Is it OK to fast for one day?
Replies
-
I think there's way to much judgement being passed in this thread without anywhere's near enough information. If OP wants to fast a day to keep weekly calories inline, big deal. How is that different than eating too much early in the day, then not eating as much later to hit your daily goals. It's all relative. I could argue if you didn't balance your daily intake properly, so had to cut back later in the day, that was verging on being a disorder. That's silly. Sure OP could just eat normally and be over for the week and plan better the next week, but just as easily OP could skip a day if it's important and plan better. It obviously would have been better to be proactive as opposed to reactive but for every other post to say this thinking verges on disorderly makes no sense.
I agree with you, however, common sense is hard to find on these types of threads. I don't think the OP has responded, yet everyone is assuming she has an eating disorder. People jumping to conclusions based on a few numbers on her profile.
Nobody said she had a disorder ... they said that the reaction is disordered. There is a difference between the two. Her reaction is definitely disproportional to her intake and irrationally set current intake ... her eating history shows multiple sub 500 calorie intake days ...
0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »Did you bother to notice her daily caloric goal, pounds left to lose, and put those into perspective or are you blindly defending the indefensible?
Nope. I'd never dig through that information and then tell someone they had disordered thinking. I don't think that's why people come here and participate in forums, nor are 99% of the people who respond qualified to make that type of statement.
Is a 24 hour fast the best possible decision given the options? Probably not, but anyone not at their ideal weight probably can trace the fact back to not having made good decisions at some point in their lives. The fact they are here shows they are trying to make better decisions.
That's all.
Ding Ding, please drive through.
Willful ignorance used to give advice ... inexcusable.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I think there's way to much judgement being passed in this thread without anywhere's near enough information. If OP wants to fast a day to keep weekly calories inline, big deal. How is that different than eating too much early in the day, then not eating as much later to hit your daily goals. It's all relative. I could argue if you didn't balance your daily intake properly, so had to cut back later in the day, that was verging on being a disorder. That's silly. Sure OP could just eat normally and be over for the week and plan better the next week, but just as easily OP could skip a day if it's important and plan better. It obviously would have been better to be proactive as opposed to reactive but for every other post to say this thinking verges on disorderly makes no sense.
so eating a little bit less at the end of the day is somehow the equivalent to a 24 hour water fast??????
He didn't say it was equivalent. It's all relative. He merely gave an example.
It is not a relevant example.
Eating less at the end of the day to compensate for a large breakfast or lunch is not even in the same universe as a 24 hour water fast.0 -
I think there's way to much judgement being passed in this thread without anywhere's near enough information. If OP wants to fast a day to keep weekly calories inline, big deal. How is that different than eating too much early in the day, then not eating as much later to hit your daily goals. It's all relative. I could argue if you didn't balance your daily intake properly, so had to cut back later in the day, that was verging on being a disorder. That's silly. Sure OP could just eat normally and be over for the week and plan better the next week, but just as easily OP could skip a day if it's important and plan better. It obviously would have been better to be proactive as opposed to reactive but for every other post to say this thinking verges on disorderly makes no sense.
so eating a little bit less at the end of the day is somehow the equivalent to a 24 hour water fast??????
He didn't say it was equivalent. It's all relative. He merely gave an example.
It is not a relevant example.
Eating less at the end of the day to compensate for a large breakfast or lunch is not even in the same universe as a 24 hour water fast.
Yup lets move that goalpost away from the extreme measure being use to lose weight to something more closer to believable.0 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »I used to fast from food once a week for religious reasons. It won't hurt you.My husband fasts occasionally for religious purposes.
This is completely different from starting a cycle of "I'm over my calories for the week, so I won't eat for a day". Please consider that before responding like this.
My point was occasional fasting is not harmful. My husband fasted 1x a week for several weeks at a time with no ill effects.
0 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »I used to fast from food once a week for religious reasons. It won't hurt you.My husband fasts occasionally for religious purposes.
This is completely different from starting a cycle of "I'm over my calories for the week, so I won't eat for a day". Please consider that before responding like this.
My point was occasional fasting is not harmful. My husband fasted 1x a week for several weeks at a time with no ill effects.
