Keenan · European journal of nutrition 2022 · randomized controlled trial · n=34

Intermittent fasting and continuous energy restriction result in similar changes in body composition and muscle strength when combined with a 12 week resistance training program.

Cited 24 times in the scientific literature.

Level 2 - randomized trial

Randomized controlled trial comparing two dietary restriction strategies alongside resistance training

PubMed 35084574 · doi:10.1007/s00394-022-02804-3 · record verified 2026-08-26

What was done

Thirty-four untrained participants completed a 12-week resistance training intervention (two supervised resistance sessions and one unsupervised combined session per week) while following either continuous energy restriction (CERT: 20% daily caloric restriction, n = 17) or 5:2 intermittent fasting (IFT: ~70% restriction 2 days/week, euenergetic 5 days/week, n = 17). Both groups were prescribed ≥ 1.4 g/kg/day of protein. Investigators evaluated changes in body weight, lean body mass (LBM), body fat, thigh muscle size and quality (via ultrasonography and peripheral quantitative computed tomography [pQCT]), dietary intake, and upper/lower body strength and muscular endurance.

What was found

Across both groups, body weight decreased by 4.6% (p < 0.001), body fat decreased by 24.1% (p < 0.001), and LBM increased by 3.7% (p < 0.001), with no significant overall differences between groups, though outcomes differed by sex. Both groups improved thigh muscle size and quality while reducing intramuscular and subcutaneous fat. The CERT group demonstrated a significantly greater increase in muscle surface area on pQCT compared to IFT. Strength and muscular endurance improvements were similar across groups.

Why it matters

This study indicates that 5:2 intermittent fasting is as effective as continuous calorie restriction for fat loss and muscle gain when accompanied by adequate protein and resistance training.

Limits

The sample size was small (34 completers), the trial was retrospectively registered, and unsupervised training sessions were not directly monitored. Specific subgroup values for the reported sex differences were omitted from the abstract, and long-term sustainability beyond 12 weeks was not assessed.

Cited by