Alan,
> I missed your reference
> that fasting for two weeks would be detrimental to anyone
> (other than of course the obvious such as the starving or those
> afflicted with metabolic diseases such as diabetes etc.).

AH! We have changed our tune, I see!

It seems that NOW fasting for two weeks is great for anyone  --  well,
almost anyone, er ... um ... well that is, of course, except for the
starving (which evidently starving is now no longer the same thing as
fasting), and those afflicted with diseases such as diabetes (Of course! Of
course! Silly me! Who would have assumed that "everyone" would include
diabetics? That was _obviously_ not part of your definition of "everyone.")

Hmmmm. Well, let's see. You claim that fasting is beneficial for everyone.
Or you'll eat your hat ... well, that is, almost everyone ....

Does this claim include the extremely obese? Or those on heavy (or even
moderate) medications? Or those with cancer? How about anorexics? Stroke
victims? AIDS patients? How about people with glaucoma? Meningitis?
Iron-deficiency anemia? MCAD deficiency? Hepatitis? Cirrhosis of the liver?
How about a person on dialysis, or even one not on dialysis but with
moderate or severe kidney problems? How about pregnant women? Infants? How
about my bodybuilder friends who may have been on steroids for several
years? How about a very frail elderly woman with advanced osteoperosis? How
about a person recovering from surgery? How about someone on Coumadin or
other heart rate regulators?

Or, did you mean that all those above were not included in your definition
of "everybody" either?

You might want to study up a bit before you make your wild claims, or offer
health dangerous advice. Your claims about fasting are ill-informed.

Love Liza

--
[log in to unmask] (Liza May)