근육의 중요성과 간헐적 단식의 이점

잘 먹고, 간헐적 단식을 하고, 운동을 하는 것은 노화 과정에서 근육을 만들고, 지방을 줄이고, 전반적인 건강을 유지하는 데 매우 중요합니다.

### 건강 마스터하기: 근육 형성, 간헐적 단식 및 효과적인 체중 관리의 열쇠
* 💪 " 나이가 들어감에 따라 근육량은 **특히 혈당 조절 측면에서 건강을 유지하는 데 매우 중요**합니다."
* 근육량이 감소하면 **탄수화물의 이용률이 낮아져 지방으로 저장**되어 인슐린 저항성을 유발합니다.
* 근육을 키우려면 **단백질 섭취에 중점**을 두고 적절한 탄수화물과 단백질을 섭취하는 것이 필수적입니다.
* ⏳ "간헐적 단식은 근육을 키우고 지방을 줄이는 데 도움이 되며, **'가끔은 잘 먹고 가끔은 빨리 먹는' 접근 방식**이 효과적입니다."
* 간헐적 단식 연구 결과는 다양할 수 있으며, **칼로리 섭취량과 같은 개별적인 요인을 고려**하는 것이 중요합니다.
* 스트레스, 수면 부족, 과도한 운동과 같은 요인이 **체중 감량과 근육 증가를 방해**할 수 있습니다.
* 간헐적 단식과 고강도 인터벌 트레이닝을 결합하면 **지방을 감량**하고 **근육을 늘리는 데 효과적인 전략**이 될 수 있습니다.
* 🍽️ "영양과 관련해서는 **좋은 탄수화물, 단백질, 채소를 적당량 섭취**하는 것이 핵심입니다."

Understanding all the knowledge in the world, actually, losing muscle has a bigger impact than metabolism. We've only talked about belly fat, we haven't really talked about losing muscle, but as we get older, muscle becomes much more important. So, at this moment in my life, when I have the most muscle, I want to increase my muscle. Why is muscle so important? If muscle decreases, our body's capacity to process sugar decreases, so even if we continue to consume carbohydrates, if our muscles deteriorate, then the carbohydrates or sugar that enter our body are not used properly for blood sugar control. Instead, they are stored in our body's storage units, which are muscles and the liver. So, a decrease in muscle mass means it's going straight to the liver.

Actually, so if I don't reduce my carbohydrate intake, my blood sugar won't be controlled, and I'll become insulin resistant. When you have insulin resistance, your muscles deteriorate faster. Oh, it's like Park Soo-hong. So when you have insulin resistance, your muscles deteriorate faster than they naturally would during the aging process. So, fat accumulates between our muscles, like marbling in meat. Yes, just like fat in the liver, fat between muscles also causes insulin resistance. So, the oil in between muscles is not good either. Yes, it's not good. So, we need to keep moving and increase muscle mass. But we keep sitting, and as we age, it's natural for muscles to deteriorate. You know, as we age, that's just how it goes.

It's something that is taken for granted. So, if you don't do that, I can delay vascular aging much more. Yes, it's important to build muscles. How do you build muscles? First, you have to eat well. Yes, don't eat. Oh, if you don't eat well, even if you exercise, muscles won't grow. Ah, if you convert existing fat into muscles, is it not good? If I could do that, it would be great, but then it seems like a lot of muscles will be built, right? It's not that easy. So, to build muscles, you need to consume enough carbohydrates and protein as needed. Only then will muscles grow. However, you don't need to worry about carbohydrates; just pay attention to protein, and then keep focusing on your weight.

I noticed that if you eat a lot, you gain weight, so by eating less, carbohydrates do not decrease, but only protein decreases. So, in that situation, the muscle that should be gained through aerobic exercise does not develop. Therefore, you should eat well, taking care to consume carbohydrates and protein as needed. If you do that, like I mentioned earlier, those muscles can be built, but the question arises whether fat will be lost. Yes, that's why intermittent fasting should be done. Fat may not be lost even if muscles are gained. So, fat can be lost as well. That's why bodybuilders eat huge amounts, like bananas, sweet potatoes, protein shakes, and diligently consume chicken breast. However, they exercise for hours. People like that gain muscle and lose fat, right? But we...