Did your husband routinely undereat compared to an already insufficient caloric goal on his non-fasting days?0 -
Thread closed. Oops, I'm not an Admin, I can't lock a thread. Sigh....0
-
-
maybe you guys should start a "helpful advice, no arguing" group....0 -
maybe you guys should start a "helpful advice, no arguing" group....
Based on their posts here, it would lack helpful advice. It would contain nothing but admittedly willful ignorance leading to "you go girl" posts without regard to safety, logic, or reason.0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »
maybe you guys should start a "helpful advice, no arguing" group....
Based on their posts here, it would lack helpful advice. It would contain nothing but admittedly willful ignorance leading to "you go girl" posts without regard to safety, logic, or reason.
You keep using that phrase, but it does not apply to me or the other poster. So judgy you are.0 -
maybe you guys should start a "helpful advice, no arguing" group....
If we want to we will. We do not need your suggestion or any other input.0 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »I used to fast from food once a week for religious reasons. It won't hurt you.My husband fasts occasionally for religious purposes.
This is completely different from starting a cycle of "I'm over my calories for the week, so I won't eat for a day". Please consider that before responding like this.
My point was occasional fasting is not harmful. My husband fasted 1x a week for several weeks at a time with no ill effects.
This not an uncommon practice. Many people routinely eat this way.0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »
maybe you guys should start a "helpful advice, no arguing" group....
Based on their posts here, it would lack helpful advice. It would contain nothing but admittedly willful ignorance leading to "you go girl" posts without regard to safety, logic, or reason.
You keep using that phrase, but it does not apply to me or the other poster. So judgy you are.
He admitted to not looking at the facts ... therefore it does apply. In your rush to judge you overlooked important details leading to you arguing a position based upon fallacies.
Not getting the facts first is why your advice isn't helpful.0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »
maybe you guys should start a "helpful advice, no arguing" group....
Based on their posts here, it would lack helpful advice. It would contain nothing but admittedly willful ignorance leading to "you go girl" posts without regard to safety, logic, or reason.
You keep using that phrase, but it does not apply to me or the other poster. So judgy you are.
He admitted to not looking at the facts ... therefore it does apply. In your rush to judge you overlooked important details leading to you arguing a position based upon fallacies.
Not getting the facts first is why your advice isn't helpful.
Facts? Everyone here is arguing on assumptions.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »
maybe you guys should start a "helpful advice, no arguing" group....
Based on their posts here, it would lack helpful advice. It would contain nothing but admittedly willful ignorance leading to "you go girl" posts without regard to safety, logic, or reason.
You keep using that phrase, but it does not apply to me or the other poster. So judgy you are.
He admitted to not looking at the facts ... therefore it does apply. In your rush to judge you overlooked important details leading to you arguing a position based upon fallacies.
Not getting the facts first is why your advice isn't helpful.
Facts? Everyone here is arguing on assumptions.
So the OP doesn't have a daily goal of 1151 and three pounds to lose? She doesn't have days under 500 calories consumed?
See ... facts.
While your so busy supporting a fast you're missing the very simple fact that the OP is undereating when hitting her "goal".
0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »
maybe you guys should start a "helpful advice, no arguing" group....
Based on their posts here, it would lack helpful advice. It would contain nothing but admittedly willful ignorance leading to "you go girl" posts without regard to safety, logic, or reason.
You keep using that phrase, but it does not apply to me or the other poster. So judgy you are.
He admitted to not looking at the facts ... therefore it does apply. In your rush to judge you overlooked important details leading to you arguing a position based upon fallacies.
Not getting the facts first is why your advice isn't helpful.
Facts? Everyone here is arguing on assumptions.
So the OP doesn't have a daily goal of 1151 and three pounds to lose? She doesn't have days under 500 calories consumed?
See ... facts.
While your so busy supporting a fast you're missing the very simple fact that the OP is undereating when hitting her "goal".
IF she logs all her food, then some days are under 500. You are assuming she does. (There are also days that nearly double her goal.) You are assuming a lot based on very little unprovable information. Those ain't facts Sweetie.0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »
maybe you guys should start a "helpful advice, no arguing" group....
