Intermittent Fasting Beyond Calorie Restriction: Mechanisms, Clinical Outcomes, Mental Health, Safety, Religious Fasting, and Long-Term Sustainability—A Narrative Review

Ori Scott, M.Sc., Registered Dietitian (Israel)

Independent Researcher, New York, NY, USA

Email: orialexscott@gmail.com

Abstract

Background

Intermittent fasting (IF) encompasses dietary strategies that alternate fasting or marked energy restriction with periods of eating. Proposed benefits extend from weight management to cardiometabolic health, circadian regulation, inflammation, the gut microbiome, autophagy, and brain health, but fasting protocols differ substantially and their effects may reflect energy restriction rather than fasting itself.

Objective

To critically evaluate the mechanisms, clinical outcomes, safety, psychological effects, religious-fasting evidence, and long-term sustainability of IF, emphasizing whether benefits occur independently of energy restriction and weight loss.

Methods

A structured narrative review was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE as the principal bibliographic source, supplemented by citation tracking and Scopus-compatible search concepts. Contemporary evidence from January 2021 through September 2026 was prioritized, with earlier landmark studies retained when necessary. Randomized trials and high-level evidence syntheses were prioritized for clinical outcomes and human studies for mechanistic claims.

Results

IF reduces body weight and can improve selected cardiometabolic outcomes, but advantages over continuous energy restriction are generally small or absent. Early time-restricted eating may produce selected circadian-related metabolic effects. Human evidence for fasting-induced autophagy remains limited and does not establish mediation of clinical benefits. Evidence concerning inflammation, microbiome composition, mood, cognition, and sleep is heterogeneous. Religious fasting provides supportive but confounded naturalistic evidence. Some anthropometric and metabolic effects diminish after fasting is discontinued.

Conclusions

IF is a viable dietary strategy for selected adults but is not established as broadly superior to conventional energy restriction. Long-term benefits appear to depend substantially on sustained behavior, and evidence does not support a permanent metabolic “reset.”

Keywords: intermittent fasting; time-restricted eating; alternate-day fasting; calorie restriction; obesity; autophagy; metabolic health; religious fasting

Introduction

Intermittent fasting (IF) has evolved from a collection of traditional and religious practices into a widely studied nutritional strategy for weight management and metabolic health. The term encompasses several distinct interventions, including time-restricted eating (TRE), alternate-day fasting (ADF), modified ADF, the 5:2 diet, and other forms of periodic energy restriction. These approaches differ in fasting duration, frequency, energy intake, timing of food consumption, and behavioral burden and should not be assumed to produce identical physiological effects.[1–4]

Interest in IF has expanded beyond weight reduction to proposed effects on insulin sensitivity, cardiovascular risk factors, hepatic metabolism, inflammation, circadian biology, the intestinal microbiome, cognition, mental health, autophagy, and aging.[1–4] Mechanistic explanations frequently invoke a transition from predominantly glucose-based metabolism toward greater fatty-acid oxidation and ketogenesis during fasting, accompanied by changes in insulin and glucagon signaling and nutrient-sensing pathways involving AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK), mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR), and cellular stress-response systems.[1–4]

Autophagy has received particular attention. Nutrient deprivation is an established regulator of autophagy in experimental systems, in which intracellular components can be degraded and recycled through lysosomal pathways. However, evidence that fasting regulates autophagy in cells or experimental animals should not be conflated with evidence of clinically meaningful systemic autophagic activation in humans. Direct human evidence remains limited and tissue-dependent.[5,6]

A similar distinction is necessary for weight management. IF frequently reduces spontaneous energy intake, making it difficult to determine whether benefits arise from fasting physiology or from the resulting energy deficit. In a 12-month randomized trial involving 139 adults with obesity, adding an 8-hour eating window to prescribed caloric restriction did not significantly improve weight loss or metabolic risk factors compared with caloric restriction alone.[7] An isocaloric controlled-feeding trial likewise found no additional weight-loss effect from TRE when energy and nutrient intake were held constant.[8] Conversely, studies of early TRE have reported improvements in selected metabolic outcomes under conditions designed to minimize differences in weight, suggesting that circadian meal timing may exert effects not completely explained by energy restriction.[9]

Recent evidence syntheses reinforce this distinction. A 2025 network meta-analysis of 99 randomized clinical trials involving 6,582 adults found that both IF strategies and continuous energy restriction reduced body weight compared with ad libitum eating, while ADF produced only a modest additional reduction compared with continuous restriction.[10] A 2026 Cochrane review of 22 studies involving 1,995 participants concluded that IF may result in little or no difference in weight loss compared with conventional dietary advice.[11]

Long-term sustainability presents a separate question. Most trials measure outcomes while participants are actively following an intervention rather than after fasting is discontinued. Religious fasting offers a useful, although methodologically distinct, naturalistic model because defined fasting periods are followed by resumption of usual eating. A 2025 synthesis of Ramadan fasting found reductions in weight and body mass index (BMI) during and shortly after Ramadan followed by progressive movement toward pre-Ramadan values.[12]

The objective of this narrative review is therefore to evaluate IF beyond the binary question of whether it produces weight loss. Particular attention is given to the distinction between effects attributable to energy restriction and those potentially attributable to fasting or meal timing; human evidence concerning autophagy; cardiometabolic, hepatic, inflammatory, microbiome, and psychological outcomes; religious fasting; safety; and persistence of effects after fasting is discontinued.