If people don't live at the gym for more than 4 hours a day, we can't apply that method. So, is there a way to build muscles and lose fat without doing that? Right, by eating well and occasionally doing intermittent fasting, you can achieve it. When you eat well, you build muscles, and when you fast, you lose fat. Exactly. Eat well, don't eat a little in between, eat well, take breaks in between. That's what you need to do. So, I've actually prepared a bit for intermittent fasting. Well, then, with protein, everything we call protein is fine, like beans and tofu, great, fish is the best, everything is good, meats are great too.

How much should one eat to eat well? It's the amount needed by my body, the amount of blood needed in my body. So, eat as much as your body needs. Your body determines that based on what goes into your mouth. But why do people say things like, Eat a little less when you feel a bit short? So, I'm someone who raises objections to that. If you eat less, it may be good for your health and longevity, that's true. It consistently shows that in animal experiments. If you eat less to promote longevity, by cutting your usual meal in half or eating only half of what you usually eat, it may help with longevity. However, whether you can live longer or not, well, that's uncertain. If you're over 80, protein intake may be insufficient. As you age, muscle loss may occur, leading to a faster aging process, and your lifespan may increase, but it's uncertain. So, I make sure to consume protein, so I take care of my muscles.

What are some ways to maintain muscle mass and also maintain the will to live in old age? So, if you eat well, build muscle, and occasionally fast to reduce fat, ultimately it's beneficial, right? That's right, that's right. So, isn't it a way to live healthily while building muscle? In terms of quantity, when eating, instead of eating a lot at each meal, eat deliciously twice a day. That's what they say, right? Yes, that's correct. So, I have prepared a lot, but if you do a lot, it's enough. If you do a lot, it's enough. That's right. In intermittent fasting, what I mean is, eat well and occasionally fast. Now, Park Yong-woo advocates intermittent fasting. I have really been trying that lately. Really. But now, the recent studies in the last three years...

Content is coming out a lot like an explosion. About fasting, let me summarize and read it. So far, it's a bit of a mix of positive and negative. Saying that there is no big difference between low-calorie meals and fasting is not considered a significant method, and there are also results. Some say this is a good method, but in animal experiments, it consistently shows positive results. When intermittent fasting is done, but think about it. In animal experiments, humans control them. So when they fast, they fast for sure and give the right amount, so the results can only be ideal. However, in clinical studies, it doesn't work that way because it can't be completely controlled. Therefore, in the research, there are some studies that are considered successful. In 2017, for example, tracking and observing a low-calorie group and a fasting group for a year, the fact is like this.

Doing research for a year is not easy. Even the participants in the study, no matter how much research funding they receive, find it challenging because it's a normal thing. So, the interesting thing about this research is that for the first six months, they followed a low-calorie diet, then an intermittent fasting diet, and for the remaining six months, they just ate normally, whatever they wanted. The conclusion is that there was no difference in weight loss, fasting blood sugar, or insulin resistance between the two groups. Therefore, intermittent fasting is not particularly better than a low-calorie diet. That's the conclusion. But the interesting thing now is that the dropout rate is high. Why? Because it's hard. Both have high dropout rates, but intermittent fasting is much higher at 38%. So, four out of ten people gave up. It's better to eat a little less than to eat less frequently.

I gave up 30%, so if it's not a study using medicine, it drops for up to six months, but it doesn't fall below that. If you just keep trying, you will achieve a plateau or gradually improve again. But how did this research go? I mentioned last time that unless we break free from the constraints of calories, there will be no progress for us. Yes, to publish such a good paper in academic journals, objectivity must be guaranteed, so the concept of calories cannot be excluded. So, how did calories come into play in this research? Well, for the low-calorie group, we made them eat what they usually ate and calculated the calories, making them eat only 75% of that. Every day, for example, and then the intermittent fasting group fasted every other day, but they fasted the amount they usually ate.

On days when you don't eat, you should eat 125%, and on fasting days, you should eat 25%. Then the calories are roughly the same. So, it's just a different way of eating the same amount of calories. It's about whether you eat more or less. But it says there's no difference. The interesting thing is if you look here, now what you see here is on fasting days, for example, with intermittent fasting, you should eat 25%, which means you should eat less than 500 calories. But you ate more, close to 1000 calories. Oh, and on days you should eat well, you should eat over 2000 calories. But you only ate 1500 calories. Yeah, but this is what these people have written, so it seems like they may not have written it 100% accurately. Even though they wrote it as ordered from this side, fasting days ate a lot.

