priors.science/reviews/intermittent-fasting-time-restricted-eating

Intermittent Fasting and Time Restricted Eating

The current evidence on 10 claims, ordered from most established to most contested. Each score is the panel’s evidence certainty — how firmly the literature supports the claim as stated.

10claims tracked
89primary papers reviewed
9 Aug 2026latest evidence review
Weeklyre-scored against new papers
0 Established · 4 Likely · 3 Uncertain · 2 Doubtful · 1 Refuted  |  four-reviewer panel · PICO Framework
ClaimStandingEvidence certaintyCorpus
Time-restricted eating feasible with no serious adverse eventsSafLong-standingLikely82%15
Time-restricted eating not superior to calorie restrictionWLLikely80%14
Intermittent fasting lowers HbA1c in type 2 diabetesGLYLikely78%14
Time-restricted eating reduces weight vs unrestricted eatingWLLikely72%14
Early time-restricted eating lowers blood pressureCMUncertain66%19
Time-restricted eating reduces visceral and total fatWLUncertain63%16
Time-restricted eating reduces lean muscle massWLUncertain52%16
Early time-restricted eating improves insulin sensitivity without weight lossGLYDoubtful45%15
Time-restricted eating improves blood lipid profileCMDoubtful33%18
Time-restricted eating cuts weight independent of caloriesGLYRefuted28%16
Track Intermittent Fasting and Time Restricted Eating.
These claims are re-scored against new papers every week. Track this topic for the full review, including each claim’s challenge and the papers behind it.
Track this topic →
Standing — what the evidence certainty means
Established≥ 85%Strong, consistent evidence. Unlikely to change.
Likely70–84%Well supported, with some gaps or indirect evidence.
Uncertain50–69%Mixed or limited evidence. Genuinely open.
Doubtful30–49%Little support; the weight of evidence leans against it.
Refuted< 30%The evidence contradicts it — confidently false as stated.
Where the evidence sits in time
Long-standingMost of this evidence is older than the rest of this field.