modern buddha
Bluelighter
^ Words can only come in so many varieties. You understood what I meant. 
-
H&R Moderators: VerbalTruist
Fasting Megathread
- Thread starter MilliVanilli
- Start date
is intermittent fasting be used for cleansing or weight loss?
Dtergent
Bluelight Crew
You can imagine how cultural practices were built up, by compounded anecdotal evidence that swayed behavior towards one way or another. It is a natural tendency of people to pay attention to anecdotal evidence. Perhaps some have had experience that has been contrary to what scientific studies indicate.
Fasting is a very personal, variable experience.
When it comes to research, I remember a friend whose girlfriend organized a symposium of Islamic medicine a few years ago. There was a lot of research going on exploring the validity of fasting and its relation to chronic fatigue, and some diseases I don't recall. Of course, it would be important to think that the field itself would be assumed to encourage the continuity of religious fasting, but do try to run some searches. It may reveal interesting subjects not given attention elsewhere. I will try when I have some free time.
Intermittent fasting is also receiving attention from a lot of the buffed-up-guy-types I know, so perhaps it is springing up from some initial research. Forgive me as I have no time to do more searching now.
Some articles I had bookmarked before:
An article on a study (on mice) showed an increase in life span, resilience against diseases similar to Alzheimer's and diabetes.
This article from a Rheumatology
|) exploring diet therapy for arthritis does have an area that cites a few studies on fasting. Do a search on "fasting" within the article to see the links, or click on the hide below to see a link-less quote:NSFW:
Again, fasting is a very variable experience. Like I said a few pages back, my experiences fasting vary radically since I gained about 30 pounds (my liver was shot before that due to substance abuse). Overall I can deal better with skipping meals and fasting now. I used to get all lightheaded and imbalanced when I tried, haha.
I seriously think that UNLESS you are intensely into a modality that encourages fasting (as in, you understand the principles of that modality) AND you are in touch with your body (able to read signals), a prolonged fast is not a good idea. You need to know what to expect, how to cast off the waste your body produces as it metabolizes the fat and releases fat-soluble toxins, etc.
Otherwise, skipping a meal every once in awhile, OR eating very lightly (or all juices/fruit) on one day is a good way to start and see how you feel. Do a lot of research before you go on your "big one", or do it with someone experienced. Play it by ear.
addictivepersona
Bluelight Crew
Not to derail the topic at hand but today's day #1 of a mini-fast I'm doing before the 12-day group fast. Had to eat at lunch unfortunately (had to try a hospital tray--Thankfully the "vegetarian spaghetti" had meat sauce by mistake, so I just had to eat the fruit [everyone had to try something]). But I'm back on track and should be good to go 'til Saturday, maybe Sunday.
dokomo
Ex-Bluelighter
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2008
- Messages
- 5,590
You could say this about nearly anything, as long as you add that if done right clause to the end of it. Its a glittering generality that doesn't contribute anything of value to the discussion.
Jblazingphoenix10 said:
I think you're misunderstanding my intent - I'm not challenging your experiences, feelings, etc with fasting. I get that you derive a sense of well-being from it, and I think that is great. All that I'm saying is that those positive feelings do not necessarily indicate that its a healthy practice.
Jblazingphoenix10 said:
Woah, woah calm down now
I'm not 'shitting all over' anything, I'm not out to attack anything. I simply want to stimulate real conversation about the benefits of fasting. I recognize the psychological benefits and sense of well-being, but I'm just not convinced that corresponds with biological benefits (or outweighs the risks.) I think that a healthy diet (and even perhaps calorie restriction as others have mentioned) carry fewer risks with even more long-term benefits. Jblazingphoenix10 said:
I'll be the first to admit there are serious problems within the scientific community in terms of bias an influence (especially when it comes to pharmaceuticals.) I am not, however, advocating any kind of drug or anything else that would invite bias--just a healthy diet. Meats, fruits and vegetables are probably the least lobbied and advertised items out there.
You can imagine how cultural practices were built up, by compounded anecdotal evidence that swayed behavior towards one way or another. It is a natural tendency of people to pay attention to anecdotal evidence. Perhaps some have had experience that has been contrary to what scientific studies indicate.
Fasting is a very personal, variable experience.
When it comes to research, I remember a friend whose girlfriend organized a symposium of Islamic medicine a few years ago. There was a lot of research going on exploring the validity of fasting and its relation to chronic fatigue, and some diseases I don't recall. Of course, it would be important to think that the field itself would be assumed to encourage the continuity of religious fasting, but do try to run some searches. It may reveal interesting subjects not given attention elsewhere. I will try when I have some free time.
