December 20, 2024 • 23 mins
In this new "Study Finds" episode, Dr. Matt Law looks behind the headlines once again to figure out if late eaters are doomed in life. Will eating after 5pm kill you? Listen to find out!
Episode Resources:
Concerning study finds 'serious consequences for health' for people who eat after 5pm - Daily Mail
Eating After 5 PM Could Be Damaging Your Metabolic and Heart Health - SciTechDaily
TREAT to Improve Cardiometabolic Health (NY-TREAT) - ClinicalTrials.gov
Díaz-Rizzolo, D.A., Santos Baez, L.S., Popp, C.J., Borhan, R., Sordi-Guth, A., Manoogian, E.N.C., Panda, S., Cheng, B., & Laferrère, B. Late eating is associated with poor glucose tolerance, independent of body weight, fat mass, energy intake and diet composition in prediabetes or early onset type 2 diabetes. Nutr. Diabetes 14, 90 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41387-024-00347-6
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
You know what I've discovered is one of
(00:01):
the greatest feelings as an adult?
It's sitting down to get into
something,
whether it's working on a new project,
binging your favorite show,
or eating dinner with a family,
and realizing that you don't have to
pee.
It's an all-new prove-it-to-me.
(00:47):
Hello everyone,
and welcome to Prove-It-To-Me.
I'm your host, Dr.
Matt Law,
and if you're watching the video
version of this,
I bet you already noticed something
different.
Yeah, I moved the camera.
Now,
as I'm scrolling through my teleprompter
here,
it looks like I'm staring you straight
in the face.
(01:07):
Do you feel that?
Do you feel that intimacy?
Do you love it?
Okay,
I've got another Great Study Finds
episode for you today.
I mean, I think it's great.
This is one that, on the surface,
confirms my prejudices.
Aren't those the best?
Don't you love running across articles
(01:29):
that make you feel like you're
thinking, saying,
and doing the right things?
I mean, screw the 2,000
other articles that show evidence that
I'm wrong.
I got this one that I will latch onto,
seriously.
I don't even have to read it.
I got this headline that is right in
line with my way of thinking.
I'm done.
I'm fulfilled.
(01:50):
Am I bad at sarcasm?
I'm potentially bad at sarcasm,
but I implore you to stick with me
anyway.
If this is your first time here,
you know we don't.
do that.
We don't take things at face value.
We need substance, evidence, data.
We take deep dives into the meat behind
(02:10):
the headlines.
I mean, headlines are catchy,
but headlines are not evidence.
They're supposed to be catchy.
They're designed to get you to click on
them.
But that's the trick, isn't it?
You have to actually click on it.
Then you have to figure out if it's
real, whether it's exaggerated,
(02:31):
where the sources came from, etc.
Now,
if it's an article that says something
you disagree with,
or might show how your way of thinking,
saying, or doing things is wrong,
you might actually go through all that
work.
But I'm willing to bet you won't do all
that work for stuff that lines up with
your way of thinking.
Okay, I'm sorry,
(02:51):
I went down that rabbit hole not once,
but twice.
The point is we are here because we are
the clickers.
We are the skeptics.
We leave opinions to the exorbitantly
paid pundits that tell you what you
want to hear, and we slum it over here,
looking for evidence and debate the
appropriateness of the application of
(03:11):
the scientific method.
If I just accepted everything that I
want to hear and fed you what you want
to hear, well,
obviously I'd make more money.
Yeah,
so thanks for listening to prove it to
me.
I guess this is my last episode.
See ya.
Nah, come on folks.
(03:33):
If you're a masochist,
it's not that easy just to stop looking
for ways to torture yourself.
And it makes it even more fun to bring
other people into your house of pain.
So welcome.
I can't wait to torture you with data
and research.
So you read the episode title, right?
If you know me from outside of this
podcast,
you know that I'm an occupational
(03:53):
safety and health professional with the
background in environmental health.
You might even be looking to this
podcast for safety research.
So why the heck are we doing yet
another episode on nutrition?
I'm glad you asked.
I mean, first of all, look at me.
I love nutrition.
Do you think all of this just happens?
(04:14):
I know I look like I'm 16,
but I'm actually 67.
Okay, I'm 34.
But my point is I like being physically
healthy mentally and emotionally.
I'm a mess.
That's why I have a podcast.
But physically, it takes work.
Believe it or not,
I do not have the genetics to stay fit
easily.
Give me a month and I can get really
(04:36):
unhealthy really quickly and with very
little effort.
So I work my ass off to stay physically
healthy.
And it's not just exercise.
It's also eating right.
The problem is there is a lot of
information out there about nutrition
that is not based in science,
but it's super popular and a lot.
(04:58):
A lot of people make big profits off
steering other people in the wrong
direction.
Fad diets aren't sustainable for most
people,
and the lack of regulation on labeling
in terms of those fad diets is just
ridiculous.
