Hacker News Reader

Comment by Cro_on | Hacker News Reader

If there were ever a panacea, it would be fasting. The more tight and widespread the research becomes, the more that we prove what humanity has known anecdotally throughout civilisation.

From being a Roman cure for epileptic seizures, through the integral practice in most religions, and to the 21st century where we start to prove that it increases both healthspan and lifespan.

I find it quite interesting that something so simple, which practically anybody can do, can have such a positive effect on one's life. You are literally healing and regenerating yourself by doing nothing! And instead of compounding medical bills you actually save money!

Thank you modern science for validating my no longer fringe medical beliefs :)

View on HN

I always find it funny that fasting comes up so often, but a ctrl-f almost never turns up someone mentioning Ramadan. Nearly 25% of the world population fasts for an entire month, but it's almost invisible to the western world. While I don't agree with all of the details of the fast (I drink water), I think it is an admirable holiday, it's way healthier for the world than Christmas or Thanksgiving.

Yes. Like the GP mentioned, fasting is a ritualistic practiced in many cultures.

In India, for example, there are fasting days in a month and many have certain days of the week even where they fast.

I lived in Saudi Arabia for two years and did Ramadan, out of not wanting to offend my Saudi colleagues who were fasting.

As a practictioner of fasting, I don't think that "modern" Ramadan has much to do with fasting anymore - at least, in the way I see fasting working for me. Reason being that at the end of each day of fasting, there is a very large amount of food being consumed, and I mean a lot. Fasting is about calorie restriction for sustained amount of time - modern Ramadan (based on the experience I had in Saudi, which is a very conservative country) is not really about restricting calories, but just shifting the time of the day in which A LOT of calories are ingested.

I've heard the same, although it was only with one person I know. I was talking to my friend about Ramadan and how I thought it was a really healthy behavior. She laughed and told me that a lot of people eat garbage (her word, not mine - a lot of fatty and fried foods) and she had to take the initiative to eat healthier stuff during Ramadan.

Still, it definitely gives you the opportunity to reset every year.

Egyptian here, can confirm this unfortunately. Most here just go all-in when they break their fast. In fact, I would say that they ingest more calories in Ramadan than in regular days. I advise all I know to eat with moderation, but few listen :(

Personally, when I started to eat moderately when fasting, I started to feel much better. Previously, I would be very tired when breaking the fast... I would be so full that I wouldn't be able to do anything except lie down.

I think that the current trends are due to people nowadays seeing it like a mega celebration, and they see that eating a lot and feeling tired after is just a sign of that celebration. Ramadan is more than just fasting, but I am going off-topic.

By the way, there's a sunnah in Islam to fast Monday's and Thursday's. Some here may find it beneficial.

Depending on your intent fasting can be for a lot of things.

The health benefits of fasting aren’t about total calorie restriction, but ARE about shifting when you eat to allow your body to kick over into the fasted state for a period of time to get the benefits of that.

I practice a 24 hour fast once a week, for spiritual and health benefits, not to lose weight, and enjoy a very full dinner after the 24 hour fast.

Ramadan looks very much to me to be about fasting, at least spiritually.

I used to live there too. In the 90s. I doubt total calorie consumption drops during ramadan. Rather, meals just happen at different times.

In France, from where I stand (I don't have close muslim friends), they also have large meals during the night.

I don't know if that was always the case in history of this religion, maybe in the past the night meal was simply a shared meal with the group, of normal size.

It seems that in your case and mine, we're seeing something that has more to do with symbolism and morals (no gluttony, more thoughtful days, sharing, empathy).

Ctrl-f also returns no results for Lent. I haven't tried for other religious fasting or abstinent holidays but I'm sure there would be 0 to few mentions. HN skews strongly towards certain industries and demographics so it's a bad sample of "the western world" and it seems that most people posting here would simply lump Ramadan under "religious practices" of which there are several mentions. Most religions include both feasting and fasting practices so I wouldn't single out any single one as more healthy or hurtful for the world.

