I agree with the other posters. The investigators made every attempt to keep the two groups comparable, but that meant that during the one-meal-a-day trial, they had to encourage participants to eat more than they wanted to. The short duration of the trial and the fact that the participants were paid to participate and were not eating one meal a day as a matter of personal choice may have added to the stress of the trial.
Since blood pressure is something everyone can check fairly easily, I think the wise move is to check it periodically. If it goes up, that's not good, and some thought should be given to whether that is a matter of adjustment or a long-term incompatibility with fasting. If it goes down -- which many people have reported seeing -- that's a nice benefit.
--- In fast5@yahoogroups.com, Vijay Kulkarni <vjkulkarni@...> wrote:
>
> http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/85/4/981.full.pdf
>
>
> The above study seems to suggest that 1 meal per day with the same calorie intake as 3 meals per day could have some unwanted affects like increased blood pressure, and worse cholesterol measures. What do you all think?
>
> Regards,
> Vijay Kulkarni
>
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (4) |
No comments:
Post a Comment