Researchers wanted to know if different ways of eating could help reduce inflammation in people at risk of type 2 diabetes. They compared two popular eating approaches—intermittent fasting with early eating windows and regular calorie restriction—against standard care over 6 months. While both eating approaches led to more weight loss than standard care, and weight loss did reduce inflammation markers in the blood, the study found that the specific method used didn’t make a significant difference. This suggests that losing weight itself is what matters most for reducing inflammation, regardless of which eating plan you choose.

The Quick Take

  • What they studied: Whether intermittent fasting with early eating times or regular calorie restriction reduces inflammation better than standard eating habits in people at risk of developing type 2 diabetes
  • Who participated: 209 adults with an average age around 35 years who were overweight or obese and at risk for type 2 diabetes. They were randomly assigned to three groups: intermittent fasting with early eating (eating only between 8am-12pm on 3 days per week), regular calorie restriction (eating 30% fewer calories daily), or standard care (no specific diet changes)
  • Key finding: Both intermittent fasting and calorie restriction led to more weight loss than standard care. Importantly, weight loss reduced inflammation markers in the blood (specifically C-reactive protein and TNF-alpha), but both eating methods worked equally well—neither was significantly better than the other
  • What it means for you: If you’re trying to reduce inflammation and lower your diabetes risk, losing weight is what counts most. You can choose whichever eating approach fits your lifestyle best, since the research suggests the method matters less than actually achieving weight loss. However, this is an exploratory study with a smaller subset of participants, so results should be confirmed with larger research before making major dietary changes

The Research Details

This was a randomized controlled trial, which is considered a strong type of research study. Researchers divided 209 adults into three groups: one group practiced intermittent fasting with early eating windows (eating only between 8am and noon on 3 days per week), another group reduced their daily calories by 30%, and a third group continued eating normally as a comparison. The study lasted 6 months. For the detailed analysis of inflammation, researchers focused on participants who lost weight above or below the median amount (35 people in the intermittent fasting group, 32 in the calorie restriction group, and 18 in the standard care group). They measured inflammation markers in the blood at the start and end of the study, and also examined inflammation-related genes in fat tissue samples from some participants.

This research design is important because it allows researchers to compare different eating approaches fairly. By randomly assigning people to groups, researchers can be more confident that differences in results come from the eating method itself, not from differences in the people. The 6-month timeframe is long enough to see meaningful changes in weight and inflammation. By measuring both blood markers and genes in fat tissue, the researchers could look at inflammation from multiple angles.

This study has several strengths: it’s a randomized controlled trial with a decent sample size, it measured multiple inflammation markers, and it looked at both blood tests and tissue samples. However, there are some limitations to consider: the subset analyzed for detailed inflammation markers was smaller than the original group, and the study was described as ’exploratory,’ meaning it was designed to explore questions rather than definitively answer them. The results should be viewed as preliminary findings that would benefit from confirmation in larger studies.

What the Results Show

Both the intermittent fasting group and the calorie restriction group lost significantly more weight over 6 months compared to the standard care group. This weight loss was associated with meaningful reductions in two key inflammation markers measured in the blood: C-reactive protein (CRP) decreased by an average of 1.36 mg/dL, and TNF-alpha decreased by 0.082 pg/mL. These reductions were statistically significant, meaning they were unlikely to have happened by chance. However, when researchers compared the two active diet groups directly, there was no significant difference between them—both approaches reduced inflammation markers equally well. This suggests that the weight loss itself, rather than the specific eating method, was responsible for the inflammation reduction.

When researchers examined inflammation-related genes in fat tissue samples, they found no meaningful differences between the groups. This was somewhat surprising, as researchers might have expected to see changes in the genes that control inflammation in fat tissue. This finding suggests that while weight loss reduces inflammation markers circulating in the blood, the changes in fat tissue inflammation may be more subtle or may require longer to develop. The lack of difference between groups in fat tissue also supports the conclusion that the method of weight loss matters less than the amount of weight lost.

Previous research has suggested that both intermittent fasting and calorie restriction can reduce inflammation, but it wasn’t clear which method worked better. This study adds to that knowledge by showing that both approaches are roughly equivalent when it comes to reducing inflammation markers, at least in people at risk of type 2 diabetes. The finding that weight loss itself is the key factor aligns with other research showing that excess weight contributes to inflammation in the body. This study helps clarify that people don’t need to choose one specific eating method over another based on inflammation reduction—they should choose the method that they can stick with long-term.

The study has several important limitations. First, the detailed analysis of inflammation markers was done on a smaller subset of the original 209 participants, which reduces the statistical power of those findings. Second, the study was described as exploratory, meaning it was designed to generate questions for future research rather than provide definitive answers. Third, the study only lasted 6 months, so we don’t know if the benefits continue or change over longer periods. Fourth, the study focused on people at risk of type 2 diabetes, so results may not apply to other populations. Finally, the study didn’t examine whether the inflammation reduction actually translated into better health outcomes or reduced diabetes risk—it only measured inflammation markers themselves.

The Bottom Line

If you’re at risk for type 2 diabetes and want to reduce inflammation, focus on losing weight through whichever eating approach you can maintain long-term. Both intermittent fasting with early eating windows and regular calorie restriction appear equally effective for reducing inflammation markers. Choose based on what fits your lifestyle and preferences. However, these findings are preliminary (confidence level: moderate), and you should consult with a healthcare provider or registered dietitian before making significant dietary changes, especially if you have diabetes or take medications.

These findings are most relevant for adults who are overweight or obese and at risk for type 2 diabetes. The results may also apply to people with prediabetes or metabolic syndrome. However, the findings may not apply to people of normal weight, people with existing type 2 diabetes, or people with other health conditions. Pregnant women, people with a history of eating disorders, and those taking certain medications should consult healthcare providers before trying these eating approaches.

Based on this study, you might expect to see reductions in inflammation markers within 6 months of consistent weight loss. However, individual results vary. Some people may see changes sooner, while others may take longer. It’s important to remember that inflammation reduction is just one benefit of weight loss—other health improvements may take different amounts of time to appear.

Want to Apply This Research?

  • Track weekly weight loss and monitor for inflammation-related symptoms (fatigue, joint pain, persistent infections) over a 6-month period. Set a goal of losing 5-10% of body weight and record weekly weigh-ins and symptom changes in the app.
  • Choose either intermittent fasting (eating only during an 8am-12pm window 3 days per week) or calorie restriction (reducing daily calories by 30%), whichever feels more sustainable. Use the app to log meals, track adherence to your chosen method, and monitor weight changes weekly.
  • Establish a baseline by recording current weight, energy levels, and any inflammation-related symptoms. Then track weekly weight, meal timing or calorie intake depending on your chosen method, and symptom changes. After 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months, review progress and adjust if needed. Consider asking your doctor to check inflammation markers (CRP, TNF-alpha) at baseline and 6 months to objectively measure changes.

This research is exploratory in nature and should not replace professional medical advice. Before starting any new eating plan, especially intermittent fasting or calorie restriction, consult with your healthcare provider or a registered dietitian, particularly if you have diabetes, take medications, are pregnant, have a history of eating disorders, or have other health conditions. The inflammation markers measured in this study are associated with disease risk but are not diagnostic of disease. This study does not prove that reducing inflammation markers will prevent type 2 diabetes or other diseases. Individual results vary, and what works for one person may not work for another.