I certainly don't discredit your long history of raising chickens, that isn't the point. Not having feed before the hens does lower your feed bill. But, chickens are browsers, eating a little often over the daylight hours.
"Abstract--In mammals, time-restricted feeding (TRF) with no caloric restriction provides health benefits and extends longevity, usually with a minor (∼3%) or no reduction in total food consumption. In the current study, a TRF regimen of 6 h free access to food (08:00–14:00 h) was applied to Leghorn chickens from 25 to 86 weeks of age; control birds ate freely during the light hours (06:00–20:00 h). Unexpectedly, the TRF-treated birds consumed, on average, 11.7% less food than the controls. This was manifested by an average reduction of 9.6% in body weight, 2.6-fold in visceral fat accumulation, and 6.5% in egg weight. Hen-housed egg production was reduced by 3.6% in the TRF group compared with the control, along the first 40 weeks of the follow-up (P < 0.05), and changed into a tendency of 0.7% higher egg production thereafter. Several parameters of egg quality showed significant improvement (P < 0.05) in the TRF group compared with the controls. A comparison of diurnal patterns of feed consumption revealed a higher rate of hourly consumption in the TRF group and increased consumption before dark in the control group. In conclusion, the reduced feed intake in response to the TRF treatment and loss in visceral fat accumulation supports the lack of a strong adipostat activity in chickens and different appetite regulation mechanisms compared with mammals. Therefore, future TRF studies in chickens should be adjusted by extending the ad libitum time window. The lower feed intake by the TRF-treated chickens compared with the ad libitum-fed controls seems to reduce the efficiency of egg production. Nevertheless, the improved egg quality and persistence of egg lay at the older age suggest that similarly to mammals, the TRF treatment delayed at least some of the negative impacts associated with advanced age."
The key takeaway is a nearly 10% reduction in weight, 2.6 times the visceral fat, and a 3.6% drop in egg production. The abstract does state that the hens will lay longer into their old age, with less feed efficiency, and better egg quality. If one is keeping chickens as pets there is some validity to starving a flock by only feeding twice a day. I think the same would be found for nearly all living things including humans.
So, yes, restricting feed to flocks isn't optimal unless you are raising pets. For most of us, raising chickens needs to make financial sense nor are most of us in a position to be able to hand feed twice a day.
Your second set of points. No one disputes that your rats disappeared after you sprayed lemon oil and started feeding twice a day. But the scientific studies show that it wasn't the smell of lemon oil.
The use of lemon oil in the studies wasn't acclimating them to "poison", it was showing that lemon oil increases their learning abilities and that indeed they prefer nest boxes without lemon oil. But you could soak the feed and the ground around a feeder with lemon oil and it wouldn't prevent a hungry rat from eating. The rats would prefer you not do that though, that was proven in the studies.
And scientific studies quoted are not "hasty assumptions" nor is pointing out flaws in posted advice "dishing" anything out but simple facts and truth.
It is just that everyone would be better served if they checked out the old wives tales before posting them. A healthy discussion is a good thing, I for one was surprised to learn that lemon oil caused some rats to learn faster. Strange and useless but interesting to know.
