Fasting: glorified eating disorders?

[spacecadetglow]

It seems like there's an almost cultish zealotry for fasting around these parts. A lot of people appear to be motivated by a desire to cleanse, purify, and *gasp* lose weight! But this is always mentioned as an aside. There's also a tendency for people to get very defensive about their fasting, and go to great lengths to prove that it's safe and effective. I don't doubt that it is; I just distrust the religious fervor behind it, and the real sicknesses (EDs) it often masks.

The only time I ever did a fast was to kick start me out of an ED. It actually worked, but I don't know how much of it was caused by the fast and how much was just my intention to do that, you know?

What are your thoughts?

[VinceG]

(EDs)

Erectile Dysfunctions?

[Alison Jenkins]

It is well known that binge eating disorder & compulsive overeating can be triggered by dieting / starvation. I always say that you only need to ask yourself if your first diet worked why would you ever need another. I have done thousands of diets but underneath it was an active eating disorder.

Now I'm in recovery I don't need to diet / starve myself.

Alison

[Lakshyayidhi Lakshmihi]

Originally Posted by VinceG

Erectile Dysfunctions?

This is not the first time I've noticed your preoccupation with that issue.

[Lakshyayidhi Lakshmihi]

Originally Posted by spacecadetglow

What are your thoughts?

I think if it's done under the supervision of a board certified physician, it's safer...but I never understood it myself. Sure the body has reserves to save you from starvation in the short term, but I don't see why you should drain those reserves.

[stanmrak]

I agree; there seems to be an inordinate amount of interest in fasting in this forum. I myself have done it over the years, but after consulting with a friend who operates a professional detox clinic, I have decided that fasting is no longer a wise option. This is primarily due to the nature and abundance of the toxins in our environment today. According to my friend, traditional fasting does not rid you rid of these toxins, but only recirculates them in your system.

[spacecadetglow]

Yeah, I mean, I don't think people realize how amazingly adaptive our bodies have become at warding off toxins. There's toxins everywhere, people, even in the air we breathe when we talk outside. When you become preoccupied with it, it becomes an obsession, just like a person with an ED will obsessively guard themselves against high caloric intake. Same beast, different name.

It pains me to see so many people think they're doing something healthy for themselves when they're really just feeding a demon inside them. Happened to me for years, and when I realized what I was doing to myself, it all seemed so obvious. I never looked back.

[Solipsist]

Okay, serious (as opposed to rhetorical) question, here--

Could the propensity to fast for such long periods be tied to ego? I mean, I can understand how one can feel better about themselves after having fasted for xx days. I would think that sense of accomplishment and pride would come into play, there.

[mikej]

wouldn't your ego try to get you to eat though?

[spacecadetglow]

Yeah, I think, absolutely. Of course. EDs are also extremely ego-driven. The pride and accomplishment (these emotions themselves are not distorted, but functioning in an ED frame they start to look very, very sick indeed) after one runs for 6 miles, or goes all day without eating.

It becomes a competition with oneself, how well can I do? If I fight myself, can I win? Just even talking about this is getting me all teary eyed, because I know how it feels to suffer like that.

Most of the websites I've read on fasting are, as I insinuated in the beginning, motivated by dogma. There's an almost religious fervor to its proponents, something I have come to highly distrust. When someone is loudly, obnoxiously shouting "THIS IS THE ANSWER! THIS IS WHAT YOU NEED FOR OPTIMAL HEALTH!" I know that it is almost certainly not.

[James81]

A lengthy fast (something beyond a week) is really only something that "should" be done once every couple of years or so (to be healthy). Maybe once a year at the very most.

A weeklong or 3-5 day type of fast can be done a couple of times a year I think.

A one day fast can be done as frequently as once a week or once every couple of weeks.

So, in my opinion, anything over and beyond those types of frequencies (give or take a little) is an eating disorder.

[Solipsist]

Originally Posted by mikej

wouldn't your ego try to get you to eat though?