Methods

Review Design

This article was designed as a structured narrative review rather than a systematic review or meta-analysis. The objective was to integrate clinical, mechanistic, behavioral, and naturalistic evidence while distinguishing established human evidence from indirect or hypothesis-generating findings.

No claim is made of PRISMA compliance, exhaustive literature retrieval, duplicate independent screening, protocol registration, formal study-level risk-of-bias assessment performed specifically for this review, or original quantitative evidence synthesis.

Information Sources and Search Approach

PubMed/MEDLINE was used as the principal bibliographic source. Search concepts incorporated controlled vocabulary and free-text terms including intermittent fasting, fasting, time-restricted eating, time-restricted feeding, alternate-day fasting, 5:2 diet, and periodic fasting. Outcome concepts included obesity, weight loss, body composition, energy restriction, insulin resistance, diabetes, metabolic syndrome, cardiovascular risk, liver disease, inflammation, circadian rhythm, ketogenesis, autophagy, proteostasis, microbiome, cognition, depression, anxiety, sleep, adverse events, eating disorders, adherence, weight regain, maintenance, Ramadan, and Orthodox Christian fasting.

The principal contemporary evidence window was January 1, 2021 through September 26, 2026. Earlier landmark randomized and mechanistic studies were retained when necessary to interpret contemporary findings.

Scopus-compatible search concepts were developed as a supplementary strategy. Reference lists of relevant systematic reviews, meta-analyses, umbrella reviews, and primary studies were additionally used for citation tracking.

Evidence Selection and Interpretation

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were prioritized for comparative clinical questions. Systematic reviews, meta-analyses, network meta-analyses, umbrella reviews, and Cochrane reviews were used to characterize consistency across the evidence base. Primary publications were preferred for specific numerical claims.

Human mechanistic studies were prioritized when assessing biological mechanisms. Preclinical studies were used to establish biological plausibility but were not interpreted as demonstrating clinical effectiveness in humans.

Evidence was interpreted according to study design. Observational associations were not interpreted as proof of causality, and exploratory, post hoc, subgroup, or uncontrolled findings were treated cautiously. Particular attention was given to whether differences between interventions could be explained by energy intake, achieved weight loss, dietary composition, meal timing, or adherence.

Religious fasting was analyzed separately from conventional clinical IF because Ramadan and Orthodox Christian fasting alter exposures beyond fasting duration, including hydration, food composition, sleep, and social behavior.

Forms of Intermittent Fasting

TRE restricts daily food intake to a defined interval without necessarily prescribing an energy deficit. Common eating windows range from approximately 4 to 10 hours. Early TRE concentrates intake earlier in the biological day, whereas later TRE shifts intake toward afternoon or evening.

ADF alternates fasting or severe energy-restriction days with unrestricted or less-restricted days. Modified ADF generally permits limited energy intake on fasting days. The 5:2 approach typically imposes substantial energy restriction on two days per week, whereas 4:3 IF uses three restricted days.

These protocols are not metabolically interchangeable. TRE primarily manipulates when food is eaten, although spontaneous energy restriction may occur. ADF, 5:2, and 4:3 interventions more directly manipulate the distribution of energy intake across days. Early TRE additionally changes circadian alignment.

Ramadan fasting differs further because both food and fluids are avoided between dawn and sunset. Orthodox Christian fasting often produces substantial changes in dietary composition through recurrent restrictions on animal-derived foods. These religious practices therefore require separate interpretation.

Metabolic Switching, Nutrient Sensing, and Circadian Biology

Following food intake, insulin promotes glucose utilization and energy storage. As the postabsorptive interval lengthens, hepatic glycogen contributes to maintaining circulating glucose, while longer fasting periods increase lipolysis, fatty-acid oxidation, and ketone production.[1–4]

Reduced insulin signaling and cellular energy availability can alter AMPK and mTOR activity and interact with mitochondrial function, oxidative-stress responses, and autophagy.[1–4] These physiological adaptations provide plausible mechanisms for fasting-related effects but do not establish superiority over energy-matched non-fasting diets.

Circadian timing may distinguish some forms of TRE from ordinary energy restriction. Sutton et al. reported that early TRE improved insulin sensitivity, β-cell responsiveness, blood pressure, oxidative stress, and appetite in men with prediabetes despite approximately weight-stable conditions.[9] The study was small and short but provided proof-of-concept that meal timing can influence selected metabolic outcomes independently of major weight loss.

