Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Understanding the "starvation mode" myth.
Options
Replies
-
trigden1991 wrote: »Starvation mode is a myth.
Just like global warming and military intelligence.
It isnt so much as a myth as it is a misnomer. Global warming is inaccurate in that it conveys a false exposition of reality in what the world is actually going through. A more accurate term would be "Global Climate Change" as the world is actually going through a metamorphic state.
The same goes for the inordinately unsuitable designation that was bestowed upon the controversial starvation mode. A more appropriate label would have been "self-destructive mode."
then why are you calling it starvation mode?2 -
starvation mode = when you don't eat anything for a pro longed period of time and your body turns on itself for energy. Takes a long time to happen...6
-
albertabeefy wrote: »
I can see how frustrating that would be ... but I think it's quite possibly the exception rather than the rule.singingflutelady wrote: »Unfortunately there are people here who claim they are undereating but gained weight so they must be in starvation mode. It's pretty frustrating obviously.
In this case, OP certainly seems to "get it".
One thing I should mention ... the idea of a permanently-damaged metabolism from weight-loss in obese subjects does have some merit. Although nobody seems to know exactly why, studies bear this out:
McGuire M, Wing R, Klem M, Hill J. Behavioral strategies of individuals who have maintained long-term weight losses. Obes Res. 1999;7:334–41.
Wing R, Hill J. Successful weight loss maintenance. Annu Rev Nutr. 2001;21:323–41.
Klem M, Wing R, Lang W, McGuire M, Hill J. Does weight loss maintenance become easier over time. Obes Res. 2000;8:438–44.
Leibel R, Rosenbaum M, Hirsch J. Changes in energy expenditure resulting from altered body weight. N Eng J Med. 1995;332:621–28.
Weigle D, Sande K, Iverius P, Monsen E, Brunzell J. Weight loss leads to a marked decrease in nonresting energy expenditure in ambulatory human subjects. Metabolism. 1988;37:930–36.
Weyer C, Walford R, Harper I, Milner M, MacCallum T, Tataranni P, et al. Energy metabolism after 2 y of energy restriction: the biosphere 2 experiment. Am J Clin Nutr. 2000;72:946–53.
Gemert Wv, Westerterp K, Acker Bv, Wagenmakers A, Halliday D, Greve J, et al. Energy, substrate and protein metabolism in morbid obesity before, during and after massive weight loss. Int J Obes. 2000;24:711–18.
Leibel R, Hirsch J. Diminished energy requirements in reduced-obese patients. Metabolism. 1984;33:164–70.
I'm not obese but I had the opposite experience for a while.
(Disclosure: I am a mostly recovered anorexic binge/purge subtype who went through inpatient and day hospitalization programs.)
The goal was to gain 1-2 kg a week no exercise allowed. We started at 1500 calories and added 300 a week until we reached BMI 20 or gained too quickly. Prior to treatment I ate 500 calories a day and exercised 2 hours a day. I never once gained more than 0.5 kgs a week even on the highest amount they would give which was 3600 calories a day. My metabolism must have been on fire to only gain 1 lbs a week for months eating 3600 calories a day. Maybe it was using it on healing but I wasn't super scary anorexic thin (BMI 16 when I entered). I never really figured out what happened and you bet I was constantly in trouble from the program leaders for not gaining 1kg and infact I got kicked out when I lost .5 lbs one week on 3600 with no cheating.
My metabolism is actually back to normal now mostly ( though I now have Crohn's disease which when in a bad flare I suffer malabsorption and lose weight on TPN, Prednisone and eating by mouth. Don't recommend this diet though lol)0 -
In my opinion starvation mode is the body slowing metabolism to conserve whats left. I don't see how weight gain could be the result unless calories increase over the long term.
That is the basics of what I believe. Weight gain isnt the result of slowing the metabolism, its the result of falling of the wagon. Here is the basic break up of what I have seen and experienced.
