Chrononutrition and Household Meal Planning: A White Paper on the Science of Meal Timing and Practical Strategies for Better Eating Rhythms

Abstract

The human body is not a passive calorimeter that processes calories identically at any hour of the day. A substantial and maturing body of research in circadian biology, endocrinology, and nutritional physiology — now gathered under the label chrononutrition — demonstrates that when food is eaten has independent metabolic consequences beyond what and how much is eaten. Insulin sensitivity, substrate oxidation, diet-induced thermogenesis, and appetite hormone regulation all vary systematically across the 24-hour cycle, producing measurable differences in glucose tolerance, satiety, and energy storage depending on the timing of intake. This paper summarizes the physiological foundations of chrononutrition, reviews the strongest empirical evidence, examines the cross-cultural puzzle of Mediterranean late-eating cultures that appear (historically) to have enjoyed better metabolic outcomes than early-eating Americans, and proposes a structured set of household meal-planning strategies that translate the science into workable domestic practice. The paper closes with an analysis of implementation constraints, including the often-overlooked labor economics of the kitchen, which determine whether any chrononutritional plan can actually be sustained by a real household.

1. Introduction

For most of the twentieth century, nutritional advice was dominated by a calories-in-calories-out accounting model in which the ledger cared only about totals. Advice about meal timing, when it appeared at all, was folk wisdom or cultural inheritance rather than an evidence-based intervention. That has changed. Over the past two decades, a convergence of work in circadian biology, metabolic physiology, and clinical nutrition has produced a rigorous and increasingly actionable body of findings indicating that meal timing is a first-class variable in metabolic health (Panda, 2016; Scheer et al., 2009). The field has generated the term chrononutrition to mark this shift, drawing on the broader framework of chronobiology in which virtually every organ in the human body keeps time.

The implications are household-level, not just clinical. A family or shared dwelling in which dinner is routinely consumed at 8:30 or 9:00 PM, after which members retire to sedentary evenings and bed within two hours, is running a metabolic pattern meaningfully different from one in which the main meal arrives at midday and a modest supper concludes several hours before sleep. The difference is not trivial and it is not equally distributed across household members — older adults, those with insulin resistance, shift workers, and late chronotypes each respond differently to the same schedule.

This paper offers a mixed-audience treatment: accessible to thoughtful general readers but grounded in the primary literature and equipped with a full reference apparatus for those who wish to verify or pursue the findings further. Its aim is twofold. First, to lay out what is actually known about chrononutrition — distinguishing well-established physiological mechanisms from more speculative clinical recommendations. Second, to propose concrete meal-planning frameworks that households can adopt without imposing rigidity that a real kitchen, with real people, cannot sustain.

2. Circadian Foundations of Metabolism

2.1 The Master Clock and Peripheral Oscillators

The human circadian system is organized hierarchically. A master pacemaker in the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN) of the hypothalamus, entrained primarily by light reaching the retina through intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells, coordinates the rough 24-hour rhythm of the body (Hastings et al., 2018). But nearly every tissue — liver, pancreas, intestinal epithelium, adipose tissue, skeletal muscle — carries its own molecular clock, a transcriptional-translational feedback loop involving CLOCK, BMAL1, PER, and CRY genes (Bass & Takahashi, 2010). These peripheral clocks are entrained in part by the SCN and in part by external zeitgebers (time-givers), of which meal timing is among the most powerful for peripheral tissues (Wehrens et al., 2017).

This architecture matters because it means food itself acts as a timing signal. A regular breakfast reinforces the phase relationship between the liver’s glucose handling rhythm and the SCN’s light-entrained cycle. Erratic or late eating desynchronizes peripheral clocks from the central clock, producing what researchers call internal circadian misalignment — a state in which different organ systems are effectively on different schedules (Scheer et al., 2009). Misalignment has been demonstrated to produce elevated postprandial glucose, reduced leptin, and inflammatory changes even in healthy volunteers within days.

2.2 Insulin Sensitivity and the Diurnal Glucose Curve

Insulin sensitivity is not constant across the day. In healthy adults, it is highest in the morning and declines progressively, such that the same oral glucose load produces a substantially larger and more prolonged glucose excursion in the evening than at breakfast (Morris, Yang, et al., 2015; Saad et al., 2012). Pancreatic β-cells also show a diurnal rhythm in insulin secretion, and hepatic glucose production follows its own cycle, with dawn-phenomenon elevations driven in part by cortisol.