Jamshed et al. subsequently found that early TRE combined with energy restriction produced greater weight loss than a ≥12-hour eating window under comparable behavioral counseling, although not all cardiometabolic outcomes differed.[13] These findings support an outcome-specific role for circadian meal timing rather than a general conclusion that every fasting interval produces independent metabolic benefit.

Autophagy and Proteostasis

Autophagy is a regulated lysosomal pathway involved in degradation and recycling of intracellular components, organelle quality control, and proteostasis.

Fasting-responsive autophagy is well established in experimental systems, but translation to humans remains difficult. Static concentrations of autophagy-related proteins do not necessarily measure autophagic flux, and responses may differ substantially by tissue.

Chaudhary et al. reported fasting-associated activation of autophagy markers in mouse liver but not in mouse or human skeletal muscle, demonstrating both tissue specificity and limitations in extrapolating animal findings directly to humans.[5]

In 2025, Bensalem et al. measured physiological autophagic flux in peripheral blood mononuclear cells from 121 adults with obesity randomized to standard care, calorie restriction, or intermittent fasting plus TRE for six months. A significant difference in change was observed between intermittent TRE and standard care at six months, but this was a post hoc comparison, and there was no significant within-group increase from baseline in the intermittent-TRE group.[6]

Human evidence therefore supports the possibility that intermittent nutrient restriction can modify autophagic flux under some conditions, but it does not establish systemic “cellular cleaning,” determine the optimal fasting duration for human autophagy, or demonstrate that autophagy mediates IF's clinical benefits.

Weight Loss and Body Composition

Weight loss is the clinical outcome for which IF has the strongest evidence. The more consequential question is whether IF provides a meaningful advantage over continuous energy restriction.

Liu et al. randomized 139 adults with obesity to calorie restriction with or without an 8-hour eating window for 12 months. Weight decreased in both groups, but the between-group difference was not significant.[7]

Maruthur et al. addressed the question more directly through an isocaloric design in adults with obesity. When energy and nutrient intake were matched, TRE did not produce significantly greater weight loss than a usual eating pattern.[8] This provides strong evidence against a large intrinsic weight-loss effect of shortening the eating window independently of energy intake.

Other intermittent regimens may perform differently. Catenacci et al. randomized 165 adults with overweight or obesity to 4:3 IF or daily calorie restriction within a 12-month high-intensity behavioral program. Weight loss was greater with 4:3 IF by 2.89 kg (95% CI, 0.14–5.65 kg in favor of 4:3 IF).[14] Both groups, however, received intensive behavioral support and physical-activity recommendations, and achieved energy intake and adherence may have contributed to the difference.

At the synthesis level, the 2025 BMJ network meta-analysis found that IF and continuous restriction both reduced weight relative to unrestricted eating, with only ADF demonstrating a statistically significant additional weight reduction compared with continuous restriction, and the magnitude was modest.[10] The 2026 Cochrane review similarly concluded that IF may make little or no difference in weight loss compared with regular dietary advice.[11]

Longer-term meta-analysis also suggests broadly comparable weight and cardiometabolic outcomes between IF and continuous calorie restriction.[15] An updated umbrella review identified stronger evidence for improvements in several anthropometric and metabolic outcomes compared with controls but did not establish a universal fasting advantage over appropriately matched dietary restriction.[16]

Body composition deserves separate consideration. A meta-analysis of 28 RCTs found similar changes in body weight and fat mass between intermittent and continuous energy restriction but a small additional reduction in fat-free mass with intermittent restriction.[17] Although quantitatively small, preservation of lean tissue may be particularly important in older adults and individuals at risk of sarcopenia.

Overall, IF should be considered an effective alternative dietary strategy, rather than a universally superior weight-loss method.

Is It Fasting or Energy Restriction?

IF simultaneously changes several exposures: total energy intake, fasting duration, meal timing, dietary composition, body weight, and behavioral structure. Failure to distinguish these components explains much of the apparent inconsistency across studies.

The Liu and Maruthur trials demonstrate that adding or imposing TRE does not reliably increase weight loss when energy restriction is already prescribed or energy intake is matched.[7,8] Conversely, the Sutton study suggests that early meal timing can influence selected metabolic endpoints without major weight change.[9]

The most evidence-consistent interpretation is therefore that weight reduction is predominantly determined by energy balance, whereas selected metabolic responses may additionally depend on meal timing and circadian alignment. This interpretation accommodates both neutral isocaloric studies and positive early-TRE findings without assuming that all benefits arise from one mechanism.

Type 2 Diabetes and Glycemic Outcomes

IF can improve body weight and glycemic measures in selected individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D), although protocol and medication use substantially influence both efficacy and safety.

Pavlou et al. randomized 75 adults with T2D and obesity to 8-hour TRE, calorie restriction, or control for six months. TRE produced greater weight loss relative to control, whereas reductions in glycated hemoglobin occurred with both TRE and calorie restriction without a significant difference between those interventions.[18]

The INTERFAST-2 trial examined 46 people with insulin-treated T2D assigned to three nonconsecutive fasting days per week or control for 12 weeks. Under dietary counseling and continuous glucose monitoring, IF improved glycated hemoglobin and reduced insulin requirements.[19] The intensive monitoring limits extrapolation to unsupervised fasting in insulin-treated patients.

