I was mooching through the Discovery Channel website and found an 'Ask the survival expert' page. One question caught my eye:
"Hi, my question is, if you don't have water, should you still eat?"
The answer was (somewhat abridged):
"Your body does require water for the digestion process. With few exceptions, most foods do not contain enough water to sustain your body without supplemental water sources. Therefore, you must drink water to live. Any intake of food without water will require that water be drawn from the cells of your already dehydrated body, thus compounding your problem. The rule is NO WATER = NO FOOD. "
I'm interested in what people think of this. Biologically it is a correct statement. However, is it better to have some energy from food to help you keep going in order to find water or better to not eat until you find water? Like most things it probably depends on the exact circumstances.
Look forward to any thought people have on this!
Joff
"Hi, my question is, if you don't have water, should you still eat?"
The answer was (somewhat abridged):
"Your body does require water for the digestion process. With few exceptions, most foods do not contain enough water to sustain your body without supplemental water sources. Therefore, you must drink water to live. Any intake of food without water will require that water be drawn from the cells of your already dehydrated body, thus compounding your problem. The rule is NO WATER = NO FOOD. "
I'm interested in what people think of this. Biologically it is a correct statement. However, is it better to have some energy from food to help you keep going in order to find water or better to not eat until you find water? Like most things it probably depends on the exact circumstances.
Look forward to any thought people have on this!
Joff