3 ms·
Isn’t it unhealthy to skip both breakfast and lunch? How are you getting the energy to do stuff without eating?
by daggerdrone 2mo ago
Isn’t it unhealthy to skip both breakfast and lunch? How are you getting the energy to do stuff without eating?
- CalRobert 2mo agoNo idea but worth remembering that modern breakfast was invented to sell cereal.
- gritspants 2mo agoYeah I had a schedule like that when the kids were very young but it caught up with me, frankly. Having the computer be the first and last thing I interacted with every day was not great for my mood either.
- katzgrau 2mo agoGranted, I do need to take a break from that schedule every so often. If I catch myself being unfocused I just go to bed. Also, the first thing I work on is usually a high leverage project that excites me. Reading news or answering emails (things that can affect my emotions) are usually avoided during that time. Usually.
- thaumasiotes 2mo ago> Isn’t it unhealthy to skip both breakfast and lunch? No, why would you think that?
- davmar 2mo agohey hey don't interrupt the hustleporn
- hahahaa 2mo agoOh no you see this is now called intermittent fasting not "lunch is for wimps".
- jawilson2 2mo agoIntermittent fasting and calorie reduction are the only known way to EXTEND lifespan and wellness. 10 years of low carb + fasting is the single most important health decision I have ever made.
- dyarosla 2mo agoKind of a strong statement there. Happy that fasting’s had such a positive influence on your life but: No: fasting has not been proven to extend lifespan in humans. Also no: exercise has been far more provably correlated with healthspan improvements than fasting.
- Gareth321 2mo agoYou are more correct, but I think the truth lies somewhere between your statement and theirs. We have correlative evidence that lower calorie diets and/or fasting results in longer lifespans, improved insulin sensitivity, pancreatic cell responsiveness, blood pressure, oxidative-stress measures, and more, in humans. We also have animal testing showing causative evidence that fasting produces longer lifespans. Of course, animals are not humans, and correlation does not imply causation. Still, we do not currently have causative evidence that smoking causes lung cancer, and we widely agree that that is harmful for lungs. With enough correlative evidence I think it becomes reasonable to accept it as actionable evidence.
- triceratops 2mo agoIt's only unhealthy if you get hungry.
- keeda 2mo agoWellllll, kind of... I've realized hunger is often just another habit because we're used to eating N meals a day, like the GP comment implies. I've done a quasi OMAD (1-meal a day) thing on-and-off for 3+ years now and don't feel hungry the rest of the time, given my current physical activity levels. It took a few days to get used to, but now I can start and stop OMAD on demand. I'd recommend everyone try fasting and figure out what their bodies really need (preferably over the holidays, because the adjustment period can be a bit rough and could interfere with work.) I suspect most of the developed world is over-eating by quite a lot given our largely sedentary lifestyles.
- poncho_romero 2mo agoI did fasting for a while, usually fasting for 16+ hours and eating 1-2 meals in the eight hour feeding window, but eventually stopped in favour of working out. I'd like to be able to lift while also fasting, but I'm worried that (1) I'd struggle to hit my protein targets and (2) only eating during a small window each day would hurt muscle growth.
- keeda 2mo agoOh for sure, if your physical activity is higher you need to eat commensurately more! What I meant is, for most of us with desk jobs and little physical activity, our bodies need surprisingly little food and this is what fasting reveals. Like even on OMAD I pretty much don't lose any weight (and no, I'm not as lean as I wish I were!) I strongly suspect if average, healthy people cut out an entire meal a day and changed nothing else, their bodies would stay mostly the same.
- ColdStream 2mo agoAs a fun project, you should look up the history of eating schedules. They vary wildly between different cultures. Some have a single large meal at the start of the day, others have 5 smaller meals spread through, and everything in between. There is no standard even if it feels like it simply because that is how we are raised. It is but social convention.
- MeetingsBrowser 2mo agoSocial and historical conventions don’t necessarily align with “good for your health”.
- colechristensen 2mo agoMost "good for your health" advice is pop culture driven with a half life of 5 years anyway and breakfast being the most important meal of the day is a marketing slogan. In other words, no better than any various convention. About the only things that stick are "don't stop physical and mental activity as you age" and "do stuff in moderation". If you call it "intermittent fasting" and write a book about it, you can get a whole movement behind how healthy skipping breakfast and lunch is. And another movement preaching about how bad it is. And a followup book about what you REALLY should do ad nauseam.
- ColdStream 2mo agoPretty much, so much of what we take for granted in culture was actually intentionally designed from the top down to have masses of people fall into line and become good servants of the economic system. As for good diets, for instance, there is a wild meal schedule that has shown to be fairly good at managing weight, it is just intense. It is the 16 to 17 meals a day plan. One meal every hour you are awake, each one only about 100 to 150 calories. It does potentially work but try selling it to people and worse getting folks to stick to it.
- colechristensen 2mo ago
- _kb 2mo agoThe secret is to have your children eat for you, then just do blood transfusions when they’re at peak nutrient level. You can do that while you work for optimal efficiency.
- brainzap 2mo agobreak-fast is for farmer that do hard work
- Jtarii 2mo agoYour body has energy reserves that it can use when you aren't eating.