The EARLY trial compared a 5:2 meal-replacement intervention with metformin or empagliflozin in adults with early T2D and overweight or obesity.[20] Because intermittent restriction and meal replacement were combined, the study cannot isolate fasting as the causal component.

A 2025 meta-analysis of 12 RCTs involving 966 participants reported short-term improvements in glycemic and anthropometric outcomes but found that benefits were not sustained after discontinuation.[21]

IF can therefore be a dietary option for selected patients with T2D, but medication adjustment and hypoglycemia risk require particular attention, especially with insulin and insulin secretagogues.

Cardiometabolic Health

Successful IF is frequently accompanied by improvements in blood pressure, insulin resistance, triglycerides, and other cardiometabolic risk markers. The magnitude of fasting-specific benefit is less certain.

An umbrella review of 11 meta-analyses representing 130 RCTs found that only a subset of proposed obesity-related outcomes was supported by moderate- or high-quality evidence.[22] More recent umbrella analyses have similarly identified favorable associations for weight and selected metabolic outcomes while emphasizing heterogeneity and variable certainty.[16,23,24]

Longer-duration trials are particularly informative because short-term differences may not persist. In adults with overweight or obesity, longer-term synthesis indicates that IF and continuous calorie restriction generally produce comparable changes in body composition and cardiometabolic risk.[15]

Thus, cardiometabolic improvement is a credible consequence of successful IF, but much of the benefit appears shared with other effective energy-restriction strategies.

Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease

Weight loss and improved insulin sensitivity can reduce hepatic steatosis, providing a rationale for IF in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD).

A systematic review and meta-analysis found improvements in body weight, liver enzymes, hepatic steatosis, and liver-stiffness measures following fasting interventions, although protocols and diagnostic approaches were heterogeneous.[25] A subsequent network meta-analysis of eight RCTs involving 635 participants identified regimen-specific improvements in selected hepatic outcomes but inconsistent effects across metabolic measures.[26]

These findings suggest potential benefit but do not establish that IF improves clinically meaningful liver outcomes independently of weight loss. Effects on fibrosis progression, liver-related events, and other long-term outcomes remain insufficiently studied.

Inflammation

IF is frequently described as anti-inflammatory, but human evidence is more qualified.

A review of human trials found that TRE producing modest weight loss did not consistently reduce C-reactive protein (CRP), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), or interleukin-6 (IL-6), whereas ADF-associated reductions in CRP occurred primarily in studies with greater weight loss.[27]

A 2025 meta-analysis of 21 studies involving 839 participants found reductions in TNF-α, CRP, and leptin but no significant effects on IL-6 or adiponectin.[28]

IF may therefore modify selected circulating inflammatory biomarkers, but effects are not uniform across markers or protocols, and the extent to which they occur independently of weight loss remains uncertain.

Gut Microbiome

The intestinal microbiome is a plausible mediator of dietary and meal-timing effects, but the human IF literature remains limited.

A 2024 systematic review screened 1,332 records but identified only eight eligible human studies. Most reported some changes in microbial diversity or composition, but affected taxa varied considerably.[29] Individual trials have reported microbiome and metabolomic changes following IF or TRE,[30–32] but differences in dietary composition, sequencing methods, populations, and fasting protocols complicate interpretation.

Changes in microbial taxa should not be equated with demonstrated clinical benefit. At present, the microbiome is best classified as an emerging mechanistic domain rather than an established mediator of IF efficacy.

Mental Health, Cognition, and Sleep

Preclinical research provides plausible mechanisms through ketone metabolism, neurotrophic signaling, synaptic plasticity, and cellular stress responses, but human evidence is substantially less mature.

A 2021 systematic review and meta-analysis of 11 studies involving 1,436 participants found preliminary evidence of lower anxiety and depressive-symptom scores in analyses of lower-risk RCTs without increased fatigue; importantly, the included studies were not conducted in psychiatric populations.[33]

A second meta-analysis included 14 studies and 562 participants and reported improvement in depression scores, whereas effects on anxiety and overall mood were less consistent.[34] IF should therefore not be presented as an established treatment for depression or anxiety.

Cognition remains similarly uncertain. Reviews suggest potential effects but emphasize limited and heterogeneous human evidence.[35]

Sleep evidence does not currently demonstrate a robust controlled benefit. A 2026 meta-analysis of 13 studies involving 638 participants found modest changes in some uncontrolled analyses, whereas pooled controlled comparisons did not show significant improvements in sleep duration or Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index scores.[36]

Restrictive eating schedules also require consideration in individuals with disordered-eating vulnerability. Observational evidence has identified associations between IF practice and eating-disorder symptomatology, but cross-sectional designs cannot determine causality.[37]

Religious Fasting

Religious fasting provides important real-world evidence but should not be equated directly with experimental IF.