So we have to do a little work and look
at the real data behind nutrition to
get this right.
(05:18):
Now, here's another thing.
Nutrition is not unrelated to workplace
safety.
Health and wellness are big factors
when it comes to taking care of our
workforce.
Have you heard of total worker health,
trademarked by the National Institute
of Occupational Safety and Health?
That's NIOSH for short, by the way.
Yeah, physical, mental,
(05:38):
and emotional health are extremely
important,
and a lot of research today aims to
fill our gaps in knowledge about how
these things affect our workforce just
as much as the big physical hazards.
One more thing, and I stand by this.
If you yourself are a safety
professional,
How do you expect to care for the
health and safety of other people if
(05:59):
you don't take care of yourself?
I know, and I'm sure you know,
the folks that destroy themselves in
the name of performing well at work.
I guess you could call it noble in the
short term, but it's not sustainable.
My opinion is that you must be actively
engaged in caring for yourself if you
want to take care of others.
(06:19):
I mean, lead by example too, right?
And this goes for all of you in
healthcare and service industries too.
Okay,
I am now going to remove myself from
this soapbox and we can get into the
research.
Feel free to yell at me in the comments
for taking you into my world of
unwelcomed opinions.
Alright,
let's get into today's study finds.
(06:41):
Something you should know about me,
I do everything early.
I go to bed early, I wake up early,
sometimes involuntarily,
thanks Insomnia.
And I eat early.
I'm someone that needs breakfast as
soon as I wake up.
If that's 4 or 5 o'clock in the
morning,
that means I get hungry between 10 and
(07:01):
11.
So that's when I eat lunch.
Then I'm hungry again around 4.
And my oldest child is ravenous when
she gets home from school too,
so we generally eat dinner between 4
and 5 in the afternoon.
I love this.
I eat when I need to eat,
I don't go to bed with the nasty
feeling of a full stomach,
(07:22):
and I generally make decent decisions
about what to eat because I can usually
plan that schedule fairly well.
I'm the cook in the family after all.
Also, on the weekends,
sometimes I like to make a big lunch
instead of a big dinner.
That lets me get my cooking out of the
way early,
and usually I'll either snack lightly
or skip dinner entirely if I can manage
(07:43):
it.
I guess you could call it intermittent
fasting,
but it's impromptu and inconsistent for
me.
I get hangry,
so fasting consistently is really not
an option for me.
Now,
I realize that what I have is a luxury.
I work from home.
My time can be fairly flexible.
(08:04):
And I can make this eating schedule
work.
Not everybody has that.
So wouldn't you know it,
a study finds popped up on the news
last week that affirms my lifestyle.
Yeah,
now I'm going to latch onto that and
shove it in your face.
Get ready for this one.
The headline read something like,
the dangers of eating after 5pm.
(08:27):
Wow, well guess what everybody,
I'm safe.
I'm going to outlive all of you.
Suck it, late eaters.
Your dinner is coming after you.
All right, all right, I got you.
Let's dig behind the headline and see
if there's any hope for you folks that
work in an office 9 to 5 or on a job
site 7 to 7.
(08:48):
I get that you don't have many choices.
So let's see if we can figure out
what's going on with this study.
This is a big one I guess.
Google gave me several results right
off the bat when I searched eating
after five study.
I clicked on the most recent one from
Daily Mail.
Their headline reads concerning study
finds quote serious consequences for
(09:09):
health unquote for people who eat after
5pm and was published on November 21,
2024.
See,
we're already off to a great start quote
concerning study.
Time to freakin panic folks.
Daily Mail hopes you're concerned
enough to click on it so you can see
let's see 12345 static advertisements
(09:32):
and two video advertisements without
even scrolling down to read the
article.
My favorite is when there are so many
that the page crashes before you can
even get to the middle of the article.
And that's exactly how far I needed to
scroll to get to the link to the study.
Now, actually,
the first thing I want to do is make
sure this is the study I'm looking for.
(09:55):
I went back to my Google search and
clicked on a similar recent article
published by SciTech Daily.
Both of these articles are pointing to
a recent study done by Universitat
Oberta de Catalunya.
Yeah, that's UOC for short.
And I'm going to use that since I
struggle with pronunciation and
(10:15):
Columbia University led by Dr.
Diana Diaz Rizzolo.
So this is probably what I'm looking
for.
The study link takes me to nutrition
and diabetes,
which is a peer reviewed online open
access journal bringing to the fore
outstanding research in the areas of
nutrition and chronic disease,
including diabetes from the molecular
(10:37):
to the population level.
That's from the front page of their
website.
The article title is, quote,
late eating is associated with poor
glucose tolerance,
independent of body weight, fat mass,
energy intake and diet composition in
pre-diabetes or early onset.
type 2 diabetes." That's a little less
(10:58):
scary than concerning study, isn't it?
