Talk:Daniel Fast

[Untitled]

The first and third discussions are added from user page talk because they related to this topic:

Religious factors

I just removed a paragraph talking about people being motivated by religion to keep a diet. First, most of the paragraph was a copy of the information that's already in Daniel Fast and my first thought was to remove most of it per WP:UNDUE and leave a brief mention of different religious diets and fasts. However, there is no source that says that the Daniel fast is kept by people who feel motivated to do so because it is described in the Bible; secondly, there are no sources that indicate that Sawm which was the other diet mentioned is kept for health reasons, or indeed that there is a positive health effect of it. So I simply do not think that these two different food restrictions belong in this particular article. --bonadea contributions talk 06:29, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm Sorry, I was trying to fast to meet the wiki request for Daniel Fast links from other articles (and mostly copied the existing article).

Sawm was just another example of a common religious fast or diet. I'm just saying religious beliefs factor into diet in the intro.

There are two recent newspaper articles speaking of the increased popularity of the Daniel Fast. Here's one that's on the Web [[1]] The fast is part of the regular education program at two colleges; here's one account [[2]]. I'll use that second research article as a reference, if OK.

The point isn't that people do the Daniel Fast for health reasons. They do it for religious reasons. But, the scripture says the fast promoted relative (to those eating "royal food") health. We know from the three reviews at the start of Healthy Diet that diets higher in whole plant foods are more healthy. The DF is all plants.

The DF is probably a very healthy diet. Researchers in one of those formal studies speculate the reasons why it might be healthy. I can't write about the strong conclusions of those studies, because they are primary (not reviews). But, I should be able to relate the researchers speculation. The speculation is that the absence of saturated fats, lack of processed (no white flour, sugar ect) foods, the abundance of nutrient and fiber rich plant foods, the lack of preservatives and additives, and reduced intake of methionine (and leucine, from another researchers [[3]] comments), would make it a healthy diet.

Is it against Wiki rules to say Bible scripture says it's healthy, or the King thought it was healthy and let Daniel continue eating (what he thought would be bad for health turned out good)? Note the scripture contains a test of two diets, basically "royal" and vegan/whole plant food. I can recount the scripture, then write about the researchers speculations. I hope that answers your concerns, and I will write to meet them. Please provide additional feedback. Thanks for your efforts.32cllou (talk)

First, the section you added was about one motivation, not a factor. Second, it's too specific for a general article. If you're going to add this, you need to discuss religious motivations in general to eat a healthy diet (with proper sourcing). The Daniel Fast, if mentioned at all, should only be mentioned in passing. The same goes for Dieting, only there the text should discuss religious motivations to diet. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:03, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

I understand it's too specific for healthy diet, sorry. I'll just try to find a way to add a short sentence with the link. I can significantly shorten it in diet too.

I'll find another reference saying basically taking care of your body is something Scripture says you should do? You don't like this reference (which says that many many times)?

Are you saying scripture shouldn't be quoted?32cllou (talk) 18:26, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Scripture can be quoted but a secondary source is needed as a reference for the interpretation (see WP:PRIMARY). --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:49, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I hope the Ellen G. White book, and those two research reports (the two Bloomer et al) provides the secondary source interpretation.32cllou (talk) 19:14, 3 May 2014 (UTC)32cllou (talk) 21:54, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

References

Please elaborate

What fixes are needed in Daniel Fast? I'll remove the Bloomer et al sentence speaking of fiber ect. That's a vague medical claim being made by other than the analysis of Biblical passages. Other than that, there's no "medical" information for a review. I'll buy two recently published books on the Daniel Fast. From a synopsis, they discuss health benefits. Note that the existing book reference (White) alone supports much of the current text in the article.32cllou (talk) 15:05, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

There are lots of unsourced sentences in this article, but refs bundled together at the end of paragraphs. This lack of WP:INTEGRITY makes it difficult to verify the information, and needs to be sorted out. Alexbrn ^{talk|contribs|COI} 15:58, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Please elaborate

