Complete and Voluntary Starvation of 50 days
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
I had prior experience doing such a diet once before (for 21 days a year earlier) knowing 8 weeks could be realistic for me to maintain at the time. I stopped a week early because even I boiled the tap water, the residual chlorine left over wasn't properly broken down by my body (food helps with that normally) and caused strong reactions every time I tried to drink (nausea even vomiting in final week). So not being able to hydrate myself I needed to stop very abruptly.
After I reintroduced my body to food I ended up in hospital a week later due to kidney stones (presumably a side effect of the starvation diet and flushing them out)
The hunger goes away after the 3rd/4th day and I was even able to go for a small run every other day until week 5. My motivation for it was neither religious nor to loose weight (although I had 10kg too much compared to my ideal shape 5 years before). People thought I was crazy for doing it (and I didn't tell anyone about it while it happened and also refused to discuss it with my doctor). I wanted to see how my body (and mind) reacts to extreme pressure like that. Also I felt experienced enough at the time to do this I would not recommend pushing too far into the extreme especially if it's your first time. Also worth noting that my weight never bounced back and I managed to maintain my ideal even after 5 years later (only gained 5kg mostly bodymass I lost not so much the fat).
My mental abilities (creativity, concentration, focus) were incredible especially until week 5. What I learned is as the body prepares for starvation it also releases huge amounts of energy that is stored up. Feels like having super powers. The body makes these reserves available so we can give it a final push for hunting or finding food (when homo sapiens is out in nature trying to survive I guess). It's probably why fasting is such a big thing in every religion.
When I fast, regular water tastes terrible, I can only drink distilled water. And for those that feel like arguing about distilled water, there's a series of arguments in my account on this topic already.
My unanswered questions on distilled water: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16449541
Edit: for clarity.
Fair enough.
>Distilled water pulls minerals from cells and causes apoptosis.
Does it do this because it's acidic?
>...most people get their minerals from solid food anyways.
Are you saying that because distilled water is acidic, and doesn't have minerals, it will destroy our bodies when fasting?
Any strong acid able to "dissolve tissues" will kill cells of course (causing apoptosis), but is not the only way. Distilled water is not so acid.
Your questions are too over-specialized, too vague or too complex to be answered in a few lines. I can understand the lack of motivation and answers. How much electrolytes are there in a single "bite" of "any particular food"... is an example of question impossible to answer. A mouthful is a variable and undefined amount of matter, and "any particular food" has an almost infinite range.
I am obviously uninformed on the topic, so belittling my questions seems like a way to sidestep answering the spirit of the questions.
Edit:
>Cells are burst by that water. Is a simplification, but is a "mechanical damage"
From a quick google search, this seems to only happen when the cells are actually removed from the body and submerged in distilled water.
Do you believe that drinking distilled water causes blood cells to burst in our veins?
Not, this is false. All alive tissues are subject to osmotic regulation. Is a basic mechanism to protect the cell integrity.
> drinking distilled water causes blood cells to burst in our veins?
Not in your veins, in your gut. Is well known that drinking big amounts of distilled water causes diarrhea. A glass of water will not have much effect on you. All depends on the dose. (Injecting distilled water directly in your veins could cause blood cells to burst, on the other hand).
>Not in your veins, in your gut.
>...drinking big amounts of distilled water causes diarrhea.
Stating that distilled water caused cells to explode in your stomach and give you diarrhoea are some extraordinary claims that I have never come across before, and I think they require some sources to back up.
Edit: Some googling and I am mostly finding support for distilled water, and nothing as dramatic as what you are claiming about exploding cells in your stomach.
Even the doctors that seem to oppose distilled water support its use for detoxing. I think the idea of distilled water being bad is an old myth that is still hanging around.
Edit2: I just found out that all the navy ships and submarines provide distilled water as the only drinking source for their sailors. Considering that they are at sea for months at a time, I think this completely debunks the myth that distilled water "explodes cells" and causes diarrhoea.
I guess that sailors eat something also in all those months, including a fair amount of salt in their diets.
Distilled water is both acidic and osmotically poor due to its low levels of dissolved solids. Like was mentioned 10 comments ago, drinking distilled water will sap your body of electrolytes and other minerals. This can include bone loss due to resorption. However it isn't the worst thing if you consume a good diet of solid food containing minerals - which most people do.
