Fasting on Yom Kippur

Discussion in 'Food and nutrition' started by Dan, Oct 6, 2003.

  1. Dan

    Dan Guest

    For my whole life people have been telling me confidently that fasting on the Jewish holiday of Yom
    Kippur (when no food OR water is consumed for appx 24 hours) is healthy! They vaguely refer to a
    beneficial "cleansing" and "giving your stomach a "rest".

    It seems to me that this type of fasting (especially with NO water) would be decidedly UNhealthy.

    What is the current medical view on this subject?

    Thanks!

    Dan
     
    Tags:


  2. Eric Bohlman

    Eric Bohlman Guest

    [email protected] (Dan) wrote in news:[email protected]:

    > For my whole life people have been telling me confidently that fasting on the Jewish holiday of
    > Yom Kippur (when no food OR water is consumed for appx 24 hours) is healthy! They vaguely refer to
    > a beneficial "cleansing" and "giving your stomach a "rest".
    >
    > It seems to me that this type of fasting (especially with NO water) would be decidedly UNhealthy.
    >
    > What is the current medical view on this subject?

    That in healthy people, doing it for only one day is neither medically harmful nor medically
    beneficial. Those vague benefits you talk about are basically spiritual, not physiological (of
    course, if one routinely overeats to the point of feeling bloated and sluggish, there will be
    physiological reasons behind a feeling of increased well-being from not doing it for a day. These
    are similar to the physiological benefits that someone who routinely hits himself on the head with a
    hammer would experience if he took a break from it).

    Don't confuse "cleansing" used in a spiritual sense with pop-med notions of "detoxification."

    There's some evidence that fasting may have a short-term euphoriant effect, which apparently
    becomes quite a problem in people with eating disorders. But that's hardly a major problem with a
    one-day fast.
     
  3. Dan

    Dan Guest

    Thanks Eric!

    I just found this page: http://www.ivillage.com/food/experts/nutrition/qas/0,,242253_4387,00.html?a-
    rrivalSA=1&arrival_freqCap=1&pba=adid=6265659

    What do you think? I think she is talking about the consequences of a longer fast... but I'm
    not sure....

    Dan

    Eric Bohlman <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...
    > [email protected] (Dan) wrote in news:[email protected]:
    >
    > > For my whole life people have been telling me confidently that fasting on the Jewish holiday of
    > > Yom Kippur (when no food OR water is consumed for appx 24 hours) is healthy! They vaguely refer
    > > to a beneficial "cleansing" and "giving your stomach a "rest".
    > >
    > > It seems to me that this type of fasting (especially with NO water) would be decidedly
    > > UNhealthy.
    > >
    > > What is the current medical view on this subject?
    >
    > That in healthy people, doing it for only one day is neither medically harmful nor medically
    > beneficial. Those vague benefits you talk about are basically spiritual, not physiological (of
    > course, if one routinely overeats to the point of feeling bloated and sluggish, there will be
    > physiological reasons behind a feeling of increased well-being from not doing it for a day. These
    > are similar to the physiological benefits that someone who routinely hits himself on the head with
    > a hammer would experience if he took a break from it).
    >
    > Don't confuse "cleansing" used in a spiritual sense with pop-med notions of "detoxification."
    >
    > There's some evidence that fasting may have a short-term euphoriant effect, which apparently
    > becomes quite a problem in people with eating disorders. But that's hardly a major problem with a
    > one-day fast.
     
  4. Jeff

    Jeff Guest

    "Dan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Thanks Eric!
    >
    > I just found this page:
    >
    http://www.ivillage.com/food/experts/nutrition/qas/0,,242253_4387,00.html?arrivalSA=1&arrival_freqC-
    ap=1&pba=adid=6265659
    >
    > What do you think? I think she is talking about the consequences of a longer fast... but I'm not
    > sure....

