yes of course but I never said that you have to be in a calorie deficit to do IF. I said the benefits of IF helps people eat in a calorie deficit. Big difference. And that it can help people find a way of eating WHICH doesn't have to be in a deficit. Maybe it works for their schedule, appetite, etc.

However, a calorie deficit can happen (not all the time if people end up in a surplus at the end of the day even if they were in a "restricted window") and that's how people lose the weight because they reduced the time of eating compared to what they were doing before.

Autophagy happens when you're in a negative energy balance so you don't have to fast to be in autophagy. Sure you can increase the length of time of that deficit by fasting but the differences are probably not that significant. Also, adding exercise has been shown to be good for autophagy and compared to fasting alone. In other words, if you prioritize fasting for autophagy and not exercising, you're doing yourself a disservice. In this video, Dr. Layne Norton mentions two studies that found exercise benefits for autophagy https://youtu.be/NLl0DZBP2Wo

Also, you mentioned "it's not because of calorie restriction. It's all about lowering the blood sugar" To lower blood sugar, managing calorie intake can help with this, again, it comes down to energy balance. Exercise really helps with this compared to fasting alone. Also, eating a diet with fiber and getting enough sleep helps. I know it doesn't sound as attractive as IF but it works when you're consistent with it.

You also mentioned something about the "fat burner system" according to Dr. Mindy which there's literally no evidence about that. If you're talking about the fat burning zone, that has been debunked many times already. I think it's just another marketing term.

If you have any evidence showing me about what you wrote, I'd like to read about it. However, there's been recent evidence time and time again how IF is not superior to having a flexible eating pattern. This meta-analysis of RCTs https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36177730/ found that systolic blood pressure and blood glucose levels decreased more in the constant energy restriction group. Both groups had improved health and body composition outcomes. There was another meta-analysis that found no significant differences in waist circumference, BMI, blood sugar levels or blood pressure between time-restricted eating diets and control diets. Another words, BOTH can work just fine, it just depends on the individual's preferences.

Overall, the point is that IF is not superior to a flexible eating pattern and that these claimed benefits have not been consistently proven. As said before, if it helps the person to eat in a regular pattern and they like how they feel, then sure nothing wrong with that. But to claim these benefits as if they will do something amazing to your body that eating in a non-IF fashion can't do is becoming old news. Hopefully you found this helpful and can read more about it as the research continues to grow.