"Starvation Mode" and How to Fix

Apparently starvation mode is a real thing. It's just usually not referred to as "starvation mode". It offers ways on how to fix it. I thought this was an interesting and informative article by Dr. Jade Teta.

https://www.t-nation.com/diet-fat-loss/truth-about-metabolic-damage?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=article3624
«1345

Replies

  • beatyfamily1
    beatyfamily1 Posts: 257 Member
    I suggest reading the article before commenting.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Of course he's going to say that....he's got a book to sell.

    He's also not even a Doctor of Medicine, he's a Doctor of Naturopathy...

    :(
  • Asher_Ethan
    Asher_Ethan Posts: 2,430 Member
    My understanding is the only time starvation mode is real is when you're ACTUALLY starving, think holocaust survivors.

    Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
  • singingflutelady
    singingflutelady Posts: 8,736 Member
    I lost a lot on 500 calories a day plus 2 hours of cardio.
  • singingflutelady
    singingflutelady Posts: 8,736 Member
    Timshel_ wrote: »
    Timshel_ wrote: »
    I suggest reading the article before commenting.

    Are you an advanced lifter?

    Shhhhh...this applies to everyone. You must not have read.

    Sorry. I should not be so flippant about it. But as other mentioned, no one argues that there is in fact starvation mode. What is argued is that it in anyway applies to 99.9% of people trying to lose weight - it doesn't. It seems to have been inserted in the "diet community" as nothing more than science marketing at its' finest. And it has become an excuse for other tracking issues.

    I have worked with clients while training, elite athletes, and the whole ranges of people, and I have seen some extreme examples of caloric deficit issues such as fatigue, lack of muscle build or even muscle diminishing, and even just last month a friend who does hardcore crossfit competitions was in the hospital for Marasmus. Those are all effects of improper/low caloric intake, but none of them had issues with not losing or even gaining weight. Actually, those symptoms and issues are precursors to actual starvation mode type metabolic changes. A system will give some strong feedback as such to let you know you are not getting enough nutrients/calories before actually starving. But you will lose weight.

    Again, barring very extreme cases and true medical issues.

    All the best.

    Sorry I only said that because in #3 it mentions advanced lifters ;)
  • BarbaraJatmfp
    BarbaraJatmfp Posts: 463 Member
    "The Biology of Human Starvation" is a 1200-page book reporting a starvation study done back in 1940. They took 20+ college-age men of average weight and reduced their calories by 50%. This went on for weeks. The men lost weight - of course - and were reduced to walking skeletons. After the study ended, the men were gradually returned to their previous caloric intake levels. What they found was that the calories previously required to maintain a weight now caused those same people to gain weight.

    This study was used to reefed the starving people after WW II: concentration camps, POW camps, and starving people in the countries affected by the war.

    Call it what you want (starvation mode, or whatever), but they found that we should not reduce our calories by more than 75%.

    Google it if you want: "Biology of Human Starvation".
  • Timshel_
    Timshel_ Posts: 22,834 Member
    Sorry I only said that because in #3 it mentions advanced lifters ;)

    Ironically, as you pointed out the website is for the hardest of hardcore lifter and specifically addressed there. I would suspect all the supplements promoted can do some whack things to the body so I would be curious to see if it would apply to clean lifters as well. I just searched and did not see any studies though. :/

    Cheers.

  • BarbaraJatmfp
    BarbaraJatmfp Posts: 463 Member
    should be "used to re-feed"
  • BarbaraJatmfp
    BarbaraJatmfp Posts: 463 Member
    And don't reduce your calories below 75% of what you are eating. Not "by 75%". Sorry
  • BarbaraJatmfp
    BarbaraJatmfp Posts: 463 Member
    The point of my post is that after starving, the calories those people ate no longer maintained their weight. The same number of calories caused them to gain weight. Starvation mode is not a good place to go. You will pay for it later.
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 10,089 Member
    "The Biology of Human Starvation" is a 1200-page book reporting a starvation study done back in 1940. They took 20+ college-age men of average weight and reduced their calories by 50%. This went on for weeks. The men lost weight - of course - and were reduced to walking skeletons. After the study ended, the men were gradually returned to their previous caloric intake levels. What they found was that the calories previously required to maintain a weight now caused those same people to gain weight.

    This study was used to reefed the starving people after WW II: concentration camps, POW camps, and starving people in the countries affected by the war.

    Call it what you want (starvation mode, or whatever), but they found that we should not reduce our calories by more than 75%.

    Google it if you want: "Biology of Human Starvation".

    Drawing this conclusion (or rather, the conclusion to "not reduce calories below 75% of what you are eating" as you rephrased it later in the thread) from the study you describe is spurious reasoning. Where is the group on 50% calorie reduction for a shorter period of time (i.e., less total weight loss), to be able to distinguish the effects of the %calorie reduction from the effects of becoming walking skeletons? Where is the group on 10% calorie reduction for a longer period time, so that they attain the same total weight loss of 20 men you describe (not a satisfactorily large study, also)?

    Also, how can you draw conclusions about the effect of eating at "below 75% of what you are eating" (74%, 70% , 60%) from a study of individuals on a 50% reduction?

    Finally, if someone is overeating substantially on their current calories (say, gaining a pound a week--which, for someone who suddenly realizes they've gained 10 or 15 pounds in the last few months is not unrealistic), eating at 75% of their current calories could well leave them at maintenance or even still in a slight surplus, so it's far too vague to be useful as general advice.


  • JaneSnowe
    JaneSnowe Posts: 1,283 Member
    The point of my post is that after starving, the calories those people ate no longer maintained their weight. The same number of calories caused them to gain weight. Starvation mode is not a good place to go. You will pay for it later.

    Do you mean that their previous amount of maintenance calories caused them to gain more than what they weighed before?