    She doesn't know what she is talking about. But she is talking about fasting for several days, not
    one. People get gastrointestinal diseases (vomiting + Diarrhea) that last a few days, then start
    eating again. As long as they drink, there is no harm done.

    So I beleive that fasting for 24 hours won't hurt a bit.

    Jeff

    > Dan
    >
    >
    > Eric Bohlman <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...
    > > [email protected] (Dan) wrote in news:[email protected]:
    > >
    > > > For my whole life people have been telling me confidently that fasting on the Jewish holiday
    > > > of Yom Kippur (when no food OR water is consumed for appx 24 hours) is healthy! They vaguely
    > > > refer to a beneficial "cleansing" and "giving your stomach a "rest".
    > > >
    > > > It seems to me that this type of fasting (especially with NO water) would be decidedly
    > > > UNhealthy.
    > > >
    > > > What is the current medical view on this subject?
    > >
    > > That in healthy people, doing it for only one day is neither medically harmful nor medically
    > > beneficial. Those vague benefits you talk about
    are
    > > basically spiritual, not physiological (of course, if one routinely overeats to the point of
    > > feeling bloated and sluggish, there will be physiological reasons behind a feeling of increased
    > > well-being from not doing it for a day. These are similar to the physiological benefits
    that
    > > someone who routinely hits himself on the head with a hammer would experience if he took a break
    > > from it).
    > >
    > > Don't confuse "cleansing" used in a spiritual sense with pop-med notions
    of
    > > "detoxification."
    > >
    > > There's some evidence that fasting may have a short-term euphoriant
    effect,
    > > which apparently becomes quite a problem in people with eating
    disorders.
    > > But that's hardly a major problem with a one-day fast.
     
  5. Dan

    Dan Guest

    Jeff,

    Thanks for your response... but my friend's assertion was not only that fasting is not unhealthy...
    but actually has some health benefits! What do you think?

    Dan

    PS Why don't you think the woman knows what she's talking about?

    "Jeff" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > "Dan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > Thanks Eric!
    > >
    > > I just found this page:
    > >
    > http://www.ivillage.com/food/experts/nutrition/qas/0,,242253_4387,00.html?arrivalSA=1&arrival_fr-
    > eqCap=1&pba=adid=6265659
    > >
    > > What do you think? I think she is talking about the consequences of a longer fast... but I'm not
    > > sure....
    >
    > She doesn't know what she is talking about. But she is talking about fasting for several days, not
    > one. People get gastrointestinal diseases (vomiting + Diarrhea) that last a few days, then start
    > eating again. As long as they drink, there is no harm done.
    >
    > So I beleive that fasting for 24 hours won't hurt a bit.
    >
    > Jeff
    >
    > > Dan
    > >
    > >
    > > Eric Bohlman <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:<[email protected]>...
    > > > [email protected] (Dan) wrote in news:[email protected]:
    > > >
    > > > > For my whole life people have been telling me confidently that fasting on the Jewish holiday
    > > > > of Yom Kippur (when no food OR water is consumed for appx 24 hours) is healthy! They vaguely
    > > > > refer to a beneficial "cleansing" and "giving your stomach a "rest".
    > > > >
    > > > > It seems to me that this type of fasting (especially with NO water) would be decidedly
    > > > > UNhealthy.
    > > > >
    > > > > What is the current medical view on this subject?
    > > >
    > > > That in healthy people, doing it for only one day is neither medically harmful nor medically
    > > > beneficial. Those vague benefits you talk about
    > are
    > > > basically spiritual, not physiological (of course, if one routinely overeats to the point of
    > > > feeling bloated and sluggish, there will be physiological reasons behind a feeling of
    > > > increased well-being from not doing it for a day. These are similar to the physiological
    > > > benefits
    > that
    > > > someone who routinely hits himself on the head with a hammer would experience if he took a
    > > > break from it).
    > > >
    > > > Don't confuse "cleansing" used in a spiritual sense with pop-med notions
    > of
    > > > "detoxification."
    > > >
    > > > There's some evidence that fasting may have a short-term euphoriant
    > effect,
    > > > which apparently becomes quite a problem in people with eating
    > disorders.
    > > > But that's hardly a major problem with a one-day fast.
     
