Fasting

bigmonkey · #1 08-12-2007, 05:38 PM

I did a search on this but didn't get much in the way of results so thought I'd just go ahead and make a new post.

In the past I've had periods of time where I will eat several meals a day and could eat even more if I wanted, and had other periods where I can comfortably live off a slice of bread or piece of fruit once a day for weeks. The difference is in the size of my stomach. The more you eat the larger your stomach is stretched, so you become hungry again sooner, or this is my understanding anyway.

At the moment I'm in the grip of a large appatite period, and I'm planning to get onto a fairly extreme diet by going on a week's fast. I drink plenty of juice though, probably about a litre a day, and some squash, so I get quite a few calories. The purpose is just to allow my stomach to shrink enough so that I can exist on very little afterwards.

Anyone think this is a stupid plan or unhealthy? I have fasted several times before and done longer each time. My current record is 140 hours which is just under 6 days, so a week's fast isn't exactly a great leap for me. Also, on every fast I've done, I've found that towards the end I've felt like I could continue it for considerably longer. I don't think it would be that inconceivable to go for a month or longer, but I would probably need to be drinking more calories in juice then I would be taking on my low-food diet.

As far as I'm concerned, a good fast does exactly the same thing as a stomach staple would do, except it takes less time to recover, is completely free, and doesn't involve any surgery.

Also, my current position is that fasting might be unhealthy for older people, but I'm only 21 so not really in much danger of ill health yet.

So that is a presentation of my current beliefs about the subject. Does anybody who has good reason to think they know more than me about this (most people here would I imagine), want to enlighten me about these possibly naive beliefs I have? Would anybody recommend (or condemn) a "fast-then-diet" approach, because I've never really heard of that before?

SmileyEH · #2 08-12-2007, 06:00 PM

I can't see any reason to believe how fasting is anything but horribly bad for you. Don't diet at all for starters. Make a lifestyle change, be active and eat well.

Thremp · #3 08-12-2007, 08:01 PM

This sounds terrible.

kyleb · #4 08-12-2007, 08:29 PM

Fasting is great if you have too much muscle and want to get rid of it. Do you fall into this category?

Quicksilvre · #5 08-12-2007, 08:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
This sounds terrible.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT. Taking in roughly the same amount of calories a day MUST be better than this.

StaticShock · #6 08-12-2007, 08:32 PM

If you gain spiritual fulfillment or something from fasting then go for it. Physically, it's a terrible idea as has already been said.

Just remember... When you starve yourself your body kind of turns on itself and starts to eat muscle for nutrients. The less muscle you have the less calories you're burning when at rest. End result, you get weak and fat because after your fast you end up binging.

bigmonkey · #7 08-12-2007, 09:50 PM

I forgot to mention (or rather I tried to mention but failed to realise I'd only previewed ratehr than posted, then left), that I am intending to be doing exercise to complement the diet. Diet + Exercise = lifestyle change, right?

My action plan is to get a 2nd hand exercise bike off eBay, and I'm hoping to do 800 miles between 1st October and 31st November. I'm planning on starting the fast in early September and will get the bike about that time as well for some practicing.

I'm not sure whether I get spiritual fulfilment from fasting. I think after I'd finished my 140 hour fast I felt better physically than I've ever felt. It's usually tough for the first 3 days, and then I suddenly break through some weird barrier, and I feel like I never need to eat again. However, as pointed out, I have ended the fast with a binge most times (once with a 6-egg omelette), but that;s only because those times, in the early stages when Iw as hungry I constantly told myself "Just keep going and there's this great meal at the end of it for you", and this got reinforced so often that I didn't even question myself when I toddled off to the pizza place at the end when I actually wasn;t even hungry and couldn't eat half a pizza. This time I already know I will break the fast slowly. I'm just using it as a preparation for the lifestyle change, so to speak.

The alternative is to ease myself into eating less and exercising more, and in weighing up the utility of each option, I reckon the fast method involves a few days of mild pain and then it's go time, and the "easing" method involves a few weeks of continually pushing myself to the next level until it's go time proper.

So...everybody's said it's a terrible idea, but the only good reason for that so far has been that 1) I will lose more muscle than fat, and 2) I will binge afterwards which makes the whole thing pointless and --EV. Well I can guarantee that (this time) I won't binge afterwards, so that just leaves the first, which I think is worth taking for the benefit of not needing to eat much during my regime. I think the pain of being hungry when you only ate a few hours ago is worse than the pain of exercise, so I'm going with that option.

guids · #8 08-12-2007, 09:57 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I forgot to mention (or rather I tried to mention but failed to realise I'd only previewed ratehr than posted, then left), that I am intending to be doing exercise to complement the diet. Diet + Exercise = lifestyle change, right?

My action plan is to get a 2nd hand exercise bike off eBay, and I'm hoping to do 800 miles between 1st October and 31st November. I'm planning on starting the fast in early September and will get the bike about that time as well for some practicing.

I'm not sure whether I get spiritual fulfilment from fasting. I think after I'd finished my 140 hour fast I felt better physically than I've ever felt. It's usually tough for the first 3 days, and then I suddenly break through some weird barrier, and I feel like I never need to eat again. However, as pointed out, I have ended the fast with a binge most times (once with a 6-egg omelette), but that;s only because those times, in the early stages when Iw as hungry I constantly told myself "Just keep going and there's this great meal at the end of it for you", and this got reinforced so often that I didn't even question myself when I toddled off to the pizza place at the end when I actually wasn;t even hungry and couldn't eat half a pizza. This time I already know I will break the fast slowly. I'm just using it as a preparation for the lifestyle change, so to speak.

The alternative is to ease myself into eating less and exercising more, and in weighing up the utility of each option, I reckon the fast method involves a few days of mild pain and then it's go time, and the "easing" method involves a few weeks of continually pushing myself to the next level until it's go time proper.

So...everybody's said it's a terrible idea, but the only good reason for that so far has been that 1) I will lose more muscle than fat, and 2) I will binge afterwards which makes the whole thing pointless and --EV. Well I can guarantee that (this time) I won't binge afterwards, so that just leaves the first, which I think is worth taking for the benefit of not needing to eat much during my regime. I think the pain of being hungry when you only ate a few hours ago is worse than the pain of exercise, so I'm going with that option.

[/ QUOTE ]

its unhealthy and stupid, unless you do it for "spiritual reasons". Quit trying to rationalize it. Do what you want, but its pointless and counter productive to traditional goals of health. But if you get your kicks by not eating, do what you feel like.

Assani Fisher · #9 08-13-2007, 12:56 PM

When I wrestled in HS I probably ate 500 or less calories per day for days at a time. I wasn't very strong at the end of the season, but I was in phenomenal cardiovascular shape and weighed the least I ever have in my adult life.

Thremp · #10 08-13-2007, 02:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
When I wrestled in HS I probably ate 500 or less calories per day for days at a time. I wasn't very strong at the end of the season, but I was in phenomenal cardiovascular shape and weighed the least I ever have in my adult life.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, this is effing terrible.