Well, great news, everyone.
This article is open access.
So what does that mean?
Quite simply, anyone can access it.
You don't need academic credentials or
a paid membership to a journal to read
the full article.
The way this generally works,
since journals need funds to maintain
(11:19):
their review teams and databases,
the authors pay the journals a fee to
publish their articles for open access.
These fees have a range that can
commonly be anywhere from $2,000
to $5,000 US dollars.
Since academic researchers don't
usually make a lot of money on their
own,
these fees are usually paid by grants.
(11:39):
In fact,
during the grant proposal process,
it's common to add a budget line item
for open access publishing.
Now,
I can't say for sure that any of that
happened here because I was not able to
find the fees on this journal's
website.
Also,
this article is classified as a quote,
brief communication,
(12:00):
which is evident when you open up the
PDF version of the article.
It's four pages.
Remember the one on maple syrup we just
did?
That was 13 pages.
In this article,
the introduction methods and results
sections are shortened and the
discussion is the longest.
There are also only 20 references,
which is an uncommonly short list for
(12:22):
peer-reviewed articles.
All right, let's look at funding,
conflicts of interest, etc.
Although here's the thing,
I don't know who would stand to profit
from a study about eating after 5 p.m.,
but I guess you never know.
Okay,
we have funding from the National Institute
on Aging,
a grant from the Alfonso Martin
Escudero Foundation,
(12:43):
two Russ Berry fellowships,
and the publication was supported by
the National Center for Advancing
Translational Sciences of the National
Institutes of Health.
That's all above board, I would say.
The authors are all academic
researchers.
No competing interests were declared.
Yeah, I'm not seeing any concerns here.
Let's jump into the study itself.
(13:04):
It looks like this study was designed
to expand on previous studies that
showed late eating was linked to poor
glucose metabolism in association with
higher body mass index, or BMI,
and increased body fat as a result of
greater energy intake and highly
processed food consumption.
Keyword, linked.
(13:26):
That's correlation, not causation.
But here's where it gets interesting.
This study wanted to test whether the
association between eating late and
glucose metabolism was independent of
body weight, fat mass,
daily energy intake,
or diet composition.
Why is that interesting?
Basically,
(13:47):
they are trying to pull out one
specific association between two
variables to verify that relationship
is consistent and not consistent.
necessarily affected by or linked to
all the other variables.
Okay,
let me re-explain this for this study.
Previous research showed that eating
late was linked to poorer glucose
(14:08):
metabolism.
Glucose metabolism is the process by
which your body breaks down glucose or
sugar to generate energy.
That previous research also showed
higher BMI and increased body fat,
but it was all because of eating more
and eating bad foods.
So the previous research says if you
eat late,
you're probably eating more and eating
(14:29):
bad food and that's why your
metabolism, BMI, and body fat suffers.
So our new study that we're looking at
today is hoping to determine if there
is a direct association between eating
late and poor glucose metabolism
regardless of what you eat or how much
you eat.
(14:49):
This is cool because this is the type
of study that gets you closer to
causational but ultimately is still
correlational.
Participants?
26 of them.
26?
Yeah.
They're all from New York City,
between 50 and 75 years old,
overweight or obese,
and either pre-diabetic or early onset
(15:09):
type 2 diabetic.
In the abstract,
the authors give you the study ID
number which you can look up on
clinicaltrials.gov and get even more
detail than what's here in the article.
All of these participants had to speak
English too.
They had to be breakfast eaters,
they had to consistently get 6 hours of
sleep, wake up between 5 and 11am,
(15:31):
and go to bed before 2am.
Participants were excluded if they had
complicating diseases or disorders,
smoked, used drugs,
consumed excessive alcohol,
and a few other things.
So again,
we have a fairly small and really
specific type of person participating
in this study.
If you're not between 50 and 75,
(15:54):
overweight and pre-diabetic,
this study might not apply to you.
It's helpful for the study itself
though.
This level of specificity in sampling
helps weed out other complicating
factors that can mess with the
experiment.
It's just something to keep in mind.
Hopefully the discussion calls for more
research.
Participants had to log their meals.
(16:14):
They were classified as late eaters if
more than 45% of their daily calories
were consumed after 5pm and early
eaters if not.
Basically,
you're a late eater if almost half of
what you eat is eaten after 5pm.
Big dinner eaters.
Already,
this is telling me that if all of my
(16:34):
meals are even,
let's say 600 calories for breakfast,
600 for lunch, and 600 for dinner,
I'm not a late eater according to the
definition of this study.
We are already moving past that quote,
don't eat anything after 5pm,
like the scary news articles seem to
say.
It's don't eat half of your daily
(16:56):
intake after 5 p.m.
All right, results and discussion.