On days when you need to eat less, what's the difference between eating less to reduce calories? So, conducting studies on people is not easy. Therefore, saying there is no difference here, and concluding that there is no difference straightforwardly, is not possible. Earlier, when I talked about eating well, I mentioned that you need to eat well and pay attention to what you eat. This is another study now. This time, it was done at New England Journal of Medicine. What they did this time was they looked at 16:8. What is 16:8? It means fasting for 16 hours and eating for 8 hours, which is a form of intermittent fasting. How did they do it? Generally, the standard protocol is low-calorie meals. In medicine now, one group just had a standard low-calorie meal, and the other group applied 16:8.

What's the problem here? It's that even with the same calories, whether it's a group that did 16:8 or a group that did 12:12, men were restricted to 1,500 to 1,800 calories and women to 1,200 to 1,500 calories. Isn't it right to adjust the calories? Even though it may be correct in the research method, can we apply the results of this research to the general public and tell them to endure hunger like this for a year? That's why I keep emphasizing in intermittent fasting that you should eat well. Whether you do 16:8 or 5:2, you should eat well on eating days. If you do 16:8 and just eat fewer calories like 1,500 or 1,200, will you get the desired results? So, this emphasizes the importance of calories because objectivity must be guaranteed.

Our modern evidence-based medicine has a weakness, you know. Oh, this is another interesting study. This one is about pong dang pong dang. So, one day you eat well, and the next day you fast completely. On the day you eat well, kids can eat as much as they want, without counting calories. Yes, so this study targeted healthy young adults for 6 months. Yes, one day you eat whatever you want, then the next day, you fast and only drink water. They did this for 6 months, and the interesting result was that even doing this, the basal metabolic rate did not decrease. The conclusion was that even after doing this for 6 months, there was no effect. No, the fact that the basal metabolic rate did not decrease is very important. Because as I mentioned, if you eat less, the basal metabolic rate decreases. But.

I fasted all day like this, but my basal metabolic rate did not decrease. How does this deceive the body? So, it's not a noticeable result. Deceiving the body, even if you eat a little, burns a lot of calories. When the body is deceived and eats well, the basal metabolic rate does not drop. I didn't know that I was in the middle of a war without my basal metabolic rate dropping. So, I tried it. How did you do it? I ate to my heart's content one day and fasted completely the next day. I tried this. The research is usually done casually, but I completely fasted for 3 days out of the 7 days in a week. So, I fasted for 36 hours for 3 days. I planned to do it for a month, but I gave up after 2 weeks and switched to a 24-hour fast. So, a 24-hour fast is now.

Fasting for a day is having one meal, and a 36-hour fast is just drinking water and not eating at all. When you look at the results now, in the first week, weight decreased by 3kg, body fat decreased by 1.4kg, and muscle decreased as well. I didn't eat anything for 3 days out of 7 days, so I ate a lot on the days I did eat, skipping meals on Mon, Tue, and Wed, and eating a lot on Thu, Fri, and Sat. So, I ate on Mon and Sat, didn't eat on Tue and Fri, and ate on Wed. That's how it was done. But the surprising thing is that in the second week, weight and body fat didn't change at all. Yes, so even though I fasted for 3 days out of 7, yes, but there was no change. Oh, if there is no change, what does that mean? It means that my body caught on and dropped the basal metabolic rate. Right, right, that's right. So, I was surprised, and from the third week, I just changed to eating one meal a day instead of fasting altogether.

Even though I knew it, when the fourth week came, yesterday, my weight and body fat started to move. Yes, so this was my first experience, and even though I didn't eat for three days out of seven, it should have moved a little, but since the amount of food I ate decreased absolutely, despite the absolute decrease, when I saw that my weight and body fat didn't budge at all, I was really surprised by the overall situation. So, the research results that came out earlier were targeting young and healthy adults, so it could be because I am not young, but it doesn't necessarily apply to everyone universally. So, for me, the 36-hour fasting didn't work. Ah, how is 24-hour fasting different from 36-hour fasting? If I finished eating at 6 p.m. the day before, then I would eat at 6 p.m. the next day.

