[elmolino89]

I am not sure exactly what some people call fasting but I am bewildered by statements "I did 60 days of fasting/it is safe".

Here one can read about the "safety" of ca 60 days hunger strikes. See the section: "People who died on hunger strike"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1981_Irish_hunger_strike

The oldest one died at age 29.

Bonus: "Other participants in the hunger strike". Column: Reason for ending the strike

One poor guy got a perforated ulcer and internal bleeding after 13 days.

[45w7w8w48]

> bewildered by statements "I did 60 days of fasting/it is safe".

These people are either overweight or even obese, or just lying to you, or lying to themselves (e.g., drinking juice and coffee, or getting calories elsewhere and not counting it). Also, I guarantee they're completely sedentary.

If you're reasonably physically active (especially if you do any weight training) and you're in a prolonged caloric deficit while already being lean, you will lose muscle mass and bone density, and ultimately get injured:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4834845/

[elmolino89]

Apart from the quacks no medical doctor imho will state: 60days fast is completely safe for any 250 pounder at any age and without a medical supervision.

[emacsen]

There are a number of differences here that should be noted.

Firstly, as you keenly note, we need to define terms like fasting. The kind of fasting people are doing for extended periods always includes water, but more than that, for an extended fast, it also includes electrolytes, and sometimes other nutrients.

Secondly, 60 days is a very long fast. While people are going to point out cases of people fasting for a year or more, the fact is that those are in the extreme minority. Most people consider a 10 day extended fast to be a very long one. A sixty day fast is far different, and there are studies that show negative effects of very long fasts, rather than "medium length" fasts such as seven days.

Third, I think it's a bit of a mistake to conflate a week long fast (what the post is about) with a 60 day fast.

Fourthly, most of the people talking about having done extended fasts talk about doing it in the same way one might talk about running a race- with practice. You'll see people talking about one meal a day, then a 24 hour fast, 48 hour, 72 hour, and then a week.

That gives the body a chance to adapt to the fasted state. These are health conscious people doing a health conscious thing.

Lastly, though, an ulcer isn't caused by fasting. Most ulcers are caused by infection, which was only discovered later in the 1980s. The kidney obstruction could be made worse by dehydration certainly, but it's still not causal.

People do need to eat, and extended fasts can be very dangerous, but there's such a world of difference here that I think it's not worth discussing.

[elmolino89]

Last but not least: ulcers are exacerbated by fasting.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23432987/

[atchoo]

It's not about the duration but the starting weight and health of a faster. These were underweight / lower end of normal range long term prisoners in the early 80's who died when bodyweights were significantly under 100lbs.

That definitely isn't what anyone is suggesting. The people fasting these days for 50+ days with no ill effects are significantly overweight sometimes on the order of 100+ lbs. They can lose 60 lbs over similar duration which would kill someone underweight but leave them still technically obese.

Someone fasting for health will stop once something starts to feel off unlike hunger strikers who experienced serious declines before death. Sudden death from malnutrition during a fast while feeling fine at a normal range bodyweight isn't really a thing.

[elmolino89]

Really? Bobby Sands started with 155lbs, died at 95lbs.

The 155lbs for a chap in the 1980s was certainly in the middle range. Check his wiki page: for sure he didn't look anorectic in the picture taken at the age 19.

More importantly:

Seems that we are entering the True Irishman or Scotsman territory:

Fasting 60 days is super safe but apparently only if you started with 300lbs, your weight did not drop "significantly" more than 4lbs below 100, you have no preexisting conditions, take balanced drinks with electrolytes (btw at least some IRA prisoners took water with salt) and you may take some nutrients and call it fasting.

Yes?

[atchoo]

You sound like you think you are disagreeing. The prerequisite health and body fat requirements for safely fasting for extended periods is surely obvious.

The photos I have seen of Bobby Sands show him to be taller than his friends and sknny... unusually skinny by modern standards. This person cannot safely lose 60lbs of bodyweight, others can:

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/aug/04/bobby-sands-66-...

[pengaru]

What can we assume of the general health and condition of prisoners mistreated to such an extent they've embarked on a hunger strike in protest though?

[elmolino89]

We can check that after 4 years in prison Bobby Sands weighted 155lbs.

Check 5 demands 9f the hunger strike.

Nothing about food or medical treatment.

British prison certainly was no joke (solitary confinement as a punishment i.e) but not exactly a gulag.