After all the measuring and statistical
tests,
this study found that eating 45% or
more of daily caloric intake after 5 p
.m.
resulted in lower glucose tolerance
among older adults with prediabetes or
early type 2 diabetes.
(17:16):
The reason this is important is because
if your body is not processing glucose
and turning it into energy like it
should,
it increases the risk of full onset of
type 2 diabetes.
Now,
the authors say there was no difference
in total caloric intake or
macronutrients composition between the
two groups when you look at the whole
(17:37):
day.
By the way, macronutrients are fat,
carbohydrates, and protein.
However,
they did observe that the late eaters
consumed more fats and carbohydrates
after 5 p.m.
than early eaters.
That lines up with the previous studies
that showed late eaters ate more food
and worse food after 5pm.
Alright,
let's look at the limitations paragraph.
(18:00):
This was all in New York City.
Does it apply to other parts of the
world?
Maybe.
Participants all had a prolonged eating
window,
meaning the period of the day in which
they ate food was 14 hours or more.
The authors say this could introduce
bias,
but given the prevalence of this eating
pattern among the general population,
it probably still works.
(18:21):
Also,
meal logging was all self-reported,
but they estimate a 10% error rate.
Here's the big one.
Quote,
the study's small sample size is a
limitation,
but for pilot studies such as this one,
former power calculation is not always
possible.
End quote.
See?
Small sample size.
(18:42):
And this is pilot study.
Pilot studies are not conclusive.
Okay, let's read on.
Quote, however,
caution is advised in generalizing
findings as the cohort specifically
targets individuals with prediabetes or
type 2 diabetes and obesity.
End quote.
(19:03):
This right here is exactly why we go
beyond the headlines.
The news articles, the health blogs,
whatever,
are not going to give you that.
They are eager to capture you with a
headline and get their content and
their advertisers in front of you.
That's their purpose.
That's the business.
The challenge is that real research is
(19:23):
almost never conclusive,
and it almost never gives you
causation.
Here,
we have a correlation in a small study
among a very specific population.
We need more research.
We need more data.
Here,
the authors are calling for more research,
replicating the study with more diverse
populations and age groups to see if it
(19:45):
is applicable beyond who they studied
in this round.
This means we are not yet ready to say
for sure that all late eaters are
doomed.
So, for you 9-5-ers, this is good news.
There is hope for you yet.
Are there takeaways for the layperson?
Sure.
I can tell you what I'm taking away.
(20:06):
I'm going to continue trying to eat
good foods and I'm going to try not to
eat huge dinners,
but I'm also not gonna panic when I
decide to have a steak at 5.30pm
because I had a late call and I
accidentally missed lunch.
I'll probably be okay.
I probably won't wake up with diabetes.
Maybe.
As always,
(20:27):
I've put all the links in the episode
notes for you to review.
Take a look,
let me know what you think.
If I miss something,
I'm always open to criticism.
I mean, you're wrong,
but I'll listen to you anyway.
Just kidding.
I've got a challenge for you.
The next time you see a study on the
news and you start to panic,
send it over to me at contact at
(20:47):
proveitpod.com.
I'll take a look,
we'll dive deep beyond the headline,
and we'll get it on the next episode of
Study Finds.
For now,
I'm going to keep working on some other
research.
I'm a little behind on getting things
set up with other guests,
but I promise it's coming.
Oh, and hey,
this will be the last episode before
2025.
I want to wish everyone a wonderful
holiday season and a happy new year.
(21:09):
I want to take a serious moment to
remind you to get some rest and to look
out for your neighbors and loved ones
this season.
This is a joyous time,
but it can also be challenging time for
many.
If you or a loved one are struggling
mentally or emotionally with life's
many challenges,
remember that you can reach out at any
time to the Suicide and Crisis Lifeline
by dialing 988.
(21:29):
That's 988 from any phone in the United
States.
Please do take care of yourself and the
people you know this holiday season and
know that help is only a call or text
away.
Until next time, I'm Dr.
Matt Law.
This has been another episode of Study
Finds on the Prove It To Me podcast.
Take care and stay safe, everyone.
(22:05):
Prove It To Me is produced by me,
Matt Law,
original music by West London.
You can find this podcast on Podbean,
Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube,
Amazon Music, and iHeartRadio.
Like what you've heard so far?
Please like, subscribe,
and follow wherever you get your
podcasts,
and leave a 5-star review on Apple
Podcasts.
Got questions about what we talked
(22:26):
about or research that you want to
share?
Send an email to contactatproveitpod
.com.
The views and opinions expressed in
this podcast are those of the host and
its guests and do not necessarily
represent the official position,
opinion,
or strategies of their employers or
companies.
Examples of research and data analysis
discussed within this podcast are only
examples.
(22:46):
They should not be utilized in the real
world as...
the only solution available as they are
based on very limited,
often single use case,
and sometimes dated information.
