Diets
intermittent fasting decreases systolic and diastolic blood pressure
In plain terms: Does intermittent fasting lower blood pressure?
Leans support Diets 🔬 Includes disconfirming
Part of: 🥗 intermittent fasting
RefutedContestedStrong support
consensus score 0.32
Yes modestly — pooled RCTs show roughly a 4-6 mmHg systolic reduction, but much of it parallels weight loss and effects on diastolic pressure are smaller and less consistent.
📅 Last reviewed: 2026-07-15 ⓘ
Evidence ladder
How far up the ladder this claim has climbed. A high consensus on a low rung means "consistent so far," not "proven in people."
Top evidence so far: All trials, pooled (Meta-analysis)
MechanismIn-vitroAnimalObservationalRCTMeta-analysis
How the studies fall
8 support 2 contradict 3 tested null 4 mixed · 17 sources, 10 independent groups
What the evidence shows
Leans support: intermittent fasting lowers blood pressure modestly against usual eating, but largely no more than ordinary calorie restriction does.
The evidence (18)
| Source | Grade | Stance | Quality | Finding |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guo Y, Lu L, Chen L, Wang Y, Zhao F, Jiang Y 2025 · Int J Obes | meta-analysis | mixed | moderate | Systematic review of IF in overweight/obese adults reported inconsistent antihypertensive effects across protocols and flagged safety/adherence caveats. |
| Almalki ZS, Ahmed NJ, Mandil RA, Alsammak NS, Abou Chahin N, Alanazi HH, Alqahtani AM, Albassam AA, Alalwan A, Alahmari A 2026 · Health services insights | observational | mixed | moderate | ITS analysis, n=15,289 T2DM+HTN: SBP fell -4.12 mmHg during Ramadan (p<.001) but rebounded to pre-Ramadan levels afterward (not sustained); DBP not reported |
| Huang X, Huang G, Wei G 2025 · Nutr Hosp | meta-analysis | supports | moderate | Meta-analysis of 16 RCTs (5369 patients with type 2 diabetes) found IF significantly reduced both systolic and diastolic blood pressure versus control. |
| Gichamo FG, Mulisa MD, Regasa ND, Dadi MA, Lakew YB, Nida AD, Munie EY, Jima MT, Efrem P 2026 · BMC endocrine disorders | observational | supports | low | n=68 T2DM, pre/post Assumption Fast: SBP ↓9.19 mmHg, DBP ↓9.44 mmHg (p=0.001 both) |
| He H, Qin Z, Liu K, Wang Z, Wang J 2026 · Front Nutr | meta-analysis | contradicts | moderate | SR/MA of 22 RCTs in women with overweight/obesity; the BP pools were 8 studies, n=533. IF did not significantly change SBP (MD = -0.50, 95% CI -3.20 to 2.19, P = 0.714) or DBP (MD = 0.71, 95% CI -0.87 to 2.29, P = 0.378); no leave-one-out reached significance (SBP MD -1.24 to 0.42, all P > 0.05). Authors: 'Current evidence indicates that IF does not significantly affect SBP in women with overweight or obesity.' Heterogeneity was extreme (I2 95.8% SBP, 91.5% DBP) but Egger (t = 0.31, P = 0.767) and trim-and-fill found no publication bias. BMI and FBG improved; blood pressure did not. |
| Yong YN, McCubbin AJ, O'Driscoll DM, St-Onge MP, Bonham MP 2025 · Sleep Med Rev | meta-analysis | mixed | moderate | SR/MA of 18 RCTs found IF reduced diastolic (but not consistently systolic) blood pressure versus ad libitum eating. ⚠️ correction-on-file (Crossref) - kept, corrigendum not retraction |
| Kibret KT, Peeters A, Tegegne TK, Mesfin YM, Nichols M 2025 · Curr Nutr Rep | meta-analysis | supports | moderate | [FT-verified 2026-09-25] Kibret 2025 frequentist random-effects NMA, 56 RCTs overall; SBP k=27/n=1,852, DBP k=27/n=1,861. Versus usual diet (high GRADE certainty): SBP mADF -7.24 mmHg (95% CI -11.90 to -2.58), PF -3.17 (-6.01 to -0.32), TRE -3.18 (-5.22 to -1.13); DBP mADF -4.70 (-8.46 to -0.95), PF -2.90 (-4.79 to -1.02), TRE -3.24 (-4.69 to -1.79). Zero-calorie ADF was NOT better than usual diet on SBP. CER (not an IF regimen) also lowered SBP -4.55. So: consistent, modest reductions across 3 of 4 IF regimens, not 'inconsistent'. Caveats the authors attach: 21/56 (37.5%) trials high risk of bias; excluding short trials, 'the effects of mADF on SBP and DBP ... were no longer significant'; authors say results 'should be interpreted with caution due to high risk of bias'. Publication-bias test results for BP: cannot-tell from available text (in supplement). |
| Al-Jafar R, Zografou Themeli M, Zaman S, Akbar S, Lhoste V, Khamliche A, Elliott P, Tsilidis KK, Dehghan A 2021 · J Am Heart Assoc | observational | supports | moderate | LORANS study plus meta-analysis found Ramadan fasting produced small, inconsistent within-person changes in systolic/diastolic BP. |
| Semnani-Azad Z, Khan TA, Chiavaroli L, Chen V, Bhatt HA, Chen A, Chiang N, Oguntala J, Kabisch S, Lau DC, Wharton S, Sharma AM, Harris L, Leiter LA, Hill JO, Hu FB, Lean ME, Kahleová H, Rahelic D, Salas-Salvadó J, Kendall CW, Sievenpiper JL 2025 · BMJ | meta-analysis | mixed | high | Network meta-analysis of RCTs found IF improved several cardiometabolic outcomes but blood-pressure benefits were small and largely explained by weight loss versus continuous energy restriction. ⚠️ correction-on-file (Crossref) - kept, corrigendum not retraction |
