Intermittent Fasting doesn't burn FAT it Burns MUSCLE!

What is going on I have warriors so we have a new video here by mish mishy mitchy mishy phd she has a phd so she must know what she's telling you right well there's a little thing with people that are in the industry and they they almost pride themselves on their phd and when they get their phd many of the times they weren't talking about intermittent fasting intermittent fasting is very new if you in the spectrum in the timeline of research and studies especially if you went through the process of getting your phd which is not an easy process so kudos to mishy is not an easy process you you have to go through strenuous uh studies i don't know specifically what her uh what her field is but she definitely has to put out studies they have to be peer reviewed and published on uh on journals and it's not a easy thing to do because there there has to be a novelty in your study you have to come with a different spin to make it uh worthwhile to even tackle or be accepted as a study that you can tackle and then even after that you still got to put it out and it has to be peer reviewed to see if it even passes the test to be viewed by the the general public on a prestigious journal has to be peer reviewed by at least three different people so kudos to her but biased exist no matter what so we're gonna go ahead and click this video i'm not gonna play it all the way through it's pretty long it's about 11 minutes but i'm going to give you a just summary of everything else that she said because i've already watched the video but i do have the studies that she has that she posted and we're going to take a look at that all right a lot of gurus out there love to sing the praises of intermittent fasting for weight and for health but is that actually based on science today i am sharing actual scientific studies on how intermittent fasting affects your weight body composition and health hey there i'm mish and i am a full-time researcher with my phd and by day i conduct and publish studies of my own and by night i share the results of other people's studies here to help you reach your wish i wonder what is her field though that that's one thing that i don't know i can't tell from here what her field what her study field is what does she because you can get a phd in anything it doesn't necessarily have to be in uh nutrition or you know body composition or you know any of that stuff it could be on other things but i'm i'm curious weight loss fitness health and nutrition goals today i'm talking about intermittent fasting because a lot of you have asked me about it and because it's pretty amazing how little actual science gets talked about in the conversation about intermittent fasting so as i agree with this 100 a lot of people just talk about intermittent fasting but they don't actually talk about the studies and the science that we that we have which is a lot we do have a lot of contrary to popular belief we do over like 20 or 30,000 new studies every year on intermittent fasting as usual i have to jump in there and get actual scientific studies to share on this debate about whether or not intermittent fasting is actually useful and i'm also going to give some reasons why what you're going to hear from this video is probably going to be different from what you've been hearing from the rest of the internet and for a brief background when people say intermittent fasting they typically refer to time restricted eating which is when you eat in a smaller time window during the day than most people do so a lot of people will eat during eight hour windows and then fast for 16 hour windows or make that eating window even smaller like six hours or even four hours and there are so many people including doctors who say that intermittent fasting is like the magic cure for being overweight or for being unhealthy in terms of it's not the magic cure the same way um caloric restriction is not the magic cure right intermittent fasting works because it it provides a a benefit or a an assistance to being at a caloric uh calorically being calorically restricted um so that you can then be at a net negative energy balance and burn fat oxidate fat and burn it so you're eventually losing weight uh via body fat reduction um but it also has other benefits in terms of partitioning body fat itself so it isn't i always find it funny when people say it's magic they're saying that it's magic this is a magic thing the magic pill magic it's not magic the same way your your kidneys filter uh you know what you drink right uh like it's not magic right it's not magic that your body does things right it's not magic that when you are a caloric deficit your body burns fat but for but because it's intermittent fasting and it's the fun thing to try to you know poke fun at people just say hey they try to say it's magical ha ha ha the biology the science is all magic it's it's not magic man it's not it's not it's not when water turns into steam when you put it in a pot that's science it's not magic so losing weight with intermittent fasting is not magic it's just science high blood pressure diabetes are all these different things so naturally i had to go all myth buster on this one and actually go straight to the highest quality scientific studies out there and specifically today's study is from a top medical journal from researchers at ucsf and it is one of the largest if not the largest study on intermittent fasting it has 116 participants i don't know if she does her research as much as she thinks she does because she's saying that this is one of the largest if not the largest if not the largest means that she's not aware that