Talk:Inedia

Recently published critical evaluation of cases of claimed inedia / breatharianism / bigu

Dear article editors/authors,

I would like to bring to your attention my recently published scientific review article on cases of claimed inedia / breatharianism / bigu: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.explore.2020.05.015 It is the first critical, in-depth review of all cases where claimants where monitored around the clock. Note that, in addition to the main article, there are six supplements with further information.

I required a high methodological standard for such extraordinary claims to be considered verified. None of the studies were able to meet that standard. Yet, there are curious cases and results that justify further research.

You may want to consider citing the article on this page. I think it can give readers some orientation in this controversial field.

Best regards, Marcus H. Mast

Marcus H. Mast (talk) 10:59, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

@User:Marcus H. Mast other than the doi link, do you have an academic-style reference to this article? Is it peer reviewed?--Nø (talk) 14:06, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

@User:Nø It is an Elsevier-published, peer-reviewed scientific journal. See section "Peer Review" in the journal guidelines: https://www.elsevier.com/journals/explore/1550-8307/guide-for-authors#txt20920. Reference: Mast MH. Claims of anomalously long fasting: An assessment of the evidence from investigated cases. Explore. 2020;16(5):287-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.explore.2020.05.015. Marcus H. Mast (talk) 14:36, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Unfortunately this account is now spamming talk-pages [1] but Explore: The Journal of Science & Healing is not used on any Wikipedia articles. It not considered a reliable science journal. It appears to be a front for publishing the paranormal. Psychologist Guy (talk) 17:06, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Has Herr Mast published any other work? I cannot find any. -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 17:15, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Ah. this quote helped me, "The journal has been described as a "sham masquerading as a real scientific journal" which publishes "truly ridiculous studies"" -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 17:18, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

I just wanted to point out the article on the relevant pages as it relates to their content. I think that's an appropriate thing to do and not "spamming". Other than that, I'm not here to argue or discuss. You think what you think and do what you want to do with this information. Marcus H. Mast (talk) 10:14, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

I have read someting, but this "paper" is true sham ("the implications for science would be profound should inedia be real."; "However, while a skeptical attitude certainly is appropriate, one should keep in mind that science has seen major corrections of theoretical paradigms in the past"; "Should inedia turn out to be a real phenomenon, expanding existing theory to account for it would likely constitute a longer process.") and so on and so on.

It is a cheap attempt to hide sham as real scientifc work. --Julius Senegal (talk) 10:36, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

As per the description on Elsevier's web page: EXPLORE: The Journal of Science & Healing addresses the scientific principles behind, and applications of, evidence-based healing practices from a wide variety of sources, including conventional, alternative, and cross-cultural medicine. It is an interdisciplinary journal that explores the healing arts, consciousness, spirituality, eco-environmental issues, and basic science as all these fields relate to health.

So you're denying their edit based on your personal beliefs. This is an actual journal which has not be removed from Scopus. Tac62184 (talk) 22:06, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Explore: The Journal of Science & Healing is not evidence-based, it is a pseudoscientific journal run by cranks (Dean Radin, Larry Dossey). It is not a suitable journal to be citing as a reliable source. It is considered a predatory journal by most academics. Psychologist Guy (talk) 23:08, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Brooks article

[2] Recent SFGate article about Wiley Brooks. 2601:648:8202:350:0:0:0:C115 (talk) 10:33, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Criminal case

Dear Wikipedia users, I don't know how to edit Wikipedia articles but this is just to let you know about a criminal case in Sweden where two parents were convicted of causing bodily harm to their 18 month old child by practicing breatharianism. You can hear about it in the podcast Rättegångspodden (in Swedish) and you can also find the preliminary investigation in a thread on Flashback.se (also in Swedish). Just thought it might be interesting for this article if someone wants to translate and edit. 213.238.196.130 (talk) 07:11, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Biblical reference?

Just wondering if the "Mythology and Religion" section should also have a reference to Deuteronomy 9:9 and 9:18 ("When I went up on the mountain to receive the tablets of stone, the tablets of the covenant that the Lord had made with you, I stayed on the mountain for forty days and forty nights; I ate no bread and drank no water." and "Then once again I fell prostrate before the Lord for forty days and forty nights; I ate no bread and drank no water, because of all the sin you had committed, doing what was evil in the Lord’s sight and so arousing his anger.", New International Version, just to give some example in a recognized translation). Do you think that counts as an example of inedia? Clsn (talk) 01:11, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

What we think isn't really relevant. Inclusion would require that relevant reliable sources considered it an example of inedia. Which seems unlikely, given that doing so would require a literalist interpretation of Deuteronomy. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:18, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

The lead defines

Inedia (Latin for 'fasting') or breatharianism is the claimed ability for a person to live without consuming food, and in some cases water.

We cover examples of this from a number of cultures, and I'm not sure we in all cases have sources applying the word inedia to these examples. I think the biblical reference is another example meeting the definition, and might be included. (I suppose bread in the quote implies food in general.)--Nø (talk) 08:31, 26 October 2022 (UTC)