Assumptions made within this discussion
about research and data analyses are
not necessarily representative of the
position of the host, the guests,
or their employees or companies.
No part of this podcast may be
reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system,
(23:08):
or transmitted in any form or by any
means mechanical, electronic,
recording,
or otherwise without prior written
permission of the creator of the
podcast.
The presentation of the content by the
guests does not necessarily constitute
an active endorsement of the content by
the host.
You know what I've discovered is one of
(00:01):
the greatest feelings as an adult?
It's sitting down to get into
something,
whether it's working on a new project,
binging your favorite show,
or eating dinner with a family,
and realizing that you don't have to
pee.
It's an all-new prove-it-to-me.
(00:47):
Hello everyone,
and welcome to Prove-It-To-Me.
I'm your host, Dr.
Matt Law,
and if you're watching the video
version of this,
I bet you already noticed something
different.
Yeah, I moved the camera.
Now,
as I'm scrolling through my teleprompter
here,
it looks like I'm staring you straight
in the face.
(01:07):
Do you feel that?
Do you feel that intimacy?
Do you love it?
Okay,
I've got another Great Study Finds
episode for you today.
I mean, I think it's great.
This is one that, on the surface,
confirms my prejudices.
Aren't those the best?
Don't you love running across articles
(01:29):
that make you feel like you're
thinking, saying,
and doing the right things?
I mean, screw the 2,000
other articles that show evidence that
I'm wrong.
I got this one that I will latch onto,
seriously.
I don't even have to read it.
I got this headline that is right in
line with my way of thinking.
I'm done.
I'm fulfilled.
(01:50):
Am I bad at sarcasm?
I'm potentially bad at sarcasm,
but I implore you to stick with me
anyway.
If this is your first time here,
you know we don't.
do that.
We don't take things at face value.
We need substance, evidence, data.
We take deep dives into the meat behind
(02:10):
the headlines.
I mean, headlines are catchy,
but headlines are not evidence.
They're supposed to be catchy.
They're designed to get you to click on
them.
But that's the trick, isn't it?
You have to actually click on it.
Then you have to figure out if it's
real, whether it's exaggerated,
(02:31):
where the sources came from, etc.
Now,
if it's an article that says something
you disagree with,
or might show how your way of thinking,
saying, or doing things is wrong,
you might actually go through all that
work.
But I'm willing to bet you won't do all
that work for stuff that lines up with
your way of thinking.
Okay, I'm sorry,
(02:51):
I went down that rabbit hole not once,
but twice.
The point is we are here because we are
the clickers.
We are the skeptics.
We leave opinions to the exorbitantly
paid pundits that tell you what you
want to hear, and we slum it over here,
looking for evidence and debate the
appropriateness of the application of
(03:11):
the scientific method.
If I just accepted everything that I
want to hear and fed you what you want
to hear, well,
obviously I'd make more money.
Yeah,
so thanks for listening to prove it to
me.
I guess this is my last episode.
See ya.
Nah, come on folks.
(03:33):
If you're a masochist,
it's not that easy just to stop looking
for ways to torture yourself.
And it makes it even more fun to bring
other people into your house of pain.
So welcome.
I can't wait to torture you with data
and research.
So you read the episode title, right?
If you know me from outside of this
podcast,
you know that I'm an occupational
(03:53):
safety and health professional with the
background in environmental health.
You might even be looking to this
podcast for safety research.
So why the heck are we doing yet
another episode on nutrition?
I'm glad you asked.
I mean, first of all, look at me.
I love nutrition.
Do you think all of this just happens?
(04:14):
I know I look like I'm 16,
but I'm actually 67.
Okay, I'm 34.
But my point is I like being physically
healthy mentally and emotionally.
I'm a mess.
That's why I have a podcast.
But physically, it takes work.
Believe it or not,
I do not have the genetics to stay fit
easily.
Give me a month and I can get really
(04:36):
unhealthy really quickly and with very
little effort.
So I work my ass off to stay physically
healthy.
And it's not just exercise.
It's also eating right.
The problem is there is a lot of
information out there about nutrition
that is not based in science,
but it's super popular and a lot.
(04:58):
A lot of people make big profits off
steering other people in the wrong
direction.
Fad diets aren't sustainable for most
people,
and the lack of regulation on labeling
in terms of those fad diets is just
ridiculous.
So we have to do a little work and look
at the real data behind nutrition to
get this right.
(05:18):
Now, here's another thing.
Nutrition is not unrelated to workplace
safety.
Health and wellness are big factors
when it comes to taking care of our
workforce.
Have you heard of total worker health,
trademarked by the National Institute
of Occupational Safety and Health?
That's NIOSH for short, by the way.
Yeah, physical, mental,
(05:38):
and emotional health are extremely
important,
and a lot of research today aims to
fill our gaps in knowledge about how
these things affect our workforce just
as much as the big physical hazards.