there are other studies that are much larger than the one that she is referencing because she's basically searching for studies that match what she wants to talk about if she already has a bias and you already you guys know my my channel right yes we we are positive right towards intermittent fasting but we've i've talked about studies that were negative towards intermittent fasting on my channel multiple times different studies that came out like as they come out right i'm talking oh new study and it'll show that there's a negative element where you're not losing as much weight as just caloric restriction in this specific randomized controlled trial and we'll talk about it and we'll talk about it in a non-biased way in in the sense where it's good data to to take in right it's just one study but it's good data to take in because we need to look at all of the data not just individual studies that we like right not just uh oh this says intermittent fasting works so i'm gonna grab this anybody could go on google and type you know intermittent fasting studies shows isn't good for you and then you pick the studies that you want because you can find whatever study you want to kind of push the the the the bias that you already have against intermittent fasting if you actually go in there with an open mind you'll find a multitude of studies that talk about so many different things and show so many different results and there are so many of them so i've already reserved to believe that she has done a substantial amount of research considering that she thinks that 116 participants is if not the largest intermittent fasting study that is randomized controlled trial with just caloric restriction she is incorrect she is incorrect hence and they did a 12-week randomized controlled trial of a 16-8 intermittent fasting protocol which i'll explain more in a moment versus a control group participants were randomly assigned to the intermittent fasting group versus the control group and in the intermittent fasting group they were told to have their usual diet and usual exercise usual everything except ad libitum they were told to eat ad libitum which means eat any kind of macronutrient uh composition or any kind of macronutrient uh food that you like uh the the actual term is escaping me um do or don't do exercise do whatever you want eat whatever you want just do intermittent fasting and then eat whatever you want so exercise was not uh controlled for or managed um nor was with or within the methodology nor was protein intake within the methodology they could eat protein they cannot eat protein it's all up to them right so keep that in mind because that's going to be important for what they were only allowed to eat between the hours of noon and 8 p.m and the only thing they could have outside those hours was water and black tea and coffee with nothing added so no cream or sugar so this means that they were fasting for 16 hours a day and eating for eight hours a day which is one of the most popular intermittent fasting protocols out there the control group on the other hand was told to eat three standard meals a day and they could snack as they wanted so pretty much just be normal don't intermittent fast and the researchers measured participants weight and did dexa scans to get at body compositions along with a bunch of lab tests i mean the devil's the the detail the devil is in the detail i guess the devil's in detail you can tell by just the way people frame things if they have a hidden bias to you know to something right um just the way she said that right there where she was like oh just be normal don't do intermittent fasting already shows her the the undertone the underlining intent of her video and not just that but just her perception or feeling towards intermittent fasting which is a little bit disappointing because even when you you would think that with somebody that has a phd which once again i respect her 100 for having that you would think that they would be more open-minded but they tend not to be as open-minded there are certain things that have they're very rigid on moving from that and this is kind of an example of that in my opinion over the course of these 12 weeks of doing either the intermittent fasting diet or the control standard three meals a day diet so first for weight the intermittent fasting group lost weight about one percent of their body weight on average but the control group also lost weight and it was also about one percent of their body weight on average and importantly there were no significant differences between these groups so the simple act of being in this study and having researchers telling you to do something with your diet and having to weigh yourself and do these body scans and whatnot unsurprisingly caused everyone to lose a little bit of weight on average which is a known effect that is very expected which i'll talk about more later because it becomes important later on so both groups lost a little bit of weight over the course of these 12 weeks but the intermittent fasting group did lose more in one way and that was in terms of lean mass aka muscle mass in this study specifically the intermittent fasting group lost a pound and a half of muscle from their arms and legs and another pound of muscle from their torso so overall people in the intermittent fasting group just from eating between the hours of noon and eight and changing nothing else about their diet or exercise or anything lost two and a half pounds of muscle over the course of less than three months usually when you lose weight on the scale about 20 to 30 percent of that is lean mass but in the case of the intermittent fasting group