| Başaran R, Demirci H, Başaran TÖ, Yalçintaş E 2026 · BMC geriatrics | observational | contradicts | moderate | 24h ABPM, n=69, oldest-old: SBP 132.5±16.1 vs 129.8±14.8 (fasting HIGHER, p=0.049); DBP 70.2±9.6 vs 68.0±8.7 (higher, p=0.008) |
| Sun Y, Shang M, Zhang Y, Hu J, Wang H 2025 · Sci Rep | meta-analysis | supports | moderate | Network MA of 21 RCTs: 'intermittent fasting also demonstrated significant blood pressure-lowering effects (MD -5.98 mmHg, 95% CI -10.4 to -0.35; SUCRA 76)' for systolic BP vs control diet; DBP MD -3.69 mmHg [-7.11, 0.59] (Table S8) is an underpowered trend in the same direction. SBP significant, DBP trending the same way - supports. 85.7% of trials high risk of bias from lack of blinding; no closed loops, so no consistency test. |
| Abdollahpour N, Seifi N, Nosrati M, Esmaily H, Shahri AMM, Ferns GA, Alinezhad-Namaghi M, Ghayour-Mobarhan M 2025 · Scientific reports | observational | supports | moderate | 5:2 IF (n=40) vs calorie restriction (n=42), 12wk cohort: SBP lower in IF vs CR (123.78±9.95 vs 127.62±12.16, p<0.05); MAP fell in both groups vs baseline; DBP not significantly different between groups |
| Gholampoor N, Sharif AH, Mellor D 2024 · Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis | meta-analysis | supports | moderate | SR/MA of religious/faith-based fasting found reductions in blood pressure among cardiovascular risk factors. |
| Celik M, Kaleli MF, Gezer M, Moloshova N, Kan MU, Feyzullahoglu E, Kesriklioglu S 2026 · J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) | observational | tested-null | low | Cross-sectional, single 24h ABPM during Ramadan, n=231 (117 self-selected fasters vs 114 non-fasters), no pre-Ramadan baseline. 24h SBP median 121 vs 124 mmHg (p=0.082), 24h DBP 76 vs 78 (p=0.371); nighttime mean BP 92.3 vs 96.0 mmHg (p=0.032). Authors: all values 'tended to be lower in the fasting group'. Underpowered trend toward the claim, confounded by self-selection (non-fasters had more diabetes, p=0.015, and CKD, p=0.006). |
| Nofal HA, Elmor AAR, AbdAllah AM, Zaitoun NA, Andargeery SY, Sharafeddin MA, Hassan RIA, Elhawy LL 2025 · BMC public health | RCT | supports | low | RCT n=54 MetS patients, Islamic 2-day/wk fasting+lifestyle vs lifestyle-only: SBP p=0.042, DBP p<0.001, both better in IF group |
| Gómez-Pérez AM, Bandera-Merchán B, Martínez-Montoro JI, Gutiérrez-Bedmar M, Díaz-Perdigones C, Subiri-Verdugo A, Moreno-Indias I, Tinahones FJ 2025 · Eur J Prev Cardiol | RCT | tested-null | moderate | 24-hour ambulatory BP sub-analysis of an RCT found no significant BP advantage of time-restricted eating or alternate-day fasting over other hypocaloric diets. |
| Bin Abdulrahman KA, Alodami BF, Almuteb AM, Alqahtani AA, Alhusayni MS, Almohsen YF 2026 · Journal of family medicine and primary care | observational | mixed | low | narrative review (2021-2024 lit): states Ramadan fasting associated with reductions in body weight, fat mass, and blood pressure in T2DM |
| Trepanowski JF, Kroeger CM, Barnosky A, Klempel MC, Bhutani S, Hoddy KK, Gabel K, Freels S, Rigdon J, Rood J, Ravussin E, Varady KA 2017 · JAMA Intern Med | RCT | tested-null | high | 1-y RCT, 100 metabolically healthy obese adults (ADF 25%/125% energy on alternating days vs daily 75% restriction vs no-intervention control). Against control, ADF moved blood pressure only slightly downward with wide intervals (Table 2, ADF minus control: systolic -3.1 mmHg, 95% CI -11.3 to 5.2 at 6 mo and -2.3, -11.0 to 6.4 at 12 mo; diastolic -1.5, -7.4 to 4.4 and -0.1, -6.3 to 6.1); ADF vs daily restriction also null. Underpowered trend on systolic (point estimates favour lowering, intervals include zero), so tested-null per CONVENTIONS §5 second clarification. Participants were largely normotensive at baseline (mean SBP ~122-124 mmHg), which the authors say explains why risk markers did not change; BP was a secondary outcome and ADF-arm dropout was 38%. |
Disagree, or know a study we missed?
We grade by evidence, not opinions. The way to weigh in is to point us to a study we haven't cited (check the evidence table above first), or to flag a problem with one we have. Every submission is reviewed; if it holds up, the grade updates and shows in Science Changes Its Mind.
Opens a short form. You'll sign in with Google so submissions are tied to a real account — we don't display your identity, and we only accept a link we can verify (PubMed, DOI, ClinicalTrials.gov).
Educational only, not medical advice. Grades and scores reflect published evidence weighted by study design and quality; see the methodology.