And then, I eat dinner at 6 o'clock, finish, and starve all day today, then if I have breakfast at 7 o'clock tomorrow morning, it means I fasted for 37 hours. However, doing it for 36 hours puts the body in a tense state. No, looking at the previous research results, even though the basal metabolic rate did not decrease, it was not the case for me. So, can these results be universally applied to everyone? No, they can't. No, they can't. Maybe we can understand our bodies a bit. So, when the basal metabolic rate drops, if you reduce the amount of food, you feel a bit low on energy. If this child is not on a diet right now, they won't skip meals like this. I have lived for 50 years, and this child has never experienced this. It's like feeling low on energy, feeling sleepy, and even though I've done all the exercises, the weight doesn't seem to come off easily. When I looked into it a bit, now.

As mentioned, the basic metabolism decreases when fasting, so even on days when you are not fasting, you should eat well. If you don't eat well, your basic metabolism decreases, and your body changes into one that doesn't lose weight even if you fast. So, now your final weight doesn't move, and then you need to exercise. Just controlling the timing has its limits, so to maintain your basic metabolism, intermittent fasting is necessary, along with exercise stimulation. Also, it's good to have fun because if stress hormones continue to rise due to weight not changing, the body seeks sugar, and if you forcibly reduce meals, you lose muscle. So, in some cases, dieting itself can be stressful. Next, what else?

Because fatigue builds up, not being able to drink a lot of caffeine and not taking enough rest, or lack of sleep, or being too greedy and exercising for a few hours a day, the body perceives it as stress. Then, the weight may not move. It's not about unfair instructions from the boss, it's just that the body feels stressed. So, even when trying to diet and the weight and body fat don't move, of course, you need to sleep well and check if you are sleeping. But you also need to consider whether you are filled with stress from head to toe. When you are not losing weight, you need to think about that. Now, the interesting thing is, as I mentioned earlier, comparing the 16:8 fasting, where you fast for 16 hours and eat for 8 hours, with the 12:12 fasting, where you fast for 12 hours and eat for 12 hours.

I've tried targeting young men who usually do weight training, so I changed only the timing, while keeping the menu and amount of food the same. These are people who usually do strength training and understand the importance of protein, so they eat well. Well, they did it for 8 weeks, and there was almost no difference in muscle growth between the two groups. But body fat decreased much more noticeably in the 16:8 group. So, to see the effects of intermittent fasting like 16:8, you need to include exercise, eat well, and then you can see the effects. It is possible to lose body fat nicely while maintaining or increasing muscle mass. So, I have a question. I get too hungry during the 16-hour fasting period. Can't I just eat a little bit to ease the hunger? I just ate a tiny bit. Is it not okay? Are there any nutrients that provide energy?

When you come in, the effect of fasting disappears. You shouldn't eat anything. You should only drink water at that time. So, some people really carry a paper cup and if they're hungry, they chew on it but don't swallow. But the interesting thing is when you chew on something, your body becomes healthier. For example, you won't feel hungry. So, when intermittent fasting for 16 hours or 24 hours, you go crazy because you're hungry, and if you close your eyes, you'll imagine food. This means your body is not healthy. A healthy body can enjoy feeling hungry as it becomes healthier. So, the digestive system rests, the blood that should go to the digestive system goes up to the brain steadily, so the brain becomes clearer, the body becomes much lighter, your head becomes clearer, and you feel this kind of sensation. You start to find eating bothersome, that's what being healthy is about. So, hearing these kinds of stories can be too much.

If you starve, it's not good for your stomach. You lose weight, but you should think about your stomach first. When you worry about your stomach, it's not good. If you think like that, it's too extreme. People say that being too bent is not good, but when you look back at human history, intentionally bending occasionally like this is a way to think about the past. In the past, people really starved like eating rice. If you compare it, it's relatively easy for us now. So, shouldn't we go easy on our stomachs too? Oh, in that way. There are research results on intermittent fasting and high-intensity interval training. This is a recent study targeting healthy obese young women. It's similar to what I'm doing now, a 5-day diet. What intermittent fasting is, you can eat as much as you want for one day without counting calories, and then for two days, I recommend a 24-hour fast.