I agree with the basic premise that religious fasting is an often overlooked but beneficial practice in the modern era.

But they eat each day in Ramadan (at certain times), don't they? How is it even "fasting" and why should it be mentioned?

There are different kinds of fasting. They don't eat from sun rise until sunset during Ramadan. I'd qualify that as fasting.

those who "fast" also eats right? like other living being?

Eating once a day or in a limited time period is called "intermittent fasting".

Great point.

@zhynn, Buddhists monks eat one meal a day throughout their lives. Even lay Buddhists who maintain 8 precepts do not eat after noon throughout their lives. As a practicing Buddhist I eat during a 4-5 hour window everyday of the year. Why make a big deal about one religion?

Is this true in practice, for most practitioners? It's sometimes hard to tell how ideals match up to reality when it comes to this stuff, for those without first-hand experience. For my part I've read a fair amount about Buddhism but the real-life experience of a lay practitioner or monk remains obscure to me.

In reading about Christian monastics I've found that their fasting practices are, and were even in the middle ages, much less dramatic than they seem at first glance, except in relatively rare cases. For one thing, many fasts aren't so much "don't eat" but "eat somewhat less, but still quite a bit", and there are tons of feast days to counter-balance that. And even those rules are thrown out for older monks and any who are ill, of course. You look at their calendar and think "damn, that's a lot of fasting!" but then you read accounts by actual monks and more detailed sets of rules and find they did very little actual no-eating fasting, in the typical case, and many "fast days" still involve a lot of eating.

In my own Sangha (community) of lay people, we have several who observe the 8 daily precepts. Every retreat I have gone to, I have never seen monks eat more than one meal a day.

> Is this true in practice, for most practitioners?

I think it would be more common to find a lay practitioner adhering to the first five precepts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_precepts

while on fasts, you get an energy level and mental clarity that has to be felt to be believed. everyone should try it at least once.

i like to persuade people by having them imagine an isolated tiger who hasn't eaten anything in a week. by force of nature their sense of smell, hearing, etc. must all be heightened so as to ensure their survival.

But that's because they are incredibly hungry and food focused, at that point they don't care about taking part in other activities and just want food. That tiger would definitely not be the sort I'd care to be around.

understandably! it will no longer be thinking: human animal, could be dangerous..

but a tiger has evolved to be an apex predator, and not much else.

our predatory speciality is more about leverage than brute force, or scavenging rather than hunting. so i think the logic still applies that cognition can be improved in a way that is beneficial to modern humans. resourcefulness implying that resources are found / conjured when they appeared to be lacking?

I have been on a 18/6 and 20/4 fasting protocol for 3 months now - few up and downs but mostly sticking to it. The obvious results are weight loss (not so much, I'm within my BMI targets). I can confirm that my mental sharpness has improved but it's not the same every day.

Most days I feel amazing, some other days I feel quite tired and I experience some mental fog. I still haven't found the reason for such an oscillation.

I suspect it has to do with what I eat during the eating window (for instance, more sugarish food, more carbs, etc). I think I should record what I eat and compare it with the overall well-being to get to some conclusions.

I noticed that in the winter, eating mostly fruits would cause a “crash” about ~30mins-1h after my fruity meal (but dang I had a lot of energy during that time). When I ate potatoes, spaghetti, I would have a longer span of energy.

I hear people say this a lot, but I've done plenty of fasting and rarely experienced this, and when I did, it was very mild. I don't know if I'm significantly outside the norm. The noticeable difference is that I feel pretty low energy after about ~24 hours of fasting.

I did a 3 day fast to see what it was all about. The energy levels were not there. I would get tired after a short brisk walk. Physically I was weaker but still had burst strength just no endurance or cardio.

Mentally however I found myself unable to have too many variables in my head and my mind was not more able to focus on something but less distracted with extraneous thoughts. I could if I wanted to shut off the chatter in my brain and meditation became very easy.

It is definitely a different mode for me and I do appreciate it but I'm told that many people in my family have ADD and that I might actually be showing symptoms that would go away when in ketosis.

