Jump to content

Guest Indiana

What is the best way to do fasting?

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

Guest Indiana -
Space Merchant -
4
121

Top Posters


Recommended Posts

Guest Indiana

Abstaining from all food and water/juices or abstaining from all food but drinking water/juices?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 5/18/2019 at 8:00 PM, Guest Indiana said:

Abstaining from all food and water/juices or abstaining from all food but drinking water/juices?

If for health benefits, it would be wise to start with Intermittent Fasting, and in which domain in IF, 16/8, whereas you fast for 16 hours,l enough to baseline your insulin and autophagy (consumption of the body’s own tissue as a metabolic process occurring in starvation and certain diseases) to kick in, and after the 16 hours, you have an 8 hour eating window. So an example would be, your eating window is 2pm-9pm and your fasting window is from 10pm to 1pm (next day). If for weight loss, you must keep under a caloric deficit, meaning to not over eat calories, and you must EAT CLEAN, high fats, low carbs, not too much fruit because you will cause the fructose to go to the liver and end up storing as fat.

There is also the 20/4, also known as the Warrior's Diet, similar to 16/8, however you fast for 20 hours and your eating window is 4 hours

And lastly, there is 23/1, refereed to as OMAD, which means, One Meal A Day. You must fast for 23 hours and you have a 1 hour eating window, so you take in ALL you need in that one sitting meal.

Somethings to note, you cannot eat anything during a fast, not even a single almond and taking in calories will spike you insulin. You are limited to water, black coffee (with nothing in it and can only be consumed about 1-2 hours after waking up in the AM, ideally 9AM or 11AM) and or tea, no sugar at all. For all that is consumed must be 0 calories during the fast until that hour comes when you are in your eating window.

Water Fast is somewhat difficult whereas you only consume water for the whole day, and eat the next day.

Dry Fast is abstaining from food, water, juice, etc. This one is more on the extreme level.

16/8 and 20/4 can be done everyday, however, OMAD you can do like 1-2 a month, unless you are a veteran you can do this occasionally and or everyday. You can also integrate KETO into this too, or you can modify Intermittent Fasting, an example, turning 20/4 into 22/2, etc.

You must also be FAT ADAPTED whereas your body becomes adjusted to the changes you make when it comes to eating.

That being said, WEIGHT LOSS and FAST LOSS are 2 different things, fasting will only deal with weight loss (a LITTLE bit of fast loss if you do nothing expect the IF diet itself and that alone), for fat loss, you must do strength training and or lifting, no cardio, for fasting is taking care of the weight for you.

Remember, never fast to the point of utter starvation, it is bad for the body and ruins progress. If you really must eat, you can eat a bit early from your eating window, for example, 2pm, but you can take your first snake and or meal around 1:45pm. Also eat CLEAN, get your good nutrients from your food and your proteins because it is beneficial for building up the body as you loss weight, and work out.

I have been doing OMAD and 16/8 since high school and I am use to it, even capable of doing dry fast and or water fast if need be for once a month or two.

I also recommend taking information from these people to better understand Intermittent Fasting; better to take information from those who have done it and understand it longer, those who have far more wisdom in such compared to some of us to came much later:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/19/2019 at 11:31 PM, Bubba Johnson Jr said:

don't put any food in your mouth

Or that lol. But then you will be putting yourself in an extreme catabolic state.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now