But you decided to consume distilled water...on a fast...without taking vitamins or minerals. It takes a real philistine to believe in the benefits of something that is actually killing them - because they read it from some dieting blog. Googling distilled water comes up with many medical and health journal papers. But we dont even need that because basic cell membrane physiology which is a standard pre-med class, deals with all this stuff. I wont continue the debate.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16543125
I am curious is there is even a single source on the internet with real data on any negative effects of distilled water, cause I have only seen comments on forums, but no proof.
Have fun reading this synopsis on the topic of fasting and distilled water: https://www.ncahf.org/articles/e-i/fasting.html
In summary, you buy into the "pain must be good!" ascetic BS. You have insecurity and by fasting, you believe you must be rewarded for your sacrifice. Well, it sucks that you actually get more pain for your pain - break down your body, lose muscle, produce ammonia, urea, and all sorts of toxins, pull out stored toxins and use them because your body is so desperate on its low reserves of vital nutrients..and destroy your organs. Bravo!
Please dont dig this distilled watering hole any deeper.
>You have insecurity...
Why are you making this personal?
>break down your body, lose muscle, produce ammonia, urea, and all sorts of toxins, pull out stored toxins and use them because your body is so desperate on its low reserves of vital nutrients..and destroy your organs. Bravo!
According to this video _none_ of that happens. He addresses all of those claims. (provides proof from actual medical studies)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIuj-oMN-Fk
The medical studies he presents (not his own) state the opposite of what you are saying. If you don't want to watch the video, I think this article is similar:
https://idmprogram.com/fasting-and-muscle-mass-fasting-part-...
This does of course detract from your argument that distilled water is bad for you.
As for electrolytes, usually you need to intake specific foods or liquids that are high in electrolytes (electrolytes are just chemicals that increase electrical conductivity of a solution when dissolved). So while a litre of tap water has more electrolytes than a litre of distilled water, a litre of fruit juice has more (though drinking a litre of fruit juice probably isn't great for you).
As for whether lack of electrolytes is harmful, the answer is yes. Electrolytes are required for your body's electro-chemistry to operate properly and maintain the proper function of your heart, brain, body's fluid-balance, and pH buffer system. When you lose electrolytes (such as through heavy sweating, diarrhea or vomiting) those processes may not work as well.
I would note that when you are dehydrated, hospitals will generally provide you with liquid electrolytes (intravenously if the situation is dire), implying that there is some medical benefit of liquid sources over solid ones (but I might be mistaken). But there are several solid sources of electrolytes.
How much distilled water does it take to cause "harm"?
Since "normal" water can cause loss of electrolytes also, what is the actual difference between the two? (is there any actual data? or do we have to guess?)
A commenter further down says distilled water causes stomach cells to explode and diarrhoea. But since I just found out today that the entire Navy provides only distilled water to it's sailors. (think 3 months under the sea in a submarine with only distilled water) I am really starting to think that the idea that distilled water was ever bad for anyone is a myth.
Read the quote again. I said lack of electrolytes is harmful, because that's what you asked. I don't believe that distilled water is harmful by itself (though if you take it and you don't know that you need to take in minerals from other sources then it could be harmful purely through negligence). I'm just trying to answer your question.
> But since I just found out today that the entire Navy provides only distilled water to it's sailors. (think 3 months under the sea in a submarine with only distilled water)
But sailors are also given vitamin supplements (to prevent scurvy and a variety of other diseases). I'd be surprised if they aren't also given some form of mineral and electrolyte supplements, to combat those problems. I don't know why they'd provide them distilled water though.
> A commenter further down says distilled water causes stomach cells to explode and diarrhoea.
I'm in agreement with you that this comment doesn't make any sense.
I know that is what you said, but we are talking in circles.
Why do you think distilled water robs you of _enough_ electrolytes to cause harm? There must be some real data or proof somewhere?
I've read a lot of comments here claiming this, but not a single source is quoted anywhere. Don't you think it's odd that many believe something, yet it's so hard to find proof of it?
According to this medical doctor distilled water is considered helpful against cancer, specifically stating no added minerals, vitamins or electrolytes. Interview from Rising (web mag?) with Dr. Jason Fung (JF).