Well, the body needs food to survive, and the ego can take anything to the extreme, so, I'd say, yes, the ego can get you to eat, but in that case, it's more like "binging." I've done that, myself. (I love to dine).

But on the same token, and again, because the ego takes things to extremes, as Space points out below, there can be some ego gratification in not eating.

Originally Posted by spacecadetglow

It becomes a competition with oneself, how well can I do? If I fight myself, can I win? Just even talking about this is getting me all teary eyed, because I know how it feels to suffer like that.

Hugs, Space. You can cry all you want in front of me.

Most of the websites I've read on fasting are, as I insinuated in the beginning, motivated by dogma. There's an almost religious fervor to its proponents, something I have come to highly distrust. When someone is loudly, obnoxiously shouting "THIS IS THE ANSWER! THIS IS WHAT YOU NEED FOR OPTIMAL HEALTH!" I know that it is almost certainly not.

Yep. Applies to lots of things, too, not just fasting.

[Andrew Brunelle]

Fasting is not an eating disorder. People have been fasting for health for thousands of years. While it may be true that some people who fast may have an eating disorder, most people are doing it for health reasons, not simply to lose weight. It has profound healing powers if done correctly. Although I've never fasted for more than 3 days. But I truly don't need to. It is those with chronic health problems that will benefit the most.

[mikej]

Originally Posted by Solipsist

Well, the body needs food to survive, and the ego can take anything to the extreme, so, I'd say, yes, the ego can get you to eat, but in that case, it's more like "binging." I've done that, myself. (I love to dine).

But on the same token, and again, because the ego takes things to extremes, as Space points out below, there can be some ego gratification in not eating.

ok but what i've read about fasting is that it tends to weaken the ego rather like meditation does.

[spacecadetglow]

Originally Posted by Andrew Brunelle

Fasting is not an eating disorder. People have been fasting for health for thousands of years. While it may be true that some people who fast may have an eating disorder, most people are doing it for health reasons, not simply to lose weight. It has profound healing powers if done correctly. Although I've never fasted for more than 3 days. But I truly don't need to. It is those with chronic health problems that will benefit the most.

Yes, fasting itself does not constitute an eating disorder, this is an important to distinction to make. It's a tool, and it's all in how you use the tool. I'm just going by my impression based on a looot of posts I've seen on this forum, that's all. I know the signs of EDs, and there's a lot of them, here.

Originally Posted by mikej

ok but what i've read about fasting is that it tends to weaken the ego rather like meditation does.

It certainly can, if that's what you intend. That's definitely what I intended with my fast, more or less, and it worked great. But I'll never do it again.

[Solipsist]

Originally Posted by mikej

ok but what i've read about fasting is that it tends to weaken the ego rather like meditation does.

Originally Posted by spacecadetglow

It certainly can, if that's what you intend.

I agree with Space, here. It's all about motive. Always, always, always question motive.

[Lakshyayidhi Lakshmihi]

Originally Posted by mikej

wouldn't your ego try to get you to eat though?

Why? Conditioned constructs don't need essential amino acids.

[mikej]

Originally Posted by Lakshyayidhi Lakshmihi

Why? Conditioned constructs don't need essential amino acids.

but they do like to hide behind things like food, alcohol, drugs etc.

[Lakshyayidhi Lakshmihi]

Originally Posted by mikej

but they do like to hide behind things like food, alcohol, drugs etc.

Well homosexual men who are in the closet sometimes marry women to hide their homosexuality.

That doesn't mean they need that wife to exist. Just that they use her to hide from who they are.

[LostMyMap]

Originally Posted by Andrew Brunelle

Fasting is not an eating disorder. People have been fasting for health for thousands of years. While it may be true that some people who fast may have an eating disorder, most people are doing it for health reasons, not simply to lose weight. It has profound healing powers if done correctly. Although I've never fasted for more than 3 days. But I truly don't need to. It is those with chronic health problems that will benefit the most.

This is what I would like an explanation of. An explanation with reason, without any fananticism. Can someone explain how starving myself equates to health? Even for a day?