  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I believe the action of the people made it to where the angels sent by God did not find any good hearts to sway that decision. I don't believe Abraham or anyone else was speaking as though they were higher than God. Even though Jesus had that ability to speak out, he also did not question the decisions of God since he would have seen that as an angel, firsthand to be just and a righteous judgment. True. However, I have not found any misinterpretation of prophecy by the Watchtower given to them by God to warrant a redefinition of that interpretation. Divine providence if not given to all disciples of Christ. No different from earlier prophets. However, just like those earlier prophets, the people didn't also like or accept the message given to them by the prophets just as witnesses question the findings given by the Watchtower. This of course will be settled with a judgment. I believe, certain Bible Student congregation continued to follow the advent timeline, however, Russell determination to understand chronology made a conservative effort with God's help to finally understand his own chronology. I believe not even the Edgar's pyramid scheme influenced Russell even though he found it helpful. Perhaps, that is where the confusion lies, the distinct separation of the Bible Student Association and their separate ideologies. I believe the action of another differs from the comment expressed here. I have seen the disappearance of many, at times without uttering a word but adding an emotion as a “like” or “dislike” manner on a subject or post. It appears certain people are just not tolerated, that any means to silence and violate an individual’s right afforded to them under the first amendment bill of Rights which at issue to be, have some kind of decorum that is not exercised by others that have no limitation. While I appreciate the thought, I cannot go beyond the action and limitations imposed to people that speak and find truth on their side.
    • I think that’s very unlikely. I mean, come on, are you going to cuss out an angel—dare him to a fight? Unless you no longer believe in angels, but then the phrase loses its meaning. I think it makes more sense, partly because of the above reasoning and partly because of the aspect of Law that Paul recalled when he cussed out the high priest: “You must not speak injuriously of a ruler of your people.” These ones of Jude had no problem with it. I think that expression is probably like what your mother used to say when upbraiding you for some act of disobedience, prefacing her scolding with: “I suppose you are proud of yourself, are you?!” She doesn’t actually think you are proud—just disobedient, maybe that you think you know better. And in the case of those Corinth elders, negligent—perhaps with some self-exalted view of “tolerance” as you suggest or perhaps just plain negligent. Arguing for the latter is the fact that when they did lower the hammer on this lout, Paul had to counsel them to let up in his next letter—the rebuke of the man had had its effect, but they were slow to see that—or perhaps just negligent once again in the other direction. Negligent is as negligent does. I played a little loose with the term, admittedly. Actually, to the extent that the GB are the successors of those who brought the truth of God’s word to us in the first place, they are the biggest whistleblowers of all time—blowing the whistle on the deceptions of religion claiming to represent God. A lot of detractors today pose as “whistleblowers”—unheeded reformers, who say they do not have anything against Jehovah’s Witnesses—they just want to curtail what they think are wrong practices. It’s hard to ferret out who’s who, here, because these persons mix here with ones who truly would like to see the whole JW structure AND the message they spearhead blown to smithereens. It is easy to overgeneralize, as @Arauna perhaps has done. Still, Shultz on my Twitter feed (of deVienne & Shultz) observed that whistleblowing in the case of JWs is often just a blind for not wanting to live the morals and principles that Witnesses do. It’s hard to believe that those slimy ones of Jude’s letter would have acquiesced to Jude’s description of them. It is far easier to believe that many of them would have repackaged themselves as reformers, whistleblowers, even escaped cult members. The congregation they left was simply too strict, too unyielding, even abusive in “forcing” its version of morality on others, and they would change that.
    • True, but a well-established, misinterpretation of a prophecy has no divine providence. Over the years here, Allen, I've often seen you attack the Bible when you think the Bible contradicts the Watchtower, but here you are attacking both the Bible and the Watchtower:  *** ws17 June p. 13 par. 16 Set Your Heart on Spiritual Treasures *** At times, our understanding of a Bible prophecy or a scripture may be adjusted. When that happens, it is important to take the time to study the adjustment and meditate on it. (Acts 17:11; 1 Timothy 4:15) We not only need to understand the main differences between the old understanding and the new one, but we also need to pay attention to the details of the new understanding. Such a careful study will guarantee that the new truth becomes part of our collection of Bible truths. Why is it good for us to make such efforts? Russell did not reject Barbour's chronology. Years later, after their split, when Barbour began rejecting his own chronology and numerology, Russell continued to accept it and doubled down on it. The split was primarily over variations in their understanding of the ransom, but I was talking about his chronology and numerology. Conflicted or not, I think you should feel welcome to express your opinions, whether they are for or against me, for or against others, the Watchtower, or even the Bible. I have not seen any indication that you are breaking any rules. Controversial discussions might upset people, but that's the value of discussion: it can upset long-established traditions (strongly entrenched ideas/things) and some people have a large emotional investment in these traditions. Some level of "upset" or "disturbance" should be expected. Neither you nor I should be expected to deal with these issues totally devoid of emotion. At least we are mostly trying to stick with the scriptures, the facts and the evidence.     