Is it OK to fast for one day?
Options
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.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.
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?0 -
-
-
Intermittent fasting is a proven strategy for weight loss. There are countless articles on the topic about how to use them and timing their use effectively. I don't use them all that often, but from time to time I do. I fasted yesterday until dinner, then ate normally afterwards. Sunday I worked out at gym for 90 minutes and ate a bit above my normal maintenance level, but still healthy.
Here's the basic idea:
Day 1: Eat a bit above maintenance (if you get in a good workout, all the better) to get your metabolism (think of it as your furnace) going good.
Day 2: Fast for a period of time, longer the better. Your furnace is still stoked from Day 1 and is expecting a similar day (food/exercise) so it's going full tilt but since you aren't eating, you burn remaining carbs then fat during the day.
no one is arguing against IF ..
what everyone is saying is that the OP is setting herself up for a disordered view of eating if she is going to do a 24 hour water fast every time she goes over a little bit on calories.
Exactly.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??????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??????
These examples people give to move the goalpost like always.
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.
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.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.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.
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.
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 -
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
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions