The circadian timing system governs daily biological rhythms, synchronising physiology and behaviour to the temporal world. External time cues, including the light‐dark cycle and timing of food intake, provide daily signals for entrainment of the central, master circadian clock in the hypothalamic suprachiasmatic nuclei (SCN), and of metabolic rhythms in peripheral tissues, respectively. Chrono‐nutrition is an emerging field building on the relationship between temporal eating patterns, circadian rhythms, and metabolic health. Evidence from both animal and human research demonstrates adverse metabolic consequences of circadian disruption. Conversely, a growing body of evidence indicates that aligning food intake to periods of the day when circadian rhythms in metabolic processes are optimised for nutrition may be effective for improving metabolic health. Circadian rhythms in glucose and lipid homeostasis, insulin responsiveness and sensitivity, energy expenditure, and postprandial metabolism, may favour eating patterns characterised by earlier temporal distribution of energy. This review details the molecular basis for metabolic clocks, the regulation of feeding behaviour, and the evidence for meal timing as an entraining signal for the circadian system in animal models. The epidemiology of temporal eating patterns in humans is examined, together with evidence from human intervention studies investigating the metabolic effects of morning compared to evening energy intake, and emerging chrono‐nutrition interventions such as time‐restricted feeding. Chrono‐nutrition may have therapeutic application for individuals with and at‐risk of metabolic disease and convey health benefits within the general population. image

Diet is one of the main drivers of non-communicable chronic diseases (NCD). Modifying the food supply may be an attractive strategy for promoting health and reducing NCD risk. The intentional modification, processing, enrichment, or fortification of foods to produce "functional foods" currently varies according to legal definitions and existing regulatory frameworks, initially intended function, and production methods. This review critically appraises the existing definitions and concepts applied to functional foods, proposing a new concept of "functionalized foods". The conceptual difference between the two categories is that the term "functional foods" is used for products validated for human health through controlled trials, while "functionalized foods" is used for food products obtained through enrichment or (bio)fortification that lack such a validation, yet. Consequently, the review aims to establish a framework for better understanding the range of existing products, enhancing communication, and promoting a more accurate interpretation of the functional food landscape.

Nightshift work is associated with adverse health outcomes, which may be related to eating during the biological night, when circadian rhythms and food intake are misaligned. Nurses often undertake nightshift work, and we aimed to investigate patterns of energy distribution and dietary intake across 14 days in 20 UK National Health Service (NHS) nurses working rotational shifts. We hypothesised that the proportion of daily energy consumed during the nightshift would increase over consecutive nights. Primary and secondary outcome measures included intakes of energy and macronutrients. Our results show that nurses consumed the same total daily energy on nightshifts and non-nightshifts, but redistributed energy to the nightshift period in increasing proportions with a significant difference between Night 1 and 2 in the proportion of total daily energy consumed (26.0 ± 15.7% vs. 33.5 ± 20.2%, mean ± SD; p < 0.01). This finding indicates that, rather than increasing total energy intake, nurses redistribute energy consumed during nightshifts as a behavioural response to consecutive nightshifts. This finding informs our understanding of how the intake of energy during the biological night can influence adverse health outcomes of nightshift work.

Context Daily variation in the thermic effect of food (TEF) is commonly reported and proposed as a contributing factor to weight gain with late eating. However, underlying circadian variability in resting metabolic rate (RMR) is an overlooked factor when calculating TEF associated with eating at different times of the day. Objective This work aimed to determine whether methodological approaches to calculating TEF contribute to the reported phenomena of daily variation in TEF. Methods Fourteen overweight to obese but otherwise healthy individuals had their resting and postprandial energy expenditure (EE) measured over 15.5 hours at a clinical research unit. TEF was calculated for breakfast, lunch, and dinner using standard methods (above a baseline and premeal RMR measure) and compared to a method incorporating a circadian RMR by which RMR was derived from a sinusoid curve model and TEF was calculated over and above the continuously changing RMR. Main outcome measures were TEF at breakfast, lunch, and dinner calculated by different methods. Results Standard methods of calculating TEF above a premeal measured RMR showed that morning TEF (60.8 kcal ± 5.6) (mean ± SEM) was 1.6 times greater than TEF at lunch (36.3 kcal ± 8.4) and 2.4 times greater than dinner TEF (25.2 kcal ± 9.6) (P = .022). However, adjusting for modeled circadian RMR nullified any differences between breakfast (54.1 kcal ± 30.8), lunch (49.5 kcal ± 29.4), and dinner (49.1 kcal ± 25.7) (P = .680). Conclusion Differences in TEF between morning and evening can be explained by the underlying circadian resting EE, which is independent of an acute effect of eating.

Nutrition science has been criticised for its methodology, apparently contradictory findings and generating controversy rather than consensus. However, while certain critiques of the field are valid and informative for developing a more cogent science, there are also unique considerations for the study of diet and nutrition that are either overlooked or omitted in these discourses. The ongoing critical discourse on the utility of nutrition sciences occurs at a time when the burden of non-communicable cardiometabolic disease continues to rise in the population. Nutrition science, along with other disciplinary fields, is tasked with producing a translational evidence-base fit for the purpose of improving population and individual health and reducing disease risk. Thus, an exploration of the unique methodological and epistemic considerations for nutrition research is important for nutrition researchers, students and practitioners, to further develop an improved scientific discipline for nutrition. This paper will expand on some of the challenges facing nutrition research, discussing methodological facets of nutritional epidemiology, randomised controlled trials and meta-analysis, and how these considerations may be applied to improve research methodology. A pragmatic research paradigm for nutrition science is also proposed, which places methodology at its centre, allowing for questions over both how we obtain knowledge and research design as the method to produce that knowledge to be connected, providing the field of nutrition research with a framework within which to capture the full complexity of nutrition and diet.