Q: If you knew you were going to be vomiting it back up at some point but it was dinner time and you were hungry, what would you eat?
A: My guess is that this is the reason for the old adage "feed a cold and starve a fever". Or was it "starve a cold..."? Nah. Let's go with the first one. At any rate, a fever is more likely to come with a stomach virus, and around the onset of such things you are unlikely to feel like a big lunch, anyway. But, for this case, say that you are a bit peckish. Reason dictates that you want something without much texture, like broth or jello. I always find the chunkier foods the least pleasant to revisit later. But, of course, this is up to your personal taste in textures.
I might also suggest that eating bland foods and foods that are easier on the digestion could forestall having to chuck it up later at all, working on the theory that your body has a tipping point that, once passed, triggers the response. Keeping your body from getting to that point might mean you could ride the brief illness out without incident.
Personally, I take a more grimly determined route. Considering how many things can upset my stomach, and given that most of those causes are transitory (or caused by not having eaten, or eaten the right things), I tend to eat whatever I want as long as I still have appetite. I won't eat sausage or raw jalapenos, of course, but I won't starve myself just because I might be sick later. Proper sustenance is, after all, part of good health. Bring it on, agents of disease. Let's see what you got.
