I often read these threads about fasting/intermittent fasting on HN and see a lot of nitpicking about flaws in the study.
Given that almost all studies tend to fall between "no effect" or "clear positive effect" of fasting on health, do we have enough evidence to say "fasting is good for your health?" I still believe there's value in further research to nail down exactly how and how much, but curious if we can make the overall statement confidently.
If you can successfully pull it off, there's substantial evidence it is generally beneficial. But I have a genetic disorder that impairs fat processing (so I had no real fat stores to draw on while fasting) and I began fasting or semi fasting while homeless at times when I was too broke to afford food.
Initially, it was extremely hard on me. I routinely threw up on fasting days and usually managed to get something into me so was really only light rationed, not actually fasting. It took years for me to get well enough for fasting to stop being horrible torturous drama and I still have extremely severe diarrhea when I resume eating.
Second, there is a thing called Refeeding Syndrome that can occur when you break a fast. It can be deadly.
I think it benefits a lot of conditions, but if you have a condition, it's also potentially dangerous to try it and we need to get a lot more savvy about how people with conditions can safely try it.
With asking around about Refeeding Syndrome and some best practices for how to effectively break a fast plus some experience, breaking a fast has gotten to be a lot easier on me.
I could have potentially died from fasting and it likely wouldn't have been blamed on fasting. My condition is serious enough they would have blamed my condition.
But it has proven beneficial and I hate it less than I used to.
The logic behind this is that the turmeric and ginger causes a (very mild) inflammatory response in the stomach. It gets the body "ready" for food again.
The bone broth supplies a very mild, easily digestible form of protein that resupplies immediate deficits. Sauerkraut supplies good digestive bacteria to rebuild your population of digestive helpers. This helps prevent diarrhea, though not entirely.
Almonds, pumpkin seeds, sunflower seeds (preferably unsalted) begin supplying dense packets of minerals. Don't have too much, but a few handfuls will be a good start.
Avacado! Calories (from good fat) and minerals, and more fiber.
The soup is the first serious nourishment. The tofu, chard, kale, and napa provide a range of good stuff. Protein from the tofu, and more minerals and fiber from the leafy greens. Lightly salted broth, (a mix of bone broth and chicken broth for flavor) is also good.
Yogurt (active culture) provides calcium and fat, and another excellent boost to helper bacteria.
More snacking on the nuts and seeds as you like...
A light dinner of thin slices of ribeye with onions and soy sauce over rice, and a nice cruciferous vegetable blanched, dressed with a touch sesame oil and salt.
Rebooted!
The waits in between are important, as is continued hydration along the way.
All that said, many of the benefits you supposedly get from 3-day / 5-day fasts, can be had from reduced calorie diets.
> I still have extremely severe diarrhea when I resume eating.
Try resuming with an at least slightly green banana. It's a really effective tool vs. diarrhea in general, but I've found it to also be a great restart after fasting.
Definitely not. Nutrition and dietary studies are famously hard to draw any solid conclusions from due to the logistical challenges of performing quality studies (randomization, blinding, "placebo" effects, adherence, follow-up, ...). Additionally, do we assume these effects are consistent for everyone, or certain age groups, genetic markers, ethnicities, etc. Even within individuals, would effects be beneficial for the whole lifetime?
It seems balance and "do what works for you" would be the recommendation.
I often read these threads about fasting/intermittent fasting on HN and see a lot of nitpicking about flaws in the study.
Given that almost all studies tend to fall between "no effect" or "clear positive effect" of fasting on health, do we have enough evidence to say "fasting is good for your health?" I still believe there's value in further research to nail down exactly how and how much, but curious if we can make the overall statement confidently.