Breatharianism test

[RandomElement]

I get why JREF doesn't want to put claimants at risk, but would not a simple before and after weight measurement suffice? By after, it could be waiting a few days then comparing to expected weight loss.

Minimal danger for two days with no food.

 

[jsfisher]

I get why JREF doesn't want to put claimants at risk, but would not a simple before and after weight measurement suffice? By after, it could be waiting a few days then comparing to expected weight loss.

Minimal danger for two days with no food.

What would be paranormal about two days without food?

 

[RandomElement]

It is not the two days without food, but the two days without losing an ounce.

If energy is absorbed from the air and the sun as claimed, then a claimant would maintain weight.

 

[GnaGnaMan]

I get why JREF doesn't want to put claimants at risk, but would not a simple before and after weight measurement suffice? By after, it could be waiting a few days then comparing to expected weight loss.

Minimal danger for two days with no food.

They could fill up with water...

Anyways, people have died by breatharianism. Sure, in a test they'd be monitored but normally you want people to try their stunts at home.
You definitely don't want the challenge to encourage people to try something life-threatening.

 

[Ranb]

Total intake and output would need to be measured. I think I can gain weight after a two day fast simpy by drinking enough water.

 

[wardenclyffe]

I'd be willing to bet that if the claim was that no weight would be lost during a two day fast and that water intake would be carefully monitored and weighed, the JREF might entertain that claim.

Ward

P.S. The JREF might require a random start time so the claimant would not be able to completely dehydrate themselves ahead of time. And they'd have to come up with a formula for how much water is allowed without adding weight over the course of two days.

 

[Tiktaalik]

I don't think two days would do it. I've been sick and not eaten anything and not had much to drink, either, and not lost any weight after a few days, at least not enough to register as a pound on a normal scale. I think the test would have to go on longer, and that would be dangerous.

 

[rjh01]

Of course first you would need to find a person who would be willing to apply. Then they would have to specify what they could do. Like do they need to drink water?

 

[Foolmewunz]

I somehow don't think that a one or two day fast and loss of weight vs. no loss of weight is really a "Paranormal Challenge". Breatharianism is, but the JREF has specified why they will not test such claims. Trying to shorten it does not actually prove anything.

 

[Brown]

Weight loss in individuals is variable in the short term and is easily manipulated. And taking weight isn't very precise. A scale can't tell water from fat from muscle from poop.

And let me repeat why testing these claims is a waste of time:

We've been around this issue before. Does Mr. Randi have a reasonable basis for giving such "claims" short shrift? You bet he does.

First, the claim is inherently hazardous. It is well-known that human beings can go without food for extended periods of time, and there is nothing supernatural, paranormal or occult about that. Extended periods of starvation, however, are known to be harmful to health, and it is unreasonable to expect a claim to be tested that puts the claimant's health at such risk. Mr. Randi does not test individuals who claim, for example, to be impervious to bullets, and with good reason: such a test would be inherently hazardous to the claimant, regardless of the claimant's sincerity and willingness to be tested.

Second, the claim in question requires an extensive amount of time and is expensive to control. The individual in question must be monitored continually for weeks, if not months.

Which is related to the third point, namely, such claims are rife with fraud. Past tests of such claims have shown a propensity on the part of claimants to sneak food when they thought they were not being observed. These were not a mere mistaken beliefs or honest self-delusions on the part of the claimants; rather, they were deliberate attempts to cheat.

In the absence of a compelling reason, there is no reason to undertake the time and expense needed to test such a claim.

 

[desertgal]

First, the claim is inherently hazardous.

That's all the reason the JREF needs.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Can anyone recall the news show that did the terrific debunking of this? Female "guru" - and she gave up after only a couple of days....?

I know it's not popular enough, e.g. homeopathy, but I would like that Randi and the JREF give more attention to it because it's so dangerous. When I see that smarmy Kirby de Lamerolle beatifically describing the benefits and spouting his crap about calories coming from protons of light, I want to reach through my computer screen and strangle him.

 

[rjh01]

Can anyone recall the news show that did the terrific debunking of this? Female "guru" - and she gave up after only a couple of days....?

I know it's not popular enough, e.g. homeopathy, but I would like that Randi and the JREF give more attention to it because it's so dangerous. When I see that smarmy Kirby de Lamerolle beatifically describing the benefits and spouting his crap about calories coming from protons of light, I want to reach through my computer screen and strangle him.

I think this is what you are after.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cnCuzUd4eC0

 

[Foolmewunz]

I think this is what you are after.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cnCuzUd4eC0

Thanks, that's the one. The comments are frightening. Even in the face of this hard body slam to their beliefs, the True Believers^TM are still out in force. "Well, at least she had the courage to try to prove her beliefs. More than I can say for the interviewer." Huh? She had the courage to try to prove.... and failed... in spades.