In practical terms this means that a 500-calorie meal eaten at 7:00 AM and the same meal eaten at 9:00 PM produce different glycemic and insulinemic consequences. Bandín et al. (2015) demonstrated this directly in a randomized crossover study: late lunch (taken at 4:30 PM rather than 1:00 PM) reduced glucose tolerance, altered cortisol rhythms, and decreased daytime thermogenesis. The evening window is metabolically less forgiving, and the effect compounds in people with already compromised glucose handling.

2.3 Melatonin, Sleep, and Nutrient Processing

Melatonin, the hormone most associated with sleep onset, begins rising approximately two to three hours before habitual bedtime in a process called dim-light melatonin onset (DLMO). Melatonin receptors are present on pancreatic β-cells, and melatonin binding actively suppresses insulin secretion (Garaulet et al., 2015). This produces a striking interaction: individuals who eat within the melatonin window experience blunted insulin responses to carbohydrate loads, resulting in elevated postprandial glucose. Garaulet’s group has shown that this effect is magnified in carriers of certain MTNR1B gene variants, but it appears to some degree in the general population.

The practical inference is that the final hours before sleep are metabolically the worst time to consume a carbohydrate-rich meal, not because of any folk notion that calories “turn to fat” at night, but because the endocrine environment into which those calories arrive is actively unfriendly to glucose disposal.

2.4 Hormonal Appetite Regulation

Leptin (the satiety signal from adipose tissue) and ghrelin (the hunger signal, largely from the stomach) have their own circadian patterns, and both are sensitive to meal timing. Sleep restriction combined with late eating produces reduced leptin and elevated ghrelin the following day, generating real increases in hunger and food-seeking behavior (Spiegel et al., 2004). Vujović et al. (2022), in a rigorous within-subject isocaloric study, found that shifting meals four hours later, while holding total calories, macronutrients, and sleep-wake schedule constant, produced higher hunger ratings, lower 24-hour leptin, reduced energy expenditure, and shifts in adipose tissue gene expression favoring storage.

This is one of the cleanest isocaloric demonstrations available that timing is metabolically active, independent of content. The study controlled precisely the variables that earlier observational work could not, and its findings are difficult to explain away.

3. Empirical Findings on Meal Timing

3.1 Landmark Isocaloric Studies

Beyond Vujović et al. (2022), several controlled studies have established the independent effect of timing. Jakubowicz et al. (2013) compared two isocaloric 1,400-calorie diets in overweight women, differing only in caloric distribution: the breakfast-heavy group (700 kcal breakfast, 500 lunch, 200 dinner) lost substantially more weight, reduced waist circumference more, and showed better glucose and triglyceride markers than the dinner-heavy group (200-500-700) at 12 weeks. Because total calories and macronutrients were matched, the difference must be attributed to timing and distribution.

Garaulet et al. (2013), in a large observational weight-loss cohort in Spain, found that late lunch eaters (the main meal of the day in Spanish culture) lost significantly less weight than early lunch eaters despite equivalent total caloric intake, baseline BMI, and treatment protocol. Because Spanish lunch is the main meal and typically occurs between 2:00 and 4:00 PM, “late” in the Spanish context meant after approximately 3:00 PM — still earlier than a typical American dinner.

3.2 Time-Restricted Eating Research

A parallel stream of work has examined time-restricted eating (TRE), in which caloric intake is compressed into a window of 6–12 hours with the remainder of the day spent fasting. Satchin Panda’s laboratory at the Salk Institute has been central here. Hatori et al. (2012) demonstrated that mice fed an identical high-fat diet within an 8-hour window were protected from obesity, insulin resistance, and hepatic steatosis compared with mice allowed ad libitum access to the same food — a striking finding that has been replicated across multiple rodent models.

In humans, Gill and Panda (2015) used a smartphone application to capture actual eating patterns in free-living adults and discovered that most participants ate across a window exceeding 14 hours daily, with significant intake after 8:00 PM. A pilot intervention shrinking the window to 10–11 hours produced spontaneous weight loss and improved sleep. Sutton et al. (2018) demonstrated that early time-restricted feeding (6-hour window ending at 3:00 PM) improved insulin sensitivity, β-cell responsiveness, and blood pressure in prediabetic men even in the absence of weight loss — a pure timing effect.

