Is it more better to fast a whole day or eat very little that day?

We can think about this logically...

If you start feeding your body, you're sending the message "I've got more food coming your way in the next day" (Digestion takes 48 hours at least)...So your body starts devoting more energy to digestion, and at the same time is working on maintaining muscle mass.

And then you keep feeding your body, so it keeps dividing it's energy between digestion and mass sustenance, instead of just releasing hormones that help maintain mass (such as HGH) when the digestive system is at rest.

You necessarily are putting more stress on the body by continually feeding it.

But if you fast for 48 hours, your body drains out glycogen, and then begins to run on ketones.

At that point, it's not about the digestive system anymore. The body has switched is source of energy from elsewhere...and it begins to release more hormones to help with homeostasis.

It's able to devote all its energy to maintaining weight and reserving nutrients. Henceforth...I believe that fasting without caloric intake is the better route, and some science points to this.

/r/nutrition Thread