The Effect of Intermittent Fasting on Appetite: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Previously, narrative reviews have considered the effects of intermittent fasting on appetite. One suggestion is that intermittent fasting attenuates an increase in appetite that typically accompanies weight loss. Here, we conducted the first systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify the effects of intermittent fasting on appetite, when compared to a continuous energy restriction intervention. Five electronic databases and trial registers were searched in February 2021 and February 2022. Abstracts (N = 2800) were screened and 17 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), consisting of a variety of intermittent fasting regimes, met our inclusion criteria. The total number of participants allocated to interventions was 1111 and all RCTs were judged as having either some concerns or a high risk of bias (Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool). Random effects meta-analyses were conducted on change-from-baseline appetite ratings. There was no clear evidence that intermittent fasting affected hunger (WMD = -3.03; 95% CI [-8.13, 2.08]; p = 0.25; N = 13), fullness (WMD = 3.11; 95% CI [-1.46, 7.69]; p = 0.18; N = 10), desire to eat (WMD = -3.89; 95% CI [-12.62, 4.83]; p = 0.38; N = 6), or prospective food consumption (WMD = -2.82; 95% CI [-3.87, 9.03]; p = 0.43; N = 5), differently to continuous energy restriction interventions. Our results suggest that intermittent fasting does not mitigate an increase in our drive to eat that is often associated with continuous energy restriction.

Consumption of low-calorie sweetened drinks is associated with 'sweet satiation', but not with 'sweet-taste confusion': A virtual study.

Originating from studies on rats, the 'taste confusion' hypothesis predicts that exposure to low-calorie sweeteners (LCS) will impair compensatory responses to sugar intake, resulting in increased overall calorie intake. We conducted a virtual study in which young adult human participants (n = 332), who differed in their history of exposure to sweet drinks (e.g., drank 'diet' (LCS) soft drinks or 'regular' (sugar-sweetened) soft drinks), imagined consuming a cheese sandwich and two-thirds of a 500 ml drink (still water, sparkling water, diet Coca Cola, regular Coca Cola, or semi-skimmed milk), or no drink, as a hypothetical lunch-time meal. They then used a screen-based tool to select the amount of a sweet snack (chocolate M&M's) or savoury snack (salted peanuts) that they would eat immediately with the remaining third of their drink (i.e., a total of 12 drink and snack combinations per participant). The results were inconsistent with the predictions of the taste confusion hypothesis; specifically, the extent to which consumption of sugar cola compared with water (still or sparkling) reduced snack intake did not differ between habitual diet (LCS) and habitual sugar soft-drink consumers. Other results showed a 'sweet satiation' effect (i.e., lower sweet versus savoury snack intake when the drink accompanying the meal was sweet compared with when it was water), and negligible compensation in snack food intake for the difference in the energy content of diet versus sugar cola.