The TRE literature is not uniform. Some recent trials (Lowe et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2022) have found that late TRE windows produce modest or no benefit beyond simple caloric restriction. The pattern emerging is that the earliness of the window, not merely its compression, matters for metabolic outcomes.

3.3 Breakfast-Weighted vs. Dinner-Weighted Caloric Distribution

Taken together, the evidence converges on a general principle: caloric intake front-loaded toward morning and early afternoon produces better metabolic outcomes than the same intake back-loaded toward evening. McHill et al. (2017) found that later circadian timing of food intake correlated with higher body fat percentage independently of sleep timing, total caloric intake, and activity level. Morris, Garcia, et al. (2015) demonstrated that diet-induced thermogenesis — the caloric cost of digesting and processing food — is approximately 50% higher at breakfast than at dinner, meaning the same meal produces a larger thermogenic burn when eaten early.

These are not marginal effects. A 50% difference in thermogenesis, multiplied across hundreds of meals per year, represents a nontrivial energy balance shift.

4. Cross-Cultural Variation: The Mediterranean Paradox

Any reader of the preceding section will pause to ask an obvious question: if late eating is metabolically unfavorable, how do Italians, Spaniards, Greeks, and other Mediterranean cultures — famous for 8:00, 9:00, even 10:00 PM dinners — maintain (or at least have historically maintained) better cardiovascular and metabolic outcomes than Americans who eat at 6:00 PM? The puzzle is real and its resolution is instructive.

4.1 Traditional Italian and Spanish Patterns

The Mediterranean schedule is structurally distinct from the American schedule in ways that extend far beyond the clock reading of dinner. Traditional Italian and Spanish eating patterns share several features:

A substantial breakfast or mid-morning second breakfast establishes early caloric intake — not the coffee-and-pastry stereotype but, in many households, bread, cheese, fruit, and yogurt or the Spanish almuerzo of bread with tomato, olive oil, and cured meat. Lunch (pranzo in Italian, comida in Spanish) is the day’s main meal, taken between approximately 1:00 and 3:00 PM, and is the most caloric. It often involves a first course (pasta, rice, or soup), a protein-and-vegetable second course, and a modest dessert or fruit. Importantly, lunch in Mediterranean cultures has traditionally been a substantial midday pause — in some regions, a siesta followed. Dinner (cena) is considerably lighter: perhaps a vegetable soup, a small plate of fish or eggs, cheese, and bread. It is social more than nutritional. The late clock time reflects a cultural decision that dinner is family time, not a caloric event.

Trichopoulou et al. (2003) and the PREDIMED trial (Estruch et al., 2018) have documented the metabolic advantages of the Mediterranean composition pattern — high olive oil, legumes, vegetables, fish, moderate wine, low red meat. But composition is only part of the story.

4.2 Structural Differences Masking Timing Effects

At least five structural features of Mediterranean eating mask or counteract what would otherwise be the metabolic penalty of late dinner:

Caloric distribution is inverted. Because lunch is the main meal, dinner is small. A 400-calorie dinner at 8:30 PM is metabolically quite different from a 1,100-calorie dinner at 6:00 PM. Bo et al. (2014) found that even within a Mediterranean population, those whose caloric distribution was more dinner-weighted showed adverse metabolic profiles despite the same overall diet quality.

Composition differs. An Italian cena of minestrone, bread, and grilled vegetables presents a radically different glycemic and insulinemic load than a typical American dinner of pasta with meat sauce, garlic bread, and dessert. The traditional evening meal is low in refined carbohydrate and high in fiber.

Post-meal movement is routine. The passeggiata — the evening stroll through town after dinner — is a defining feature of Italian and Spanish social life. Post-prandial walking meaningfully blunts glucose excursions, with studies showing 15-minute post-meal walks producing clinically significant reductions in postprandial glucose (DiPietro et al., 2013). Americans, in contrast, typically retire to television after dinner.

The food-to-sleep interval is similar. An Italian family eating at 8:30 PM and sleeping at midnight has a 3.5-hour interval between last bite and sleep. An American family eating at 6:30 PM and sleeping at 10:00 PM has the same 3.5 hours. What matters physiologically is the position of the meal relative to DLMO and sleep onset, not its position on the wall clock.