I fasted for 18 hours. If you fast for 18 hours, you can have two meals. On fasting days, I eat around 600 calories a day, divided into two meals of 300 calories each. On non-fasting days, I eat as much as I want. On fasting days, I drink a cup of lavada rum. I have one meal when the sun rises, then another one almost at night. So, to maintain an 18-hour fast, I have to eat during the remaining six hours. Therefore, if I have dinner and then have lunch the next day, it becomes an 18-hour fast. So, I did that, and then gathered research subjects for high-intensity interval training under supervision, making them exercise rigorously. We did it three times a week for 8 weeks. Let's see how the results turned out. What's interesting is that there was a group that only did intermittent fasting for 8 weeks without exercising much, and there wasn't much change in their weight.

Even the basal metabolic rate drops. It's not easy to take care of one's diet properly, even for professionals. So, if you don't eat well, your basal metabolism drops. Oh, and a group that only does high-intensity interval training loses fat, gains muscle, and becomes a healthy pig. Yes, so even though there is no change in weight, fat decreases, and muscles increase. But if the group does intermittent fasting and high-intensity interval training, they lose weight, waist circumference, fat, gain muscle, and become healthier. Oh, what kind of exercise is it? High-intensity interval training. High-intensity interval training is, um, aerobic exercise done at an intensity where you can still talk to the person next to you, just enough to catch your breath.

You know, it's not lightly running up the stairs, but rather a bit faster, so that you might feel out of breath. When you feel out of breath, then you slow down your pace and walk slowly, waiting for your breath to come back. When it does, you start again. By doing this for just 15 to 20 minutes, it's enough. You don't have to do it for a long time. Oh, you can run hard, take a break when it gets tough, and then do it again if you can. Run hard, take a break if it gets tough, and repeat. By doing this for just 20 minutes, it has a similar effect to doing aerobic exercise for over 40 minutes. Recently, I've been running for 2 minutes, walking for 2 minutes, running for 2 minutes, and walking for 2 minutes because I can't go for more than 2 minutes. But that's high-intensity exercise, right? Yes, if you go to a gym, some people walk at a speed of 12km/h for 30 minutes, while others run at 8km/h but get lost in thought.

For a wandering person, that's a high-intensity exercise, right? So, if you get used to it, then that person can run for 30 minutes with a 12k, which is very inefficient. You need to run for 30 minutes to make it a high-intensity exercise, which makes your body inefficient. No, even just running for a minute makes it high-intensity, efficient body. But when this efficiency improves, even if you speed up, it becomes less tiring or healthier. So, what we want now is to become healthier than we are now, right? Oh, intermittent fasting and high-intensity exercise. So, when you eat well, you build muscle, and when you don't eat, you lose fat. In fact, this is what I expressed as a cellular switch. Our body's cells, when there is excess energy, then it turns into fat.

When we fast and then eat, it builds muscles. Yes, however, when there is no energy, then at that time, not only the stored fat is used but also autophagy occurs. It's a kind of recycling system in our body. It extracts nutrients from aging and diseased cells to create new cells. They just let the old cells die. What happens then? The cells rejuvenate. So, ultimately, this can prevent the progression to cancer, prevent obesity or diabetes, and have positive effects. Therefore, if intermittent fasting is used wisely, it can be like medicine. Just fasting for 16 hours or not eating for two days, and eating inadequately during the rest of the time can lead to muscle loss and harm health.

Rather than asking if intermittent fasting is good or bad, it's more about how well you can effectively use this double-edged sword to benefit your health. It's about using it well. Just fasting alone is not enough, and just exercising alone is not enough. Right, the best combination is to eat well, do intermittent fasting, and exercise. Eat well five days a week, do fasting twice a week, and yes, do interval training. How many times a week should you do it? Three to four times a week is enough. It doesn't matter which days. Then, on days when you eat well, it's better to do strength training on days when you eat less. Right, that's right. Doing strength training and this, on days when you fast, intentionally come to the department store and do some shopping or consciously walk a lot, move a lot, so that fat will burn more effectively. So, handle it skillfully.

On the day you apply, make sure to eat well, exercise, apply, and I have a question. We usually eat well, don't we? Just eat until you're full, right? If you just eat what you usually eat until you're full, it's not good, right? Or can we just do that? Or do we have to diligently consume protein drinks? No, you don't need to do that. So, as long as you get the nutrients your body needs, it's enough. If you don't have a good understanding of nutrition, it's not easy. So, the best thing is good carbohydrates for your body. White rice, no need to distinguish between brown rice or mixed grain rice, just carbohydrates. About the size of a fist for a meal, eat that much. It's small, right? About the size of a fist, not overflowing, just that amount is enough.