A 2024 meta-analysis of religious or faith-based fasting included 14 studies, with 10 studies contributing to quantitative synthesis. Religious fasting was associated with a small reduction in BMI; Ramadan fasting was associated with lower systolic blood pressure, and Orthodox Christian fasting with lower total cholesterol, while several other outcomes did not differ significantly.[38]

Ramadan fasting is physiologically distinct from most clinical TRE because both food and fluids are avoided during daylight hours, and sleep, activity, social behavior, and meal composition may change simultaneously.

An umbrella review of Ramadan evidence reported favorable changes in several metabolic-syndrome components but found low or critically low methodological quality among underlying reviews.[39]

Orthodox Christian fasting differs again because food composition changes substantially. A review of 17 clinical studies described increased intake of plant foods and fiber, lower energy intake, and potentially favorable lipid and glucose profiles during fasting periods.[40] These effects cannot be attributed solely to fasting duration.

Religious fasting therefore provides supportive naturalistic evidence while illustrating how diet quality, hydration, circadian behavior, and cultural practices can confound fasting research.

Safety and Special Populations

Short-term IF appears reasonably well tolerated in selected adults studied in randomized trials.

A 2024 systematic review and meta-analysis of 15 RCTs involving 1,365 adults with overweight or obesity found no significant increase in fatigue, headache, or study withdrawal compared with controls.[41] Mild symptoms such as hunger, gastrointestinal complaints, headache, or dizziness nevertheless occur, and adverse-event ascertainment is inconsistent across studies.

These findings cannot be generalized to every population. Particular caution is appropriate in people with current or previous eating disorders, pregnancy or lactation, children and adolescents, underweight or malnutrition, frailty, clinically important sarcopenia risk, medications requiring food administration, and diabetes treated with insulin or insulin secretagogues.

Potential reproductive effects also remain inadequately characterized; reviews of human studies emphasize the limited evidence base rather than demonstrating either established benefit or harm.[42]

For older adults, preservation of lean mass is particularly important. Adequate protein intake, resistance exercise, and monitoring of body composition may be more clinically meaningful than body weight alone.

Adherence, Sustainability, and What Happens When Fasting Stops?

A dietary intervention can be biologically effective yet clinically unsuccessful if it cannot be sustained. IF simplifies dietary decision-making for some individuals but conflicts with work schedules, social eating, family meals, medication timing, or hunger tolerance for others.

The 4:3 trial demonstrates that intermittent restriction can be sustained successfully by many participants within an intensive behavioral program, but the same adherence cannot be assumed without structured support.[14]

More importantly, efficacy during active fasting should not be conflated with persistence after fasting stops.

A 2025 meta-analysis in T2D found short-term metabolic improvements but reported that benefits were not maintained after discontinuation.[21] Ramadan fasting provides convergent naturalistic evidence. A 2025 meta-analysis of 54 prospective studies involving 2,857 healthy adults across 21 countries found reductions in body weight and BMI during Ramadan, followed by progressive movement toward pre-Ramadan levels after fasting ended.[12]

These observations do not imply that every benefit necessarily disappears. Individuals may retain altered eating habits, lower energy intake, or reduced weight after an intervention. Nevertheless, available evidence does not support the concept that a finite fasting period permanently “resets” metabolism.

Long-term maintenance is more plausibly determined by sustained energy balance, diet quality, physical activity, sleep, and adherence to whichever behavioral changes remain after the formal fasting intervention.

Evidence Synthesis

Domain	Representative evidence	Interpretation
Weight management	RCTs, Cochrane review, network meta-analysis[7,8,10,11,14–17]	IF reduces weight, but broad superiority over continuous restriction is not established
Fasting vs energy restriction	Isocaloric and calorie-matched RCTs[7–9]	Energy deficit explains much weight loss; circadian timing may influence selected outcomes independently
Autophagy	Translational and exploratory human studies[5,6]	Biologically plausible; direct human evidence remains emerging
T2D	RCTs and meta-analysis[18–21]	Glycemic and weight benefits are possible; medication safety and durability are important
MASLD	Systematic reviews/meta-analyses[25,26]	Favorable surrogate outcomes possible; long-term liver outcomes remain uncertain
Inflammation	Review and meta-analysis[27,28]	Selected biomarkers may improve; a uniform weight-independent anti-inflammatory effect is unproven
Microbiome	Human systematic review and trials[29–32]	Microbial changes occur, but reproducibility and clinical significance are uncertain
Mental health/sleep	Meta-analyses/reviews[33–37]	Preliminary psychological signals; insufficient evidence for psychiatric or sleep treatment
Safety	RCT meta-analysis[41]	Reasonably tolerated in selected adults; evidence cannot be generalized to vulnerable populations
Religious fasting	Meta-analyses/reviews[12,38–40]	Useful naturalistic evidence but strongly confounded by diet, hydration, sleep, and behavior
Durability	Post-intervention meta-analyses[12,21]	Some benefits diminish after fasting ends; permanent metabolic resetting is unsupported

Research Gaps

Future studies should isolate fasting duration from energy deficit using controlled or isocaloric designs and should treat early and late TRE as biologically distinct interventions.