Did you try it more than just for that three days (as in, try multiple fasts over time), and or try other variations of it (eg 16/8 intermittent fasting) to see if one of those might suit you better?

I don't think that a sudden 3 days fast will bring any immediate benefits (perhaps some weight loss), on the contrary. I see fasting more as a long term, life choice. I do feel more energetic and sharp during fasting.

I recently did a full check-up (I'm 48) and all my blood/urine values were spot on - before starting my fasting protocol some values mostly related to arteriosclerosis were slightly over the recommended values. Obviously, this doesn't say much or it's far from being a scientific proof: it's just an observation. There are good chances that for a lot of people fasting would just not help and make life misearable.

Definitely. I started deopping breakfast. At first it was hell. But you get used to it. Noe I’m down to one meal a day. It’s very convenient, and my energy levels aren’t affected by food intake.

I had a period a few years back where I did fasts up to 3 days quite frequently.. Once I got used to it they felt pretty good. But, the point I wanted to add is that they would have been very difficult for me if I wasn't also doing a pretty strict low-carb ketosis diet. Without the hunger control of keto and having my body acclimated to using stored fat as a primary energy source, fasts have been untenable.

I found my first fast to not be representative of later fasts. You get more accustomed to not eating after you repeat the practice. You become conscious of how often you wander into the kitchen and stick your nose in the refrigerator and the pantry. A cold glass of water becomes a delightful snack.

You might try reducing your fasts to just 24 or 36 hours on weekends.

Currently, I do intermittent fasting where I don't eat before noon or after 6pm, 7 days a week. It helps me to manage my weight, I feel consistently energetic (I work out most days, cardio and weights), my mind feels as clear as ever, and I have no trouble following the practice as a lifestyle.

I'd say that I don't feel quite that clarity of thought when meditating after fasting for 30 hours or so. But it strikes the right balance of achieving some benefits of fasting without feeling like a huge chore that I have to overcome.

Did you supplement with any vitamins or electrolytes? I've done a few 100hr fasts and definitely experienced a decrease in physical energy, but my mental clarity was always improved. I have ADD and use a mix of intermittent fasting and alternate-day fasting as one form of my treatment.

I have fasted 100 lbs away over the last 2 years. I adhere to an 18/6 time delay eating schedule but have done 2-3 day fasts with 1 refeed meal for a month at a time. I've also done countless 5-7 day fasts. I've gone as long as 12 days with nothing but water. There were many months where I could count the number of times I ate on one hand. My last go was every other day with just one meal on my eating days. I did that this year for all of January to the end of March and would never recommend alternate day fasting to anyone. You will mess your self and your metabolism up. You will lose a lot of muscle. Alternate day fasting should be avoided.

Never over two years did I feel any of the mental clarity or more energy you speak of. I follow guys like Cole (snake diet) and even he speaks of the feeling of dying and lying in bed shivering on a 5-7 day.

Are you sure about the metal clarity and energy levels, because I and the folks I know who fast don't seem to have those affects.

Many, many people who follow fasting/ketogenic diets report heightened energy and focus, myself included. This usually comes after the carb/keto flu phase once adjusted to the low carb intake and after the body has gone fully into ketosis. You have to be careful to get enough salt while fasting or eating very low-carb, though, as your body can struggle to hold on to water without those carbs you're used to eating. Consuming too little salt can definitely contribute to feeling sluggish.

When I fasted I remember the feeling of energy kicking in around day 2-3. I had moments of supreme clarity but also moments of fuzziness. The energy boost was real though. I continued to exercise quite heavily so didn't't see any muscle loss. I'm quite a big guy so there were a lot of fat reserves to melt—my skin became very greasy as if I'd eaten a very fat-heavy meal, I could even taste the oil in my mouth.

I wonder if, if you are not a big eater, then the difference might be less than if you tended to be full of food, digesting away all day and night. Similarly, if there's not a lot of fat on you maybe, rather than burning fat with an energy boost, you end up burning muscle and feel tired?