  6. Jeff

    Jeff Guest

    "Dan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Jeff,
    >
    > Thanks for your response... but my friend's assertion was not only that fasting is not
    > unhealthy... but actually has some health benefits! What do you think?

    I don't think fasting has any health benefits. It can disturb bowel function (nothing to poop out,
    but bowel function usually is not badly disturbed, so you miss a poop) and can cause blood sugar to
    go down (esp. for people with diabetes on meds). I don't think the risks are that great, though.

    I don't think fasting is good for you. There are better ways to lose weight. And it does not cleanse
    the body of anything. So I don't see any health benefits.

    Jeff

    > Dan
    >
    > PS Why don't you think the woman knows what she's talking about?
    >
    >
    > "Jeff" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...
    > > "Dan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > Thanks Eric!
    > > >
    > > > I just found this page:
    > > >
    > >
    http://www.ivillage.com/food/experts/nutrition/qas/0,,242253_4387,00.html?arrivalSA=1&arrival_freqC-
    ap=1&pba=adid=6265659
    > > >
    > > > What do you think? I think she is talking about the consequences of a longer fast... but I'm
    > > > not sure....
    > >
    > > She doesn't know what she is talking about. But she is talking about
    fasting
    > > for several days, not one. People get gastrointestinal diseases
    (vomiting +
    > > Diarrhea) that last a few days, then start eating again. As long as they drink, there is no
    > > harm done.
    > >
    > > So I beleive that fasting for 24 hours won't hurt a bit.
    > >
    > > Jeff
    > >
    > > > Dan
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Eric Bohlman <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:<[email protected]>...
    > > > > [email protected] (Dan) wrote in news:[email protected]:
    > > > >
    > > > > > For my whole life people have been telling me confidently that
    fasting
    > > > > > on the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur (when no food OR water is
    consumed
    > > > > > for appx 24 hours) is healthy! They vaguely refer to a beneficial "cleansing" and "giving
    > > > > > your stomach a "rest".
    > > > > >
    > > > > > It seems to me that this type of fasting (especially with NO
    water)
    > > > > > would be decidedly UNhealthy.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > What is the current medical view on this subject?
    > > > >
    > > > > That in healthy people, doing it for only one day is neither
    medically
    > > > > harmful nor medically beneficial. Those vague benefits you talk
    about
    > > are
    > > > > basically spiritual, not physiological (of course, if one routinely overeats to the point of
    > > > > feeling bloated and sluggish, there will be physiological reasons behind a feeling of
    > > > > increased well-being from
    not
    > > > > doing it for a day. These are similar to the physiological benefits
    > > that
    > > > > someone who routinely hits himself on the head with a hammer would experience if he took a
    > > > > break from it).
    > > > >
    > > > > Don't confuse "cleansing" used in a spiritual sense with pop-med
    notions
    > > of
    > > > > "detoxification."
    > > > >
    > > > > There's some evidence that fasting may have a short-term euphoriant
    > > effect,
    > > > > which apparently becomes quite a problem in people with eating
    > > disorders.
    > > > > But that's hardly a major problem with a one-day fast.
     
  7. Tim Tyler

    Tim Tyler Guest

    Jeff <[email protected]> wrote or quoted:

    > I don't think fasting has any health benefits. It can disturb bowel function (nothing to poop
    > out, but bowel function usually is not badly disturbed, so you miss a poop) and can cause blood
    > sugar to go down (esp. for people with diabetes on meds). I don't think the risks are that
    > great, though.
    >
    > I don't think fasting is good for you. There are better ways to lose weight. And it does not
    > cleanse the body of anything. So I don't see any health benefits.