Human autophagy studies require validated dynamic measures across clinically relevant tissues rather than reliance on isolated static markers. Clinical trials should also measure lean mass and protein intake, particularly in older adults.

Post-intervention follow-up is a major priority. Outcomes during active fasting should be distinguished from outcomes six months, one year, or longer after participants return to unrestricted eating.

Clinical endpoints should extend beyond surrogate biomarkers. Evidence remains insufficient regarding cardiovascular events, diabetes complications, liver-related events, cognitive decline, cancer outcomes, and mortality.

Mental-health research should distinguish depression, anxiety, cognition, appetite, eating behavior, and eating-disorder risk rather than combining these outcomes under broad concepts of “brain health.”

Religious-fasting studies should quantify energy intake, food composition, hydration, sleep, physical activity, and behavioral changes to clarify which components contribute to observed associations.

Strengths and Limitations

This review integrates clinical, mechanistic, behavioral, and religious-fasting evidence within a framework explicitly distinguishing fasting-specific effects from energy restriction. Recent high-level syntheses and primary randomized trials were prioritized, and mechanistic plausibility was separated from demonstrated human clinical benefit.

The review also distinguishes efficacy during an intervention from persistence after discontinuation, an issue that is frequently underemphasized in discussions of IF.

Limitations arise from the narrative design. Study identification was structured but not exhaustive, and formal duplicate screening and study-level risk-of-bias assessment were not performed specifically for this manuscript. IF protocols, comparator diets, populations, intervention durations, and outcomes are heterogeneous. Many trials are relatively short, and dietary intake and adherence are frequently self-reported. Evidence is considerably stronger for weight and metabolic surrogate outcomes than for autophagy, mental health, microbiome effects, clinical disease events, or long-term post-intervention outcomes.

Conclusions

Intermittent fasting is a viable dietary strategy for selected individuals, particularly when it facilitates a sustainable energy deficit or favorable meal timing. It should not, however, be regarded as a single metabolic intervention or as uniformly superior to continuous energy restriction.

The strongest evidence indicates that IF and conventional calorie restriction produce broadly comparable weight and cardiometabolic outcomes. ADF, 4:3 IF, and early TRE may provide modest advantages for particular outcomes or populations, but the evidence does not establish a universally superior fasting protocol.

Fasting clearly alters nutrient-sensing physiology, including insulin signaling, fatty-acid oxidation, ketogenesis, and AMPK–mTOR-related pathways. Autophagy is strongly responsive to nutrient deprivation in experimental systems, but direct human evidence remains emerging and does not establish clinically meaningful systemic “cellular cleaning” or prove that autophagy mediates IF's clinical benefits.

Evidence concerning inflammation, microbiome modulation, cognition, mood, and sleep remains heterogeneous. Religious fasting provides informative naturalistic evidence but cannot establish fasting-specific causality because food composition, hydration, sleep, cultural practices, and behavior change concurrently.

Most importantly, benefits observed while fasting should not be assumed to persist after fasting ends. Current evidence indicates that at least some anthropometric and metabolic changes diminish after discontinuation, and there is no convincing evidence for a permanent metabolic “reset.”

IF is therefore best understood as a family of dietary strategies whose effects depend on energy balance, meal timing, dietary quality, adherence, individual physiology, and clinical context. Future research should determine which components confer benefits beyond conventional dietary restriction and whether these effects can be sustained over years rather than weeks or months.

Declarations

Funding

This work received no external funding. No third party provided financial or commercial support for the preparation of this review.

Conflicts of Interest

The author is the founder of Healthy Habits Coaching, a nutrition and healthy-habits coaching and educational platform through which the author provides coaching services and publishes health and nutrition educational content, including narrative reviews. Some subject areas addressed by Healthy Habits Coaching overlap with topics discussed in this manuscript.

Healthy Habits Coaching did not provide external sponsorship for this review, and no third party provided financial or commercial support for its preparation. The author's relationship with Healthy Habits Coaching is disclosed for transparency as a potential commercial and/or non-financial interest. The author reports no other conflicts of interest relevant to this manuscript.

Author Contributions

Ori Scott: Conceptualization; Methodology; Investigation; Validation; Writing—review and editing; Project administration.

Ori Scott conceived the review topic and scope, defined the research questions and evidence-selection framework, evaluated the scientific relevance of the literature and the interpretation of the evidence, critically revised the manuscript, and approved the final version. The author accepts full responsibility for the integrity and final content of the work.

Ethics Statement

Ethics approval was not required because this narrative review is based exclusively on previously published literature and involved no recruitment of human participants, collection of identifiable personal information, or original research involving human participants or animals.

Patient Consent

Not applicable. The manuscript contains no original participant data, identifiable patient information, or clinical images requiring patient consent.