Pace, structure, and grazing discipline. Mediterranean meals are longer, taken at table, socially structured. Snacking between meals is traditionally modest. American eating is shorter in duration, more fragmented, and embedded in a culture of near-continuous grazing on calorie-dense processed food. Gill and Panda’s (2015) observation that Americans eat across a 14-hour window captures this.

4.3 The Erosion of the Mediterranean Advantage

It is worth noting that the Mediterranean advantage has been eroding, and this provides a useful natural experiment. Spain’s obesity prevalence has climbed to among the highest in Western Europe, and type 2 diabetes has risen sharply (Aranceta-Bartrina et al., 2016). Italy shows similar if somewhat attenuated trends. The dietary shifts driving this — adoption of ultra-processed food, sugary beverages, larger dinner portions, loss of the siesta structure, increased snacking — combined with the inherited late clock schedule appear to be a particularly adverse combination. When traditional protective structures dissolve but the late clock remains, the late clock begins to bite.

This supports the interpretation that Mediterranean cultures never had a free pass on late eating; rather, they had a compensatory architecture that made the late clock nonproblematic. Remove the architecture and the timing penalty emerges.

5. Individual Moderators

Chrononutrition advice cannot be delivered as a single prescription because people differ systematically in their circadian physiology and metabolic baseline.

5.1 Chronotype

Chronotype — the individual’s tendency toward morningness or eveningness — has genuine biological underpinnings, including clock gene polymorphisms, and predicts optimal meal timing. Late chronotypes (“night owls”) have later DLMO, later cortisol peaks, and later insulin sensitivity curves. Forcing a strong night owl to eat breakfast at 6:00 AM may actually worsen their outcomes, as their physiological “morning” begins later (Merikanto et al., 2013). Household meal-timing decisions cannot be made without some acknowledgment of the chronotype mix of household members. A strict 5:30 PM dinner in a household with a late-chronotype member whose workday ends at 6:30 PM is a setup for conflict and for that member eating a second dinner later.

5.2 Age and Life Stage

Older adults tend toward phase-advanced circadian rhythms (earlier sleep, earlier wake) and often tolerate earlier dinners better (Duffy et al., 2015). They may also have reduced insulin sensitivity generally, making evening carbohydrate loads more consequential. Children and adolescents differ in the opposite direction during puberty, when a phase delay is developmentally normal.

5.3 Sex Differences

Some meal-timing studies have shown sex-differentiated responses, with women showing stronger metabolic effects of meal timing in certain paradigms (Garaulet & Gómez-Abellán, 2014). Pregnancy and menstrual cycling introduce additional complexity not well-addressed in the current literature.

5.4 Activity and Metabolic Health Baseline

A lean, insulin-sensitive athlete can absorb a late high-carbohydrate meal with far less metabolic consequence than an older adult with prediabetes. Skeletal muscle is the primary sink for postprandial glucose, and physically active muscle accepts glucose via insulin-independent pathways. Recommendations must therefore be calibrated to the metabolic baseline of the individual, not applied as a universal rule.

6. Household Meal Planning Solutions

The translation of chrononutritional evidence into household practice requires careful design. The goal is not to impose an optimal clinical schedule but to design a sustainable pattern that captures most of the metabolic benefit while respecting the labor, preference, and schedule constraints of actual human households.

6.1 Caloric Redistribution: Lunch as the Main Meal

The single most evidence-supported shift a household can make is redistributing calories toward earlier in the day. This does not require early dinner. It requires a substantial breakfast, a main-meal lunch, and a genuinely modest dinner.

A practical target distribution, drawing on Jakubowicz et al. (2013) and the Mediterranean pattern:

Breakfast: 25–30% of daily calories
Lunch: 40–45% (the main meal)
Dinner: 25–30%
Snacks, if any: kept within the eating window

This inverts the typical American distribution (approximately 15% / 25% / 50% / 10%) and captures much of the timing benefit without requiring anyone to eat dinner at 5:00 PM.

For households where family schedules make a main-meal lunch impossible on weekdays (most American work and school contexts), a hybrid approach works: a substantial breakfast (25–30%), a moderate lunch (30–35%), and a modest dinner (30–35%). This still represents a meaningful shift from the dinner-heavy default.

6.2 Cook-Ahead and Batch Strategies

The common practical obstacle to any meal-timing plan is that dinner is late because cooking is hard because the cook is tired at the end of the day. This is a labor problem, not a nutritional one, and it requires labor solutions.