Based on their posts here, it would lack helpful advice. It would contain nothing but admittedly willful ignorance leading to "you go girl" posts without regard to safety, logic, or reason.
You keep using that phrase, but it does not apply to me or the other poster. So judgy you are.
He admitted to not looking at the facts ... therefore it does apply. In your rush to judge you overlooked important details leading to you arguing a position based upon fallacies.
Not getting the facts first is why your advice isn't helpful.
Facts? Everyone here is arguing on assumptions.
So the OP doesn't have a daily goal of 1151 and three pounds to lose? She doesn't have days under 500 calories consumed?
See ... facts.
While your so busy supporting a fast you're missing the very simple fact that the OP is undereating when hitting her "goal".
Why do you take what people put on their profiles as gospel? Any numbers can be input there, whether on purpose or in error.
You seem overly upset about this issue. Why does fasting bother you so much?0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »
maybe you guys should start a "helpful advice, no arguing" group....
Based on their posts here, it would lack helpful advice. It would contain nothing but admittedly willful ignorance leading to "you go girl" posts without regard to safety, logic, or reason.
You keep using that phrase, but it does not apply to me or the other poster. So judgy you are.
He admitted to not looking at the facts correction: PROFILE... therefore it does apply. In your rush to judge you overlooked important details leading to you arguing a position based upon fallacies.
Not getting the facts first is why your advice isn't helpful.
Where did I judge? OP is free to eat or not eat as she wishes. I never once said she had disordered thinking.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »
maybe you guys should start a "helpful advice, no arguing" group....
Based on their posts here, it would lack helpful advice. It would contain nothing but admittedly willful ignorance leading to "you go girl" posts without regard to safety, logic, or reason.
You keep using that phrase, but it does not apply to me or the other poster. So judgy you are.
He admitted to not looking at the facts ... therefore it does apply. In your rush to judge you overlooked important details leading to you arguing a position based upon fallacies.
Not getting the facts first is why your advice isn't helpful.
Facts? Everyone here is arguing on assumptions.
So the OP doesn't have a daily goal of 1151 and three pounds to lose? She doesn't have days under 500 calories consumed?
See ... facts.
While your so busy supporting a fast you're missing the very simple fact that the OP is undereating when hitting her "goal".
IF she logs all her food, then some days are under 500. You are assuming she does. (There are also days that nearly double her goal.) You are assuming a lot based on very little unprovable information. Those ain't facts Sweetie.
the only fact that matters is that she wanted to do a 24 hour water fast because she felt like she ate "too much," which is borderline disordered view of eating.
I don't understand why anyone would consider that a normal thought process.
If she said she was considering IF; 5:2; fasting for religious reasons, etc, then OK, I can see the point, but I fail to see who it is considered normal to want to do a water fast just beucase you over ate for a few days or the week, or whatever...0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »
maybe you guys should start a "helpful advice, no arguing" group....
Based on their posts here, it would lack helpful advice. It would contain nothing but admittedly willful ignorance leading to "you go girl" posts without regard to safety, logic, or reason.
You keep using that phrase, but it does not apply to me or the other poster. So judgy you are.
He admitted to not looking at the facts ... therefore it does apply. In your rush to judge you overlooked important details leading to you arguing a position based upon fallacies.
Not getting the facts first is why your advice isn't helpful.
Facts? Everyone here is arguing on assumptions.
So the OP doesn't have a daily goal of 1151 and three pounds to lose? She doesn't have days under 500 calories consumed?
See ... facts.
While your so busy supporting a fast you're missing the very simple fact that the OP is undereating when hitting her "goal".
Why do you take what people put on their profiles as gospel? Any numbers can be input there, whether on purpose or in error.
You seem overly upset about this issue. Why does fasting bother you so much?
Based on the part in bold, I now know better than to trust you.
Fasting, for those averaging a healthy amount, doesn't bother me. Advising somebody that it is ok when they are already undereating by all evidence they've provided, does. Context matters.
