4 ms·

The more I’ve learned over the years about health has now lead me down the path to practice periods of fasting. Anyone trying to eat a perfect Whole Foods diet

The more I’ve learned over the years about health has now lead me down the path to practice periods of fasting. Anyone trying to eat a perfect Whole Foods diet may also still consume the occasional garbage food. I feel like fasting is a missing tool in the toolbox we don’t hear about enough. Doing periods of 2 to 5 day fasts just seems to kind of reset things. Give organs a break that would otherwise never have a break. Many benefits to speak of.. But excited to see what the science shows in the coming decades. There just seems to be something inherently natural feeling about feast and fast. Human ancestors were probably not eating 3 good size meals every single day forever without EVER giving there systems a break. The body seems to benefit from having a break from the constant toxin ingestion.

unsupp0rted 3y ago
> Give organs a break that would otherwise never have a break. Do organs benefit from having a break?
- MeImCounting 3y ago
  NO they dont. This is wrong and dangerous. Fasting puts extra stress on your organs.
- bgandrew 3y ago
  I'm also wandering. My organ is having a really long break these days, not sure if it's even healthy.
- wredue 3y ago
  I found this, although I am not asserting that the author is an authority, nor asserting any credence: https://www.alliedacademies.org/articles/fasting-can-heal-the-human-organism-of-disease-and-reverse-the-ageing-process-11647.html#:~:text=The%20abstinence%20of%20food%20affords,and%20tissue%2C%20absorb%20effusions%20and https://www.alliedacademies.org/articles/fasting-can-heal-th... The national library of medicine isn’t quite as extreme as the suggest that certain cancers are prevented, but does indicate support of fasting having positive outcomes for human systems: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK534877/#:~:text=Most%20glycogen%20is%20stored%20in,adipose%20tissue%20and%20protein%20stores https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK534877/#:~:text=Most%2.... A comment below states some cancers risks have a great increase from obesity, so the claim of intermittent fasting reducing cancer risk may to have some credence.
Almondsetat 3y ago
The "occasional garbage food (that isn't straight up poison)" is quite literally irrelevant. You can fast for many reasons but this is really a silly one to mention
yreg 3y ago
I think fasting is probably healthy, but kind-of presenting it in context of being a solution to elevated cancer rates seems like a stretch.
- ssivark 3y ago
  Why? I’ve seen arguments (highly simplified) that cancerous cells are more resource hungry than healthy ones, and fasting might help (selectively) starve them to death — leaving only the healthiest cells surviving.
giraffe_lady 3y ago
You fast from food for five days straight? I regularly fast for religious reasons and don't flinch from a two day fast a few times a year but five is intense. I did five days one time, and broke the fast by eating watermelon. A few minutes later I vomited just pure watermelon pulp. It wasn't even gross, it was like there was no digestive liquids in my stomach to do anything to it. I had to teach my body to eat again. You do this regularly?
MeImCounting 3y ago
Just gonna put this out there that this is dangerous, faddy advice. Fasting is a road to eating disorders and is much harder on your organs than eating nutritious food. If it "works for you" thats fine but I hope someone will always put it out there that fasting is dangerous, unsupported by evidence and more dangerous than you can know. Fasting gives you a dopamine dump to give you the energy to find food. Not because it is in anyway good for you. Fasting makes people feel good after ending the fast because your body is relieved to no longer be starving. These dynamics are well understood in the context of eating disorders where "health fasting" is a well known symptom and excuse. It's crucial to note that most studies on intermittent fasting have been short-term and conducted on animals, focusing on immediate changes like glucose levels rather than long-term health outcomes. This lack of extensive scientific data calls for caution in adopting intermittent fasting, especially for individuals with specific health conditions or vulnerabilities.
- nerdponx 3y ago
  2-5 day fasting seems extreme. I think most intermittent fasting recommendations are more like "skip lunch 3 days a week".
  - xboxnolifes 3y ago
    Usually it's more like skipping breakfast and not snacking after dinner. Skipping lunch isn't much of a fast if you're eating breakfast at at 7am and dinner at 7pm. But eating dinner at ~7pm and having your next meal be lunch is ~16 hours without eating.
- giraffe_lady 3y ago
  I don't encourage people to fast but it's also not true that it's unsupported by evidence. It's an ancient and widespread practice in nearly all of the major world belief systems. Billions of people fast, and there is a massive cross-cultural body of writings about the effects of it. Which is not the same as modern peer-reviewed medical study, no. But it's not "no evidence" either.
  - 3y ago
autoexec 3y ago
How sad that the FDA sucks so badly at their job that people are now like: "I have to try not to eat in order to reduce the amount of poison I'm ingesting from all of our food". Regulatory capture at work I guess.
- robocat 3y ago
  > FDA sucks so badly at their job The job is impossible with our current sciencey abilities and our current systems. I'm in the future already: where's my freaking flying car!
Merad 3y ago
> Give organs a break that would otherwise never have a break. Many benefits to speak of.. Meaning no offense but this seems like such a silly claim to make. I'm sure it's appealing to feel like you've found a way to hack the system but... color me skeptical. Our bodies evolved over millions of years to operate continuously and generally do so quite successfully for 60-80 years with no special effort required. That said, I do look forward to seeing Tiktok videos touting the benefits of intentionally induced cardiac arrest to give your heart a break. Or holding your breath for long periods to give your lungs a break.
- J_Shelby_J 3y ago
  Ah yes, we evolved eating 3 meals and 3 snacks a day 24/7/365 over millions of years. So sad that the chicken nugget tree went extinct.
  - Merad 3y ago
    I don't think that argument really holds up. IME people who are highly interested in fasting, cleanses, or "resting their organs" claim to feel like they're being overwhelmed by "toxins" and need to do those things despite eating a very health conscious diet.

unsupp0rted 3y ago

> Give organs a break that would otherwise never have a break. Do organs benefit from having a break?