I’ve never done the long term fasts, but my anecdotal experience also confirms this - I definitely have significantly less mental clarity on any type of fast I’ve done, to the point where it definitely affects my productivity even by end of day 1.

Myself as well. You just hit low blood sugar. Technically not fasting, but I have an appetite so weak I can skip meals easily and will do so if I don’t pay attention. Eventually I just feel very lethargic and enter what I can only conceive of as “starvation” or “energy conservation” mode. It’s not pleasant. I also have trouble with muscular mass being the first thing to go.

I'm pretty much that way, too.

I think I also just become more irritable if it's been too long since the last time I ate. It definitely doesn't seem to improve mental acuity for me, and any kind of physical activity is just going to feel worse. I've never tried any kind of a formal fast, though, so I don't know if there's something to planned schedules that makes it different.

I can kind of see how I might, under some circumstances, enter some kind of a state of quicker thinking after fasting, but I think it would be something similar to sleep deprivation, where you get perhaps a bit "hyper". That's not really a state I necessarily strive for either.

I've also never been overweight, and have always had more trouble gaining weight than getting rid of it. I wonder if that has something to do with it. I suppose the metabolism might be different if you've got some fat stores vs. if you're rather low-fat.

I can understand how fasting could e.g. have differential effects on cancer cells and thus be useful in specific circumstances. I also understand that people have rather different reactions, so I don't doubt that some people achieve some kind of a state that feels good or useful by fasting. But I don't really understand the hype, or calling it a panacea.

My understanding (and experience) is that this clarity is usually just about the lack of all the crap that normally makes you feel awful. Things like sugar, dairy, and processed grains plus preprocessed foods. I've always found that after 10 days, you start to feel amazing and do so for around two weeks more before your body starts to adjust.

The mental clarity comes from adrenaline. When you fast your body slowly uses up its glycogen store and releases adrenaline to compensate. Presumably it does so in order to keep you active / motivated enough to go look for food to refill your glycogen stores. It is this adrenaline that gives you the mental clarity and causes you to have trouble sleeping when on a fast: fasting is essentially natural adderall.

On top of this, once you use up all your glycogen, your body enters a period of autophagy which causes disfunctioning cells and protein fragments to become broken down and reused. This causes your body to function more efficiently, including your brain.

That's true but it's also true that neurogenesis will start at some point during a fast. For me, it's around day 3 or 4. It's an evolutionary mechanism to form new connections in the brain to help find food/survive.

> I've gone as long as 12 days with nothing but water.

This is dangerous and please don't encourage others to do only water fast. Pure water fast is dangerous beyond 4 days or so.

You need to supplement minerals while on per-longed fast. Salt, magnesium and potassium are vital to regulatory processes in your body.

When your body uses up all reserves it will not be able to sustain those processes. It is serious business so please read up on the subject while trying anything longer than 3 days.

> feeling of dying and lying in bed shivering on a 5-7 day.

This is body telling you something is wrong, ignoring is outright stupid. Like ignoring that you are bleeding.

> I have fasted 100 lbs away Congratulations

Interesting. Any studies that validate the first point? I recall research talking about how there’s little muscle wastage until day 21 in normal healthy adults.

Keen to know if we have learned more in this space

The figure I have seen is that muscle wasting drops to less than 0.2 kg per day once the body fully enter ketosis. Obviously, anyone considering a fast longer than a few days should do so under the supervision of a doctor who can monitor electrolyte levels etc. They can also check for the rare enzyme defect called Medium-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency, those with it are unable to fast safely.

Isn't 0.2 kg per day is a huge amount of muscle?? Thats half a pound a day!

for salt look up topics around:

https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/000394.htm

Magnesium and potasium main but not only function is to regulate heart beat. Lack of them might lead to arrhythmia and other complications.

Not sure about muscle loss.

I know this is true just anecdotally. I'm totally ripped after a 7 day fast with none of my muscle wasting away, just the fat.

