Restricting eating times linked to 91 percent higher risk of cardiovascular death

A recent comprehensive study of 20,000 adults suggests that time-restricted eating, a form of intermittent fasting, may significantly increase the risk of death. Moreover, healthy eating habits could challenge the established scientific consensus on this topic.

The latest research, published by the American Heart Association, reveals that restricting eating to less than eight hours a day is associated with a staggering 91 percent increase in the risk of death from cardiovascular disease.

After analyzing participants’ dietary habits and health over a period of up to 17 years, the study found no evidence to support the idea that limiting meals to an eight-hour window reduces the risk of death from any cause.

Lead author Professor Victor Wenze Zhong expressed surprise at the results, stating to BBC Science Focus that they had anticipated a decrease in cardiovascular disease risk and overall mortality with long-term adoption of an eight-hour time-restricted diet.


He further stated, “Despite the popularity of this dietary approach for its short-term benefits, our study indicates that while the typical eating window ranges from 12 to 16 hours per day, shorter meal times do not correlate with longer life.”

Although the precise reason why time-restricted eating may increase the risk of cardiovascular death is still unknown, one possible explanation suggested by Zhong is that it could lead to a loss of muscle mass.

Recent interest in time-restricted eating has been fueled by its potential health benefits. Prior studies have indicated that it could aid weight loss and improve blood sugar and cholesterol levels.

Many practitioners follow a 16:8 schedule, whereby they consume all food within an eight-hour window and fast for the remaining 16 hours.

This eating pattern aligns more closely with natural circadian rhythms and is believed to support better sleep and metabolic function. However, the recent findings cast doubt on its long-term benefits.

Stanford University School of Medicine Professor Dr. Christopher Gardner cautioned that while time-restricted eating may offer short-term advantages, it could have adverse long-term effects, based on the study.

It is important to note that the study has not yet undergone peer review, and detailed dietary information of the participants is not available.

The research population, with an average age of 49, recorded 2797 deaths, of which 840 were due to cardiovascular disease.

As per Zhong, individuals, especially those with existing heart disease or cancer, should be cautious about adopting an eight-hour eating window due to its associated increased risk of cardiovascular death.

He emphasized the potential effectiveness of intermittent fasting for short periods, such as three to six months, for weight loss and cardiometabolic health improvement. However, long-term adherence to practices like eight-hour time-restricted eating warrants careful consideration.

Despite these cautionary findings, Zhong and Gardner noted that it is premature to draw definitive conclusions regarding time-restricted eating based on a single study.

Ultimately, the study suggests that the content of one’s diet may hold greater importance than the timing of meals for long-term health outcomes.

About our experts:

Dr. Victor Wenze Zhong is a professor and chair of the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. He holds leadership roles in the American Academy of Nutrition and the American Heart Association.

Dr. Christopher Gardner is a professor of medicine at Stanford University, known for his research on dietary components and patterns. He has served on the American Heart Association Nutrition Committee and the Lifestyle & Metabolic Health Council.

Source: www.sciencefocus.com

500 million euro fine imposed on Apple by EU for restricting music streaming access, according to reports in technology sector

Apple has reportedly been fined 500 million euros by the European Union over restricting access to its music streaming service, in what would be a landmark blow to the US technology company.

The European Commission is investigating whether Apple prevented music streamers from telling users cheaper ways to subscribe outside of the app store.

According to the Financial Times, the city of Brussels plans to impose a €500m (£427m) fine, a landmark move against Apple after years of complaints from companies offering services through iPhone apps. This is a judgment.

In 2019, Swedish streaming company Spotify filed a complaint with the EU, accusing Apple of limiting choice and competition in its app store by imposing a 30% fee on all purchases. Apple also blocked Spotify and other companies from notifying customers on their phones that they could avoid fees and get better deals simply by signing up on Spotify's website.

Apple says its fees are justified because it spends a lot of money providing a secure app store and gives Spotify access to hundreds of millions of customers. However, Spotify argues that Apple Music, Apple's own music streaming service, does not incur similar additional costs, giving Spotify an advantage and making the rates non-competitive.

The European Commission said Apple's actions were illegal and contrary to European Union rules forcing competition in the single market, the FT reported, citing five people close to the investigation. would argue. The commission could also reportedly ban practices that prevent music services from advertising cheaper subscriptions off-platform.

Apple was fined 1.1 billion euros by France in 2020 for anti-competition agreements with two wholesalers, but has never been hit with a competition fine by the European Commission.

But IT and other big tech companies are under increasing scrutiny due to competitive concerns. Google is appealing against fines of more than 8 billion euros imposed by the EU in three separate competition investigations. Apple lost a lawsuit by Fortnite developer Epic Games that claimed its app store was an illegal monopoly, but Epic won a similar lawsuit against Google, which runs Android phone software, in December. .

Last month, Apple announced it would allow EU customers to download apps without going through its own app store, in response to the EU's digital markets law. The law, whose details were revealed last year, imposes new obligations on “gatekeepers” such as Amazon and Google, which are particularly powerful in controlling the choice of mobile phone software.

Skip past newsletter promotions

The European Commission declined to comment. Apple had no new comments, but pointed to its previous statement that it would respond to the commission's concerns “while promoting competition and choice for European consumers.”

Source: www.theguardian.com