Batch-cooking on a weekend day (or a designated prep afternoon) for three to five weeknight dinners transforms the weekday cooking task from composition to reheating and assembly. Cooked grains, braised proteins, roasted vegetables, and sauces keep well for three to five days refrigerated. Soups and stews generally improve. A household that invests three hours on Sunday afternoon in cooking can produce a week of 15-minute dinner assemblies.

A related strategy is component cooking — preparing individual ingredients (beans, grains, roasted vegetables, grilled chicken, sauces) rather than complete meals, then assembling them into different configurations across the week. This respects varied dietary needs within a household because individuals can compose plates that suit their requirements from shared components.

6.3 Anchor-Plus-Variable Frameworks

A useful planning heuristic is the anchor-plus-variable framework: identify two or three “anchors” — predictable elements that recur — and compose variations around them. For example:

Monday: grain + protein + two vegetables (Mediterranean bowl variant)
Tuesday: soup + bread + salad
Wednesday: grain + protein + two vegetables (different seasoning profile)
Thursday: stew or braise + starch
Friday: something simple — eggs, flatbread, cheese, fruit (a deliberately light dinner)

The repeated structure reduces decision load (the “what’s for dinner” cognitive tax that falls disproportionately on the primary cook) and makes batch-cooking straightforward.

6.4 The Distributed Workload Model

If a household has multiple capable adults, concentrating cooking on one exhausted person predictably produces late, suboptimal dinners. Distribution can take several forms:

Role distribution: One person cooks, another does cleanup; one prepares the protein, another the vegetables; one handles weekday breakfasts, another weekday dinners.

Day distribution: Rotating cook days, with each cook responsible for their day end-to-end.

Task-type distribution: One person does the weekly batch cook; others handle assembly on their assigned evenings.

Support role distribution: If one person is designated cook, others take on explicit kitchen support roles — chopping, setting the table, handling dishes — rather than functioning as recipients only.

The critical principle is that a household member who insists on a particular meal schedule bears a corresponding responsibility to contribute to making that schedule achievable. Complaint without contribution is not a meal-planning position; it is a failure of household justice. Any chrononutritional advice applied to a household must confront this directly, because no clever scheduling or batch-cooking plan will survive contact with a kitchen in which the cook is isolated, tired, and unsupported.

6.5 Post-Meal Movement

The passeggiata principle is a low-cost, high-return intervention. A 15- to 20-minute walk after dinner blunts postprandial glucose, aids digestion, and improves sleep quality (Reynolds et al., 2016). Walking at a conversational pace is sufficient; the effect is not dose-dependent on intensity within a moderate range.

Households can build this in by treating after-dinner walks as a social rather than exercise activity — a time for conversation, not a time to hit a heart rate target. In weather where outdoor walks are impossible, indoor movement (light housework, stair climbing, standing rather than sitting for an hour) captures some of the benefit.

This single habit, adopted consistently, probably does more for metabolic health than further fine-tuning the dinner clock by 30 minutes.

6.6 The Grazing vs. Meal-Discipline Question

Contemporary American eating is characterized by wide eating windows and frequent between-meal intake. The evidence supports compressing the daily eating window, ideally to 10–12 hours for most adults (Gill & Panda, 2015). This does not require rigorous fasting protocols; it simply means establishing consistent times for the first and last eating events of the day and not eating outside them.

A household that consistently begins eating at 7:30 AM should aim to stop by 7:30 PM (12-hour window) or 6:30 PM (11-hour window). For most households, the meaningful intervention is closing the evening earlier — the habit of late-night snacking being the dominant violation. Kitchen closure at a consistent evening hour is a simple and effective rule.

6.7 Handling Mixed Dietary Needs

Households with members on varied dietary requirements — food allergies, medical restrictions, differing preferences — often find that the complexity of accommodating everyone contributes to late, stressful dinners. The component-cooking approach addresses this: prepare base components that suit the most restricted diet, plus a few additions that the less restricted members can add. This avoids the cook producing parallel meals.

For example, a base of rice, roasted vegetables, and a neutral protein works for most diets. Add-ons (sauces, cheese, additional proteins, garnishes) can be chosen by each eater at the table. This is not a chrononutritional intervention per se, but it reduces the cooking labor that pushes dinner late in the first place.

