Nausea and eating · call recap
Two people who found the opposite things helped
17 April 202612 attendedHeld by Tomás
A call I set up as a deliberate contradiction, because this circle occasionally develops an orthodoxy and orthodoxy is not what pooled experience is for. Two long-standing members with completely opposite approaches described their weeks in detail and neither was asked to concede anything. The room found it much more useful than agreement.
The two accounts
Viv eats first thing in the morning, small and bland, and finds that anything after eight in the evening ruins the night. She has structured two years around a large-ish breakfast and a very small supper, and reflux was her whole first year until she did.
Gwen cannot face anything before the afternoon and has stopped trying. Breakfast is impossible, lunch is fine, and her useful meal is at seven. She spent four months forcing a morning meal because everything she read told her to, and felt worse for all four.
What the room did with it
Asked good questions, mostly about how each of them worked it out. Both answers were the same: a couple of lines a day for a few weeks until a pattern appeared. Neither had reasoned it out in advance and neither had got it from a leaflet.
Ray, who complains about everything and then does it anyway, made the point that landed. The circle keeps producing rules — cold not hot, small and often, protein first — and every one of them is somebody's pattern generalised. The rules are worth trying. They are not worth obeying.
Where we left it
With the two of them agreeing to co-host a call in the autumn for people in their first month, precisely because they disagree. And with a mild correction to my own habit: I have been repeating cold not hot for two years as though it were universal, and for at least three people in this room it is the wrong way round.