Starvation Mode myth?

jrc5423

I see a lot of posts on here suggesting not to set calories below 1200, and that relistically you should eat more than 1200. I always see this advice given to people struggling to lose weight, claiming they've gone into starvation mode. As a woman at 5'4", lightly active, I don't think 1200 is too low. I've had a lot of success with CICO, but I'm just wondering if anyone has actually taken this advice and saw a drastic difference in weight loss at a higher calorie count, like 1500/day as compared to 1200/day?

DeguelloTex

The difference in weight change between 1500 per day and 1200 per day would be, over time, about 0.6 pounds per week.

KateTii

Starvation mode is a myth. It's impossible for the body to give food more calories than it had. Otherwise, how would people starve to death?

I think the main thing is, people start off on 1200 but aren't accurate or honest with their logging. They miss the butter, the salad dressing, that one square of chocolate etc. They think their 100grams of cheese is actually only 50grams because they are just guessing how much it is. Once the weight stops coming off, they think they are in starvation mode and add more calories but at the same time become more honest with their logging. Now in a true deficit, they start losing the weight and think it's because they have come out of starvation mode.

rankinsect

There's a few good reasons not to drop below 1200:

* Nutrition becomes harder and harder to achieve. Getting your vitamins, your protein, your essential fats, etc. in with a small calorie budget requires very careful planning that most people just won't do. Doubly true if you have other dietary restrictions to consider. It's quite possible to die of malnutrition while still being obese.

* Even if you avoid malnutrition, rapid fat loss can lead to health effects, most notably gallstones.

* You lose weight quicker but it doesn't teach you any habits for long-term success, so it tends to cause yo-yoing, where you lose quickly, then regain quickly. Getting the weight off is actually not the hard part. Keeping the weight off for the rest of your life is the hard part. The time you spend losing weight needs to be the training for habits to keep you successful in maintenance.

* There is a smaller effect of calorie restriction on slowing your metabolism - primary via more efficient mitochondrial ATP synthesis. It can also promote your hunger and lethargy, and reduce satiety, stacking the deck against your success.

* The more aggressive your diet, the worse the ratio of fat burned to muscle burned is. If you also have protein deficiency, the rate of muscle loss goes up even more.

DaddieCat

InvisibleVeganUnicorn wrote: »

they legally cant tell you to eat less than that. figure out your bmr, then eat 500 or 1000 less than that each day depending on how fast you want to lose.

This, also, is against terms of service. Promoting a VLCD or very low calorie diet should only be encouraged under medical supervision for legitimate reasons.

kshama2001

KateTii wrote: »

Starvation mode is a myth. It's impossible for the body to give food more calories than it had. Otherwise, how would people starve to death?

I think the main thing is, people start off on 1200 but aren't accurate or honest with their logging. They miss the butter, the salad dressing, that one square of chocolate etc. They think their 100grams of cheese is actually only 50grams because they are just guessing how much it is. Once the weight stops coming off, they think they are in starvation mode and add more calories but at the same time become more honest with their logging. Now in a true deficit, they start losing the weight and think it's because they have come out of starvation mode.

Ya, this is really the only logical explanation for why people start to lose weight after "increasing" calories.

Stipulating that nothing has changed in amount of exercise.

http://www.acaloriecounter.com/blog/why-am-i-not-losing-weight/

M30834134

InvisibleVeganUnicorn wrote: »

they legally cant tell you to eat less than that. figure out your bmr, then eat 500 or 1000 less than that each day depending on how fast you want to lose.

Not BMR - TDEE

arditarose

I'm 5'4" as well. When I eat 1200 calories I'm always low on some macro or micro and I burn out. I'd probably have better luck on a steady 1500.

ncboiler89

Starvation mode is not a myth. It exists. And it is killing thousands of people every year.

rankinsect

KateTii wrote: »

Starvation mode is a myth. It's impossible for the body to give food more calories than it had. Otherwise, how would people starve to death?

Well, it's more of an overexaggeration of some truths. Your body can't get more energy than is in the food - but it always gets less, and it can adjust how much less. The main mechanism here is thermogenesis. Your mitochondria use all the carbohydrates, fats, and proteins they break down to create a proton gradient, and they extract the energy from this gradient to create phosphate bonds (ATP, CP). These phosphate bonds are the energy currency of the cell. Mitochondria, though, aren't perfectly efficient - some of the energy is wasted as heat. This is actually used by our body to regulate our temperature, but in response to a calorie restriction, mitochondrial efficiency can go up, producing less heat and more ATP for the same number of input calories. This means the cells get more energy than before.

Severe calorie restriction also promotes lethargy (burning fewer calories by being slower and less active) and hunger (trying to cause binges). A less severe calorie restriction can cause somewhat more calories burned simply because you feel more energetic, you fidget more, you move faster, etc.

claremarie9

rankinsect wrote: »

KateTii wrote: »

Starvation mode is a myth. It's impossible for the body to give food more calories than it had. Otherwise, how would people starve to death?

Well, it's more of an overexaggeration of some truths. Your body can't get more energy than is in the food - but it always gets less, and it can adjust how much less. The main mechanism here is thermogenesis. Your mitochondria use all the carbohydrates, fats, and proteins they break down to create a proton gradient, and they extract the energy from this gradient to create phosphate bonds (ATP, CP). These phosphate bonds are the energy currency of the cell. Mitochondria, though, aren't perfectly efficient - some of the energy is wasted as heat. This is actually used by our body to regulate our temperature, but in response to a calorie restriction, mitochondrial efficiency can go up, producing less heat and more ATP for the same number of input calories. This means the cells get more energy than before.

Severe calorie restriction also promotes lethargy (burning fewer calories by being slower and less active) and hunger (trying to cause binges). A less severe calorie restriction can cause somewhat more calories burned simply because you feel more energetic, you fidget more, you move faster, etc.

Very well said!