Because of the way that posts are being merged (again) I will take up the subject of the 1260 days and 3 1/2 days in Revelation under another topic heading.
    • I think how another fact is also clear to God. Noah and their family didn't produced better humankind after Flood. According to JW preaching, today's humankind is on top of list in badness.  According to idea you explained, best solution would be, what god once expressed in his thinking - 7 So Jehovah said: “I am going to wipe men whom I have created off the surface of the ground,- to destroy all people and to release himself from this agony :)))
    • (Genesis 6:5-7) 5 Consequently, Jehovah saw that man’s wickedness was great on the earth and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only bad all the time. 6 Jehovah regretted that he had made men on the earth, and his heart was saddened. 7 So Jehovah said: “I am going to wipe men whom I have created off the surface of the ground, man together with domestic animals, creeping animals, and flying creatures of the heavens, for I regret that I have made them.. . . If we have faith like that of Abraham, then we will ask questions about this. Just as we have asked questions about what Jesus meant when he spoke of a resurrection on Judgment Day for those who were destroyed in Sodom. Abraham asked: (Genesis 18:22-33) . . .Then the men left from there and went toward Sodʹom, but Jehovah remained with Abraham. 23 Then Abraham approached and said: “Will you really sweep away the righteous with the wicked? 24 Suppose there are 50 righteous men within the city. Will you, then, sweep them away and not pardon the place for the sake of the 50 righteous who are inside it? 25 It is unthinkable that you would act in this manner by putting the righteous man to death with the wicked one so that the outcome for the righteous man and the wicked is the same! It is unthinkable of you. Will the Judge of all the earth not do what is right?” 26 Then Jehovah said: “If I find in Sodʹom 50 righteous men in the city, I will pardon the whole place for their sake.” 27 But Abraham again responded: “Please, here I have presumed to speak to Jehovah, whereas I am dust and ashes. 28 Suppose the 50 righteous should lack five. Because of the five will you destroy the whole city?” To this he said: “I will not destroy it if I find there 45.” 29 But yet again he spoke to him and said: “Suppose 40 are found there.” He answered: “I will not do it for the sake of the 40.” 30 But he continued: “Jehovah, please, do not become hot with anger, but let me go on speaking: Suppose only 30 are found there.” He answered: “I will not do it if I find 30 there.” 31 But he continued: “Please, here I have presumed to speak to Jehovah: Suppose only 20 are found there.” He answered: “I will not destroy it for the sake of the 20.” 32 Finally he said: “Jehovah, please, do not become hot with anger, but let me speak just once more: Suppose only ten are found there.” He answered: “I will not destroy it for the sake of the ten.” 33 When Jehovah finished speaking to Abraham, he went his way and Abraham returned to his place. In Christian parlance, even Abraham and Noah were NOT intrinsically righteous, but they were counted as if righteous due to their faith. Jehovah as the Giver of LIfe has a right to destroy everyone. He may also save persons, or bring them back from the dead. And we were made to ask questions in order to understand Jehovah better. It is clear to me that you have never had a five-month old son or daughter, or grand-son or grand-daughter. We can accept that Jehovah knew what would become of those babies in their circumstances of the time. But Jehovah also knows that only those with haughtiness and no natural affection will stop questioning and stop investigating. (Psalm 10:4) . . .In his haughtiness, the wicked man makes no investigation;. . . Just an aside, but that reminds me of how the psalmist almost turns the judgment imagery of the Flood "on its head" in these poetic lines: (Psalm 36:5-8) . . .O Jehovah, your loyal love reaches to the heavens, Your faithfulness up to the clouds.  6 Your righteousness is like majestic mountains; Your judgments are like vast, deep waters. Man and beast you preserve, O Jehovah.  7 How precious your loyal love is, O God! In the shadow of your wings, the sons of men take refuge.  8 They drink their fill of the rich bounty of your house, And you cause them to drink of the torrent of your delights. Like Noah, we are in effect "deluged" with the watery depths of Jehovah's bounteous delights and judgments. But by blaming the young babies, don't you end up losing the natural meaning of Jesus' words about the innocence and humility of children, or what Paul meant when he said: (1 Corinthians 14:20) . . .but be young children as to badness; . . .
  • Popular Now

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.