    Fasting on alternate days is effective at prolonging life - since it results in calorie restriction.

    ``Effects of intermittent feeding upon growth and life span in rats.''

    The mean life span of the EOD group represented an 83% increase over that of the AL group.''

    - http://timtyler.org/pmid/?n=7117847

    There are many other studies along similar lines.

    The evidence is overwhelming - regular fasting reduces mortality, and prolongs life - probably by
    causing an overall reduction in calorie intake.
    --
    __________
    |im |yler http://timtyler.org/ [email protected] Remove lock to reply.
     
  8. Once upon a time, our fellow Tim Tyler rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our champion
    De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

    >Fasting on alternate days is effective at prolonging life - since it results in calorie
    >restriction.
    >
    >``Effects of intermittent feeding upon growth and life span in rats.''

    Humans are not rats! Just thought that you might want to know. :)

    "Malnourished and starving people are not good candidates for spontaneous healing. ... More common
    reasons for insufficient metabolic energy are inadequate diets, impaired digestions, and improper
    breathinga, all of which are within your control." -- Andrew Weil, MD in _Spontaneous Healing_

    I agree with Dr. Weil on this issue. CR activities depress the immune system of the human
    body. Skinny people are in a very bad position when it comes to surviving chemotherapy or any
    major illness.

    Educate yourself on the facts, Tyler. Search in medline under wasting disease, muscle wasting, loss
    of lean body mass or sarcopenia, anorexia, and cancer cachexia.

    The pictures of people practicing CR are nothing but pictures of walking skeletons!!!
    --
    John Gohde, Achieving good Nutrition is an Art, NOT a Science!

    Get started on improving your personal health and fitness, today.
    http://www.Tutorials.NaturalHealthPerspective.com/ Offering easy to understand lessons that will
    change your life.
     
  9. On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 14:17:57 GMT, John 'the Man' <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Once upon a time, our fellow Tim Tyler rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our champion
    >De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

    First of all, Mr. Gohde. You're overdue for a lesson in personal courtesy and respect. You're also
    overdue for a lesson in Usenet courtesy. Five crossposts are excessive, especially given your high
    ratio of invective and vain boasting to actual scientific content.

    >>Fasting on alternate days is effective at prolonging life - since it results in calorie
    >>restriction.
    >>
    >>``Effects of intermittent feeding upon growth and life span in rats.''

    Gohde:
    >Humans are not rats! Just thought that you might want to know. :)

    Your own behavior refutes your argument and fosters a bull market for the studies of ethologists.

    >"Malnourished and starving people are not good candidates for spontaneous healing. ... More common
    >reasons for insufficient metabolic energy are inadequate diets, impaired digestions, and improper
    >breathinga, all of which are within your control." -- Andrew Weil, MD in _Spontaneous Healing_

    >I agree with Dr. Weil on this issue. CR activities depress the immune system of the human body.

    CR practitioners are not malnourished.

    >Skinny people are in a very bad position when it comes to surviving chemotherapy or any
    >major illness.

    The medical evidence strongly indicates that skinny people are much less likely than fat people to
    contract cancer in the first place.

    >Educate yourself on the facts, Tyler.

    More rudeness and projection of your own deficits, Mr. Gohde.

    [Followup set to alt.duck.quack.quack.quack.]
    ---
    Richard Schulman Remove antispamming "-xyz" for email reply
     
  10. Once upon a time, our fellow Richard Schulman rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our
    champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

    >CR practitioners are not malnourished.

    Yeah, ... Sure, Right! They are just walking skeletons!!

    >>Skinny people are in a very bad position when it comes to surviving chemotherapy or any major
    >>illness.

    >The medical evidence strongly indicates that skinny people are much less likely than fat people to
    >contract cancer in the first place.

    You have to die of something, Schulman, so that means cancer. Just thought that you might want
    to know. :)

    >More rudeness and projection of your own deficits, Mr. Gohde.