One more thing, and I stand by this.
If you yourself are a safety
professional,
How do you expect to care for the
health and safety of other people if
(05:59):
you don't take care of yourself?
I know, and I'm sure you know,
the folks that destroy themselves in
the name of performing well at work.
I guess you could call it noble in the
short term, but it's not sustainable.
My opinion is that you must be actively
engaged in caring for yourself if you
want to take care of others.
(06:19):
I mean, lead by example too, right?
And this goes for all of you in
healthcare and service industries too.
Okay,
I am now going to remove myself from
this soapbox and we can get into the
research.
Feel free to yell at me in the comments
for taking you into my world of
unwelcomed opinions.
Alright,
let's get into today's study finds.
(06:41):
Something you should know about me,
I do everything early.
I go to bed early, I wake up early,
sometimes involuntarily,
thanks Insomnia.
And I eat early.
I'm someone that needs breakfast as
soon as I wake up.
If that's 4 or 5 o'clock in the
morning,
that means I get hungry between 10 and
(07:01):
11.
So that's when I eat lunch.
Then I'm hungry again around 4.
And my oldest child is ravenous when
she gets home from school too,
so we generally eat dinner between 4
and 5 in the afternoon.
I love this.
I eat when I need to eat,
I don't go to bed with the nasty
feeling of a full stomach,
(07:22):
and I generally make decent decisions
about what to eat because I can usually
plan that schedule fairly well.
I'm the cook in the family after all.
Also, on the weekends,
sometimes I like to make a big lunch
instead of a big dinner.
That lets me get my cooking out of the
way early,
and usually I'll either snack lightly
or skip dinner entirely if I can manage
(07:43):
it.
I guess you could call it intermittent
fasting,
but it's impromptu and inconsistent for
me.
I get hangry,
so fasting consistently is really not
an option for me.
Now,
I realize that what I have is a luxury.
I work from home.
My time can be fairly flexible.
(08:04):
And I can make this eating schedule
work.
Not everybody has that.
So wouldn't you know it,
a study finds popped up on the news
last week that affirms my lifestyle.
Yeah,
now I'm going to latch onto that and
shove it in your face.
Get ready for this one.
The headline read something like,
the dangers of eating after 5pm.
(08:27):
Wow, well guess what everybody,
I'm safe.
I'm going to outlive all of you.
Suck it, late eaters.
Your dinner is coming after you.
All right, all right, I got you.
Let's dig behind the headline and see
if there's any hope for you folks that
work in an office 9 to 5 or on a job
site 7 to 7.
(08:48):
I get that you don't have many choices.
So let's see if we can figure out
what's going on with this study.
This is a big one I guess.
Google gave me several results right
off the bat when I searched eating
after five study.
I clicked on the most recent one from
Daily Mail.
Their headline reads concerning study
finds quote serious consequences for
(09:09):
health unquote for people who eat after
5pm and was published on November 21,
2024.
See,
we're already off to a great start quote
concerning study.
Time to freakin panic folks.
Daily Mail hopes you're concerned
enough to click on it so you can see
let's see 12345 static advertisements
(09:32):
and two video advertisements without
even scrolling down to read the
article.
My favorite is when there are so many
that the page crashes before you can
even get to the middle of the article.
And that's exactly how far I needed to
scroll to get to the link to the study.
Now, actually,
the first thing I want to do is make
sure this is the study I'm looking for.
(09:55):
I went back to my Google search and
clicked on a similar recent article
published by SciTech Daily.
Both of these articles are pointing to
a recent study done by Universitat
Oberta de Catalunya.
Yeah, that's UOC for short.
And I'm going to use that since I
struggle with pronunciation and
(10:15):
Columbia University led by Dr.
Diana Diaz Rizzolo.
So this is probably what I'm looking
for.
The study link takes me to nutrition
and diabetes,
which is a peer reviewed online open
access journal bringing to the fore
outstanding research in the areas of
nutrition and chronic disease,
including diabetes from the molecular
(10:37):
to the population level.
That's from the front page of their
website.
The article title is, quote,
late eating is associated with poor
glucose tolerance,
independent of body weight, fat mass,
energy intake and diet composition in
pre-diabetes or early onset.
type 2 diabetes." That's a little less
(10:58):
scary than concerning study, isn't it?
Well, great news, everyone.
This article is open access.
So what does that mean?
Quite simply, anyone can access it.
You don't need academic credentials or
a paid membership to a journal to read
the full article.
The way this generally works,
since journals need funds to maintain
(11:19):
their review teams and databases,
the authors pay the journals a fee to
publish their articles for open access.
These fees have a range that can
commonly be anywhere from $2,000
to $5,000 US dollars.
Since academic researchers don't
usually make a lot of money on their
own,
these fees are usually paid by grants.
