Something feels very off about this article... it feels like they are referencing prior research about fasting and applying that to intermittent fasting. "Fasting" usually refers to people going several days without food. It would make sense why that would fuck with hormones. It seems highly dubious that those findings would extend to periods shorter than 24 hours.

Regarding the difference in benefits for women and men... this does make sense. Women's bodies are better at storing fat. We have slower metabolisms. There was some research that showed that "carb loading" the night before a race did not work for female marathoners and to get the same result they had to carb load over several days. Likewise, women were not able to replenish themselves during the race with gu's because we digest and absorb it slower.

I personally am someone who was doing "intermittent fasting" most of the time before it had a name or became a fad simply because that is when my body wanted food. I see that as the key... too many people eat at specific times and eat three meals a day simply because that's what society told them they need instead of following their body's needs. I suspect those who benefit from intermittent fasting are people like me.

It would be so much better if we helped people learn to recognize when they are hungry (and not eating otherwise!) and what their body actually needs instead of giving people diet advice. The article mentions that breastfeeding women shouldn't do intermittent fasting and teaching people to follow their bodies would help keep people from making mistakes like that and recognizing when they might need more or less.

Two thoughts re risk:

1. If you're overweight then anything to reduce that weight can be a health benefit. Ozempic has risks but the benefits are considered worth that risk for patients prescribed it

2. There is some encouraging evidence that intermittent fasting can make chemo more effective and reduce its side effects in some cancer patients

For what it's worth, I've been doing IF (most usually a full dawn-to-dusk/36 hours, but also some 2-day and 3-day fasts) for the past few years, and it has not noticeably disrupted my menstrual cycle.

I've been considering intermittent fasting as the next new habit to build, but after reading this I realize it's a bit more complicated for women. Unfortunately the post was written through a lens of gender ideology, so be forewarned. It does helpfully outline some interesting info concerning the best times to fast if you still menstruate (best times are during your period and the week after, otherwise you risk a cortisol spike if you do it the week leading up to your period). And it suggests women ease into a fasting program and err toward a longer eating window.

Just thought I'd share here in case anyone else is interested. And if you've been practicing intermittent fasting yourself, how is it going for you? Did you already know this information re: the menstrual cycle?

I was recommended to try IF by my doctor but digestive issues that require timed medication doses prevent me using it. I'm looking into something called 5:2 fasting, which has you limit calories on two days of the week (your choice of days) to 500 calories a day for women, 600 for men. It seems fairly simple and straightforward, so I may try it starting next week. A tiny meal with my meds works better than no meal in the morning.