Intermittent fasting is also receiving attention from a lot of the buffed-up-guy-types I know, so perhaps it is springing up from some initial research. Forgive me as I have no time to do more searching now.
Some articles I had bookmarked before:
An article on a study (on mice) showed an increase in life span, resilience against diseases similar to Alzheimer's and diabetes.
This article from a Rheumatology
NSFW:
I really appreciate you bringing those studies up!! I've read a lot of the intermittent fasting studies, and many of them show positive results in the animal test paradigm.
The human studies for these patterns of eating have been far more mixed. Several studies (here and here) showed increases in blood pressure and insulin resistance for human participants, versus consuming the same amount of calories split into three meals.
Dtergent said:
I couldn't agree more, research is absolutely key. Promoting a critical evaluation of its practice and benefits is my main reason for posting about it here. I essentially don't want people to approach these kinds of diet changes flippantly and end up harming themselves in the process.
With a few variations, I personally eat a fairly calorie-restricted diet and I know what you mean in terms of getting dizzy and imbalanced at first! I also experienced a lot of orthostatic hypotension during that time. Everything eventually evened out and I've adapted to it pretty well.
Dtergent
Bluelight Crew
I've been commenting about anecdotal evidence over all my years on BL, and I'd like to encourage some gentle discussion with thoughts that I had edited in before the BL hiccup yesterday (and more):
Some things to consider-- intuitively, I would rather listen to some advice culled from a bunch of anecdotal evidence leaning towards one direction by people that share variables with me (e.g. environmental, lifestyle variables, and experiences), than the conflicting results of a scientific study in which there are many variables not mentioned OR considered aside from age, gender, etc.
Over time, there have been several things in which anecdotal and cultural practice is very strongly leaning towards the positive, and scientific evidence is spotty. These often-- because there is not conclusive scientific evidence to categorize as "quackery", and because they MAY hold broad anecdotal accounts of long-term positive effects (in comparison to negative effects)-- elicit the most acidic exchanges on BL.
Understand that Western medicine comes from a completely different framework, with its own research norms (e.g. study methodologies using Western scientific method). It is not the end-all for many people, as it does fall short in things like systems analysis, noting of longer-term interaction in a cross-disciplinary scope, etc.-- I believe this is why there are so many conflicting studies without explanation. However, its experimentation procedures make it very useful in handling acute situations and emergencies! For that I am grateful.
There is one reason why Western scientific research pulls in so many directions-- there is actually a lack of a stable framework (a place where you can carry out systems analysis) in which data adjusts or evolves over time. Most dangerously, it often ends up infering broadly from small findings. Those are, to me, the weakness of that methodology.
In other established perspectives on health (an example-- ayurveda), there is an existing framework for research and scholarship as well. dokomo, I appreciate your calm approach to the topic, but do remember that different people from different frameworks do not have invalid practices just because that methodology from which you belong does not validate it. There can be a rich cros-pollination in this forum, if more in-depth discussion of other modality's frameworks (not just approaches to diseases) are created.
Some things to consider-- intuitively, I would rather listen to some advice culled from a bunch of anecdotal evidence leaning towards one direction by people that share variables with me (e.g. environmental, lifestyle variables, and experiences), than the conflicting results of a scientific study in which there are many variables not mentioned OR considered aside from age, gender, etc.
Over time, there have been several things in which anecdotal and cultural practice is very strongly leaning towards the positive, and scientific evidence is spotty. These often-- because there is not conclusive scientific evidence to categorize as "quackery", and because they MAY hold broad anecdotal accounts of long-term positive effects (in comparison to negative effects)-- elicit the most acidic exchanges on BL.
Understand that Western medicine comes from a completely different framework, with its own research norms (e.g. study methodologies using Western scientific method). It is not the end-all for many people, as it does fall short in things like systems analysis, noting of longer-term interaction in a cross-disciplinary scope, etc.-- I believe this is why there are so many conflicting studies without explanation. However, its experimentation procedures make it very useful in handling acute situations and emergencies! For that I am grateful.
There is one reason why Western scientific research pulls in so many directions-- there is actually a lack of a stable framework (a place where you can carry out systems analysis) in which data adjusts or evolves over time. Most dangerously, it often ends up infering broadly from small findings. Those are, to me, the weakness of that methodology.
In other established perspectives on health (an example-- ayurveda), there is an existing framework for research and scholarship as well. dokomo, I appreciate your calm approach to the topic, but do remember that different people from different frameworks do not have invalid practices just because that methodology from which you belong does not validate it. There can be a rich cros-pollination in this forum, if more in-depth discussion of other modality's frameworks (not just approaches to diseases) are created.
dokomo
Ex-Bluelighter
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2008
- Messages
- 5,590
Choosing to follow anecdotal information is fine as your (or anyone's) personal preference. I simply take exception when this information has the potential to be harmful and is expressed to others as being legitimate beyond the realm of an unscientific observation.