Consent for Publication

Not applicable.

Data Availability

No original participant-level data or research dataset was generated for this narrative review. The evidence discussed in the manuscript is derived from published literature cited in the reference list.

Acknowledgements

None.

Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Writing Process

During the preparation of this work, the author used OpenAI ChatGPT (GPT-5.6 Sol) to assist with manuscript organization, drafting, language refinement, revision, and presentation. After using this tool, the author reviewed and edited the content as needed and takes full responsibility for the content of the manuscript.

Related Material and Prior Online Publication

The author is the founder of Healthy Habits Coaching, where health and nutrition educational content and narrative reviews are published online. The present manuscript was prepared as a distinct scholarly narrative review .

References

1. de Cabo R, Mattson MP. Effects of intermittent fasting on health, aging, and disease. N Engl J Med. 2019;381:2541–2551. doi:10.1056/NEJMra1905136.

2. Patterson RE, Sears DD. Metabolic effects of intermittent fasting. Annu Rev Nutr. 2017;37:371–393. doi:10.1146/annurev-nutr-071816-064634.

3. Longo VD, Panda S. Fasting, circadian rhythms, and time-restricted feeding in healthy lifespan. Cell Metab. 2016;23:1048–1059. doi:10.1016/j.cmet.2016.06.001.

4. Mattson MP, Moehl K, Ghena N, Schmaedick M, Cheng A. Intermittent metabolic switching, neuroplasticity and brain health. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2018;19:63–80. doi:10.1038/nrn.2017.156.

5. Chaudhary R, Liu B, Bensalem J, et al. Intermittent fasting activates markers of autophagy in mouse liver, but not muscle from mouse or humans. Nutrition. 2022;101:111662. doi:10.1016/j.nut.2022.111662.

6. Bensalem J, Teong XT, Hattersley KJ, et al. Intermittent time-restricted eating may increase autophagic flux in humans: an exploratory analysis. J Physiol. 2025;603:3019–3032. doi:10.1113/JP287938.

7. Liu D, Huang Y, Huang C, et al. Calorie restriction with or without time-restricted eating in weight loss. N Engl J Med. 2022;386:1495–1504. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2114833.

8. Maruthur NM, Pilla SJ, White K, et al. Effect of isocaloric, time-restricted eating on body weight in adults with obesity: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 2024;177:549–558. doi:10.7326/M23-3132.

9. Sutton EF, Beyl R, Early KS, Cefalu WT, Ravussin E, Peterson CM. Early time-restricted feeding improves insulin sensitivity, blood pressure, and oxidative stress even without weight loss in men with prediabetes. Cell Metab. 2018;27:1212–1221.e3. doi:10.1016/j.cmet.2018.04.010.

10. Semnani-Azad Z, Khan TA, Chiavaroli L, et al. Intermittent fasting strategies and their effects on body weight and other cardiometabolic risk factors: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials. BMJ. 2025;389. doi:10.1136/bmj-2024-082007.

11. Garegnani LI, Oltra G, Ivaldi D, et al. Intermittent fasting for adults with overweight or obesity. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2026;2. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD015610.pub2.

12. Wulandari E, et al. Effect of Ramadan fasting on anthropometric and body-composition measures of healthy adults across different time points: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Obes (Lond). 2025. PMID:40221545.

13. Jamshed H, Steger FL, Bryan DR, et al. Effectiveness of early time-restricted eating for weight loss, fat loss, and cardiometabolic health in adults with obesity: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2022;182:953–962. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2022.3050.

14. Catenacci VA, Ostendorf DM, Pan Z, et al. The effect of 4:3 intermittent fasting on weight loss at 12 months: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Intern Med. 2025;178:634–644. doi:10.7326/ANNALS-24-01631.

15. Khalafi M, Habibi Maleki A, Ehsanifar M, Symonds ME, Rosenkranz SK. Longer-term effects of intermittent fasting on body composition and cardiometabolic health in adults with overweight and obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Rev. 2025;26. doi:10.1111/obr.13855.

16. Hua Z, Yang S, Li J, et al. Intermittent fasting for weight management and metabolic health: an updated comprehensive umbrella review of health outcomes. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2025;27:920–932. doi:10.1111/dom.16092.

17. Schroor MM, Joris PJ, Plat J, Mensink RP. Effects of intermittent energy restriction compared with continuous energy restriction on body composition and cardiometabolic risk markers: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in adults. Adv Nutr. 2024;15:100130.

18. Pavlou V, Cienfuegos S, Lin S, et al. Effect of time-restricted eating on weight loss in adults with type 2 diabetes: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.39337.

19. Obermayer A, Tripolt NJ, Pferschy PN, et al. Efficacy and safety of intermittent fasting in people with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (INTERFAST-2): a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2023;46:463–468. doi:10.2337/dc22-1622.

20. Guo L, Xi Y, Jin W, et al. A 5:2 intermittent fasting meal replacement diet and glycemic control for adults with diabetes: the EARLY randomized clinical trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.16786.