I remember reading about someone who fasted for an entire year. Of course he was morbidly obese when he started, he took supplements, and he was under strict medical supervision for the duration of the fast. (Sorry, don't remember the source.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_Barbieri%27s_fast

"Starting in June 1965, Scottish man Angus Barbieri (1939 – 7 September 1990) fasted for 382 days. He lived on tea, coffee, soda water and vitamins, living at home in Tayport, Scotland, and frequently visiting Maryfield Hospital for medical evaluation. He lost 276 pounds (125 kg) and set a record for the length of a fast."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2495396

I agree, a 12 day fast is dangerous and unnecessary. I was experimenting and would never do it again. Anything longer than a 3 day fast (72 hours) is not necessary.

I didn't say that exactly.

If you supplement minerals and listen to you body response, then you can fast as long as you have fat stores in your body.

Its only dangerous if you don't know what you are doing or ignoring signals from your body. Lightheadedness is common thing people report or /r/fasting/ and almost always they don't take salt while fasting.

But I am not an expert, it feels like I have done more reading about fasting then actual fasting. So don't take advice from strangers (especially /r/fasting or worse dryfasting nutcases).

I’ve yet to find a form of potassium that doesn’t upset my stomach when fasting. I’ve tried nu-salt, potassium citrate, and cream of tarter so far.

I’m about to give up on total fasts and have bone broth a few times a day for the minerals.

potassium iodide might work for you.

Thanks. I’ll try it out.

You don't follow Cole if you don't know the difference between the effects of dry fasting and wet fasting after 5-7 days. If you do know that, you are purposely making a misleading statement to support your argument.

I start to get this clarity and energy around the 24 hour mark. It is unmistakable.

Each time I hit that point I get the clarity and energy, and remember that it happens each time. Pretty interesting. So much energy I can't sleep and end up eating when I can't sleep which breaks the fast.

I am only 5kgs over weight at this point if that is relevant for anyone.

We need different words, really. You're describing a starvation or calorie reduction fast. More common, and what I practice, is more like a time-shift fast. For example, I exercise in the morning before eating breakfast. This is a fasted state. It trains your body to use fat as fuel. The eventual result of doing this is greater stability in your mood & mind. Your body doesn't crave carbs so much anymore, and you feel good whether or not you've eaten recently.

Your brain runs on carbs. The easiest source of carbs is carb rich food. This is why hangry people seem to want nothing but cookies & candy IMO. But your body can only hold a limited amount of free carbs at any time. Meanwhile, your liver can convert fat to carbs to feed your brain, and your body can hold a virtually unlimited amount of fat. This pathway is more difficult, so you have to train your body to use it.

So I don't think it makes you smarter or more energetic. But it does make you more stable & help avoid the crash.

Not OP, but I agree with you that we need different words. Because what OP is doing is not starvation (till their body is actually wasting away). Having done a few 3 days fasts myself, I can attest to feeling a euphoric energy around day 2 where I felt lighter, and sharper. I have been told it isn't universal, but from the content I have been consuming it has something to do with brain switching to consuming ketones.

Which actually brings me to another point; the brain does not run exclusively on carbs (glucose) - it absolutely has the ability to (and does) functions well on ketones. This is why ketogenic diets can work for many people.

But yes, there's lots of bio-chemical mechanisms that get kicked off when you're fasting for an extended period, so it could be something else that's unique to the people who experience the euphoria.

I am not sure if you've come across this concept, but "Metabolic Flexibility" seems to be trying to explain some of the "after burner" affects of switching around my dieting habits. Where I am no longer exercising strict caloric restrictions, or fasting on a regimen, but I am still observing some of the benefits of when I switched over. (Less bloating, more energetic even after a large meal, less voracious appetite on normal days).

Not eating for few days - is not (yet) starvation, its not 'body wasting away'.

Its a state where your body and mind need to be the sharpest in order to catch food. Or else due to lack of fuel you will enter actual starvation (no fat reserves).