I don't think so, got it. Next, for protein, about the size of your palm, whether it's eggs, fish, or meat, you eat this much. And then, what's next? For vegetables or other side dishes, for vegetables, you can eat a handful, really. So, don't think it's difficult, just take care of your meals like that. Because if you say you'll eat it, since nutrients like protein are not all digested and absorbed at once to become muscles, eating one portion of sirloin as if it were two portions is meaningless. So, during your waking hours, it's important to keep the concentration of amino acids in your blood at a plus. Therefore, for protein, it's much more helpful to eat a little bit frequently rather than a large amount at once. Oh, I see. Yes, I've been trying to do that little by little these days. Of course, taking care of it.

It's true that it's because there's no one, but I feel hungry after dinner. I went to bed hungry a few times, and then when I ate something after that, I felt a bit uncomfortable, kind of bloated. So, I intentionally don't eat. That's actually a sign that my body is getting better. If you're not hungry, it means your body doesn't need food. So, when I wake up in the morning, I don't feel like eating again. That's why I feel like I might die at lunchtime. The hungriest time for me is dinner time. It's fascinating, right? So, after we have dinner until the next morning, not eating for 12 hours, I'm hungrier at dinner time than in the morning. Even though I had lunch, that's how our bodies are. Oh, that's how it is. Originally, that's how it is. Why? Because we get a lot of stress during the day, right? There are things like that. When you sleep at night, what.

It's stressful, eating, and really fasting. You can't do it unless you're sleeping. I can't really do it during the day, but Reporter Ahn Seung-chan's stress has recently decreased because his family is a bit far away, so he's been living alone at home these days. That's how it works, right? But even for those who are stressed at work, if they get away from work, they might get away from stress, too. Then new stress arises. So, in reality, you shouldn't look for this stress outside. That stress is really nice. When I perceive a situation as stressful, it becomes stressful. In fact, I am the problem, not the surrounding environment. Oh, I see. Oh, I see. Oh, I see. I didn't have stress originally. The moment I set regulations, you come to me and become stressful. Stress hormones rise, so I shouldn't call it a flower. Got it. Hey, three things.

Intermittent fasting is not good. You should eat well and exercise. Will you show a changed appearance of 2% now? Please accept it well. It's hard to see. In the past, it was special and good, but you will often think like this. Now it's too late. It's right to do well when it's time. Anyway, office workers should take care of their health well. When young, exchange health for money, and when old, try to turn that money back into health. We listened to Professor Park Young-woo's good words at Samsung Hospital today. Thank you.

간헐적 단식이 건강에 좋은 이유, 핵심만 뽑아서 다시 올립니다 (강북삼성병원 서울건진센터 박용우 교수)

📣 사람을 찾습니다
🙋 언더스탠딩과 함께 일할 분을 찾습니다!

직무: 영상제작PD, 기자, 인사담당자, 마케팅담당자 
지원 접수: 이메일 접수 to.understanding.official@gmail.com
제출 서류: 이력서, 포트폴리오
접수 기간: 상시채용


라이브는 삼프로TV에서, 클립영상은 언더스탠딩에서!

매일 저녁 7시~9시

문의 : to.understanding.official@gmail.com


언더스탠딩 : 세상의 모든 지식

건강을 위한 근육 만들기의 중요성

근육 손실은 신체의 당 처리 능력에 큰 영향을 미치며 인슐린 저항성을 유발할 수 있습니다.

근육량을 유지하고 늘리는 것은 혈당 조절과 지방 축적을 예방하는 데 매우 중요합니다.

근육을 키우려면 적절한 탄수화물과 단백질이 포함된 균형 잡힌 식단과 함께 지방 감소를 촉진하는 간헐적 단식이 필수적입니다.

영양 섭취와 간헐적 단식에 집중하면 무리한 운동 없이도 근육을 키우고 지방을 감량할 수 있습니다.

신체가 필요로 하는 적정량을 섭취하는 것이 중요하지만, 적게 먹는 것이 장수를 촉진할 수 있다고 믿는 사람들도 있지만 이에 대한 연구는 불확실합니다.

