Procedural sedation is widely administered by a variety of practitioners to facilitate painful or frightening procedures in children. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] Guidelines 9 recommend a minimum period of fasting (nothing by mouth) prior to elective sedation because of concerns about pulmonary aspiration. [7][8][9] These guidelines most commonly mirror thresholds fixed for elective general anesthesia: 2 hours or longer for clear liquids, 4 hours or longer for breast milk, and 6 hours or longer prior for cow milk, infant formula, or a light meal. 9 Compliance with these requirements-whether for procedural sedation or for general anesthesia-comes at a cost to the child, the family, and to health care delivery. Fasting can be uncomfortable and distressing, 10 can cause dehydration 10 and hypoglycemia, 11 and is associated with decreased sedation efficacy 12 and more frequent sedation failure. 13 In clinical practice, it is common for minimum fasting durations to be substantially exceeded. 14 To minimize the potential for misunderstanding, patients may be intentionally instructed to fast longer, because an instruction of "nothing by mouth after midnight" is less complicated and error prone than separate thresholds for light meals vs breast milk vs clear fluids. Delays in starting scheduled procedures further extend fasting times. 14,15 Children with fasting violations risk lengthy procedure postponement or cancellation.The emergency department (ED) provides an ideal setting to scientifically evaluate the impact of fasting, because restricting oral intake after midnight cannot apply to patients requiring sedation for emergent and urgent procedures. On a daily basis, children in the ED require procedures (eg, laceration repair, abscess drainage, fracture and dislocation reduction, and diagnostic imaging) that must be promptly performed despite noncompliance with elective fasting guidelines. [2][3][4][5][6][7][8] Despite such regular ongoing performance of nonfasted sedation over decades, the ED has not been identified as a setting at greater risk for aspiration. [1][2][3]7,8 In this issue of JAMA Pediatrics, Bhatt et al 3 studied fasting guideline noncompliance for ED procedural sedation. In their multicenter, prospective, observational study, most children (3284 of 6183) receiving procedural sedation were noncompliant with standard elective fasting guidelines (vs 2899 who complied with fasting guidelines for solids and liquids) 9 and, despite this, were no more likely to vomit or experience other adverse events. No aspiration was observed in any child, whether compliant or noncompliant with fasting. These findings confirm multiple similar but smaller prior ED studies in the last 15 years 4-6 and a study including an ED subset. 1 The ED experience thus has consis-