to think some people overreact about fasting?

[HazelMember]

I was listening to Dr Rangan Chatterjee’s podcast and he mentioned a few times that whenever he talks about fasting, there is always a bit of a backlash.

He does say quite clearly that it is not for everyone, and that people should do what works for them, but apparently every time he brings it up there is still a pushback and people getting quite upset about it. He didn't go into the reasons why people are reacting this way.

There is a lot of research now supporting the benefits of fasting. Many people of different faiths have been fasting for years so there is good evidence it is beneficial.

Obviously there are exceptions and it will not be suitable for everyone but that is true of most health approaches.

It just made me wonder why it seems to trigger such a strong reaction. No one is being forced to do it and he is not presenting it as a one size fits all solution.

I wonder whether people are getting offended as it may be a willpower issue.

AIBU to think the reaction is a bit over the top?

I do the "window" eating method which I prefer to call it over "intermittent fasting". Same thing though, and it's great for me, the discipline works and it becomes a habit. Stops me from raiding the choccy box/snack box at night. Win win. It's not for weight loss at all, but it does tend to keep things even most of the time. It's not at all hard to do either IMV.

If he's talking about intermittent fasting, eating within a 12hr or 8 hr window that's not controversial and is a fairly normal way of eating, it's probably how most people would naturally eat if we didn't have to work

If we're talking about proper fasting as in going days without food or eating one meal then tgats a different matter. As someone with a history of disordered eating, I have never once felt good when going longer periods without eating. Ots only the buzz of self satisfaction that has powered me through

I think any major strict rules about eating that impact with day to day living are almost always disordered. People talking about needing huge amounts of willpower to follow a diet are again almost always disordered. Pushing proper fasting will lead to EDs, because naturally those are also the type of people that consume content from people like Dr Chatterjee and having a medic back up your starvation methods is great fuel for ED.

Ok I just looked him up as I was curious and apparently:

"Dr. Rangan Chatterjee advocates for "time-restricted eating" rather than extreme fasting, recommending a gentle approach to boost metabolic health, improve sleep, and increase energy. He often suggests a 12-hour eating window (e.g., 8 am to 8 pm) for beginners, focusing on quality, whole foods and allowing the body to repair during overnight fasting"

Therefore he does advocate for intermittent fasting so I am not sure why you seem to think my comment wasnt relevant

Also shoehorning in a little dig about anorexics!

Well ok then. I apologise. I personally believe that our differentiation in definition of fasting is probably exactly why people take issue with him. They likely think like me… think that fasting means a day+ without eating. Not everyone will listen to his whole explanation- many will simply react to the word, idea or sound bite.

I don’t know why anyone would care that someone confines their eating to an 8 hour window. It’s not particularly extreme.

Yes that. It's not the fasting that upsets people it's that people can be so evangelical about it.

I don't care what or when you eat, but if you're going to keep telling me why your way is the best way, I'll give my POV.

As a greedy fatty, I fast 16hr a day.

How was it a dig?

There's some truth in people who think it's normal to eat every day, are greedy?
Fasting is another part of disordered eating. Intermittent fasting, is fine, if it physically suits someone.

There’s a massive difference between deliberately choosing to fast in a structured way and not eating because of something unhealthy going on underneath. Fasting usually has a clear pattern, start and end points and people still eat properly overall. Disordered eating is more about fear, control, or anxiety around food, and it is not the same.

The teenage girl example makes no sense. If a teenager suddenly stopped eating with no structure and seemed distressed around food, of course people would be worried. But if someone is following a recognised fasting pattern for health or religious reasons, that is a completely different situation.

Fasting has also been around for a long time in different faiths, it is not just a modern trend. Putting it in the same category as disordered eating ignores that,.

Fasting is another part of disordered eating

How? It has so many benefits proven in scientific journals.

Intermittent fasting seems like the "right" way to eat to me, what our Grandparents would have done, if you mean 8am breakfast, 5:30pm dinner and no evening snacking. I don't know why there'd be any "backlash" to that.

As can be seen on this very thread. There is a division between those who do not class intermittent fasting as actual fasting and those who do. Which was my very point. It causes agro because people are looking at the topic from different definitions.

Only the smug ones.
you likely wouldn’t know about the non smug ones would you as they’d just be doing it and not talking about it

I don’t really care what anybody else chooses to do and have done intermittent fasting before myself but I do think some of the concern with fasting is that it can end up in a binge/restrict cycle which moves into disordered eating.

If you fast for say 16 hours and then just eat your normal breakfast, snack, lunch, dinner etc then that’s great and works for lots of people.

But if you fast for 16 hours and then are so starving hungry that you spend the first 2 hours eating your entire days worth of calories it’s not great and that’s the cycle lots of people fall into.

However that’s true of lots of methods of weight loss really, and exercise, everything taken too far can become negative for someone.

so you think It’s borderline unhealthy, but then admit that you do it
That doesn’t really make sense

There’s nothing remotely unhealthy about having 16 hours for example of not eating

That still leaves eight hours to be eating your food which is enough for anyone

As other have asked, are they reacting against the idea of fasting itself or are they reacting against somebody else banging on about fasting, quite possibly with holier-than-thou undertones? There's nothing more boring than hearing about the intricacies of somebody else's diet regimen so while I sort of do the 'intermittent fasting' thing myself - almost inadvertently - I don't feel the need to bring it up in conversation and if anybody else does I very quickly get to 'STFU I don't care you tedious git' stage.

You do realise the clue is in the name

Intermittent fasting is a form of fasting

There are no holier-than-thou undertones. It is presented as an option that is backed up by research. It seems to be against the idea of fasting.

Yes but others see that as a disqualifier… that if they don’t say the intermittent part then they don’t mean that type.

Do you realise that many cultures had fasted from the beginning of time?

It’s not all about disordered eating

And there is much scientific evidence that autophagy Is hugely beneficial

I think a lot of people think of fasting as something you do for long periods and that it’s a fairly extreme thing to do. In reality, it refers to a huge spectrum of durations. Most people fast for 12 hours every night.

Anything relating to food and its restriction seems to make people emotional. One size does not fit all and even intermittent fasting (16h plus) makes me feel unwell. Each to their own I suppose!

There might not be from the chap you mentioned but I've had several first-hand experiences of people whanging on about fasting - or whatever other dietary habits they've latched on to - like it makes them the virgin Mary. So when I hear somebody else strike up about fasting, or beetroot juice, or cider vinegar, or whatever else it is, I no longer listen politely for long.

I remember doing 24 hour fast for charity as a child in the 80's...

This.

i have seen posters on her on 72 hr + fasts. Some even for a week.

if gives those with disordered eating an “exuse” to not be eating. I know when I was in the thick of it a massive part was making sure others didn’t think you had a problem. Fasting gives someone a reason to be sitting at dinner with a glass of water with everyone else thinking you’re acting reasonably.

it doesn’t work for me.