[lisa_henderson]

I agree. Last month I went 11 days while only drinking water. No food. And the first 7 days I barely noticed. I had no hunger at all. On the 7th day I went for a 12 kilometer walk. I had plenty of strength.

After the 7th day I did start to suffer weakness, and I had a busy schedule at work, which put a limit on how long I could fast. The night of the 10th night I slept for 16 hours. The 11th day (a Saturday) I walked 10 kilometers, but it was much more difficult than walking 12 kilometers 4 days earlier.

I doubt I'll ever again do 11 days when I'm working. Maybe on vacation, but not when I have work to do. However, doing 7 days is something I plan to do this month. Because 7 days without food imposed no limits on me, at all.

It has health benefits, it imposes no burden, and it's easy to do. I don't think we need to wait for a drug to be invented, when the solution is so easy and available.

[Pete_D]

(Disclaimer: I am not a doctor)

It's great that you're seeing benefits, but I wanted to bring this to your attention (and anyone else doing long-term fasting) in case you hadn't already heard of it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refeeding_syndrome. In particular, "any individual who has had negligible nutrient intake for more than 5 consecutive days is at risk of refeeding syndrome".

I don't know in practice _how_ big the risks are - I've been meaning to get an official medical opinion for some time - but I've started trying to take it into account for my fasts (usually two or three days) and plan accordingly (drinking rehydration salts while fasting, and breaking the fast slowly, with plenty of milk for phosphates).

Apologies if you already knew about this.

[Evgeny]

That's awesome.

My longest fast was 5 days. My personal experience was that starting from day 3 I was a little "lethargic" or basically slow in the morning, but that feeling went away fairly soon, and by 10 AM I was operating as normal.

But things like climbing up the stairs got noticeably more difficult, even though I'm a physically active person. I would not dare walking 12 kilometers while fasting, except maybe shortly before breaking of the fast.

Anyway - no noticeable hunger, no nausea or vomiting and the bowel movements also stopped on day 1 or 2, so quite a fun experience overall.

[p1esk]

Recently I decided to go as long without food as I can (just mineral water). The first 3 days were fine, but the following night I was feeling nauseous, and ended up vomiting something bile-like at 3am. Tried eating a small piece of an apple, vomited again. After that, I felt slightly better, but my desire to continue with the fast disappeared, so I started eating again in the morning.

[Evgeny]

My advice for anyone interested in fasting would be to go slow. If never tried it before, start with a 24 hour fast - i.e. eat dinner, then nothing until dinner time the next day. If that went fine, next week try a 36 hour fast - i.e. dinner, no food the next day, and eat breakfast the day after. If that goes well again, continue extending the fasting time, but also allow yourself time in between. Eventually you will get a grasp and some feeling about how long is too long, or how often you can do fasts - I don't think there is much science on the topic.

I did 36 hour fasts, then I did 48 hour fasts, then I went for 3 days, then for 4, finally for 5 - over a course of several years actually. May try a longer fast in the future, but my current schedule is to have a weekly 36 hour fast - at least, most weeks.

[lisa_henderson]

I agree that fasting hits everyone differently, but then, the same can be said of drugs. It's ludicrous to think that one day we will have a drug that mimics the effects of fasting, but without any negative side effects. Whatever drug they come up with in the end, it will have its various effects that hit different people in different ways. Which brings up the obvious point, if the drug does no more than fasting, with whatever side effects fasting raises, then what is the advantage of the drug?

[PavlovsCat]

> Which brings up the obvious point, if the drug does no more than fasting, with whatever side effects fasting raises, then what is the advantage of the drug?

That it could be patented and sold, as could be the drugs that combat the side effects of the drugs invented to combat side effects.

[p1esk]

if the drug does no more than fasting, with whatever side effects fasting raises, then what is the advantage of the drug?

Well, it's kinda obvious - the drug would let you avoid feeling hungry - the main reason most people never try fasting.

[mrfusion]

Where does your body get electrolytes when you're fasting? Did you take a multivitatmin?