나이가 들수록 근육량과 단백질 섭취를 유지하는 것이 더욱 중요해지며, 이는 잠재적으로 수명에 영향을 미칠 수 있습니다.

최근 연구에 따르면 체중 감량과 혈당 조절을 위한 저칼로리 식단과 비교하여 간헐적 단식의 효과에 대한 상반된 결과가 나왔습니다.

간헐적 단식 연구에서 중도 탈락률이 높다는 점은 장기적인 지속 가능성과 효과에 대한 의문을 제기합니다.

다양한 공복 식단이 칼로리 섭취량과 신진대사율에 미치는 영향

16:8 및 5:2와 같은 단식 다이어트는 칼로리 섭취량에 일관성이 없으며, 참가자가 규정된 칼로리 제한을 준수하지 않는 경우가 많습니다.

기초 대사율이 감소하지 않는 '퐁당퐁당' 단식에 대한 연구 결과로 인해 단식이 대사율과 체중 관리에 미치는 효과에 의문이 제기되고 있습니다.

이는 연구 결과를 일반 대중에게 정확하게 적용하는 것이 어렵다는 점과 단식 중 균형 잡힌 식단을 유지하는 것이 중요하다는 점을 강조합니다.

다양한 공복 기간이 신진대사율과 체중에 미치는 영향

36시간 동안 단식해도 예상대로 기초 대사율이 감소하지 않아 체중이나 체지방에 변화가 없었습니다.

단식 실험의 결과는 나이와 건강 상태가 신진대사 반응에 영향을 미칠 수 있으므로 모든 개인에게 보편적으로 적용되지 않을 수 있습니다.

이 실험은 24시간 단식과 36시간 단식이 신체의 에너지 수준과 신진대사율에 미치는 영향의 잠재적 차이를 강조했습니다.

간헐적 단식이 신진대사와 체중 감량에 미치는 영향

단식을 하면 기초대사량이 감소하지만, 신진대사를 유지하려면 단식하지 않는 날에도 잘 먹는 것이 중요합니다.

간헐적 단식을 운동과 병행하면 기본적인 신진대사를 유지하고 체중 감량을 촉진하는 데 도움이 될 수 있습니다.

단식 중에 음식을 씹으면 공복감을 완화하는 데 도움이 될 수 있지만, 단식이 신체 건강에 미치는 이점을 충분히 경험하려면 아무것도 먹지 않는 것이 중요합니다.

간헐적 단식과 고강도 인터벌 트레이닝의 영향

간헐적 단식은 24시간 단식하고 5일 동안 600칼로리를 섭취하는 방식이며, 고강도 인터벌 트레이닝은 15~20분 동안 격렬한 운동으로 구성되어 체중 감량, 허리둘레 감소, 근육량 증가 등의 효과를 얻을 수 있습니다.

간헐적 단식과 고강도 인터벌 트레이닝을 병행하면 한 가지 방법만 사용할 때보다 체중 감량, 지방 감소, 근육 증가 등 전반적인 건강 개선 효과를 얻을 수 있습니다.

고강도 인터벌 트레이닝은 짧은 시간 동안 강렬한 유산소 운동을 하고 짧은 회복 기간을 갖는 것으로, 훨씬 짧은 시간에 장시간 유산소 운동과 비슷한 효과를 얻을 수 있습니다.

간헐적 단식과 운동이 건강에 미치는 이점

간헐적 단식은 근육 형성과 지방 감소를 촉진하여 효율성과 건강을 개선할 수 있습니다.

또한 자가포식을 촉발하여 세포를 젊어지게 하고 암, 비만, 당뇨병 예방에 긍정적인 영향을 미칩니다.

핵심은 간헐적 단식, 적절한 영양 섭취, 운동을 효과적으로 결합하여 건강에 최대한의 이점을 얻는 것입니다.

적절한 식사량과 스트레스가 식습관에 미치는 영향

단백질은 손바닥 크기로 자주 섭취해야 근육 흡수가 잘 됩니다.

배고픔 신호를 무시하고 낮 동안 금식하면 불편함과 불규칙한 식사 패턴으로 이어질 수 있습니다.

스트레스는 식습관에 큰 영향을 미칠 수 있으므로 더 건강한 라이프스타일을 위해 외부에서 해결책을 찾기보다는 내부적으로 관리하는 것이 중요합니다.