here 65 percent of the weight that they lost was lean mass aka muscle mass now keep in mind that the exit is very possible to lose muscle with intermittent fasting and the reason that this is possible which it is also possible to do it with caloric restriction but there are elements with um or just caloric restriction when i say that people think that i'm talking about caloric restriction and intermittent fasting not having caloric restriction involved but it does uh what i'm what i'm trying to say is that if there are pillars right to protein synthesis which is what protects or even what retains or helps build muscle one of pillars is meal frequency so eating more uh throughout the day uh more time frames of eating um that that helps increase protein synthesis um as well as exercise as well as being in a caloric surplus so eating more than what your your body requires in terms of energy so that that can fuel uh the building of your amino amino acids which is the building blocks uh to build protein then assists you in hypertrophy which is building muscle uh but then there's also a uh another pillar which is so we said uh caloric surplus uh exercise um meal frequency and also yeah eating more protein in your diet she's saying this about this study of 116 people that was randomized control was that was a randomized control trial that did not track protein intake which is important it did not track if the participants were exercising which is important right um obviously they were not at a caloric surplus because they lost weight and of course meal frequency was is something that um intermittent fasting just wouldn't have the luxury of doing because they you're fasting for most of the day you're not you don't have the options to to just have so many different meals but that is just a pillar it's not one that you need to retain muscle as effectively as someone else but it can help right just like when you're losing weight calorie restriction is a thing and so you're not going to be at a caloric surplus so that's a pillar that you automatically just don't have uh when you're doing um when you're in a weight loss program right so the fact that we did not get the exercise information nor did they look at the protein intake that is a big deal because some people if for example you've never done intermittent fasting before and you go into a study which is very likely because they tend to try to get people who have not experienced the uh the effects of intermittent fasting before to put them into the to have that effect happen for the first time so that they can see it's just much easier for them so that's a question that they ask and they try to make sure that they get people that not done it before you're less likely to exercise if you've come from a position where you've eaten all the time or you've eaten more frequently and you use that as fuel to exercise unless you're told to exercise people in the intermittent fasting group may just simply decide not to exercise because they feel that they don't have enough energy that's part of the mentality of you know a lot of people or the the zeitgeist uh understanding of uh intermittent fasting and just the the fasting element do i have i don't have fuel to do this workout therefore i won't do this workout so that causes a lot of drop off in physical activity especially resistance training if you're not told to do it as part of the methodology of the study which can then cause those who are in the normal eating three meals a day group to eat and exercise or be more inclined to exercise while the group that's intermittent fasting are not right that is a very possible outcome and that is the case for all of the studies that she's talking about here so that is two to three times as much muscle loss as usual from weight loss to put this into context for you an average height healthy weight woman would have about 35 pounds of muscle total and that goes down as you age so according to this study you could be looking at a potential loss of over five percent of your total muscle mass in under three months just from doing intermittent fasting and other studies have found the same effect so it's not just this one other studies have found loss of muscle mass and even the prevention of the gain of muscle mass so intermittent fasting makes it harder to gain muscle and another piece of support that people were actively burning muscle when they were doing intermittent fasting is the fact that people in the intermittent fasting group had higher levels of ldh or lactate dehydrogenase which is a marker of muscle tissue injury and in terms of other labs there were no differences from intermittent fasting in terms of diabetes markers like fasting glucose insulin resistance and a1c or any blood lipids so okay so we're going to stop it here she's going to get into a talk where she's saying oh why do people say it works well it doesn't really mean that it works when they say that because there's other variables which is true when somebody says something works we don't know what the full barrier like all of the things that they've done to what what did they do to create a intervention for themselves to lose weight it might not just be intermittent fasting that might just be one thing of the multiple things that you've done which i agree right but if we look at her study that she was talking about we have it right pulled up right here this is the first one the one with uh i believe 116 participants in this one where she states that this is the highest um the highest that she's seen i believe if not the most amount of uh participants i believe i saw it here uh somewhere let me see if i could find it we're