Starvation mode. Myth or Fact?

Options
123468

Replies

  • Delilahhhhhh
    Delilahhhhhh Posts: 477 Member
    Options
    MrM27 wrote: »
    maidentl wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Read maybe 1/2 the thread. OP has lost 20 lbs in the first month which is pretty normal with where she started. Am I missing something?

    Nope, but a lot of other people are.
    Yeah I was just confused as to what the problem is. Seems like people are generating a problem.

    There is so much analysis being performed in this thread when in reality it's so simple. Hopefully someone mentioned it and I just missed it.

    - The OP has been at this for 1 month which isn't to long.
    - She lost 20 lbs in that month which is normal for someone with that much weight to lose.
    - She hasn't lost weight in 2 weeks which is nothing. Weight loss isn't linear.
    - The OP has sloppy tracking and is still losing weight because she has a large margin of error available to her. She might be able to ride that out for a little bit or a long time, it all depends on how far off her tracking actually is. As she loses more weight and she begins to require less calories then her margin of error gets smaller and maybe catches up to her.



    Class dismissed.

    You are one class act!!

  • BodyByButter
    BodyByButter Posts: 563 Member
    Options
    You have lost 20 lbs in 30 days. I don't see the issue.
  • jpaulie
    jpaulie Posts: 917 Member
    Options
    and get
    herrspoons wrote: »
    herrspoons wrote: »
    You're consuming more calories than you think and burning less. Log everything, ditch the cheat meal and half the exercise calories you claim.

    I don't log exercise because I don't want to be tempted to eat back the calories. I honestly have no idea how many calories I'm burning while exercising.

    Ok. Log everything and ditch the cheat meal. See where you are in 3 weeks.

    and get a good scale
  • Zurgortax4
    Zurgortax4 Posts: 2 Member
    Options
    Starvation mode is a myth, and metabolic slowdown is extremely over-exaggerated
  • WholeFoodHealthy
    Options
    @WholeFoodHealthy‌ I agree 100%. Very well written. I also do IF :D

    @christinev297
    Woohoo! Glad to "meet" another IFer, and thank you, I discovered it by complete accident. I used to work for Starbucks (best job in the world, at the right location lol) and I'd work long days as I was an hours hog. Some days when we were busy I'd eat basically nothing but drink a LOT of coffee and I had a crapton of energy. Of course I attributed it to the coffee until recently (I no longer work there) when I had a bunch of errands to run and accidentally ended up not eating for ~22 hours. The whole day I was extremely energetic and alert, so I googled something like "No eating energy" and came across IF. I was amazed and read into it a whole lot more and it made perfect sense!

    I've tried a lot of "diets, and alternate day fasting is the ONLY thing that has worked to get the weight off, rather quickly and effortlessly.

    ETA: it's also the only woe that has saved me money lol I've spent a crap ton of money on supplements and stuff like plexus etc none of which worked

    If only more people knew... I mean it seems like almost common sense: Don't eat=Lose weight, but people (myself not excluded) don't think of it because no one talks about it as an option. Makes sense I guess, I mean there would be no $$$ made by supplement manufacturers, diet food companys, diet plan companies, myfitnesspal (haha) hell if every overweight person didn't eat for 2 days a week all major food companies (suppliers, restaurants, EVERYONE) would be losing money. So there's that lol.
  • MarziPanda95
    MarziPanda95 Posts: 1,326 Member
    Options
    @WholeFoodHealthy‌ I agree 100%. Very well written. I also do IF :D

    @christinev297
    Woohoo! Glad to "meet" another IFer, and thank you, I discovered it by complete accident. I used to work for Starbucks (best job in the world, at the right location lol) and I'd work long days as I was an hours hog. Some days when we were busy I'd eat basically nothing but drink a LOT of coffee and I had a crapton of energy. Of course I attributed it to the coffee until recently (I no longer work there) when I had a bunch of errands to run and accidentally ended up not eating for ~22 hours. The whole day I was extremely energetic and alert, so I googled something like "No eating energy" and came across IF. I was amazed and read into it a whole lot more and it made perfect sense!

    I've tried a lot of "diets, and alternate day fasting is the ONLY thing that has worked to get the weight off, rather quickly and effortlessly.