Stage 1: 150lbs, consume 2000 calories a day, walk 2 miles a day.
Stage 2: Consume 800 calories a day,Starve myself to 130, Walk 5 miles a day.
Stage 3: 3 day binge just cause.. Start recounting calories after but this time..eh, I feel like I was over doing it, so consume 1500 calories a day and redrop my walking to 2 miles a day. Gain to 180 lbs.
Stage 4: hover at 180 for 2 years. Redrop calories to 800 a day, walk 2 miles every day. Lose to 140. Also lose my gall bladder.. Surgeon said it was because of the yo-yo dieting.
Stage 5: Fall off again.. eat 2000 calories a day, walk 3 miles 3 times a week, gain to 215 and hold steady.
None of this makes sense until this stage
Stage 6: F it. No walking, no exercise, PTSD, consume who knows what at 3pm every night cause eating breakfast and lunch just isnt your thing, gain to 300. (THAT makes sense. I deserved that.)
What doesnt make sense is the holding steady at the other ridiculous levels when everyone else around you does less and eats more but retains their weight they originally started with because they didnt feel the need to starve off the excess fluff. Every hear a skinny girl brag about how much she eats and how much she eats? Ever witness it...
I understand each persons metabolism is unique unto themselves. Two 5' 1 girls can jog 2 miles a day, weight train 30 minutes every other day, and consume 1800 calories each.. And one could be consuming those 1800 calories in nothing but twinkies and ho-ho's while the other is more self-conscious and never touches packaged foods at all. And the Twinkie lover can be 10-15 lbs lighter than her more anxious counter part. I understand this, but I still dont "get' it. And like I pointed out before. I was the active one in my family with no health issues and was the over weight one. My sister was the one who couldnt walk half a mile without sitting down to take a break while I danced in place impatiently wanting to get moving again. This wasnt my need to work out, this was my energy level. I had an entire world to explore and she was holding me up. She had bad asthma so she had her excuse.
Here's the thing: we think we can understand how much we're eating relative to someone else and how much we're burning relative to someone else, but it's actually pretty rare for us to have that much access to someone's consumption and activity to understand their whole day in relation to ours.
Anyone who would watch my husband eat dinner would be surprised that he doesn't weigh 200 pounds because he usually eats such high calorie food for dinner. But the only meal he has aside from dinner is a small bowl of cereal and a cup of coffee. People have watched me eat and commented about how much it is compared to my weight, but they aren't seeing how I balance out the rest of my meals to still hit my calorie goal for the day.
It's really hard to judge the total of someone's lifestyle. We see someone eat Twinkies and think we understand, but it's much more complex than that. Before deciding that thin people are just destined to be thin no matter how much they eat, we need to realize that we're terrible at guessing our own calorie consumption/burn and we're bound to be much worse at guessing someone else's.
I've seen "naturally skinny" people decide to take the stairs when everyone else takes the elevator, I've seen them eat a huge lunch and then just have some soup for dinner, I've seen them take one cookie from the cookies brought to a meeting when everyone else picks at the cookies all afternoon (I've seen them do the opposite too). Our weight is the result of thousands of individual decisions, none of which are the one determining factor.
I don't believe that two women could have the exact same height, the exact same activity, the exact same calorie consumption and maintain radically different weights over time (barring a health condition). Significant metabolic differences are real, but they're rare.8 -
starvation mode = when you don't eat anything for a pro longed period of time and your body turns on itself for energy. Takes a long time to happen...
