5 ms·

I hear so much of this fasting hype lately. People seem to conveniently forget that you: 1. Lose all your muscle mass. 2. Suffer malnutrition. 3. Destroy you

I hear so much of this fasting hype lately. People seem to conveniently forget that you: 1. Lose all your muscle mass. 2. Suffer malnutrition. 3. Destroy your stomach lining due to too much acid building up. All for zero proven benefit. But hey, people like TDD too, so I don't hold it against you.

sushid 8y ago
People also seem to conveniently forget that being overweight is a problem. Also, intermittent fasting has none of the downsides you've mentioned.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
joefranklinsrs 8y ago
I don't know how you were fasting (or if you actually tried fasting) I have been doing intermittent fasting 3 days a week, each time 24 hours, for 6 months. I've lost 35 pounds thus far. 1.) I am still doing the same weights as 6 months ago, some muscle groups even more. I make sure I have a protein shake after. 2.) I did blood testing for everything with my doctor 3 months ago and last week. My doctor says i'm perfectly healthy 3.) again, if you're eating alot of complex carbohydrates after fasting, or before, your stomach will have more acids. the key is to reduce your complex carbs as well
intothev01d 8y ago
Exactly how long do you need to fast to "lose all muscle mass" and "suffer malnutrition". You mean continual intermittent fasting or just not eating for a long duration? Any sources on this?
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
everdrive 8y ago
Your criticisms are valid, however given the audience I doubt most Americans would actually 'fast,' and instead would simply skip dinner, wake up actually-hungry instead of just salty-fat-hungry, and perhaps lose a few pounds. Plus, light fasting (aka, skipping a couple of meals) actually feels really good!
sametmax 8y ago
1. Lose all your muscle mass. Given that fasting is always temporary, and that in one week of fasting you only consume 25% more proteins than an entire active day (remember you are supposed to rest while fasting), it's doubtful. Especially since fasting activate the production of growth hormones. Not that you won't loose a little muscle. Of course you will on long fasts. But "all your muscle mass" is just plain silly. Also it just doesn't happen with intermittent fasting: you tend to gain muscle. 2. Suffer malnutrition. Malnutrition is a condition you get on the long run. Not on a few weeks on not eating a year. Besides, the improvement you get on your digestive systems after putting it to rest improve your ability to absorb nutriments after the fact, so if you follow a balanced nutrition after your fast, you should actually be better off. And any fast minded person will tell you that what you eat after a fast is as much important as the fast itself. Once you empty the body, you gotta fill it with good things to allow it to rebuild clean what the autophagy removed. 3. Destroy your stomach lining due to too much acid building up. Acid production stops after a few days because there is nothing to digest. The rare cases where people suffered from stomach lining were people with terrible eating habits that had acid problems already and went full throttle on fasting. Nobody knowledgeable about the practice would forget to tell you how important it is to prepare your body days or weeks before you fast. Especially if you are not used to it. Have you ever read any study about fasting at all ?
- zukzuk 8y ago
  Regarding your 3rd point, there was a recent study that made the rounds here finding that fasting may actually be beneficial to intestinal wall lining (but no word on stomach lining): http://news.mit.edu/2018/fasting-boosts-stem-cells-regenerative-capacity-0503 http://news.mit.edu/2018/fasting-boosts-stem-cells-regenerat...