21. Liu F, Zhang Z, Sun W, Li T. The metabolic effects of intermittent fasting in patients with type 2 diabetes exist in the short term but disappear after its discontinuation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Nutr Res. 2025;138:135–150. doi:10.1016/j.nutres.2025.04.008.

22. Patikorn C, Roubal K, Veettil SK, et al. Intermittent fasting and obesity-related health outcomes: an umbrella review of meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.39558.

23. Sun ML, Yao W, Wang XY, et al. Intermittent fasting and health outcomes: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. eClinicalMedicine. 2024;70:102519. doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102519.

24. Chen YE, Tsai HL, Tu YK, Chen LW. Effects of different types of intermittent fasting on metabolic outcomes: an umbrella review and network meta-analysis. BMC Med. 2024;22:529. doi:10.1186/s12916-024-03716-1.

25. Lange M, Nadkarni D, Martin L, Newberry C, Kumar S, Kushner T. Intermittent fasting improves hepatic end points in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hepatol Commun. 2023;7. doi:10.1097/HC9.0000000000000212.

26. Abuelazm MT, Mohamed I, Naeem A, et al. Intermittent fasting regimens for metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2024;36:371–381. doi:10.1097/MEG.0000000000002715.

27. Mulas A, Cienfuegos S, Ezpeleta M, et al. Effect of intermittent fasting on circulating inflammatory markers in obesity: a review of human trials. Front Nutr. 2023;10:1146924. doi:10.3389/fnut.2023.1146924.

28. Khalafi M, Habibi Maleki A, Mojtahedi S, et al. The effects of intermittent fasting on inflammatory markers in adults: a systematic review and pairwise and network meta-analyses. Nutrients. 2025;17:2388. doi:10.3390/nu17152388.

29. Paukkonen I, Törrönen EN, Lok J, Schwab U, El-Nezami H. The impact of intermittent fasting on gut microbiota: a systematic review of human studies. Front Nutr. 2024;11:1342787. doi:10.3389/fnut.2024.1342787.

30. Su J, Wang Y, Zhang X, et al. Remodeling of the gut microbiome during Ramadan-associated intermittent fasting. Am J Clin Nutr. 2021;113:1332–1342. doi:10.1093/ajcn/nqaa388.

31. Mohr AE, Sweazea KL, Bowes DA, et al. Gut microbiome remodeling and metabolomic profile improves in response to protein pacing with intermittent fasting versus continuous caloric restriction. Nat Commun. 2024;15:4155. doi:10.1038/s41467-024-48355-5.

32. Li L, Li R, Tian Q, et al. Effects of healthy low-carbohydrate diet and time-restricted eating on weight and gut microbiome in adults with overweight or obesity: a feeding randomized controlled trial. Cell Rep Med. 2024;5:101801. doi:10.1016/j.xcrm.2024.101801.

33. Berthelot E, et al. Fasting interventions for stress, anxiety and depressive symptoms: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nutrients. 2021;13:3947.

34. Fernández-Rodríguez R, et al. Does intermittent fasting impact mental disorders? A systematic review with meta-analysis. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2023;63:11169–11184. doi:10.1080/10408398.2022.2088687.

35. Gudden J, Arias Vasquez A, Bloemendaal M. The effects of intermittent fasting on brain and cognitive function. Nutrients. 2021;13:3166.

36. Jin X, Li T, Xu X, Rong S. The effect of time-restricted eating on sleep: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nutr Rev. 2026;84:514–526. doi:10.1093/nutrit/nuaf051.

37. Cuccolo K, Kramer R, Petros T, Thoennes M. Intermittent fasting implementation and association with eating disorder symptomatology. Eat Disord. 2022;30:471–491. doi:10.1080/10640266.2021.1922145.

38. Gholampoor N, Sharif AH, Mellor D. The effect of observing religious or faith-based fasting on cardiovascular disease risk factors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2024;34:1097–1109. doi:10.1016/j.numecd.2024.02.002.

39. Jahrami H, Ammar A, Glenn JM, et al. An umbrella review and meta-analysis of meta-analyses of the impact of Ramadan fasting on the metabolic syndrome components. Nutr Rev. 2025;83–e721. doi:10.1093/nutrit/nuae001.

40. Giaginis C, Mantzorou M, Papadopoulou SK, et al. Christian Orthodox fasting as a traditional diet with low content of refined carbohydrates that promotes human health: a review of the current clinical evidence. Nutrients. 2023;15:1225. doi:10.3390/nu15051225.

41. Zhong F, Zhu T, Jin X, et al. Adverse events profile associated with intermittent fasting in adults with overweight or obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Nutr J. 2024;23:72. doi:10.1186/s12937-024-00975-9.

42. Cienfuegos S, Corapi S, Gabel K, et al. Effect of intermittent fasting on reproductive hormone levels in females and males: a review of human trials. Nutrients. 2022;14:2343. doi:10.3390/nu14112343.