    Humans are not rats! Just thought that you might want to know. :)

    "Malnourished and starving people are not good candidates for spontaneous healing. ... More common
    reasons for insufficient metabolic energy are inadequate diets, impaired digestions, and improper
    breathinga, all of which are within your control." -- Andrew Weil, MD in _Spontaneous Healing_

    I agree with Dr. Weil on this issue. CR activities depress the immune system of the human
    body. Skinny people are in a very bad position when it comes to surviving chemotherapy or any
    major illness.

    Educate yourself on the facts, Schulman. Search in medline under wasting disease, muscle wasting,
    loss of lean body mass or sarcopenia, anorexia, and cancer cachexia.

    The pictures of people practicing CR are nothing but pictures of walking skeletons!!!

    Hark! My private health newsgroup beckons!
    --
    John Gohde, Achieving good Nutrition is an Art, NOT a Science!

    The nutrition of eating a healthy diet is the foundation of the biomedical model of natural health.
    Weighing in at 17 webpages, Nutrition (http://www.Food.NaturalHealthPerspective.com/) is now with
    more documentation and sharper terminology than ever before.
     
  11. Once upon a time, our fellow Richard Schulman rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our
    champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

    >CR practitioners are not malnourished.

    The biggest bunch of crock being pushed with absolutely no evidence is that skinny is healthy.

    Walking skeletons are *not* healthy. Just thought that you might want to know. :)

    The ideal body weight is at the high end of your normal body weight and even slightly overweight is
    good, too. Searching in medline under wasting disease, muscle wasting, loss of lean body mass or
    sarcopenia, anorexia, and cancer cachexia provides the proof.

    Of course, it is best, if you are muscular rather than fat.
    --
    John Gohde, Achieving good Nutrition is an Art, NOT a Science!

    Get started on improving your personal health and fitness, today.
    http://www.Tutorials.NaturalHealthPerspective.com/ Offering easy to understand lessons that will
    change your life.
     
  12. On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 18:08:10 GMT, John 'the Man' <[email protected]> wrote:

    >The biggest bunch of crock being pushed with absolutely no evidence is that skinny is healthy.

    Your idea of skinny seems to be someone in the advanced sector with anorexia, or a starving peasant
    in a famine-stricken sub-Saharan country. Of course, these individuals aren't healthy! They're
    malnourished. It's easier to be malnourished when one is thin than otherwise, simply because food
    intake is lower. But skinny is healthy when one has a balanced diet emphasizing energy-dense foods.

    >The ideal body weight is at the high end of your normal body weight and even slightly overweight is
    >good, too.

    You're claiming that body mass index (BMI) over 25 ("slightly overweight") is good. The evidence
    doesn't support this claim. For males above a BMI of 24, mortality rises, according to the appended
    Norwegian study. (There's another issue raised in this study that needs to be discussed, but I'll
    save it for a subsequent post)"

    Epidemiology. 2003 May;14(3):293-9.

    Height and body mass index in relation to total mortality.

    Engeland A, Bjorge T, Selmer RM, Tverdal A.

    Division of Epidemiology, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Nydalen, Oslo, Norway.
    [email protected]

    BACKGROUND: The relation between body mass index (BMI) and mortality is not clear in the
    literature. An inverse relation between height and mortality has been suggested. We explore
    these relations in a very large cohort in Norway. METHODS: We studied two million men and women,
    age 20-74 years, who were measured during 1963-2000. These persons were followed for an average
    of 22.1 years. We used Cox proportional hazard models in the analyses. Also, the optimal BMI
    (the BMI at the time of measurement that was subsequently related to the lowest mortality) was
    estimated. RESULTS: Over the study period, 723,000 deaths were registered. The relative risk of
    death by BMI showed a J- or U-shaped curve, with the lowest rates of death at BMI between 22.5
    and 25.0. In men, the optimal BMI increased from 21.6 when measured at age 20-29 to 24.0 when
    measured at age 70-74. In women, the optimal BMI was consistently higher, increasing from 22.2
    to 25.7. Mortality decreased with increased height in men; in women, mortality decreased with
    height only up to heights of about 160-164 cm and then increased among the tallest women.
    CONCLUSIONS: The relation between BMI and mortality was J- or U-shaped, with the "optimal" BMI

    men and in women up to a height of 165 cm.