0 -
The problem is that things are being assumed, and until OP comes back and clarifies a few things over-reacting is way too much drama in my opinion. Is water fasting for a day every now and then harmful? No. Is it a good approach? Maybe and maybe not. I refuse to pass judgement based on her diary. She appears to be eating an average of 1200-1250 which is a valid choice, especially if she is shorter and/or has a sedentary lifestyle. Used correctly, fasting is a helpful tool that may be easier for certain individuals than alternative strategies.
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »
maybe you guys should start a "helpful advice, no arguing" group....
Based on their posts here, it would lack helpful advice. It would contain nothing but admittedly willful ignorance leading to "you go girl" posts without regard to safety, logic, or reason.
You keep using that phrase, but it does not apply to me or the other poster. So judgy you are.
He admitted to not looking at the facts ... therefore it does apply. In your rush to judge you overlooked important details leading to you arguing a position based upon fallacies.
Not getting the facts first is why your advice isn't helpful.
Facts? Everyone here is arguing on assumptions.
So the OP doesn't have a daily goal of 1151 and three pounds to lose? She doesn't have days under 500 calories consumed?
See ... facts.
While your so busy supporting a fast you're missing the very simple fact that the OP is undereating when hitting her "goal".
IF she logs all her food, then some days are under 500. You are assuming she does. (There are also days that nearly double her goal.) You are assuming a lot based on very little unprovable information. Those ain't facts Sweetie.
the only fact that matters is that she wanted to do a 24 hour water fast because she felt like she ate "too much," which is borderline disordered view of eating.
I don't understand why anyone would consider that a normal thought process.
If she said she was considering IF; 5:2; fasting for religious reasons, etc, then OK, I can see the point, but I fail to see who it is considered normal to want to do a water fast just beucase you over ate for a few days or the week, or whatever...
On what do you base the opinion that wanting to control calories through a limited fast is disordered thinking?0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »
maybe you guys should start a "helpful advice, no arguing" group....
Based on their posts here, it would lack helpful advice. It would contain nothing but admittedly willful ignorance leading to "you go girl" posts without regard to safety, logic, or reason.
You keep using that phrase, but it does not apply to me or the other poster. So judgy you are.
He admitted to not looking at the facts ... therefore it does apply. In your rush to judge you overlooked important details leading to you arguing a position based upon fallacies.
Not getting the facts first is why your advice isn't helpful.
Facts? Everyone here is arguing on assumptions.
So the OP doesn't have a daily goal of 1151 and three pounds to lose? She doesn't have days under 500 calories consumed?
See ... facts.
While your so busy supporting a fast you're missing the very simple fact that the OP is undereating when hitting her "goal".
IF she logs all her food, then some days are under 500. You are assuming she does. (There are also days that nearly double her goal.) You are assuming a lot based on very little unprovable information. Those ain't facts Sweetie.
the only fact that matters is that she wanted to do a 24 hour water fast because she felt like she ate "too much," which is borderline disordered view of eating.
I don't understand why anyone would consider that a normal thought process.
If she said she was considering IF; 5:2; fasting for religious reasons, etc, then OK, I can see the point, but I fail to see who it is considered normal to want to do a water fast just beucase you over ate for a few days or the week, or whatever...
On what do you base the opinion that wanting to control calories through a limited fast is disordered thinking?
that's not what I said.
I said it was "borderline"...
and what do you base your opinion on that overeating one day and then doing a 24 hour water fast is normal?0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »
maybe you guys should start a "helpful advice, no arguing" group....
Based on their posts here, it would lack helpful advice. It would contain nothing but admittedly willful ignorance leading to "you go girl" posts without regard to safety, logic, or reason.
You keep using that phrase, but it does not apply to me or the other poster. So judgy you are.
He admitted to not looking at the facts ... therefore it does apply. In your rush to judge you overlooked important details leading to you arguing a position based upon fallacies.
Not getting the facts first is why your advice isn't helpful.
Facts? Everyone here is arguing on assumptions.
So the OP doesn't have a daily goal of 1151 and three pounds to lose? She doesn't have days under 500 calories consumed?
See ... facts.
While your so busy supporting a fast you're missing the very simple fact that the OP is undereating when hitting her "goal".