MeImCounting 3y ago
NO they dont. This is wrong and dangerous. Fasting puts extra stress on your organs.
bgandrew 3y ago
I'm also wandering. My organ is having a really long break these days, not sure if it's even healthy.
wredue 3y ago
I found this, although I am not asserting that the author is an authority, nor asserting any credence: https://www.alliedacademies.org/articles/fasting-can-heal-the-human-organism-of-disease-and-reverse-the-ageing-process-11647.html#:~:text=The%20abstinence%20of%20food%20affords,and%20tissue%2C%20absorb%20effusions%20and https://www.alliedacademies.org/articles/fasting-can-heal-th... The national library of medicine isn’t quite as extreme as the suggest that certain cancers are prevented, but does indicate support of fasting having positive outcomes for human systems: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK534877/#:~:text=Most%20glycogen%20is%20stored%20in,adipose%20tissue%20and%20protein%20stores https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK534877/#:~:text=Most%2.... A comment below states some cancers risks have a great increase from obesity, so the claim of intermittent fasting reducing cancer risk may to have some credence.

Almondsetat 3y ago

The "occasional garbage food (that isn't straight up poison)" is quite literally irrelevant. You can fast for many reasons but this is really a silly one to mention

yreg 3y ago

I think fasting is probably healthy, but kind-of presenting it in context of being a solution to elevated cancer rates seems like a stretch.

ssivark 3y ago
Why? I’ve seen arguments (highly simplified) that cancerous cells are more resource hungry than healthy ones, and fasting might help (selectively) starve them to death — leaving only the healthiest cells surviving.

giraffe_lady 3y ago

You fast from food for five days straight? I regularly fast for religious reasons and don't flinch from a two day fast a few times a year but five is intense. I did five days one time, and broke the fast by eating watermelon. A few minutes later I vomited just pure watermelon pulp. It wasn't even gross, it was like there was no digestive liquids in my stomach to do anything to it. I had to teach my body to eat again. You do this regularly?

MeImCounting 3y ago

Just gonna put this out there that this is dangerous, faddy advice. Fasting is a road to eating disorders and is much harder on your organs than eating nutritious food. If it "works for you" thats fine but I hope someone will always put it out there that fasting is dangerous, unsupported by evidence and more dangerous than you can know. Fasting gives you a dopamine dump to give you the energy to find food. Not because it is in anyway good for you. Fasting makes people feel good after ending the fast because your body is relieved to no longer be starving. These dynamics are well understood in the context of eating disorders where "health fasting" is a well known symptom and excuse. It's crucial to note that most studies on intermittent fasting have been short-term and conducted on animals, focusing on immediate changes like glucose levels rather than long-term health outcomes. This lack of extensive scientific data calls for caution in adopting intermittent fasting, especially for individuals with specific health conditions or vulnerabilities.

nerdponx 3y ago
2-5 day fasting seems extreme. I think most intermittent fasting recommendations are more like "skip lunch 3 days a week".
- xboxnolifes 3y ago
  Usually it's more like skipping breakfast and not snacking after dinner. Skipping lunch isn't much of a fast if you're eating breakfast at at 7am and dinner at 7pm. But eating dinner at ~7pm and having your next meal be lunch is ~16 hours without eating.
giraffe_lady 3y ago
I don't encourage people to fast but it's also not true that it's unsupported by evidence. It's an ancient and widespread practice in nearly all of the major world belief systems. Billions of people fast, and there is a massive cross-cultural body of writings about the effects of it. Which is not the same as modern peer-reviewed medical study, no. But it's not "no evidence" either.
- 3y ago

autoexec 3y ago

How sad that the FDA sucks so badly at their job that people are now like: "I have to try not to eat in order to reduce the amount of poison I'm ingesting from all of our food". Regulatory capture at work I guess.

robocat 3y ago
> FDA sucks so badly at their job The job is impossible with our current sciencey abilities and our current systems. I'm in the future already: where's my freaking flying car!

Merad 3y ago

> Give organs a break that would otherwise never have a break. Many benefits to speak of.. Meaning no offense but this seems like such a silly claim to make. I'm sure it's appealing to feel like you've found a way to hack the system but... color me skeptical. Our bodies evolved over millions of years to operate continuously and generally do so quite successfully for 60-80 years with no special effort required. That said, I do look forward to seeing Tiktok videos touting the benefits of intentionally induced cardiac arrest to give your heart a break. Or holding your breath for long periods to give your lungs a break.

J_Shelby_J 3y ago
Ah yes, we evolved eating 3 meals and 3 snacks a day 24/7/365 over millions of years. So sad that the chicken nugget tree went extinct.
- Merad 3y ago
  I don't think that argument really holds up. IME people who are highly interested in fasting, cleanses, or "resting their organs" claim to feel like they're being overwhelmed by "toxins" and need to do those things despite eating a very health conscious diet.