- robotrout 8y ago
  I do a three day fast about twice a year. I started it as a way to burn up weak white blood cells, so I get new fresh ones. This is also a common regimen for cancer patients, fasting before they start a new round of chemo. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/03/12/fasting-for-three-days-can-regenerate-entire-immune-system-study/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/03/12/fasting-for-t... I have anecdotal evidence that it helps, as I seem to get sick less than I used to.
graeme 8y ago
The fasting hype is mostly short term intermitten fasting. That doesn't lead to muscle loss. Leangains by Martin Berkhan is the most famous system of muscle building that used fasted training.
bluejay2 8y ago
I have been intermittent fasting (one to two 24 hour periods a week) for several months and have lost fat and increased muscle mass with really no negative side effects. The key is to lift weights to prevent muscle loss and to eat reasonably balanced diets (and enough calories) on non fasting-days. “Eat Stop Eat” has a good overview of the science behind it all (I have no association with the author)
CyberDildonics 8y ago
I think you will need to source all those claims, all the evidence I've seen is to the contrary. For 1. you can see MMA fighters cut weight and not 'lose all their muscle mass' so that one seems to have some pretty stark evidence against it. Not to mention that body builders routinely go on bulking and cutting cycles specifically to put on more muscle.
- madeuptempacct 8y ago
  I am too lazy to reply to everyone making stuff up, but you went way, way overboard. Bulking is eating a calorie surplus, cutting is eating at a light calorie deficit, it has nothing to do with fasting. When fighters cut just before weight in, they do so to make sure that they make their weight class cut off or they can't compete. This has nothing to do with fasting - they are forced to do it to stay in weight class, but at the very top of it (being as heavy as possible is overall a boon in the ring).
  - CyberDildonics 8y ago
    I'm not sure what exactly you are saying. Fighters rapidly lose fat weeks out from the fight and they don't lose muscle (then they lose water weight, which is irrelevant here). The idea that you think 'fasting' loses muscle mass is an idea that is not backed up by any evidence. Fasting isn't a diet, it is about when you eat. Also, you didn't source anything. Don't you think maybe the dozen people replying to you might be less likely to be 'making stuff up?'
- bitwize 8y ago
  MMA fighters and bodybuilders do lose significant muscle mass during their cutting phase, not to mention dehydrating the shit out of themselves. It's not a healthy way to live, and it's not undertaken by these athletes unless strictly necesssry.
  - CyberDildonics 8y ago
    Fat goes first. Saying that a theoretical body builder who isn't even trying to make a certain weight loses 'significant' muscle is not something that's backed up by even common sense. If that were true, how does anyone end up with more muscle after they lose weight? > It's not a healthy way to live, and it's not undertaken by these athletes unless strictly necesssry That's not the discussion, this has nothing to do with whether fasting destroys muscle mass. Do you have anything to back up your claim?
rando444 8y ago
You seem to be extremely misinformed, and everything you have said is demonstrably false. Please stop spreading fear and ignorance if you haven't taken the time to do the research.

