Is time-restricted eating really better than caloric restriction? Recent meta-analysis thoughts?
So I've been diving into this recent meta-analysis by Longo et al. (2023) on time-restricted eating (TRE) versus traditional caloric restriction (CR), and honestly, it's got me riled up! Both methods have their followers, and it's like a damn civil war in the nutrition world. But when I look at the data, I can't help but feel some of the conclusions are a bit oversold.
First off, the study looked at a bunch of trials and found that TRE could be just as effective as CR for weight loss and improving metabolic markers. They had a decent sample size, but I found the effect sizes weren't as huge as they made it sound. Like, sure, if you're someone who struggles to control your eating window, TRE might help, but the evidence isn't rock solid. I mean, Schoenfeld and Phillips have shown that total caloric intake is king for fat loss (2021). Plus, if you're lifting heavy like we do, having a consistent eating pattern might be more beneficial for recovery and performance.
Also, let's chat about adherence. Most people can't stick to a restrictive eating window for long. Morton's meta-analysis (2018) showed that the long-term success of any diet hinges on how well someone can stick with it. So, while the short-term results might look shiny for TRE, what about sustainability? For lifters and gym enthusiasts, fueling your workouts consistently is key. I'm just not convinced that eating in a 6-hour window is the best way to go for long-term progress. Anyone else feel this way or have thoughts on balancing these approaches in our training and nutrition?