The data undercut fasting hype and expose systemic risks

r/science spent the day puncturing easy narratives. The most upvoted threads challenge our collective hunger for silver bullets while revealing how messy trade-offs — biological, psychological, and environmental — actually govern outcomes.

What the community really surfaced is a pattern: interventions that work do so because they change behavior or systems, not because they sound novel.

The war on shortcuts: calories, cardio, and clinical risk

The top discussion was a reality check: a sweeping review puncturing the intermittent fasting miracle narrative argued that time-restricted eating performs no better than ordinary diets when calories are equal, which is exactly the point most dieters try to avoid. Meanwhile, the stakes of body composition were put in stark relief by a large analysis tying obesity to sharply higher infection severity across hundreds of diseases, and the conversation tilted toward adherence, not hype, as the main determinant of results.

"I mean I get these results, but this diet often works for people as they cut out evening snacking. Intermittent fasting without a caloric intake change of course would not yield positive results, as you're controlling for the one factor that makes this diet effective"- u/spoonOfhoney (3583 points)

On the prevention side, new evidence that cardiorespiratory fitness stabilizes emotion under stress reframed “mental toughness” as physiology more than mindset. Put together, the day's health threads undercut diet tribalism and remind us that risk moves on two rails — energy balance and capacity — and that both are trainable, but neither is hackable.

Rethinking the mind: when measures mislead and medicines get weird

Several posts pushed back on cognitive and clinical orthodoxies at once. Claims that standard mental health tests may falter for highly intelligent people suggest our instruments can confound the very traits they seek to measure, just as findings that moderate cannabis use in bipolar disorder tracks with stronger decision-making reopened a debate clinicians prefer tidy answers for.

"24 times per week is moderate? That's 3 times a day..."- u/helaku_n (961 points)

And while the community's appetite for psychedelic fixes remains high, a trial pairing intravenous DMT with psychotherapy for depression showed rapid relief with tolerable side effects — promising, but still small, expensive, and tightly scaffolded by clinical support. The contrarian read: measurement error and context effects matter as much as molecules, so any “breakthrough” without attention to the frame is just another story we tell ourselves.

Externalities you can taste, breathe, and feel

If health threads targeted personal fictions, the environmental ones targeted systemic ones. Research showing some bottled water carries more micro- and nanoplastics than tap cut through marketing gloss, fresh measurements that the Amazon flipped to a net carbon source in 2023 underscored climate feedbacks arriving faster than policy, and work linking relentless male aggression to fatal falls among female tortoises captured how social pressures can literally push bodies over the edge.

"Hello kids, today we're going to learn about: positive feedback loops. aka, Toto, I have a feeling we're not in linear algebra anymore."- u/233C (177 points)

The social tech angle wasn't spared: data that teens who do sext share endure alarming rates of nonconsensual sharing and sextortion highlighted how digital systems redistribute harm to the least powerful. Across water bottles, rainforests, reptiles, and adolescents, today's lesson was the same: when we misprice risk and outsource responsibility, the bill arrives — in our bloodstreams, our atmosphere, and our feeds.

Journalistic duty means questioning all popular consensus. - Alex Prescott