(11:39):
In fact,
during the grant proposal process,
it's common to add a budget line item
for open access publishing.
Now,
I can't say for sure that any of that
happened here because I was not able to
find the fees on this journal's
website.
Also,
this article is classified as a quote,
brief communication,
(12:00):
which is evident when you open up the
PDF version of the article.
It's four pages.
Remember the one on maple syrup we just
did?
That was 13 pages.
In this article,
the introduction methods and results
sections are shortened and the
discussion is the longest.
There are also only 20 references,
which is an uncommonly short list for
(12:22):
peer-reviewed articles.
All right, let's look at funding,
conflicts of interest, etc.
Although here's the thing,
I don't know who would stand to profit
from a study about eating after 5 p.m.,
but I guess you never know.
Okay,
we have funding from the National Institute
on Aging,
a grant from the Alfonso Martin
Escudero Foundation,
(12:43):
two Russ Berry fellowships,
and the publication was supported by
the National Center for Advancing
Translational Sciences of the National
Institutes of Health.
That's all above board, I would say.
The authors are all academic
researchers.
No competing interests were declared.
Yeah, I'm not seeing any concerns here.
Let's jump into the study itself.
(13:04):
It looks like this study was designed
to expand on previous studies that
showed late eating was linked to poor
glucose metabolism in association with
higher body mass index, or BMI,
and increased body fat as a result of
greater energy intake and highly
processed food consumption.
Keyword, linked.
(13:26):
That's correlation, not causation.
But here's where it gets interesting.
This study wanted to test whether the
association between eating late and
glucose metabolism was independent of
body weight, fat mass,
daily energy intake,
or diet composition.
Why is that interesting?
Basically,
(13:47):
they are trying to pull out one
specific association between two
variables to verify that relationship
is consistent and not consistent.
necessarily affected by or linked to
all the other variables.
Okay,
let me re-explain this for this study.
Previous research showed that eating
late was linked to poorer glucose
(14:08):
metabolism.
Glucose metabolism is the process by
which your body breaks down glucose or
sugar to generate energy.
That previous research also showed
higher BMI and increased body fat,
but it was all because of eating more
and eating bad foods.
So the previous research says if you
eat late,
you're probably eating more and eating
(14:29):
bad food and that's why your
metabolism, BMI, and body fat suffers.
So our new study that we're looking at
today is hoping to determine if there
is a direct association between eating
late and poor glucose metabolism
regardless of what you eat or how much
you eat.
(14:49):
This is cool because this is the type
of study that gets you closer to
causational but ultimately is still
correlational.
Participants?
26 of them.
26?
Yeah.
They're all from New York City,
between 50 and 75 years old,
overweight or obese,
and either pre-diabetic or early onset
(15:09):
type 2 diabetic.
In the abstract,
the authors give you the study ID
number which you can look up on
clinicaltrials.gov and get even more
detail than what's here in the article.
All of these participants had to speak
English too.
They had to be breakfast eaters,
they had to consistently get 6 hours of
sleep, wake up between 5 and 11am,
(15:31):
and go to bed before 2am.
Participants were excluded if they had
complicating diseases or disorders,
smoked, used drugs,
consumed excessive alcohol,
and a few other things.
So again,
we have a fairly small and really
specific type of person participating
in this study.
If you're not between 50 and 75,
(15:54):
overweight and pre-diabetic,
this study might not apply to you.
It's helpful for the study itself
though.
This level of specificity in sampling
helps weed out other complicating
factors that can mess with the
experiment.
It's just something to keep in mind.
Hopefully the discussion calls for more
research.
Participants had to log their meals.
(16:14):
They were classified as late eaters if
more than 45% of their daily calories
were consumed after 5pm and early
eaters if not.
Basically,
you're a late eater if almost half of
what you eat is eaten after 5pm.
Big dinner eaters.
Already,
this is telling me that if all of my
(16:34):
meals are even,
let's say 600 calories for breakfast,
600 for lunch, and 600 for dinner,
I'm not a late eater according to the
definition of this study.
We are already moving past that quote,
don't eat anything after 5pm,
like the scary news articles seem to
say.
It's don't eat half of your daily
(16:56):
intake after 5 p.m.
All right, results and discussion.
After all the measuring and statistical
tests,
this study found that eating 45% or
more of daily caloric intake after 5 p
.m.
resulted in lower glucose tolerance
among older adults with prediabetes or
early type 2 diabetes.
(17:16):
The reason this is important is because
if your body is not processing glucose
and turning it into energy like it
should,
it increases the risk of full onset of
type 2 diabetes.
Now,
the authors say there was no difference
in total caloric intake or
macronutrients composition between the
two groups when you look at the whole
(17:37):
day.
By the way, macronutrients are fat,
carbohydrates, and protein.
However,
they did observe that the late eaters
consumed more fats and carbohydrates
after 5 p.m.
than early eaters.
