When it comes to the big diet debate, it’s often challenging to reach a consensus. While the “calories in, calories out” crowd will cite well-established science, crunching the numbers isn’t everyone’s cup of tea. Some approaches help you adopt healthier habits without doing the maths, while others will confuse you so much that you’ll forget that you’re hungry.
However, out of this tight field of competitors, two serious competitors have emerged. No doubt you’ve seen countless testimonials of those who managed to torch major flab with the help of intermittent fasting. This approach limits your meals to specific windows of time, forcing you to fast for the remaining duration of the day. The result: you’ll struggle to overindulge in the typical 8-hour open-eating period afforded by this diet, essentially helping you shed weight without really thinking about it.
READ MORE: These Are the Healthiest Diets in the World, According to Experts
On the flip side, the calorie-counting, macro-focused approach is still enjoying its time in the sun. This approach tasks you with eating at a calorie deficit making sure to track the kilojoule content of every bit of grub you’re gobbling up.
But, as you may be wondering, which two of these fan favourites rule supreme? They both deserve a seat on the throne.
New Findings
There’s no doubt that intermittent fasting is an easier plan to follow. Firstly, there’s no maths (unless you’re struggling with counting the hours). Secondly, there’s less risk of mistakes as calorie counting can be an imprecise science with many dieters over- or, more commonly, underestimating how much they’re eating. But does a straightforward approach translate into simply great returns?
A study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine is one of the first few studies to look at both popular diets in isolation. (In the past, studies have usually analysed the results of combining calorie tracking with intermittent fasting.)
READ MORE: The Science Behind How Weight Loss Actually Works
As part of their research, 90 participants with obesity were divided into three groups. Group A could only eat between 12pm and 8pm, Group B was asked to slash their daily caloric intake by a quarter and Group C, well, they kept trucking along with their normal diets.
After a year of keeping tabs on their progress, two clear winners emerged: the fasters and the counters were able to achieve similar results with both camps managing to clock in losses of 5%.
New Habits
The authors of the study noted that by shortening the eating window to just eight hours, fasters achieved similar results to those crunching the numbers with participants managing to reduce their daily intake by around 400 calories per day. Additionally, those engaging in time-restricted dining also had improved insulin sensitivity than their counting peers, meaning they got better at regulating blood sugar levels across the study’s one-year period.
READ MORE: 13 Weight Loss Hacks Guaranteed to Help You Shed Kilos
Sold? Wait a second. While these one-year returns sound great, another study published this year revealed that if you think your weight loss journey might span multiple years rather than just 12 months, calorie counting could still be your best bet. As part of research published in the Journal of the American Heart Association, the authors found that after six years those calculating their morsels lost more weight than their fasting counterparts. Their conclusion was that portion control might be far more critical than portion timing.