    ETA: it's also the only woe that has saved me money lol I've spent a crap ton of money on supplements and stuff like plexus etc none of which worked

    If only more people knew... I mean it seems like almost common sense: Don't eat=Lose weight, but people (myself not excluded) don't think of it because no one talks about it as an option. Makes sense I guess, I mean there would be no $$$ made by supplement manufacturers, diet food companys, diet plan companies, myfitnesspal (haha) hell if every overweight person didn't eat for 2 days a week all major food companies (suppliers, restaurants, EVERYONE) would be losing money. So there's that lol.

    That's... not really how it works. Someone doing IF is getting the same weekly deficit as someone just lowering their everyday calories. If I eat a big sandwich and a curry today, then eat nothing tomorrow, then eat the sandwich and curry again the next day, I'm not saving any money than if I'd just eaten the sandwich today, the curry the next day, etc... but either way you get the same weekly deficit. I think you should probably have just said 'if every overweight person were eating in a calorie deficit (regardless of how they get there)' rather than 'if every overweight person didn't eat for 2 days a week'. I've tried both IF and daily calorie deficit and saved the same amount of money doing either.
    Regardless, back to the OP, two weeks isn't a stall and is nothing to worry about :smile:
  • wishiwasarunner
    wishiwasarunner Posts: 202 Member
    Options
    You don't need to ditch "a" cheat" meal - but you should definitely log it and probably quit that one. Margarita's usually have about 400 cal each. Chips are very high in calories and then add fried food and lots of cheese. You are probably getting well over 2000 calories in that meal. So you can still cheat and allow yourself to go over your calories - but I would suggest at least looking at how much it really is to see if it is worth it to you.
    -
    But this is not really the reason for you stalling at this point - it was mostly water weight you lost and it is readjusting. You are losing some real weight as well but think about it - there are 3.5k cal in a pound of fat. So 20# would be 70,000 calorie deficit. That would be pretty hard to do even if you ate nothing and exercised in 2 weeks. If you are not hungry I do not think you need to up your calories - but the concern is that you need to be in this for the long haul. You need to develop new healthy habits and if all you have are extreme habits (either 1200 cal with lots of exercise that you are not adding back in) or the habits that got you to 333# - well neither is likely to be realistically maintained long without burn out or health issues.
  • jennifershoo
    jennifershoo Posts: 3,198 Member
    Options
    OP, it seems like you have no idea how many calories you are consuming (eyeballing?!) and no idea how many calories you are burning (your words).
    This method can not work if you estimate and just throw random numbers out there.
  • kamack1215
    kamack1215 Posts: 109 Member
    Options
    yopeeps025 wrote: »
    The only things I may be off about are the ounces in the chicken (by 1 or 2 oz) and the amount of broccoli I eat (it could be slightly more than a cup). Everything else I use a measuring cup or measuring spoon for.


    I used to measure everything with a cup or spoons but then I started actually weighing them and it is a HUGE difference. For instance, the popcorn bag said I could have 1/2 cup or 50g so I just used the 1/2 cup; but one day I decided to weigh it and the 1/2 was actually 180g! More than 3x's what I though I was eating!

    But to get back to you main question; starvation mode in a way exists but not to the extreme. I have done lots of research on this and met with a nutritionist and came to the conclusion that if your body doesn't get enough food (ie energy) your metabolic rate, as well as most body functions, slows down to conserve energy. I am not sure how many calories you need to eat but I suggest making and appointment with a nutritionist. Mine helped me a lot!
  • jennifershoo
    jennifershoo Posts: 3,198 Member
    Options
    MrM27 wrote: »
    maidentl wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Read maybe 1/2 the thread. OP has lost 20 lbs in the first month which is pretty normal with where she started. Am I missing something?

    Nope, but a lot of other people are.
    Yeah I was just confused as to what the problem is. Seems like people are generating a problem.

    There is so much analysis being performed in this thread when in reality it's so simple. Hopefully someone mentioned it and I just missed it.

    - The OP has been at this for 1 month which isn't to long.
    - She lost 20 lbs in that month which is normal for someone with that much weight to lose.
    - She hasn't lost weight in 2 weeks which is nothing. Weight loss isn't linear.
    - The OP has sloppy tracking and is still losing weight because she has a large margin of error available to her. She might be able to ride that out for a little bit or a long time, it all depends on how far off her tracking actually is. As she loses more weight and she begins to require less calories then her margin of error gets smaller and maybe catches up to her.



    Class dismissed.