When you have reduced calories intake ~~500kcal a day you are signaling to your body that you can find/catch food but there is not a lot of it. Your metabolism will slow down in order to adjust to reduce calories. You loose muscle mass much faster than when not eating at all.

I have done multiple >3 days fasts and I havent experienced this sharpness feeling though. It seems some people do and some don't.

Also worth mentioning keto is natural diet of Eskimo people, they survived generations eating seal's meat and fat. So keto is not some crazy nutjob diet invention of 21st cent.

Same here - I've been eating only one meal a day mon-fri for literally years. I also do 2-3 day fasts here and there, my longest was five days. No changes in mental clarity and energy.

Do you have any recommend resources around fasting? or a preferred routine?

I'm very interested in reading more.

The resource I've heard recommended most often is "The Complete Guide to Fasting: Heal Your Body Through Intermittent, Alternate-Day, and Extended Fasting" by Fung and Moore. I just checked-out a copy from my library and will be reading it soon.

I have no idea what a library is but i found this on Amazon for 9 British Roubles.

I felt something a bit similar, that I assume is your brain abandoning the desire for stimulus from food, leading you to go deep into whatever else to feel something. Very nice trick indeed.

Henry Cavill talked about the extreme dehydration he experiences prior to filming a shirtless scene, to make sure there is no water retention, and how he could 'smell water' from across the room.

It makes sense biologically you would get some heightened awareness mixed with periods of extreme lethargy as your body tried to preserve itself.

How does a fasting mimicking diet (FMD, like the one described in the article) work? I had a skim and didn’t see a detailed explanation. What’s your experience like?

The FMD in the article was approximately 200 calories per day for 3 days, using a standardized set of allowed items (broths, etc.)

This was done in preparation for each chemo treatment.

How long do you need to fast for benefits? Is water the only supplement allowed? Curious

https://cardiosmash.com/20-4-fasting-is-it-better-than-16-8-...

I have a book called Fasting and Eating for Health by Joel Fuhrman MD (ISBN 0-312-18719-X). In it, he recommends fasting for between 10 - 15 days around once every 10 years.

I have actually completed a 10 day water only fast a few months ago (good use of lockdown), it takes my body around 4 to 5 days to switch completely to ketosis, then to the end of the fast I was burning through 1 pound/~0.5 kg of fat per day. You can watch it happen every morning when you weigh yourself.

0.5kg of fat contain 4500 calories, how did you burn 4500 calories per day?

woow, other comment recommending fifteen day fast is a) dangerous and b) doesn't answer your question??

i fast twice per week for ~30 hours and drink copious amounts of tea and coffee. but intermittent fasting also works, the really important information is that ketosis can begin after as little as 12 hours, so basically fast for a minimum 14 hours if you want any effect at all, and everything after that is bonus. no extras in your coffees btw, though a splash of milk / coconut oil in your breakfast coffee is acceptable :)

Where is the evidence that a 15 day fast is dangerous?

i think it would be premature to assume that it had universality in the same way as something like intermittent fasting.

the possibly dangerous part is recommending that particular part of the book in response to a query asking for how long one needs to fast to feel the effects.

I should dig what people were saying about fasting in the previous eras. Of course it's well known how integrated with religion it was but it was never mentioned as a physiological lever.. more like an emotional/moral act.

Also it would be weird to see people in those days, allegedly not having access to the cornucopia of yummy food we have in 2020, going into fasting. Maybe more diseases on average made them realize that the less fed survived better ?

Works for other things too like plants. A bit of stress ends up making them more resilient. Depriving them a bit of water and Sun can make for a stronger plant.

Of course there are limits but when done right you end up with a plant that on average is stronger.

And yet, most of what you said is bullshit that's not evidence based.

"Autophagy", that famous process which supposedly happens during fasting, that miraculously regenerates us, actually happens during caloric restriction, and it's actually a daily process that happens during the night, in everyone, while glycogen stores get naturally depleted.

