TempoLife › Fasting questions › Is 16:8 or 18:6 intermittent fasting better?
Is 16:8 or 18:6 intermittent fasting better?
Neither is inherently better — 16:8 is easier to sustain, 18:6 gives a tighter eating window; the best one is the schedule you can keep without overeating in the window.
Both split the day into a fasting window and an eating window; the only difference is the ratio. 16:8 means 16 hours fasting and an 8-hour eating window (say noon to 8pm); 18:6 tightens that to 6 hours. Neither has a magic metabolic edge — intermittent fasting works, when it works, mainly by making it easier to eat less overall, not by changing the calories themselves.
That makes the honest answer about sustainability. 16:8 is the most popular schedule precisely because it fits around a normal day — a late breakfast and an early dinner covers it. 18:6 asks a bit more discipline and suits people who have already adapted to 16:8 and want a slightly firmer structure.
The trap for both is the same: if you eat more in the shorter window to "make up for it", the whole point is gone. Fasting is a schedule, not a diet — what and how much you eat inside the window still decides the result.
Work it out for yourself
Answers are a start — tracking is the answer
TempoLife turns these numbers into your numbers: log food by photo, and see weight, sleep, steps and fasting in one place. Free to start.
More fasting questions
General information, not medical advice. Figures are mainstream reference values; individual needs vary.