basically doing this live here we go 116 adults with overweight or obesity now they saw that there was no significant difference uh between the groups and they saw that there was more muscle loss uh within uh the uh tre group which is the time restricted eating group um when it came to muscle tissue right but of course it did not they didn't for the participants uh were instructed to eat three structured meals per day tre group was instructed to eat ad libitum which means whatever they want we don't know if it's protein we don't know if it's not uh and completely abstain from a caloric uh from caloric intake uh from the following times uh 8 p.m to 12 p.m the following day so basically they this is the intervention right there's nothing in in this involving uh what their physical activity was their workout or anything this is the other study that she that she mentions overweight uh objective restricting eating window a method participants 17 women and three men so this is a much much smaller uh sample size um they also were not told what to do in terms of physical activity they were simply just told to do intermittent fasting or not do intermittent fasting and that was it and they were going to take data from that and they saw that lean mass and visceral fat physical uh physical metabolic measures remain unchanged uh oh wait in this in this study it looks like okay they didn't tell them to do anything in terms of an intervention with with physical activity but they also uh they they looked at they said physical activity and metabolic measures remain unchanged which means that they looked at what they were doing but they didn't give them any specific things uh to do right so let me see here uh visceral fat uh reduction if we look at the tre non-tre versus tre uh fat mass lean mass eating a tre group reduce the number of eating occasions and reduce weight fat mass lean mass okay so it doesn't look like they are comparing it in this result with the non-tre group uh here it doesn't look like they're doing a comparison here anyways if we go to this one here this is also the same thing uh integrated race measure using water muscle sampling um they also did not uh test for physical activity in this one or have them eat a specific diet that requires protein right so my point is she's talking about randomized controlled trials being super important which they 100 are but there are other studies if you don't cherry pick studies that you can find that are randomized controlled trial and for example the most powerful study that you can find is not actually a randomized controlled trial but it is a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials which of course your boy uh edward v has done um this randomized controlled trial here that was put in the frontiers frontiers in nutrition journal looking at over 43 randomized controlled trials and synthesizing that data putting that data together of over 2483 participants and i get it yes this is not the like the most of individuals um this is all different uh studies being put together and then having over 2483 participants but when looking at the information here um yes if outcomes did not differ from cr expect uh except for reduced waist circumference that's what wc uh stands for here waist circumference if i find the yeah see waist circumference wc now um intermittent fasting was more beneficial in reducing body weight waist circumference and fat mass fm means fat mass without affecting lean mass compared to the non-intervention diet now this is a meta-analysis guys this is not one study this is a multitude of studies over 43 different randomized controlled trials and they're synthesizing that data putting it together and they're getting this result i have also effectively improved insulin resistance and blood lipid conditions compared to with it with non-intervention diets however i have showed less benefits over a caloric restriction in terms of uh let's see if if i have outcomes did not differ from cr except for reduced waist circumference okay so basically however i have showed less benefits over caloric restriction is simply talking about for example the fat-free mass of people uh after if was higher uh let me see what what exactly are they talking about in regards to the caloric restriction uh not being uh showed less benefit over um are they talking about the maybe following the diets because you're looking at the numbers here and you can see that i have a non-intervention diet showed a participant had lower weight um 1.10 let's see minus 2.12 p value of 0.03 so that's significant statistically significant and bmi after if uh the waist circumference of participants after i have decreased significantly compared to the non-intervention diet i have regulated fat mass more effectively than the non-intervention diet uh so the fat-free mass of people after if was higher um so the fat-free mass being lean mass was higher there was no difference in fat and blood glucose between the participants that i have intervention diet groups the results of insulin concentration uh indicated that if was significantly more beneficial than non-intervention diet standard mean uh so i don't know what they mean in terms of however i have showed less benefit over caloric restriction maybe in terms of the participants ability to stay in caloric restriction but based off of the data and the results here from the randomized control trials we see that there were benefits to waist circumference reduction body fat mass reduction and fat-free mass lead which also lean mass not being reduced in the intermittent fasting group and then if we go into another study intermittent fasting and weight loss and cardio