What fixes are needed in Daniel Fast? I'll remove the Bloomer et al sentence speaking of fiber ect. That's a vague medical claim being made by other than the analysis of Biblical passages. Other than that, there's no medical information for a review. I'll buy two recently published books on the Daniel Fast. Note that the existing book reference (White) alone supports much of the current text in the article.32cllou (talk) 15:02, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

PS I'm going to leave out any health claims not supported by the Biblical interpretation references.32cllou (talk) 15:08, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

I've tagged the sources. Of the four, two are primary medical sources (do not use these for medical claims); one is self-published, and the other is a student essay (?). Not, in other words, WP:RS. Unless there's much stronger sourcing, I have serious doubts over whether this topic is notable enough to sustain an article. Alexbrn ^{talk|contribs|COI} 15:16, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

But I didn't use them for medical claims, rather interpreting the Bible.32cllou (talk) 15:26, 7 May 2014 (UTC) The White reference is a re-publication of the original works, now on ePub at the request of her Estate. Someone removed ePub, and I forgot to put it back in.32cllou (talk) 15:29, 7 May 2014 (UTC) I removed the primary research article and text saying the diet could be healthy because it had fiber ect.32cllou (talk) 15:33, 7 May 2014 (UTC) And I moved the last paragraph into the first, leaving the text almost exclusively about the passages.32cllou (talk) 15:35, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Isn't an accepted and University (as "research") published works of a college senior is not usable in this article? It's not required for the text, but supports it very well in several places.32cllou (talk) 15:43, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

What is it? Who is the publisher? There seems to be a few journal articles out there, so no need for student work I'd have thought. Alexbrn ^{talk|contribs|COI} 15:47, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Someone else wanted more references, so I added the undergraduate senior project paper.[[4]]. Also see [[5]]. I could also pull from those two new books on the subject, and I'll buy and read them. Nothing isn't supported by the White or Bloomer references. I tried to remove it from Categories, but couldn't figure out how, thanks.32cllou (talk) 16:01, 7 May 2014 (UTC) Can I please remove the main tag? What about the tag on that senior paper? Or, should I remove that reference?32cllou (talk) 16:03, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

It's probably best not to use it; looking around, this diet seems to get a fair few mentions in the literature, so I withdraw my grumble about notability. Thanks for creating an article! Alexbrn ^{talk|contribs|COI} 16:05, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for helping me clean it up.

Isn't it OK if there's your tag saying potentially unreliable? It is well written and referenced, published, local (University practicing the Fast periodically), and adds wonderful religious dimensions to the fast. It does a better job than White speaking of the Spirit, mind, and body aspects of the fast. I also think it's good to give credit to the author for their contribution to the Daniel Fast article. I'll remove it if you insist.32cllou (talk) 16:21, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

I'd love to read the "mentions in the literature" you found!!32cllou (talk) 16:23, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Nothing particularly usable (more primary studies mainly) - but mentions in e.g. this NYT article. Alexbrn ^{talk|contribs|COI} 16:44, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Now I'm not so sure I need to buy those two books. Interesting article, Thanks again.32cllou (talk) 17:01, 7 May 2014 (UTC)32cllou (talk) 21:54, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

The REAL Daniel Fast

The real biblical daniel fast has nothing to do with this three week fad diet. I know because I just finished the full three year Daniel Fast as listed in Daniel Chapter One. Anyone that understands a kosher kitchen already knows Jews separate food into three categories: Death, Pareve and Life. Jews do not eat an item from DEATH in the same meal as LIFE. The only thing Daniel requested was no meat to eat which is DEATH or otherwise anything slaughtered. Years later when Daniel did a shorter version but also omitting fine bread and not anointing himself he still ate dairy which is LIFE and fish/eggs which is PAREVE. It will be nice once even people who are of a church actually start doing what is in the bible. Comments from Cindy L. Schmegelsky, author of Be A Ram No Mercy FINAL EDITION. 207.112.55.149 (talk) 16:43, 26 November 2022 (UTC)