And what does "done correctly" mean? There's more to it than just not eating?

I have a high metabolism and low body fat. Fasting is pretty much not an option for me.

[mikej]

i think the general idea is that if the body isn't using energy to digest food it can use that energy to heal itself.

[Lakshyayidhi Lakshmihi]

Originally Posted by mikej

i think the general idea is that if the body isn't using energy to digest food it can use that energy to heal itself.

Where does the energy that fuels cellular activity come from? Adenosine Triphosphate (ATP).

Where does ATP come from? Glucose.

[mikej]

Originally Posted by Lakshyayidhi Lakshmihi

Where does the energy that fuels cellular activity come from? Adenosine Triphosphate (ATP).

Where does ATP come from? Glucose.

i didn't say i subscribed to the idea i mentioned, i'm just stating what some advocates of fasting claim.

[Solipsist]

Originally Posted by mikej

i think the general idea is that if the body isn't using energy to digest food it can use that energy to heal itself.

The body doesn't have enough energy to do both simultaneously?

[Lakshyayidhi Lakshmihi]

Originally Posted by mikej

i didn't say i subscribed to the idea i mentioned, i'm just stating what some advocates of fasting claim.

Sorry if I came off as harsh.

[mikej]

Originally Posted by Lakshyayidhi Lakshmihi

Sorry if I came off as harsh.

you didn't

[spacecadetglow]

Originally Posted by mikej

i think the general idea is that if the body isn't using energy to digest food it can use that energy to heal itself.

Yes, that is the idea, but I think we must remain skeptical of such leaps of logic. Who says the body is damaged and in need of healing to begin with? That seems like a meaning someone who's super paranoid about "toxin" content of foods would make, not scientific fact.

To me, a "toxin" is a substance that is actually toxic or poisonous to the body, like formaldehyde or arsenic. But "alternative health" types like to claim that everything that doesn't grow out of the ground is a "toxin," which isn't exactly true.

I have full faith in my body's amazing natural ability to eliminate waste from my body. That's why we have kidneys! While I think that someone's health would certainly suffer, sooner or later, eating nothing but processed foods their whole life, people often underestimate the body's natural capacity to handle itself.

Especially when you see the posts that are like, "I've been vegetarian for 5 years, vegan for 2, and I've been eating raw for a year! Now it's time to do a water fast to get rid of all the gunk!"

Um, what gunk? The gunk is in your mind.

[LostMyMap]

Originally Posted by spacecadetglow

Yes, that is the idea, but I think we must remain skeptical of such leaps of logic. Who says the body is damaged and in need of healing to begin with? That seems like a meaning someone who's super paranoid about "toxin" content of foods would make, not scientific fact.

To me, a "toxin" is a substance that is actually toxic or poisonous to the body, like formaldehyde or arsenic. But "alternative health" types like to claim that everything that doesn't grow out of the ground is a "toxin," which isn't exactly true.

I have full faith in my body's amazing natural ability to eliminate waste from my body. That's why we have kidneys! While I think that someone's health would certainly suffer, sooner or later, eating nothing but processed foods their whole life, people often underestimate the body's natural capacity to handle itself.

Especially when you see the posts that are like, "I've been vegetarian for 5 years, vegan for 2, and I've been eating raw for a year! Now it's time to do a water fast to get rid of all the gunk!"

Um, what gunk? The gunk is in your mind.

This reminds me of when I used to see claims about people having x number of pounds of undigested material inside. I was always like, well yeah, if you never take a dump!

I just know for me, the hypoglycemic unpleasantness of going without food is not worth it to me. I can find other ways to improve myself.

Funny thing, some toxins do come from things that were grown out of the ground!

[VinceG]

Originally Posted by Lakshyayidhi Lakshmihi

This is not the first time I've noticed your preoccupation with that issue.

It's not the first time she's used that acronym without letting us know what it meant.

[Angela]

Seems pretty clear in the context of her thread title