7. Implementation and Constraints

7.1 Work Schedules

American work and commute patterns often produce a return-home time between 5:30 and 7:00 PM, with a further 45 to 90 minutes before dinner can be served. This structural reality means that the 5:00–6:00 PM dinner some chrononutrition advocates recommend is simply not achievable for most working households without substantial rearrangement. Realistic targets in this context are:

Dinner served by 7:00 PM on workdays
Dinner served by 6:00 PM on non-working days
Kitchen closed by 8:00 PM most evenings
Main meal shifted to lunch when possible (summer weekends, holidays, retirement, remote work days)

The perfect should not be the enemy of the achievable. A household shifting from 8:30 PM dinners to 7:00 PM dinners, with lighter dinner composition and a post-meal walk, has captured most of the available metabolic benefit.

7.2 Social Dinner Culture

American social life is substantially organized around dinner. Moving to a lunch-weighted caloric pattern means that dinners with family or friends — which will remain cultural events — become occasional rather than routine dinner-heavy occurrences. Households can preserve social dinners while making their typical weekday dinners smaller and earlier.

7.3 The Labor Economy of the Kitchen

The most important practical point in this paper is that no chrononutritional strategy survives a kitchen labor economy that is fundamentally unjust. A household in which one person does all the cooking, is tired, and is criticized for late dinners by members who do not contribute to kitchen labor will produce late, suboptimal dinners indefinitely, regardless of what any nutrition paper recommends.

The solution set here is not nutritional. It is organizational and, frankly, ethical. A household member who wishes to benefit from earlier and better-composed dinners has the following options, roughly in order of seriousness:

Contribute to the cooking labor directly — prep, cook, clean, or support.
Take on the weekly batch cook, freeing the primary cook from the most time-consuming weekly task.
Handle procurement and planning, freeing the cook from decision load.
Take full responsibility for certain days of the week, so the primary cook has scheduled relief.
Pay for help — hire someone, order prepared meals, or use meal delivery services for specified nights.

What does not work is complaint. Persistent complaint about dinner timing from a household member who does not contribute to making earlier dinners possible is not a contribution to meal planning; it is a form of consumer expectation being pressed against an overburdened producer. This is a recognizable pattern from institutional analysis more broadly — stakeholders demanding outputs without bearing input costs — and it has the same resolution in the household as it does in any other productive unit: either the stakeholder begins bearing input costs, or outputs are not going to meet their expectations, or the producer eventually burns out and outputs collapse entirely.

This is the chrononutritional intervention that most American households actually need: not a protocol but a renegotiation of kitchen labor.

8. Conclusion

Meal timing matters. The evidence that when food is eaten exerts an independent metabolic effect, beyond total calories and macronutrient composition, is now robust. Insulin sensitivity is diurnal; melatonin dampens insulin secretion; diet-induced thermogenesis is higher at breakfast than at dinner; late isocaloric eating alters hunger, energy expenditure, and adipose tissue gene expression. These are not marginal findings but represent a substantive addition to how we should think about nutrition.

At the same time, meal timing is embedded in cultural, occupational, and domestic structures that resist simple clock-based prescriptions. The Mediterranean paradox resolves into a reminder that composition, distribution, post-meal movement, and meal structure are as important as clock timing. An American family eating a dinner-weighted 8:30 PM meal of ultra-processed food and retiring to the couch is running a much worse metabolic pattern than an Italian family eating a composition-controlled light dinner at the same hour and walking for twenty minutes afterward.

The practical path forward for most households is not to achieve a clinically optimal schedule but to adopt the handful of changes that capture the bulk of the benefit: substantial breakfast, lunch as a genuine meal, light dinner, closed kitchen by mid-evening, a walk after dinner, and consistency in these rhythms. Beneath all of this sits a more fundamental variable: whether the kitchen labor is distributed fairly. A just kitchen can produce a good schedule; an unjust kitchen cannot.

The science is real. The solutions are workable. But they require the household to take itself seriously as a cooperative enterprise rather than a service relationship.

