The FastDay Forum

Wow, this is really difficult. Option 1 makes sense - it keeps the forum focused on intermittent fasting - but I wonder how it will be moderated. Will people who veer into forbidden areas be advised to consult a doctor if they are considering fasts longer than 36 hours and their post/thread deleted? Option 4a makes sense, too, assuming the notice advises consultation with a medical professional. And finally, 6 makes sense, not just because I want to pass the buck, but more a "your house, your rules". I want Moogie and the moderators to feel comfortable legally and morally about whatever decision is made, and also to feel comfortable about the extra work it might bring.

Like others have expressed, I am very grateful for Moogie and the moderators handling this issue responsibly. In general this forum feels very sane and responsible to me. I didn't notice the 10 day fast thread (!), but I have seen people coming here for advice that really they should be going to a doctor for. And inevitably, that is what they have been told by most people who responded to the post.

For those vulnerable to anorexia, then some of these messages would encourage them. I particularly noted that some of those actually trying the more extreme methods were already in the healthy BMI range, and indeed some of them were at the bottom of the healthy range. I'm concerned that they may not realise it, but may themselves be heading for anorexia. The language used in some cases was certainly that of an addictive person. There was a lack of balance in terms of positive versus negative effects. We must remember that these forums can be read without being a member, so apart from the known membership, there is a great deal of passing traffic, who may find one of the dangerous threads via a Google search and never read around the other more balanced threads.

Thank you, No_More_Mrs_Michelin. You've summed up what has been worrying me as well. I voted for 1 but would settle for 6.

I have mostly avoided threads about longer fasts tending to feel that they are a different WOE than 5:2, and may sometimes be bordering on the extreme (although I'm sure it works for some people). Some very interesting posts, most of which generally reflect my feelings.
Although I agree most with option 1, I voted for 6 because I trust Moogie & team to make the right decision. Even by bringing up the question this shows an awareness and professionalism that makes this such a good website. Thank you for addressing tricky issues Moogie.

Looks like we have a consensus ? or at least a clear majority.

[Moogie]

So far, yes - but there are a good thousand or so active members here so I'll be leaving the poll to run its course (it was set to be open for a week) to give as many folks as possible the chance to have their say

[wildmissus]

I'm glad this came up. I chose 1 but am equally happy for the forum staff to decide. As many of you know I am happy with 36 hour no food fasts but that is as far as it goes. I did start reading the extended fast thread but made my own decision to stay away from it as I didn't agree with it.

I do hope we get some more voters. With the way it's going so far, there does appear to be a consensus, but perhaps those who might feel differently are now too worried to go against opinion so far to vote. Remember you can vote without commenting, so we won't know which way you've voted.

I went for 4a, partly because I don't really like censorship but also because I wondered if it wouldn't be better for those thinking of doing extended fasts to have the benefit of the many sensible members of this forum to point out the negatives, than just be shut down on here and go somewhere else where they may not be as thoughtful. Having said that, I didn't see the 10-day fast thread and from what some of you have said here it may have coloured my opinion.

Thanks to Moogie and the other mods for allowing us to discuss the issue.

Noddy

I voted for 1 because it seems to most reflect why this forum was set up. I haven't read the 10 day fast thread which sounds very worrying but I have seen other posts about adapting 5:2ing to more extreme forms. I think it is most important that common sense is reflected in the way 5:2 or 4:3 is approached & supporting more extreme methods is detrimental to health. I have also noticed an increasing number of new members who already seem to be close to their normal BMI who are following this WOE & I hope this is not already encouraging people to go below their recommended BMI instead of using this to maintain their weight.
Thank you also to Moogie & the other moderators for setting this concern out so clearly & being so responsible. It is a difficult topic but I think it would be awful if 5:2ing became regarded as a unhealthy short cut way of eating rather than a new way of managing our longer term weight & health.

I went for 4a, partly because I don't really like censorship but also because I wondered if it wouldn't be better for those thinking of doing extended fasts to have the benefit of the many sensible members of this forum to point out the negatives, than just be shut down on here and go somewhere else where they may not be as thoughtful.

Noddy

Thanks Noddy, I voted 1 but share your concern about driving a problem underground. I wonder if some discussion about the risks on a responsible site like this would dissuade any who are thinking of longer fasts, and whose thinking could be turned around before they get involved in some of the more extreme sites.

By the way, great shoe!

I voted number 6, I don't have a strong opinion either way but personally I am interested in the topics in option 1.

Hmm...that was interesting reading. I hadn't read the 10 day fast thread either as I expect the title just didn't interest me. However, I have seen discussions of longer than 36hr fasts and found them interesting to read but not something I would ever like to attempt! I do the 36hr liquid fast though and prefer it to 500 cal 5:2. I also dislike the idea of censorship, but I can see the need for being responsible. I have seen a few posts about beginning 5:2 with liquid fasts and have always advised against it, but on reflection if when I'd first seen the site it had been there I may too have seen it as a short cut to increased weight loss and decided to start out with it. I really don't think it's the best advert for 5:2 as many people (including me) struggled with the 500 calorie 5:2 at the beginning.
Not sure I've said anything useful there except somehow discussed the downside of 36hr liquid fasting thread which I post on regularly! Doh! I guess I just can see how it may mislead people from the heart of this WOE as beginners to 5:2. Yet would hate that to be excluded as it's how I fast! Ooo...the contradictions!
I voted 6, clearly I am not the best person to make such decisions, the moderators are far more sensible!

I would also like to thank the mods for this poll. The longer fast threads were definitely turning me off to this forum.

As someone who struggled with eating disorders in my teens and twenties it was very disturbing to watch people exulting and applauding extreme control over food intake.

The whole point to this WOL is to break bad food habits without creating new ones!

Rather late to the debate and also didn't stumble over the 10 day fast thread. All sounds horrific and not what is wanted surely.
I can see much thought and discussion has subsequently occurred and can only add my thanks to Moogie and her team for being the supremely sane and professional people that they are.
Society is made up of the full spectrum and, like a spectrum of light, we can distil and focus the forum users to a steady healthy path of IF, not beyond, please.

[Moogie]

Many thanks to everyone who took the time to vote and/or voice their opinions on the matter - your opinions and much appreciated and will not be ignored! The forum staff and I will be discussing the matter further in the coming days, please bear with us as of course being in different timezones and having real life matters to attend to as well it may take us a while to work things out - but we'll let you know what's decided and how we plan on proceeding.