And we have no evidence that increased autophagy levels are beneficial, quite the contrary, we have some evidence that, right after fasting, the immune system is suppressed. The bigger the caloric restriction, the larger effect on refeeding. An effect very relevant for malnourished populations that suddenly get access to food.

This is basically modern quackery, medical technobabble lacking any evidence other than obscure studies done on mice.

What "healers" and witches used to do, but taken to the next level.

And unfortunately it is also a recipe for serious eating disorders. Hello anorexia.

Someone recently posted a link on HN to a book by an Herbert Shelton MD that you might find interesting:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110222200902/http://www.soilan...

Fasting isn't about starving yourself, or being malnourished. When you do eat, you should be getting plenty of calories, and eating well, not garbage.

Fasting != malnourishment tho.

Anecdotally, I've been doing 16/8, 20/4 intermittent fasting and a couple of 24-48h fasts over the past 10 years and have not yet developed anorexia.

I've been doing 16/8 for the past year+ and I've barely lost any weight (BMI of 25.5ish but I'm muscular). I've always been quite comfortable going without food for 16 hours, so I'm never even hungry.

> "Autophagy", that famous process which supposedly happens during fasting, that miraculously regenerates us, actually happens during caloric restriction, and it's actually a daily process that happens during the night, in everyone, while glycogen stores get naturally depleted.

Last I looked into it, we didn't really know the autophagy timeline in humans, because we can't really measure it. Of course there's a natural fasting window that every human adheres to while they sleep, but with food available at all times, three meals a day plus snacks, that window may be far smaller than what the body is evolutionarily adapted to. What if autophagy doesn't kick in properly until 10, 12 or 14 hours?

"bullshit", "quackery", ""healers" and witches"

Is all that really necessary?

When it comes to human health, the unknowns are legion. Medical science is in its infancy, but too many act as though it's a mature discipline built upon rock-solid theories with few problems.

20 years ago, I noticed that my mental fog cleared up and I felt healthier when I ate very low carb, I looked to pioneers like Atkins and others who predicted my results much better than those pushing the "food pyramid". Those pioneers were called "quacks". I was told over and over by supposed experts: "Calories in equals calories out.", "A calorie is just a calorie.", "You're going to ruin your kidneys on a high protein, high fat diet.", and on and on.

The problem isn't science. Science is the best method we have to discover the nature reality. The problem is with science used as a religion or political weapon without humility or appreciation of its flaws and limitations.

The food pyramid was never backed by any high quality evidence. It was primarily pushed by various agriculture lobbies.

Calories in calories out is 100% valid for weight loss. The problem is that people interpret it to somehow be a claim on overall health when it is just a statement on weight gain and loss, which while can be beneficial to health, isn't everything.

A calorie is just a calorie, so much as color is color. Its a single property of food that can be compared. If you want to lose weight that is the property you primarily need to look at. If you care about overall health then obviously there is a lot more to it than just calories. People somehow interpreted a calorie is just a calorie as a claim that all food is the same when its just saying that from a weight loss perspective, the energy component from any food source is the same -- there are no further claims about nutrition content.

"The food pyramid was never backed by any high quality evidence"

And yet medical organizations backed government efforts to force it upon our society.

"Calories in calories out is 100% valid for weight loss" "A calorie is just a calorie, so much as color is color."

Yeah, and you can tell an obese person to cut off their legs to lose weight. Sure, you'll be factually accurate, but are you honestly talking about weight loss?

"If you care about overall health then obviously there is a lot more to it than just calories."

Is weight loss without health considerations really the subject you think people discuss when they talk about weight loss? Nobody talking about actual dieting and weight loss is talking about thermodynamics. We're talking about the complex interactions between food, exercise, mental health, and our individual bodies in order to reliably lose weight and be healthier.

Actually there are well documented cases where not all calories are good and the same high sugar diet leads to more diabetes.

Skipping a few days of food while being overweight (the vast majority of people in the west) won't do any of what you listed though. You're probably confusing "starving" and "fasting".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com