That lines up with the previous studies
that showed late eaters ate more food
and worse food after 5pm.
Alright,
let's look at the limitations paragraph.
(18:00):
This was all in New York City.
Does it apply to other parts of the
world?
Maybe.
Participants all had a prolonged eating
window,
meaning the period of the day in which
they ate food was 14 hours or more.
The authors say this could introduce
bias,
but given the prevalence of this eating
pattern among the general population,
it probably still works.
(18:21):
Also,
meal logging was all self-reported,
but they estimate a 10% error rate.
Here's the big one.
Quote,
the study's small sample size is a
limitation,
but for pilot studies such as this one,
former power calculation is not always
possible.
End quote.
See?
Small sample size.
(18:42):
And this is pilot study.
Pilot studies are not conclusive.
Okay, let's read on.
Quote, however,
caution is advised in generalizing
findings as the cohort specifically
targets individuals with prediabetes or
type 2 diabetes and obesity.
End quote.
(19:03):
This right here is exactly why we go
beyond the headlines.
The news articles, the health blogs,
whatever,
are not going to give you that.
They are eager to capture you with a
headline and get their content and
their advertisers in front of you.
That's their purpose.
That's the business.
The challenge is that real research is
(19:23):
almost never conclusive,
and it almost never gives you
causation.
Here,
we have a correlation in a small study
among a very specific population.
We need more research.
We need more data.
Here,
the authors are calling for more research,
replicating the study with more diverse
populations and age groups to see if it
(19:45):
is applicable beyond who they studied
in this round.
This means we are not yet ready to say
for sure that all late eaters are
doomed.
So, for you 9-5-ers, this is good news.
There is hope for you yet.
Are there takeaways for the layperson?
Sure.
I can tell you what I'm taking away.
(20:06):
I'm going to continue trying to eat
good foods and I'm going to try not to
eat huge dinners,
but I'm also not gonna panic when I
decide to have a steak at 5.30pm
because I had a late call and I
accidentally missed lunch.
I'll probably be okay.
I probably won't wake up with diabetes.
Maybe.
As always,
(20:27):
I've put all the links in the episode
notes for you to review.
Take a look,
let me know what you think.
If I miss something,
I'm always open to criticism.
I mean, you're wrong,
but I'll listen to you anyway.
Just kidding.
I've got a challenge for you.
The next time you see a study on the
news and you start to panic,
send it over to me at contact at
(20:47):
proveitpod.com.
I'll take a look,
we'll dive deep beyond the headline,
and we'll get it on the next episode of
Study Finds.
For now,
I'm going to keep working on some other
research.
I'm a little behind on getting things
set up with other guests,
but I promise it's coming.
Oh, and hey,
this will be the last episode before
2025.
I want to wish everyone a wonderful
holiday season and a happy new year.
(21:09):
I want to take a serious moment to
remind you to get some rest and to look
out for your neighbors and loved ones
this season.
This is a joyous time,
but it can also be challenging time for
many.
If you or a loved one are struggling
mentally or emotionally with life's
many challenges,
remember that you can reach out at any
time to the Suicide and Crisis Lifeline
by dialing 988.
(21:29):
That's 988 from any phone in the United
States.
Please do take care of yourself and the
people you know this holiday season and
know that help is only a call or text
away.
Until next time, I'm Dr.
Matt Law.
This has been another episode of Study
Finds on the Prove It To Me podcast.
Take care and stay safe, everyone.
(22:05):
Prove It To Me is produced by me,
Matt Law,
original music by West London.
You can find this podcast on Podbean,
Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube,
Amazon Music, and iHeartRadio.
Like what you've heard so far?
Please like, subscribe,
and follow wherever you get your
podcasts,
and leave a 5-star review on Apple
Podcasts.
Got questions about what we talked
(22:26):
about or research that you want to
share?
Send an email to contactatproveitpod
.com.
The views and opinions expressed in
this podcast are those of the host and
its guests and do not necessarily
represent the official position,
opinion,
or strategies of their employers or
companies.
Examples of research and data analysis
discussed within this podcast are only
examples.
(22:46):
They should not be utilized in the real
world as...
the only solution available as they are
based on very limited,
often single use case,
and sometimes dated information.
Assumptions made within this discussion
about research and data analyses are
not necessarily representative of the
position of the host, the guests,
or their employees or companies.
No part of this podcast may be
reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system,
(23:08):
or transmitted in any form or by any
means mechanical, electronic,
recording,
or otherwise without prior written
permission of the creator of the
podcast.
The presentation of the content by the
guests does not necessarily constitute
an active endorsement of the content by
the host.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Ridiculous History
History is beautiful, brutal and, often, ridiculous. Join Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown as they dive into some of the weirdest stories from across the span of human civilization in Ridiculous History, a podcast by iHeartRadio.