Dtergent said:
As I've said, I'm the first to admit that western science doesn't hold all the answers. This is an important reason to approach any research question critically and with broad consideration, but is certainly not a reason to easily dismiss the entire practice.
Dtergent said:
I have to strongly disagree with a lot of what you said here. First, anyone actually familiar with research and the scientific process knows that a single study or a group of studies mean almost nothing. It is the aggregation and replication of these studies across test groups, conditions, locations, modalities, etc that builds scientific consensus. Replication, peer-review, and meta-analysis are all obvious examples of systems analysis that occur every single day in the western scientific community.
Dtergent said:
What you're describing here is the 'internet expert' effect. People who are good with google and think they're scientists because they can pull up a reference or two that on its face seems to support their point. This might be what you see more often on BL, but I assure you this is far from the reality of the actual scientific research process. The scientific process is constantly self-correcting and adapting to problems and challenges that might interfere with pure results.
Dtergent said:
On its face, it seems humourous to me that you are dismissive of the entire western scientific construct and then refer to Ayurveda as an "established perspective on health." Its important to point out that this varies widely depending upon where you're considering the practice of ayurvedic medicine. In the US, it is researched much the same way as traditional western medicine and funded by many of the same agencies. In other countries, its far different.
I'm all for discussing these other frameworks you mentioned, but so far the discourse has remained primarily in the shallow waters of "it makes me feel good so it must be beneficial" and other such arguments.
Dtergent
Bluelight Crew
Hi dokomo
The aggregation of scientific data, I find, is still much limited to areas of specialization. In this respect, chains of causality are much shorter as well.
I am definitely not dismissive of the whole Western scientific construct-- I believe it has many strengths despite its limitations. I feel this way about different paradigms, even our own country's modality. I referred to "other established perspectives" to include the Western paradigm, in addition to ayurveda. I feel like people can draw more parallelisms or even new directions in their research AND behavior from correlating concepts from other disciplines. That is why I suggest and hope for more basics on other modalities, instead of conflicting approaches to certain pathologies.
The aggregation of scientific data, I find, is still much limited to areas of specialization. In this respect, chains of causality are much shorter as well.
I am definitely not dismissive of the whole Western scientific construct-- I believe it has many strengths despite its limitations. I feel this way about different paradigms, even our own country's modality. I referred to "other established perspectives" to include the Western paradigm, in addition to ayurveda. I feel like people can draw more parallelisms or even new directions in their research AND behavior from correlating concepts from other disciplines. That is why I suggest and hope for more basics on other modalities, instead of conflicting approaches to certain pathologies.
alanwatts
Bluelighter
I've tried abstaining from food for only 2 days at the most. I know that's within the "3 days before hunger pangs subside" window, but I'm no Gandhi! I've always maintained a normal weight. (Almost always) When I was on a 3 month hiking trip to the Nepal Himalayas and subsisting largely on lentils and rice (Dal Bhat), I ended up down to about 120 lbs while my normal weight is closer to 140. 120 is too little to weigh for an adult male even though I'm only 5'7".
addictivepersona
Bluelight Crew
^ Each time you fast you'll find it easier to go longer.
abracadabra girl
Ex-Bluelighter
Kace what do you weigh? I bet that's the thing. Some of us have reserves to last quite a while. LOL
modern buddha
Bluelighter
Also, were you doing anything strenuous physically or mentally? That can really negatively affect the status of your health while fasting.
addictivepersona
Bluelight Crew
IME any changes to your metabolism go away with a couple days. If you fast, then totally pig out, yeah, you might gain a couple pounds that stick around if you don't watch yourself the days following. But if you fast and then eat sensibly, it won't be quite the shock to your system that a lot of people make it out to be.
but fasting then eating well will still result in weight gain then right?
addictivepersona
Bluelight Crew
Overeating is overeating, following fasting or following any other time. Gaining weight is about calories in versus calories out, really doesn't matter in the long run if that excess of calories is after fasting or not. To gain weight, gradually increase your calories with healthy, natural foods.
modern buddha
Bluelighter
^ What she said.
Moreover, most people don't use fasting as a way to quickly lose weight. It's meant more to help clean your system of toxins. Whether or not the break down of those toxins helps you gain or lose weight after fasting is not an answered question. I guess it might work differently depending on, again, how your diet is *most of the time*.
Moreover, most people don't use fasting as a way to quickly lose weight. It's meant more to help clean your system of toxins. Whether or not the break down of those toxins helps you gain or lose weight after fasting is not an answered question. I guess it might work differently depending on, again, how your diet is *most of the time*.