References

Aranceta-Bartrina, J., Pérez-Rodrigo, C., Alberdi-Aresti, G., Ramos-Carrera, N., & Lázaro-Masedo, S. (2016). Prevalence of general obesity and abdominal obesity in the Spanish adult population (aged 25–64 years) 2014–2015: The ENPE study. Revista Española de Cardiología (English Edition), 69(6), 579–587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rec.2016.02.010

Bandín, C., Scheer, F. A. J. L., Luque, A. J., Ávila-Gandía, V., Zamora, S., Madrid, J. A., Gómez-Abellán, P., & Garaulet, M. (2015). Meal timing affects glucose tolerance, substrate oxidation and circadian-related variables: A randomized, crossover trial. International Journal of Obesity, 39(5), 828–833. https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2014.182

Bass, J., & Takahashi, J. S. (2010). Circadian integration of metabolism and energetics. Science, 330(6009), 1349–1354. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1195027

Bo, S., Musso, G., Beccuti, G., Fadda, M., Fedele, D., Gambino, R., Gentile, L., Durazzo, M., Ghigo, E., & Cassader, M. (2014). Consuming more of daily caloric intake at dinner predisposes to obesity. A 6-year population-based prospective cohort study. PLoS ONE, 9(9), e108467. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0108467

DiPietro, L., Gribok, A., Stevens, M. S., Hamm, L. F., & Rumpler, W. (2013). Three 15-min bouts of moderate postmeal walking significantly improves 24-h glycemic control in older people at risk for impaired glucose tolerance. Diabetes Care, 36(10), 3262–3268. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc13-0084

Duffy, J. F., Zitting, K. M., & Chinoy, E. D. (2015). Aging and circadian rhythms. Sleep Medicine Clinics, 10(4), 423–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsmc.2015.08.002

Estruch, R., Ros, E., Salas-Salvadó, J., Covas, M. I., Corella, D., Arós, F., Gómez-Gracia, E., Ruiz-Gutiérrez, V., Fiol, M., Lapetra, J., Lamuela-Raventos, R. M., Serra-Majem, L., Pintó, X., Basora, J., Muñoz, M. A., Sorlí, J. V., Martínez, J. A., Fitó, M., Gea, A., … Martínez-González, M. A. (2018). Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease with a Mediterranean diet supplemented with extra-virgin olive oil or nuts. New England Journal of Medicine, 378(25), e34. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1800389

Garaulet, M., & Gómez-Abellán, P. (2014). Timing of food intake and obesity: A novel association. Physiology & Behavior, 134, 44–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2014.01.001

Garaulet, M., Gómez-Abellán, P., Alburquerque-Béjar, J. J., Lee, Y. C., Ordovás, J. M., & Scheer, F. A. J. L. (2013). Timing of food intake predicts weight loss effectiveness. International Journal of Obesity, 37(4), 604–611. https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2012.229

Garaulet, M., Qian, J., Florez, J. C., Arendt, J., Saxena, R., & Scheer, F. A. J. L. (2015). Melatonin effects on glucose metabolism: Time to unlock the controversy. Trends in Endocrinology & Metabolism, 31(3), 192–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tem.2019.11.011

Gill, S., & Panda, S. (2015). A smartphone app reveals erratic diurnal eating patterns in humans that can be modulated for health benefits. Cell Metabolism, 22(5), 789–798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmet.2015.09.005

Hastings, M. H., Maywood, E. S., & Brancaccio, M. (2018). Generation of circadian rhythms in the suprachiasmatic nucleus. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 19(8), 453–469. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-018-0026-z

Hatori, M., Vollmers, C., Zarrinpar, A., DiTacchio, L., Bushong, E. A., Gill, S., Leblanc, M., Chaix, A., Joens, M., Fitzpatrick, J. A. J., Ellisman, M. H., & Panda, S. (2012). Time-restricted feeding without reducing caloric intake prevents metabolic diseases in mice fed a high-fat diet. Cell Metabolism, 15(6), 848–860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmet.2012.04.019

Jakubowicz, D., Barnea, M., Wainstein, J., & Froy, O. (2013). High caloric intake at breakfast vs. dinner differentially influences weight loss of overweight and obese women. Obesity, 21(12), 2504–2512. https://doi.org/10.1002/oby.20460

Liu, D., Huang, Y., Huang, C., Yang, S., Wei, X., Zhang, P., Guo, D., Lin, J., Xu, B., Li, C., He, H., He, J., Liu, S., Shi, L., Xue, Y., & Zhang, H. (2022). Calorie restriction with or without time-restricted eating in weight loss. New England Journal of Medicine, 386(16), 1495–1504. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2114833

