A recent abstract presented at an American Heart Association (AHA) conference caused widespread concern by claiming that intermittent fasting (IF), particularly eating within an 8-hour window, may increase the risk of heart attacks by 91%. This caused alarm because millions practice IF for metabolic and cardiovascular health.

Study suggests intermittent fasting nearly doubles risk of death from heart disease - YouTube

However, the speaker critiques the study for several serious limitations:

1. Study Limitations

Not Peer-Reviewed: It’s an abstract, not a published study. It hasn’t undergone scientific peer review.

Self-Reported Data: Based on surveys over several years asking participants to recall their eating habits — highly unreliable.

No Control for Major Factors: The study didn’t account for diet quality, sleep, stress, exercise, or smoking — all critical to heart health.

Misuse of the Term “Intermittent Fasting”:

The data was collected from 2003–2018, before IF became widely practiced or defined.

Therefore, participants likely weren’t intentionally doing IF — they just happened to eat in shorter windows, possibly due to lifestyle (e.g., busy, unhealthy habits).

2. Misleading Conclusions & Media Sensationalism

The AHA’s endorsement of this preliminary data is questioned.

Major media outlets quickly echoed the headline, reaching millions.

Most journalists aren’t trained to critically evaluate scientific studies, contributing to public confusion and fear.

The speaker warns that these actions may reflect institutional resistance to non-pharmaceutical health strategies, such as IF.

3. Financial & Institutional Bias

The speaker suggests that organizations like the AHA often rely on pharmaceutical industry funding.

Health movements like IF threaten the status quo by promoting wellness without drugs.

Therefore, there’s strong incentive to discredit such methods, intentionally or otherwise.

4. How Intermittent Fasting Actually Works

IF has consistently been shown to improve metabolic health markers like:

Blood glucose

Insulin sensitivity

Triglycerides

Waist circumference

Blood pressure

These are all directly related to heart disease risk.

The speaker recommends combining IF with real food (low in sugar, seed oils, processed flour) for optimal results.

5. How to Evaluate Heart Health Properly

He advises personal tracking using reliable blood markers, including:

Markers of Insulin Resistance:

Glucose

Hemoglobin A1C

Fasting insulin

HOMA-IR (glucose × insulin / 405 or 22.2)

Markers of Inflammation & Oxidative Stress:

Triglycerides

Waist size

Blood pressure

HDL/LDL ratio (a lower HDL-to-LDL ratio indicates risk)

LDL particle size (large/fluffy = healthier)

High-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP)

6. Evaluate Yourself — “N=1 Study”

Everyone is different. You are the best test subject for your health.

Try IF and measure your biomarkers over 3 months.

If markers improve, that indicates improved health — regardless of public headlines.

7. Risk Factors Ranked (Speaker’s Opinion)

The speaker gives his rough estimate of relative importance to heart disease:

    Insulin resistance – ~80%

    Gut health/inflammation (leaky gut, food allergies) – ~10%

    LDL particle size – ~9% (mostly influenced by above)

    Total cholesterol – ~1% (only if levels are extremely high, e.g., 600+)

8. Bottom Line

Don’t let headlines scare you out of effective health strategies.

Always question motivation, funding, and bias behind sudden health scares.

Focus on physiological foundations, real food, and tracking your own markers.

Improving root causes and supporting homeostasis is true health — not masking symptoms with drugs.