gatherings, or workout habits,” she remarked.
Crowley also noted that those who are physically active may depend on meal timing for optimal performance and recovery.
Thus, it is vital for each person to discover a strategy that suits their unique long-term health and well-being.
“When a plan feels adaptable, feasible, and in harmony with one’s lifestyle, it is more likely to foster lasting advancements—not only in weight but in overall health and life quality,” Crowley concluded.
