Andrew Huberman· PhD
for them, eating more meals spread throughout the day, presumably smaller meals, same caloric intake is going to be more beneficial for their hormones.
Loading…
The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
for them, eating more meals spread throughout the day, presumably smaller meals, same caloric intake is going to be more beneficial for their hormones.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
And for some people, timerestricted feeding is not going to be compatible with hormone health for them. For them, eating more meals spread throughout the day, presumably smaller meals, same caloric intake is going to be more beneficial for their hormones.
What I'm saying is, you can be in a chronically fed state and still have just a little bit of calories, you know. You might lose body fat, and I'm not saying you won't be at a deficit, what I'm saying is this idea that you're always slugging... Every time we slug, we activate a whole set of hormones and react to it.
Time-restricted eating produces fat loss independent of total calories.
A 72-hour fast measurably improves autophagy markers in healthy adults.
One-meal-a-day (OMAD) eating patterns increase all-cause mortality in long-running cohort data.
Eating the largest meal before 3pm improves 24-hour glucose vs. an evening-heavy schedule, calorie-matched.