I am confused by some of the comments in here who seem to see no food intake for more than 36 hours as dangerous or even pathological or assume that you need to somehow "prepare" for that or take certain precautions. Is this a cultural thing?
When I was I student, I ate one meal a day, maybe some snacks in between. Very often, I went without food for a day, simply because I was too lazy / too emerged in some project to leave the house to buy food. Eating the last meal on Sunday evening, not eating on Monday, eating again on Tuesday evening - 48 hours without food. I did this many, many times, and still (in my early 30ies) do it occasionally, again just because I am too lazy to buy food sometimes. It never occurred to me that this could be considered "fasting", because neither did I feel any different after going 48 hours without food, nor did I lose any measurable amount of weight from it.
Days, weeks or even months without food was pretty much the norm until ~150 years ago. If a day, or even a week without eating would be seriously dangerous to your body, mankind would've become extinct a long, long time ago.
When I was I student, I ate one meal a day, maybe some snacks in between. Very often, I went without food for a day, simply because I was too lazy / too emerged in some project to leave the house to buy food. Eating the last meal on Sunday evening, not eating on Monday, eating again on Tuesday evening - 48 hours without food. I did this many, many times, and still (in my early 30ies) do it occasionally, again just because I am too lazy to buy food sometimes. It never occurred to me that this could be considered "fasting", because neither did I feel any different after going 48 hours without food, nor did I lose any measurable amount of weight from it.
Days, weeks or even months without food was pretty much the norm until ~150 years ago. If a day, or even a week without eating would be seriously dangerous to your body, mankind would've become extinct a long, long time ago.