Dokaz Industries / Doxa

Contested facts · veracity-3pt · fact-fasting-benefit-01

Claim: Intermittent fasting produces health benefits beyond those of equivalent total calorie restriction.

0.00
Divergence
0.80
Avg stability
0%
Refusal rate
3
Models

Where each model stands

CCG
refutedcontestedsupported
ChatGPT modal contested [contested, contested, contested, refuted, contested] · stability 0.80
  • 1 contested 0.92 The answer says 'Not proven' and notes that while animal studies show benefits, 'human randomized trials — mixed results' and 'when energy deficit is matched, most outcomes are comparable,' concluding IF 'may have added advantages for some people, but it is not yet established as universally superior.'
  • 2 contested 0.88 The answer states animal/mechanistic studies suggest benefits independent of calories but notes that larger human trials show that “once total energy intake (and weight loss) are matched, IF generally does not give large additional metabolic benefits,” so evidence is mixed and not definitive.
  • 3 contested 0.88 The answer states: “In animals (rodents) there is good, reproducible evidence... In humans the evidence is mixed... Bottom line: IF is a promising strategy and may have unique benefits..., but at present there is not definitive, generalizable proof in humans that IF reliably produces health benefits beyond equivalent total calorie reduction.”
  • 4 refuted 0.88 "Not reliably. ... when total calories and weight loss are matched, large, well-controlled human trials generally do not show clear additional health benefits of IF over equivalent continuous calorie restriction."
  • 5 contested 0.78 The answer states 'Not proven' and that human RCTs/meta‑analyses generally find no superiority of IF when calories are matched, but also notes small, preliminary human studies (especially early TRF) suggesting possible calorie‑independent benefits.
Claude modal contested [contested, refuted, contested, refuted, contested] · stability 0.60
  • 1 contested 0.92 The answer states 'The honest answer: Unclear and actively debated' and concludes that 'evidence for superior benefits is...Mixed in peer-reviewed literature' and 'In well-controlled studies comparing IF to regular calorie restriction with matched total calories, most of these differences shrink or disappear.' This directly contests the claim by indicating benefits beyond calorie restriction are n
  • 2 refuted 0.92 The answer states the claim is 'not well-established' and that 'intermittent fasting (IF) and regular calorie restriction produce similar weight loss when total calories are equated,' with multiple meta-analyses finding 'no clear advantage of IF over standard dieting.' The answer directly contradicts the claim by concluding that purported benefits 'haven't been reliably shown to exceed what you'd
  • 3 contested 0.95 The answer explicitly states 'This remains genuinely contested in research' and presents balanced arguments on both sides, concluding that the claim 'is not yet definitively proven or disproven' and that 'calling it superior to equivalent calorie restriction goes beyond current evidence.'
  • 4 refuted 0.92 The answer states the claim is 'not well-supported by current evidence' and that 'claims that it uniquely optimizes health beyond matching calorie restriction are not yet scientifically justified.' Most studies find IF and calorie restriction produce 'comparable results' for weight loss and metabolic markers.
  • 5 contested 0.92 The answer explicitly states 'This remains genuinely unclear' and concludes that 'claims of unique benefits beyond calorie restriction remain not established.' It presents evidence on both sides—some promising markers in short-term studies versus lack of rigorous long-term human evidence—characterizing the question as unproven rather than definitively proven or refuted.
Gemini modal contested [contested, contested, contested, contested, contested] · stability 1.00
  • 1 contested 0.95 The answer presents the topic as an ongoing scientific debate, noting that while human trials show most benefits are driven by calorie reduction, some evidence (such as early time-restricted eating and circadian alignment) suggests potential benefits independent of caloric deficit.
  • 2 contested 0.95 The answer notes that while human data largely shows equivalence for weight loss and standard markers, there are notable exceptions (e.g., circadian alignment and insulin dynamics) and stronger evidence in animal models, concluding that the evidence is nuanced and mixed.
  • 3 contested 0.95 The answer notes that the claim is a 'subject of major debate in nutritional science' with a 'mixed' verdict, showing evidence that most human benefits are solely due to calorie restriction while highlighting specific exceptions like early time-restricted eating.
  • 4 contested 0.95 The answer presents a nuanced view, explaining that while clinical trials show most benefits are driven by calorie reduction ('Mostly False' for weight/general markers), evidence in early time-restricted eating and circadian biology suggests independent advantages ('Partially True').
  • 5 contested 0.90 The answer states the claim is a 'subject of ongoing scientific debate' and concludes 'Mostly No' for standard outcomes while noting exceptions where meal timing and circadian alignment confer independent metabolic advantages.

Change over time

No change from the prior run — every model's modal stance held.

Every stance label is a derived judgment over the model's free-text answer, kept auditable against the original transcript in the run's raw data. Method: /methodology.