metabolic risk a randomized control trial in the jnr nursing or a research journal um we could look at this and it's a randomized control trial that was conducted on a sample of 101 overweight and obese adults with pre-diabetes and the results were the reduction in body weight body mass index waist circumference in the adf and 16 atrf groups were more significant than those in the control group across the study period um with a value less than 0.05 making it statistically significant moreover significant reductions on blood glucose triglycerides were observed in the two intervention groups as well furthermore the reduction in body weight and body mass index in the adf group were more significant than those in the 16-8 trf group um by a very significant p value of 0.001 however the difference in changes in blood glucose waist circumference and low density lipoprotein cholesterol between the two intervention groups were not significant all right so even here with caloric restriction it is less and it's 101 so it's very close to her 116 and if we look at this study here that was posted in the new england journal of medicine a very prestigious journal is caloric restriction with or without time restricted eating and weight loss this has a 139 patient that entered of the 139 patient it did reduce to 118 that actually completed a 12 month not 12 weeks 12 months which is much more telling than just 12 weeks because this looks at a longer time frame and they show that there were no differences in uh fat fat loss fat mass and all that stuff however there were slight it was slightly more fat that was being lost with the time restrictive feeding group versus the daily caloric restriction group so for example if we go here uh let's see where actually this is not the one sorry about that guys if we go here body weight was lost more not statistically significant and not significant but it was more in the time restrictive feeding group minus 9.4 kgs to minus 8.9 kgs if we look at body mass it reduced more minus 3.4 minus 3.2 and then minus 2.9 and minus 2.3 and this is 6 month period and 12 month period waist circumference same thing minus 9.4 minus 8.7 8.8 7.0 right and so we're seeing these are the differences and it's body fat mass 6.9 6.4 5.9 4.4 uh 4.5 uh body lean mass now yes slightly slightly lower slightly lower right you can see it there the differences is much is much less pronounced than all of the other ones here but it's lean mass over the course of 12 months being just 0.2 and not this super high uh 75 percent that she mentioned in her video and not only that we still don't really know what the physical activity was so once again intermittent fasting just pushes people more into the i don't know if i have enough energy to go ahead and do this so they may just not work out body fat percentage 4.7 and uh 4.3 4.4 3.0 so overall abdominal visceral fat much less here 32 31 26 21 so it's much more in the intermittent fasting area subcutaneous fat 70 49 53 so it's much more in the intermittent fasting group as we see here and this is a study of 118 people which is way more well not way more but it's more than 116 so it's a larger randomized controlled trial and not only that but really this is more important because it's a meta analysis looking at 43 studies that have over 2483 participants showing that intermittent fasting was more beneficial in the sense of waist circumference waist circumference reduction body fat reduction and even in retaining lean mass which probably means that a majority of that group were consuming protein an adequate amount and maybe even doing resistance training so my i say this i did all this to show you that you can cherry pick any study that you want her study of 116 is not the largest there are more studies even than the one that i've selected here that have more than 118 or 116 the meta analysis is a much more powerful study designed than a randomized controlled trial on its own but a meta analysis of randomized controlled trials is much much much more powerful because it's a lot more data you don't want to look at one study here one study there one study here one study there you want to look at as much as many studies as possible the more studies you are looking at that that can give you an idea of what's going on the better um and if you don't want something to be successful if you are if you already have a bias for it it's very easy to find a study that goes against it hopefully this video wasn't too long my goodness i think we have hit 31 minutes but hopefully the video wasn't too long just wanted to do a talk on that video um you're always going to see people with phds and stuff which i 100 respect i still respect uh that person um don't get me wrong but they are grossly misled to believe that intermittent fasting isn't a thing that works or it makes you lose muscle simply because that's where their bias lies their bias lies there and here on pledge fitness we talk about the positive studies the negative studies and we look at meta analysis systematic reviews of a lot of the studies to try to get that data synthesized and look at what's really going on is there a benefit here is there not hopefully this video has helped you guys uh i did all of this on the fly right now for you guys so i apologize if there were some pauses here and there but all this stuff was done on the fly these are studies that i've in the past um so i have a general understanding of what's going on in these studies but i wanted to show you guys what happens when you basically just pick a study to tell your own story to tell the story that you want to tell all right we'll see you guys in the next one thank you peace out