[abdusco]

> ... All I got was headaches, tiredness, feeling sick and constantly thinking about food. I lasted 5-6 days, tried to keep my electrolyte intake as well as I could, and it was miserable....

Fasting is not just about not eating for 16 hours in a day. When you break fast, you need to watch how much you eat, and eat a lot less.

If you fast for 16 hours then gorge yourself, your stomach will keep growling and you won't be able to get used to being hungry and think about something else.

After a couple days of moderated eating + fasting your hormone levels will reach equilibrium and you won't feel hunger as intense / won't mind it at all.

[mateo1]

I think there's a misunderstanding about the semiotics of fasting. I don't mean intermittent fasting, I mean not eating, at all.

[abdusco]

It doesn't really matter. Substitute 16 hours with however long you're fasting. You need to keep your eating habits in check when you break fast.

I'm a muslim who fasts during Ramadan (no eating / drinking until sunset) for a month, and either because I'm just conditioned mentally or because my body adapts itself, I don't really mind being hungry after 2-3 days. And the less & lighter I eat, the easier it is.

[mateo1]

>It doesn't really matter.

Yes it absolutely does. You can do intermitted fasting for 10 years but most people will die when they continuously fast for more than 20 days unassisted by IV nutrients. Are we really on the same page here?

Your religious experience of skipping lunch and having a late dinner used to be my daily routine during uni, aside from a couple of coffees with a cig. Fasting for 12-16 hours is very different from fasting for 120-160 hours. Whatever you may think, you cannot be mentally conditioned not to eat at all. I'm having trouble believing that people extrapolate their experience of skipping a meal to not eating anything for days or weeks in a row.