>JF ‘When the body senses the temporary absence of nutrients, it must prioritise which cellular parts to keep. The oldest and most worn-out cells get discarded, and amino acids from the broken-down cell parts are delivered to the liver, which uses them to create glucose during gluconeogenesis – a natural process in the body that helps to maintain stable blood sugar levels. Cancer may be a result of what’s called ‘disordered autophagy’. We’re learning that this process plays a role in cancer biology, and products that inhibit this process have been approved by the Food & Drug Administration in the US for the treatment of cancers. Fasting’s role in stimulating autophagy provides an opportunity to prevent cancer. And that’s why Dr Seyfried proposes a yearly seven-day water-only fast.’
RISING Seven days with no food, just water?
JF ‘Distilled water, to be precise. No additives, no vitamins, no minerals. Distilled water and nothing else.’
http://www.therisingman.com/categories/movement-fuel/article...
This is not just theoretical, we own a reverse-osmosis filrtation system that produces water that is very clean (around 1 ppm - compared to hundreds in regular tap water, probably even cleaner than distilled water) and I'm an avid water drinker (3-5 l/day) since a few years. I don't eat food suplements either, but try to get some reasonable amount of vegetables in my diet and a salad now and then. I'm feeling fine.. so much for minerals and ions - bah.
How long did it take from the onset of the fasting, for your mental abilities to show improvement?
In the last days I became aware that every day I continued it was another day where my mind "won" against my body, and this scared me increasingly because I was no longer sure if I was still listening objectively to my body or if I was trying to prove something just for the sake of it. (e.g. "you came already that far now don't give up" -> this reasoning worked well for doing marathons sports but felt was dangerous to apply here). It was like my body telling me that it would no longer support my BS, ... but not via a hunger feeling as in initial days but I became so weak that walking more than few meters required a rest. Even speaking for more than 10 mins was tedious.
This patient's initial weight was 207 kilograms, and over the course of a year he lost 125 kilograms. During this time he only consumed water, yeast, and multivitamins. After ending the fast, he successfully kept the weight off and only regained 7 kilograms over the next 5 years. He received a Guinness World Record for the longest recorded fast.
While a successful example of weight loss, the paper does cite five reports of fatalities occurring during total starvation weight loss treatment. It is probably not the safest way to lose weight.
Any sources?
The reason doctors administered yeast is simple – it was his only source of protein, and without it, the body starts eating its own muscle tissue. Without any form of protein at all, the man would not be able to "direct" his body to consume his vast amounts of body fat as fuel, and would die within weeks.
Just two tablespoons of nutritional yeast[1] provides a person with 60 calories, 5 grams of carbohydrates and 9 grams of protein – including all nine amino acids, which the human body cannot produce on its own.
Seems like nutritional yeast is a convenient source for essential amino acids.
[0] https://coach.nine.com.au/2016/04/06/17/01/the-mystery-behin...
I gained strength the longer I was in the fast. My running distance increased, and I lost on average .5 lbs a day. I weighed myself 4 times and day, logged all my meals and activity. I felt great. I gained back about 5 lbs on average, but this fluctuates some. (as is expected)
The key thing I learned from this, to maintain my weight loss, is to appreciate being hungry. It makes your next meal taste better, you have signal process to let you know you are burning fat, and it makes your stomach consistently smaller so you fill up easier. All wins...
I had no negative symptoms at all. I suspect partly because it wasn't a long term complete fast, and also, I've fasted my entire life at least once a year, so I know what to expect. I stay well hydrated, and get plenty of sleep.
Sorry for the lack of BMI info, but my pants getting loose was my measure for that. :)
Edit: With what I know now, if I had negative symptoms, I'd start with multiple shorter fasts until I could handle longer ones. The minimum would be 24 hours.
It sounds like you kept track of your starting weight and ending weight. If you know your starting and ending height or can safely assume your starting and ending height are very close to your current height, you can calculate change in BMI. There's no need for a skin caliper measurement, as you seem to be implying.
Technically, you can use whatever units you want, but almost every chart uses units of kg/m^2, and if the units aren't explicit, they're quite probably using kg/m^2.
Starting BMI: 28.6 Ending BMI: 25.9
It says I am still overweight, even at my lowest weight. lol
I am curious what these numbers mean to you? (I know I need to lose more weight, cause I can see it in the mirror...)