This should be required viewing for woos.

 

[rjh01]

What is worse she has a webpage here http://www.jasmuheen.com/living-on-light/breatharians/ that was written AFTER the youtube was published.

 

[tuxcat]

The claimant would kill themselves - they would have to go for a very long time without food until they starve - or rather the timescale required to rule out normal fasting would result in death through starvation. There is no known mechanism that allows for humans to extract protein, amino acids, water, carbohydrates and fat from the air so it's totally pointless to test it anyway seeing as it's going to result in dead claimants who starve to death.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

I get why JREF doesn't want to put claimants at risk, but would not a simple before and after weight measurement suffice? By after, it could be waiting a few days then comparing to expected weight loss.

Minimal danger for two days with no food.

But you would be holding the claimant to a claim they didn't make. Breatherians don't claim they won't lose weight after not eating for a couple of days.

Also, there is the possibility that they won't lose weight after a short enough period guaranteed not to be dangerous. Breatherians normally allow drinking water--and some more than that (fruit juices for example)! So it wouldn't be a difficult matter to down enough water to make up for the weight of the calorie deficit of such a short time.

 

[rjh01]

But you would be holding the claimant to a claim they didn't make. Breatherians don't claim they won't lose weight after not eating for a couple of days.

Also, there is the possibility that they won't lose weight after a short enough period guaranteed not to be dangerous. Breatherians normally allow drinking water--and some more than that (fruit juices for example)! So it wouldn't be a difficult matter to down enough water to make up for the weight of the calorie deficit of such a short time.

I agree. If the person is dehydrated at the start and drinks heaps then they may even gain a little weight. See proof of the paranormal.

They would also have to be kept in isolation as their supporters may smuggle in food. Very expensive.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Weight loss in individuals is variable in the short term and is easily manipulated. And taking weight isn't very precise. A scale can't tell water from fat from muscle from poop.

And let me repeat why testing these claims is a waste of time:

We've been around this issue before. Does Mr. Randi have a reasonable basis for giving such "claims" short shrift? You bet he does.

First, the claim is inherently hazardous. It is well-known that human beings can go without food for extended periods of time, and there is nothing supernatural, paranormal or occult about that. Extended periods of starvation, however, are known to be harmful to health, and it is unreasonable to expect a claim to be tested that puts the claimant's health at such risk. Mr. Randi does not test individuals who claim, for example, to be impervious to bullets, and with good reason: such a test would be inherently hazardous to the claimant, regardless of the claimant's sincerity and willingness to be tested.

Second, the claim in question requires an extensive amount of time and is expensive to control. The individual in question must be monitored continually for weeks, if not months.

Which is related to the third point, namely, such claims are rife with fraud. Past tests of such claims have shown a propensity on the part of claimants to sneak food when they thought they were not being observed. These were not a mere mistaken beliefs or honest self-delusions on the part of the claimants; rather, they were deliberate attempts to cheat.
In the absence of a compelling reason, there is no reason to undertake the time and expense needed to test such a claim.

Good points all, but I would respond to the highlighted bit by pointing out that the distinction between self-delusion and deliberate fraud isn't always so clear. At least, the presence of one is not proof of the absence of the other. The person could truly believe they can survive without food, but for one excuse or another something is interfering with that ability this time and so cheating is justified. (Remember, it's essentially how plenty of Uri Geller believers continue to believe even when confronted with overwhelming evidence of trickery. He used trickery this time only because blah blah blah.)

But again, the most obvious reason to reject the OP's suggestion (an attempt to avoid the self-inflicted danger of a typical attempt to prove breatherian claims) is that not losing weight after fasting a day or two isn't the claim that's being made anyway.

 

[twob]

What about Therese Neumann? She made it a little longer than 2 days without food and water - she lasted until her death, 40 years without food or drink. She just ate one little wafer a day (only if it was blessed). The Nazis didn't get her but they tried.

A medical doctor went to disprove this phony who claimed she ate nothing.

".... In July 1927 a medical doctor and four Franciscan nurses kept a watch on her 24 hours a day for a two-week period. They confirmed that she had consumed nothing except for one consecrated sacred Host a day, and had suffered no ill effects, loss of weight, or dehydration. Montague Summers in the "Physical Phenomenon of Mysticism" speaks of her supernatural ability to survive long periods without food or water. ..1940...Therese refused German ration cards saying she had no need of food or drink."

Silly little peasant women. When they were out sight seeing the country side she would get a good laugh when others needed to stop to get something to eat and drink. The doctor witnessed this Saint himself what was he to do?

And for someone who kicked the food habit, one day she would lose several pounds of blood (wounds of Christ) and by the next she regained her body weight. Over a million people observed her in this bleeding spectacle on most Fridays (not so much during the war years but before and after).