IF she logs all her food, then some days are under 500. You are assuming she does. (There are also days that nearly double her goal.) You are assuming a lot based on very little unprovable information. Those ain't facts Sweetie.
the only fact that matters is that she wanted to do a 24 hour water fast because she felt like she ate "too much," which is borderline disordered view of eating.
I don't understand why anyone would consider that a normal thought process.
If she said she was considering IF; 5:2; fasting for religious reasons, etc, then OK, I can see the point, but I fail to see who it is considered normal to want to do a water fast just beucase you over ate for a few days or the week, or whatever...
On what do you base the opinion that wanting to control calories through a limited fast is disordered thinking?
that's not what I said.
I said it was "borderline"...
and what do you base your opinion on that overeating one day and then doing a 24 hour water fast is normal?
Normal? I never expressed on opinion on what is normal.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »
maybe you guys should start a "helpful advice, no arguing" group....
Based on their posts here, it would lack helpful advice. It would contain nothing but admittedly willful ignorance leading to "you go girl" posts without regard to safety, logic, or reason.
You keep using that phrase, but it does not apply to me or the other poster. So judgy you are.
He admitted to not looking at the facts ... therefore it does apply. In your rush to judge you overlooked important details leading to you arguing a position based upon fallacies.
Not getting the facts first is why your advice isn't helpful.
Facts? Everyone here is arguing on assumptions.
So the OP doesn't have a daily goal of 1151 and three pounds to lose? She doesn't have days under 500 calories consumed?
See ... facts.
While your so busy supporting a fast you're missing the very simple fact that the OP is undereating when hitting her "goal".
IF she logs all her food, then some days are under 500. You are assuming she does. (There are also days that nearly double her goal.) You are assuming a lot based on very little unprovable information. Those ain't facts Sweetie.
the only fact that matters is that she wanted to do a 24 hour water fast because she felt like she ate "too much," which is borderline disordered view of eating.
I don't understand why anyone would consider that a normal thought process.
If she said she was considering IF; 5:2; fasting for religious reasons, etc, then OK, I can see the point, but I fail to see who it is considered normal to want to do a water fast just beucase you over ate for a few days or the week, or whatever...
On what do you base the opinion that wanting to control calories through a limited fast is disordered thinking?
that's not what I said.
I said it was "borderline"...
and what do you base your opinion on that overeating one day and then doing a 24 hour water fast is normal?
Normal? I never expressed on opinion on what is normal.
is it normal or not?0 -
Just to throw my two pence in - having looked through the OP's diary, for the last couple of weeks (apart from one or two days), she has hit between 1200-1900. Whilst 1200 is aggressive for someone only wanting to lose 3lbs, I would hardly say it rings alarm bells.
I agree that if the OP had some kind of ED, then that way of thinking would be concerning, but there are no facts to prove that, as suggested by somebody above.0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »
maybe you guys should start a "helpful advice, no arguing" group....
Based on their posts here, it would lack helpful advice. It would contain nothing but admittedly willful ignorance leading to "you go girl" posts without regard to safety, logic, or reason.
You keep using that phrase, but it does not apply to me or the other poster. So judgy you are.
He admitted to not looking at the facts ... therefore it does apply. In your rush to judge you overlooked important details leading to you arguing a position based upon fallacies.
Not getting the facts first is why your advice isn't helpful.
Facts? Everyone here is arguing on assumptions.
So the OP doesn't have a daily goal of 1151 and three pounds to lose? She doesn't have days under 500 calories consumed?
See ... facts.
While your so busy supporting a fast you're missing the very simple fact that the OP is undereating when hitting her "goal".
Why do you take what people put on their profiles as gospel? Any numbers can be input there, whether on purpose or in error.
You seem overly upset about this issue. Why does fasting bother you so much?
Based on the part in bold, I now know better than to trust you.
Fasting, for those averaging a healthy amount, doesn't bother me. Advising somebody that it is ok when they are already undereating by all evidence they've provided, does. Context matters.
This is just an internet site. Whom can you really trust? And why do we need to? My profile says I lost 5 lbs. but I didn't because I didn't have any weight to lose. I just input some numbers when I first set up my profile but then decided I didn't want anything in there. Haven't cared enough to fix it. My profile pics are accurate, though.0 -
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions