4 ms·
So many comments here claiming to understand the effect of fasting on humans generally through personal experience. Come on, people - your experience is a dat
by walnutclosefarm 4y ago
So many comments here claiming to understand the effect of fasting on humans generally through personal experience. Come on, people - your experience is a datum, it's not data, and your entirely subjective conclusions drawn from that datum are not analysis. People's response to fasting varies widely. Hunger is both a physiological and a psychological phenomenon - and like any phenomenon with a psychological component, is highly variable. And our individual ability to release stored glycogen in order to maintain metabolic function without eating also varies widely. There is no single experience of fasting.
- gjsman-1000 4y agoEverything is anecdotal before it can become science.
- Xeoncross 4y agoall anecdotes are equal but some anecdotes are more equal /s
- d23 4y agoI don't even know what point you're trying to make, but regardless, I think the point the poster you're responding to is making is that there are two places in the scientific method where anecdotes comes into the play: observation and hypothesis. These are the seeds for follow-up inquiry and the basis for the scientific method. Moreover, it's completely reasonable to be skeptical of the methodology of a study, especially when one of the subject groups is as specific as a religious group doing a fast as part of a religious observance.
- leroy-is-here 4y agoThere’s no single experience of thinking yet I can say everyone has thoughts. Thoughts about what? _That_ is what varies. The body is similar, it speaks through signals to the brain. The only way to know your body’s voice is by doing. Dismiss your notion that individual experience has no value.
- gjsman-1000 4y agoI’m here before he responds with “what about people in a coma? Therefore we don’t know!” We do know, and individual experience is underrated. If it weren’t for individual experiences we would have no science.
- katbyte 4y agoBodies are quite different, different metabolic rate, different fitness, different in many ways. I can go an entire day without eating to little ill effect. I knows people who must eat three times a day and if they miss one meal get super cranky. It’s not dismissing it to point out data vs datum or that people’s bodies vary wildly.
- leroy-is-here 4y agoWhat I’m saying is that perhaps the “cranky” eater doesn’t even know their body’s voice. Or is angry by simply hearing it. Another way of putting it: you say you have tried but are you even sure that others have tried? People will say they have experienced but in reality have not.
- katbyte 4y agoOr perhaps they have a much faster metabolism and are hypo-glycemic? I accidentally go all day without food. They must carry snacks.
- leroy-is-here 4y agoOr perhaps you’re just a better listener. Do you _know_ they _must_ carry snacks or are you imagining that’s how they must be? The real trick of this is realizing people do the same “imagining” with their own body and their own selves. They do not know.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- d23 4y agoI don't know who is labeling their observations as "analysis" other than you. It's reasonable to question a study's methodology, especially when the judges in question were fasting as a part of Ramadan. And including one's own experience as an addendum is completely reasonable too.
- wouldbecouldbe 4y agoData is also overrated. Data is often highly convoluted, with multiple causes in one correlation. We want to understand the way things work, and correlation can give us hints. But so can individual experience. But "data" is often used as the truth. So yeah individual experience here is valid. Hunger is not as simple as every hour you eat you get more hungry, and that's valid to deduct from personal experience.
- walnutclosefarm 4y agoData is indeed often opaque, but it's the only way you can make a rigorous argument that something is characteristic of the natural world. To borrow a phrase, data driven conclusion on a hypothesis are the worst form of conclusion, except for all the other methods you can name.
- wouldbecouldbe 4y agoNo its not, thats exactly my point. You cant make a conclusion like that at all. It just points you that there might be recurring charateristic but not that there actually is one or what it is.