    PMID: 12859029 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
    ---
    Richard Schulman Remove antispamming "-xyz" for email reply
     
  13. Rk

    Rk Guest

    John 'the Man' <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > Once upon a time, our fellow Richard Schulman rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our
    > champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...
    >
    > >CR practitioners are not malnourished.
    >
    > The biggest bunch of crock being pushed with absolutely no evidence is that skinny is healthy.
    >
    > Walking skeletons are *not* healthy. Just thought that you might want to know. :)
    >
    > The ideal body weight is at the high end of your normal body weight and even slightly overweight
    > is good, too. Searching in medline under wasting disease, muscle wasting, loss of lean body mass
    > or sarcopenia, anorexia, and cancer cachexia provides the proof.
    >
    > Of course, it is best, if you are muscular rather than fat.

    Depends on whether you can tell the diference between mean life span and maximum life span.
     
  14. Once upon a time, our fellow RK rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our champion
    De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nursing retorts, thusly ...

    >> Of course, it is best, if you are muscular rather than fat.

    >Depends on whether you can tell the diference between mean life span and maximum life span.

    Did you hear the one about RK?

    He thinks that he is going to live past the age of 120!

    Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

    He thinks that we should take his nutty CR claims seriously, because they all are going to live past
    the age of 120. Frankly, I think that qualifies him for the funny farm. :(

    Ha, ... Hah, Ha! Maybe somebody should let RK in on the joke?

    "... you have my sympathies" Science Officer Ash to Ripley, in the movie ALIEN.
     
  15. Once upon a time, our fellow Richard Schulman rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our
    champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

    >You're claiming that body mass index (BMI) over 25 ("slightly overweight") is good. The evidence
    >doesn't support this claim. For males above a BMI of 24, mortality rises, according to the appended
    >Norwegian study.

    You are assuming that everyone is fat, but I certainly am not.

    Skinny people don't have any muscle mass. And, no research study has ever looked at *only* people
    with excellent muscle mass. And, no research on rats has ever gotten them to lift weights and engage
    in body building.

    Just thought that you might want to know. :)
    --
    John Gohde, Achieving good Nutrition is an Art, NOT a Science!

    Get started on improving your personal health and fitness, today.
    http://www.Tutorials.NaturalHealthPerspective.com/ Offering easy to understand lessons that will
    change your life.
     
  16. Rk

    Rk Guest

    John 'the Man' <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > Once upon a time, our fellow Richard Schulman rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our
    > champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...
    >
    > >You're claiming that body mass index (BMI) over 25 ("slightly overweight") is good. The evidence
    > >doesn't support this claim. For males above a BMI of 24, mortality rises, according to the
    > >appended Norwegian study.
    >
    > You are assuming that everyone is fat, but I certainly am not.
    >
    > Skinny people don't have any muscle mass. And, no research study has ever looked at *only* people
    > with excellent muscle mass. And, no research on rats has ever gotten them to lift weights and
    > engage in body building.
    >
    > Just thought that you might want to know. :)

    You don't know what you're talking about. In fact, you're barking-mad.
     
  17. On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 22:49:22 GMT, John 'the Man' <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Once upon a time, our fellow Richard Schulman rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our
    >champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

    First of all, someone who starts off all his posts with an automated adolescent formula like
    the above is clearly not interested in reasonable discussion or being taken for anything other
    than a clown.