sushid 8y ago

People also seem to conveniently forget that being overweight is a problem. Also, intermittent fasting has none of the downsides you've mentioned.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

joefranklinsrs 8y ago

I don't know how you were fasting (or if you actually tried fasting) I have been doing intermittent fasting 3 days a week, each time 24 hours, for 6 months. I've lost 35 pounds thus far. 1.) I am still doing the same weights as 6 months ago, some muscle groups even more. I make sure I have a protein shake after. 2.) I did blood testing for everything with my doctor 3 months ago and last week. My doctor says i'm perfectly healthy 3.) again, if you're eating alot of complex carbohydrates after fasting, or before, your stomach will have more acids. the key is to reduce your complex carbs as well

intothev01d 8y ago

Exactly how long do you need to fast to "lose all muscle mass" and "suffer malnutrition". You mean continual intermittent fasting or just not eating for a long duration? Any sources on this?

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

everdrive 8y ago

Your criticisms are valid, however given the audience I doubt most Americans would actually 'fast,' and instead would simply skip dinner, wake up actually-hungry instead of just salty-fat-hungry, and perhaps lose a few pounds. Plus, light fasting (aka, skipping a couple of meals) actually feels really good!

sametmax 8y ago

1. Lose all your muscle mass. Given that fasting is always temporary, and that in one week of fasting you only consume 25% more proteins than an entire active day (remember you are supposed to rest while fasting), it's doubtful. Especially since fasting activate the production of growth hormones. Not that you won't loose a little muscle. Of course you will on long fasts. But "all your muscle mass" is just plain silly. Also it just doesn't happen with intermittent fasting: you tend to gain muscle. 2. Suffer malnutrition. Malnutrition is a condition you get on the long run. Not on a few weeks on not eating a year. Besides, the improvement you get on your digestive systems after putting it to rest improve your ability to absorb nutriments after the fact, so if you follow a balanced nutrition after your fast, you should actually be better off. And any fast minded person will tell you that what you eat after a fast is as much important as the fast itself. Once you empty the body, you gotta fill it with good things to allow it to rebuild clean what the autophagy removed. 3. Destroy your stomach lining due to too much acid building up. Acid production stops after a few days because there is nothing to digest. The rare cases where people suffered from stomach lining were people with terrible eating habits that had acid problems already and went full throttle on fasting. Nobody knowledgeable about the practice would forget to tell you how important it is to prepare your body days or weeks before you fast. Especially if you are not used to it. Have you ever read any study about fasting at all ?

zukzuk 8y ago
Regarding your 3rd point, there was a recent study that made the rounds here finding that fasting may actually be beneficial to intestinal wall lining (but no word on stomach lining): http://news.mit.edu/2018/fasting-boosts-stem-cells-regenerative-capacity-0503 http://news.mit.edu/2018/fasting-boosts-stem-cells-regenerat...
robotrout 8y ago
I do a three day fast about twice a year. I started it as a way to burn up weak white blood cells, so I get new fresh ones. This is also a common regimen for cancer patients, fasting before they start a new round of chemo. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/03/12/fasting-for-three-days-can-regenerate-entire-immune-system-study/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/03/12/fasting-for-t... I have anecdotal evidence that it helps, as I seem to get sick less than I used to.

graeme 8y ago

The fasting hype is mostly short term intermitten fasting. That doesn't lead to muscle loss. Leangains by Martin Berkhan is the most famous system of muscle building that used fasted training.

bluejay2 8y ago

I have been intermittent fasting (one to two 24 hour periods a week) for several months and have lost fat and increased muscle mass with really no negative side effects. The key is to lift weights to prevent muscle loss and to eat reasonably balanced diets (and enough calories) on non fasting-days. “Eat Stop Eat” has a good overview of the science behind it all (I have no association with the author)

CyberDildonics 8y ago

I think you will need to source all those claims, all the evidence I've seen is to the contrary. For 1. you can see MMA fighters cut weight and not 'lose all their muscle mass' so that one seems to have some pretty stark evidence against it. Not to mention that body builders routinely go on bulking and cutting cycles specifically to put on more muscle.

madeuptempacct 8y ago
I am too lazy to reply to everyone making stuff up, but you went way, way overboard. Bulking is eating a calorie surplus, cutting is eating at a light calorie deficit, it has nothing to do with fasting. When fighters cut just before weight in, they do so to make sure that they make their weight class cut off or they can't compete. This has nothing to do with fasting - they are forced to do it to stay in weight class, but at the very top of it (being as heavy as possible is overall a boon in the ring).
- CyberDildonics 8y ago
  I'm not sure what exactly you are saying. Fighters rapidly lose fat weeks out from the fight and they don't lose muscle (then they lose water weight, which is irrelevant here). The idea that you think 'fasting' loses muscle mass is an idea that is not backed up by any evidence. Fasting isn't a diet, it is about when you eat. Also, you didn't source anything. Don't you think maybe the dozen people replying to you might be less likely to be 'making stuff up?'
bitwize 8y ago
MMA fighters and bodybuilders do lose significant muscle mass during their cutting phase, not to mention dehydrating the shit out of themselves. It's not a healthy way to live, and it's not undertaken by these athletes unless strictly necesssry.
- CyberDildonics 8y ago
  Fat goes first. Saying that a theoretical body builder who isn't even trying to make a certain weight loses 'significant' muscle is not something that's backed up by even common sense. If that were true, how does anyone end up with more muscle after they lose weight? > It's not a healthy way to live, and it's not undertaken by these athletes unless strictly necesssry That's not the discussion, this has nothing to do with whether fasting destroys muscle mass. Do you have anything to back up your claim?

rando444 8y ago

You seem to be extremely misinformed, and everything you have said is demonstrably false. Please stop spreading fear and ignorance if you haven't taken the time to do the research.