I don't have a reference offhand, but the US Army has a lot of data on military-service-aged men and their cardiovascular health risks. They found BMI isn't a great predictor of cardiovascular health. Some formula involving height and the circumference of the belly was a much better predictor of cardiovascular risks.
A thin but tall westerner colleague in Japan told me that doctors in Japan are required to counsel anyone with a waist circumference over a certain limit about weight loss. There's no correction for height (or race), only sex. His doctor realized that my colleague isn't overweight, but still had to lecture him. BMI at least accounts for height, but can be similarly misleading.
But one day, I simply ate too much "regular" food at dinner, and I gained weight instead of losing it. (about 2.5 weeks in)
I didn't count calories at all, I found that discouraging in the past. I went by how I felt completely, and by forcing myself to take less than I wanted (ie, opposite of "eyes are bigger than my stomach") I was still satisfied. It was a fight with how I felt about eating before I started, versus how I felt after eating.
I learned from helping run a kids summer camp, that one counsellor would give the hungry boys 1 taco to start with. Which I thought was odd, and then they could come back and get seconds, etc... He explained that the reason was that if the boys got to take as much as they wanted, they'd take like 4 at first, and eat them all. But if they took 1, and had to wait for a few minutes before the next, they'd only eat 2.
I use this knowledge on myself to this day. I eat a little, wait, and then my appetite is dramatically reduced, and I eat less. I don't do this all the time, but I am conscience of the effect when I need it.
I wonder why that is. The key point is "voluntary" starvation, read fasting. Why not make a study with consenting participants to fast for a specific time? Which "clear ethical barrier" is broken here?
As noted by another poster, extreme fasting is sometimes fatal.[0] I've also heard elsewhere that it can be fatal and a physician should be consulted before fasting more than a couple of days.
Dr. Jason Fung [1] has some fascinating videos on Youtube about why fasting isn't bad. I am just curious why there's a mainstream view that it's bad and the exception is that it's good, vs the other way around?
[0] http://www.nbcnews.com/id/16614865/ns/us_news-life/t/woman-d...
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9Aw0P7GjHE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIuj-oMN-Fk
Edit: Dr. Fung points out one common misconception that fasting causes muscle to be eroded.
When I was in middle school, I remember my friend's older sister being on some kind of snack diet that was supposed to keep metabolism high by never going more than an hour or so without food when not sleeping.
I seem to remember Brad Pilon in "Eat Stop Eat" briefly mentioning the origin of the myth that your metabolism tanks rapidly if you skip a meal, but I could be wrong.
I do intermittent fasting myself, and it drives me a little crazy when my wife tries to convince me that it's bad for my health to skip dinner once in a while on one of my non-fast days.
It also may put pressure on them to continue where they normally would have stopped because they feel pressure because “those scientists invested so much time in it”.
And of course, they may suffer long term health effects, even if they fast for a period that typically doesn’t have any on subjects.
You can see these kinds of ethical issues clearer by exaggerating. Replace “fasting” by “being hit in the face”, for example. What’s wrong with looking for volunteers who want to be hit in the face every hour for weeks?
People when watched behave different. People under contract behave different.
It is one thing to take notes when someone does this voluntarily. It is quite another to put people under contract for something like this.
I am under the close supervision of my 30 old son and have been since he was 13. It's a completely different dynamic than reporting results to a doctor or lab for a study.
Will read the rest now but I'm not sure what to think of a paper with such an error in the first line of the abstract.
Furthermore, if that detail was relevant I'm sure that the paper wouldn't have passed through a peer review process.
Peer review for less well known pay-to-publish ($1800) journals like this one is by no means a guarantee of quality: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full
kg/m^-2 -> kg/m^2 (or kg * m^-2)
;)
That's a non-sequitur argument: the OP wasn't talking about height/mass ratio. BMI is clearly defined and it is not weight/height ratio.[0] You might as well have said "I think the units for BMI are indeed kg/m, because Abraham Lincoln was born in 1809".
Some momore info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fasting_in_Jainism
Enterprising researchers should collect data from above.
As everyone else reports, I felt more energy and focus, massive rapid weight loss.
Fasting is a miracle cure, I tried nearly everything else. More people need to know about how effective it is.