    R.S.:
    >>You're claiming that body mass index (BMI) over 25 ("slightly overweight") is good. The evidence
    >>doesn't support this claim. For males above a BMI of 24, mortality rises, according to the
    >>appended Norwegian study.

    John, 'the Man':
    >You are assuming that everyone is fat, but I certainly am not.

    I made no such assumption. You don't seem to read, much less assimilate, what other people are
    saying in attempting to communicate with you. What you did say, however, is that "The ideal body
    weight is at the high end of your normal body weight and even slightly overweight is good, too."

    >Skinny people don't have any muscle mass.

    You need to go to more ballets and watch more marathons. Suggestion: the NY Marathon is coming
    up. Have a look at all these "walking skeletons" (in your terminology) photographed at a
    recent marathon:

    http://www.nycmarathon.org/news/index.html

    >And, no research study has ever looked at *only* people with excellent muscle mass.

    Well, what are you waiting for? Maybe Governor-elect Schwarzenegger will give you a research grant.
    But scientific research is one thing, and immature claims without evidence is another. I'm
    especially disgusted by your failure to have read and responded to the refereed Norwegian study I
    provided in my last post. When evidence is presented that casts doubt on one's claim that "slightly
    overweight is good," a serious person -- a grownup -- will either accept the refuting evidence or
    present a reasonable critique of it. You did neither. You just ignored the evidence, created a straw
    man, and continued your clowning.

    >And, no research on rats has ever gotten them to lift weights and engage in body building.

    More clowning.

    >Just thought that you might want to know. :)

    And yet more immature clowning. Grow up, John, misnamed 'the Man.'
    ---
    Richard Schulman Remove antispamming "-xyz" for email reply
     
  18. Alan Turley

    Alan Turley Guest

    On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:03:30 GMT, Richard Schulman wrote:

    >First of all, someone who starts off all his posts with an automated adolescent formula like
    >the above is clearly not interested in reasonable discussion or being taken for anything other
    >than a clown.

    If you intend to engage John in a considered debate of his assertions, make sure that you have extra
    time. You will waste a lot of it or as much as you choose to invest in him.

    If you have been only recently subjected to John's blather, you might yet have the impression that
    some expression of interest on your part will persuade him to engage in meaningful dialogue. You
    are mistaken.

    John repeatedly demonstrates himself to be either hopelessly addled or willfully ignorant of the
    topics of which he speaks, and his only real expressions of quasi-original thought are
    pre-adolescent verbal abuses aimed at anyone redirecting him. Sadly, even these are a poor excuse
    for reasoned responses.

    Engage him, and he will respond with asinine comments and affected laughter. Question him, and he
    may either ignore you, respond with non sequitors and baseless rebuttal, or accuse you of
    unreasonable bias. Tell him he is wrong, and he will throw intellectual feces at the forum until you
    reach the only effective solution. Ignore him.

    Unfortunately, even scrupulous disregard of John raises issues, since absence of rebuke frees him
    for what he really wants. He wants to be seen as a knowledgeable guide in your forum, which he will
    use to push his health care views as though educated on the topic. Ignoring him licenses him to
    talk, though he is a clear example of who should not.

    @~
     
  19. Once upon a time, our fellow RK rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our champion
    De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nursing retorts, thusly ...

    >You don't know what you're talking about. In fact, you're barking-mad.

    Ah! The Academic mind at work. :()

    Yeah, ... Sure, Right! Science Geeks always know best. :(

    Ha, ... Hah, Ha!
     
  20. Once upon a time, our fellow Richard Schulman rambled on about "Re: Fasting on Yom Kippur." Our
    champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nursing retorts, thusly ...

    >>And, no research on rats has ever gotten them to lift weights and engage in body building.

    >More clowning.

    I will repeat it again for the benefit of the intellectually challenge science geeks on these ngs.

    Rats don't lift weights and engage in body building.

    Just thought that you might want to know. :)
     
Loading...