Lowe, D. A., Wu, N., Rohdin-Bibby, L., Moore, A. H., Kelly, N., Liu, Y. E., Philip, E., Vittinghoff, E., Heymsfield, S. B., Olgin, J. E., Shepherd, J. A., & Weiss, E. J. (2020). Effects of time-restricted eating on weight loss and other metabolic parameters in women and men with overweight and obesity: The TREAT randomized clinical trial. JAMA Internal Medicine, 180(11), 1491–1499. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.4153

McHill, A. W., Phillips, A. J., Czeisler, C. A., Keating, L., Yee, K., Barger, L. K., Garaulet, M., Scheer, F. A., & Klerman, E. B. (2017). Later circadian timing of food intake is associated with increased body fat. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 106(5), 1213–1219. https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.117.161588

Merikanto, I., Lahti, T., Puolijoki, H., Vanhala, M., Peltonen, M., Laatikainen, T., Vartiainen, E., Salomaa, V., Kronholm, E., & Partonen, T. (2013). Associations of chronotype and sleep with cardiovascular diseases and type 2 diabetes. Chronobiology International, 30(4), 470–477. https://doi.org/10.3109/07420528.2012.741171

Morris, C. J., Garcia, J. I., Myers, S., Yang, J. N., Trienekens, N., & Scheer, F. A. J. L. (2015). The human circadian system has a dominating role in causing the morning/evening difference in diet-induced thermogenesis. Obesity, 23(10), 2053–2058. https://doi.org/10.1002/oby.21189

Morris, C. J., Yang, J. N., Garcia, J. I., Myers, S., Bozzi, I., Wang, W., Buxton, O. M., Shea, S. A., & Scheer, F. A. J. L. (2015). Endogenous circadian system and circadian misalignment impact glucose tolerance via separate mechanisms in humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(17), E2225–E2234. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1418955112

Panda, S. (2016). Circadian physiology of metabolism. Science, 354(6315), 1008–1015. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aah4967

Reynolds, A. N., Mann, J. I., Williams, S., & Venn, B. J. (2016). Advice to walk after meals is more effective for lowering postprandial glycaemia in type 2 diabetes mellitus than advice that does not specify timing: A randomised crossover study. Diabetologia, 59(12), 2572–2578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-016-4085-2

Saad, A., Dalla Man, C., Nandy, D. K., Levine, J. A., Bharucha, A. E., Rizza, R. A., Basu, R., Carter, R. E., Cobelli, C., Kudva, Y. C., & Basu, A. (2012). Diurnal pattern to insulin secretion and insulin action in healthy individuals. Diabetes, 61(11), 2691–2700. https://doi.org/10.2337/db11-1478

Scheer, F. A. J. L., Hilton, M. F., Mantzoros, C. S., & Shea, S. A. (2009). Adverse metabolic and cardiovascular consequences of circadian misalignment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(11), 4453–4458. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0808180106

Spiegel, K., Tasali, E., Penev, P., & Van Cauter, E. (2004). Brief communication: Sleep curtailment in healthy young men is associated with decreased leptin levels, elevated ghrelin levels, and increased hunger and appetite. Annals of Internal Medicine, 141(11), 846–850. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-141-11-200412070-00008

Sutton, E. F., Beyl, R., Early, K. S., Cefalu, W. T., Ravussin, E., & Peterson, C. M. (2018). Early time-restricted feeding improves insulin sensitivity, blood pressure, and oxidative stress even without weight loss in men with prediabetes. Cell Metabolism, 27(6), 1212–1221.e3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmet.2018.04.010

Trichopoulou, A., Costacou, T., Bamia, C., & Trichopoulos, D. (2003). Adherence to a Mediterranean diet and survival in a Greek population. New England Journal of Medicine, 348(26), 2599–2608. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa025039

Vujović, N., Piron, M. J., Qian, J., Chellappa, S. L., Nedeltcheva, A., Barr, D., Heng, S. W., Kerlin, K., Srivastav, S., Wang, W., Shoji, B., Garaulet, M., Brady, M. J., & Scheer, F. A. J. L. (2022). Late isocaloric eating increases hunger, decreases energy expenditure, and modifies metabolic pathways in adults with overweight and obesity. Cell Metabolism, 34(10), 1486–1498.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmet.2022.09.007

Wehrens, S. M. T., Christou, S., Isherwood, C., Middleton, B., Gibbs, M. A., Archer, S. N., Skene, D. J., & Johnston, J. D. (2017). Meal timing regulates the human circadian system. Current Biology, 27(12), 1768–1775.e3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2017.04.059