    This^
  • triciab79
    triciab79 Posts: 1,713 Member
    Options
    The only thing I don't log is the cheat meal, which is every other Saturday night. I figure I've went over my calories for the day so it doesn't matter. Everything else is on point. I'm also drinking 1-1.5 gallons of water per day. As for not moving, one morning I'll lose a pound the next I'll gain, so overall it is staying the same (I'm OCD and guilty of weighing every day but I know it'll fluctuate daily but the trend should still be downwards). I started my diet on 1/5/15 (exercising 3 days per week) and have lost 20 lbs since then, all of that was lost in the first 2.5 weeks. Now it's just at a stand still. I guess I just got used to seeing it dramatically drop. With my weight being so high I just assumed that being on a 1250-1400 calorie per day diet it would take it a little while to start stalling.

    Everything matters!!!! Every single bite you sneak that is not part of your plan. If you eat less than you burn you will lose weight at a rate of about 3500 cal = 1lb. Lets say you need 2000 calories to maintain your current weight and you cut that to 1400 all week so you pick up 3600 calories but then on Sat you eat whatever you want so that means a 4000 calorie day (its easier than you think) well that is 2000 calories over maintenance so those come from you 3600 you earned leaving you 1600 calories lost for the week which is not even one pound. Cheat days really only cheat you out of your goal. Log everything and if you think you will feel guilty logging it then that probably means you shouldn't eat it.

  • maidentl
    maidentl Posts: 3,203 Member
    edited February 2015
    Options
    triciab79 wrote: »
    Log everything and if you think you will feel guilty logging it then that probably means you shouldn't eat it.

    There is nothing you should feel guilty about or not eat.

    Because it bears repeating:

    As MrM said:

    "- The OP has been at this for 1 month which isn't to long.
    - She lost 20 lbs in that month which is normal for someone with that much weight to lose.
    - She hasn't lost weight in 2 weeks which is nothing. Weight loss isn't linear.
    - The OP has sloppy tracking and is still losing weight because she has a large margin of error available to her. She might be able to ride that out for a little bit or a long time, it all depends on how far off her tracking actually is. As she loses more weight and she begins to require less calories then her margin of error gets smaller and maybe catches up to her.

    Class dismissed."

  • maidentl
    maidentl Posts: 3,203 Member
    Options
    ^ Apparently you cannot quote two different people in the same post. Or I tried to that in the wrong way, apologies.
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,943 Member
    Options
    Ohhhh, I missed the part about the OP losing 20 pounds in a month.
  • aziapatrick
    aziapatrick Posts: 33 Member
    Options
    I'm beginning to think the boards aren't a place for me. There have been several posts full of great information, but that is getting overshadowed by the snarky and rude comments. Being a morbidly obese woman dieting is hard but I am determined and when I ask for advice I'm looking for positivity and constructive criticism not "you're sloppy and aren't doing it right". So I want to really thank the posters who gave me advice and constructive criticism in a positive way.
    I originally posted because I was curious about starvation mode. I wanted to know opinions on it. So I've gotten what I needed and I'm done.
  • MKEgal
    MKEgal Posts: 3,250 Member
    edited February 2015
    Options
    Yes, Virginia, there is a starvation mode.
    Here's a VERY well-done explanation, both of what it isn't (the common misconceptions) and what it is (with pictures and references and sciency stuff).
    http://www.aworkoutroutine.com/starvation-mode/

    If you are really eating less than your body needs to run, you will lose weight.
    There's no way around it.
    No, your body does not hold onto calories because you're not eating enough. That's a myth.
    It has to have calories (energy). It prefers to burn carbohydrates (glucose, then glycogen), then it burns fat, as a distant third it burns protein (muscle). It's an inefficient conversion, and it's a gamble, hoping that you'll find food before too much of your heart & diaphragm are cannabilized & you die. THAT is starvation mode. It takes a long time to get there.

    Here's a newbie help post I did, which compiles links to helpful info such as sexypants, responsible goal setting (weight, calories, macros), logging & measuring food accurately, motivation...

    It seems you need to get realistic about several things:
    a healthy calorie level, to allow you to lose 2 lb per week
    your food intake (weigh &/or measure everything until you've got a handle on portion sizes, and log everything)
    work up to at least 1 hour of cardio at least 5 days per week (and don't eat the exercise calories, or at least not regularly; if you're really hungry at the end of the day, once in a while have 1/3 - 1/2 of that days')

    51637601.png
  • BWBTrish
    BWBTrish Posts: 2,817 Member
    Options
    First of all yes your right it can be pretty snarky here lol.

    But dont give up hun. You can do this. You already lost 21 pounds.
    So stick to your plan and be determent, despite what others say.

    Its the internet people are like this.
    Just try to step over it....

    You can do it!! :)