Do treats facilitate the interpretation of findings on caloric restriction?

Abstract

IntroductionFood can build social bonds and enhance interpersonal relationships. An area of research perhaps at odds with food abundance, is caloric restriction (CR), intermittent fasting (IF) or short-term fasting (STF). We aimed to study the impact of offering treats on the audience during presentations on IF and STF and whether this impacted the audience’s reception of the subject. The contradiction of the tempting nature of sharing brownies juxtaposed with the potential health benefits presented is a light-hearted subject in a world where nutritional intake and health outcomes are the object of intense academic discussion.ObjectiveInvestigate how treats influence hospital personnel interpretation of information presented on the potential benefits of CR, IF and STF.MethodsThis trial consists of a cross-sectional study (CSS) and a randomised controlled trial (RCT) conducted at three study centres. The CSS involved a survey administered to healthcare professionals to assess their knowledge, experience and willingness regarding IF and/or STF. In the RCT, brownies were randomly provided to healthcare staff attending a scientific meeting on restricting calories.Results135 participants were included in the CSS and 64 participants joined the randomised experiment. We found that the randomisation had no statistically significant effect. Only 2 out of 64 were aware of the irony of the provided treatment. In the CSS, participants most often cited the expected beneficial effects on their short-term and long-term health as important reasons for adhering to IF and/or STF. Perceiving fasting as beneficial was mostly influenced by knowledge on the topic and previously adhering to a fasting diet.DiscussionIn this light-hearted, holiday-inspired exploratory study, we found that providing your audience with treats does not influence participants’ opinion of you or your research, even when it focuses on the benefits of reducing calorie intake. The recipients of the treat will remain critical of presented findings, and due to prior experiences will be receptive to the counterintuitive topic of fasting.