Like say, 20 years? Agreed. Im sure I lost more muscle than I did actual fat when starving. Still think its a misnomer though. Perhaps a new name will clear up the confusion associated behind it. It probably already has one, and everyone completely agrees with the idea behind it, without even realizing its the same bloody thing. Like common core.. Almost everyone hates "common core" math. Change the name but give them the same lessons and they would never clue in to its origins. Its like leading sheep to the slaughter.2 -
then why are you calling it starvation mode?[/quote]
For lack of a better word. If I changed it into something more scientific sounding, I wonder how many clueless automatons would blindly follow my new cult.2 -
OP, I think that you suffered from yo-yo dieting. Did it damage your metabolism? Could be. It's hard to watch skinny people and compare ourselves to them. There again you have to take each person and analyze. What do they really eat everyday--total calories. Do they figet, are they in constant motion? So many things enter in. You have to look at yourself--who you are--and work with that, no one else. Let go of your frustration, and work out a healthy, sustainable way of eating for you.2
-
Christine_72 wrote: »I loved your post OP, and i giggled at the cow reference and the animals hating your sister (i always trust animals instincts btw
).
I rarely read long drawn out posts (sorry LC), but yours captivated me from beginning to end! Do you have a career in literature? If not, you should
Thank you. I do like to write, however I have never considered it as a potential career path. I also paint and draw, but again, never attempted it for profit. I hope to eventually complete my degree and become a field entomologist and eventually a professor in biology. I wanted to pursue entomology, but my son threatened to disown me and move to a hidden under water bunker he swore I would never find if I brought so much as an a gnat into our home.3 -
starvation mode = when you don't eat anything for a pro longed period of time and your body turns on itself for energy. Takes a long time to happen...
Like say, 20 years? Agreed. Im sure I lost more muscle than I did actual fat when starving. Still think its a misnomer though. Perhaps a new name will clear up the confusion associated behind it. It probably already has one, and everyone completely agrees with the idea behind it, without even realizing its the same bloody thing. Like common core.. Almost everyone hates "common core" math. Change the name but give them the same lessons and they would never clue in to its origins. Its like leading sheep to the slaughter.
no, I am talking about eating little, or nothing, for a period of six months. Think starving kids in Africa...
3 -
starvation mode = when you don't eat anything for a pro longed period of time and your body turns on itself for energy. Takes a long time to happen...
Like say, 20 years? Agreed. Im sure I lost more muscle than I did actual fat when starving. Still think its a misnomer though. Perhaps a new name will clear up the confusion associated behind it. It probably already has one, and everyone completely agrees with the idea behind it, without even realizing its the same bloody thing. Like common core.. Almost everyone hates "common core" math. Change the name but give them the same lessons and they would never clue in to its origins. Its like leading sheep to the slaughter.
Well, there's adaptive thermogenesis, which is basically if you underfeed yourself for a long period of time, your body will start to burn less calories every day. Which is a real thing that happens over the course of months and years. Basically your body starts not doing stuff as often as it should, like skin, hair, and muscle repair/production to become more efficient.
When people talk about starvation mode, it's usually someone who has been eating 1000 cals for 2 weeks and hasn't lost any weight, and they say it must be starvation mode - your body is hanging onto fat because it thinks you're starving. Which is not a thing.
I have to agree with a couple of previous posts - 1. that I don't think posting this in debate was wise. It does seem very personal & emotional to you, and the point of debate is to, well, debate what you said. And 2. you can't ever really know what another person's calorie and activity levels are, so comparing yourself to someone else is futile.
7 -
Some people have reading comprehension (or attention) issues. But the biggest probelem with starvation mode is math, not literacy.
Give the body fewer calories than you burn, you'll lose weight. I guarantee it. I weighed every morsel of food to the .05 of an ounce, and logged it here. I lost. I didn't hold on to fat, at all. It's just simple math. Really, really hard to do. But an incredibly wasy concept.
If it isn't working for someone, it's not a problem of comprehension or metabolism. It's because they aren't actually counting.4 -
Many people do have slower metabolisms than others, but it's not because they were destroyed through dieting. "Destroyed" is the wrong way to look at it anyways since in nature it's an advantage to be more efficient. In today's society though it means that these people can't eat as much as their siblings or best friends without spending an hour at the gym because they burn fewer calories just sitting around than others do. Sometimes it takes years to realize this and make the general/habitual changes required to keep at a healthy weight long-term. Sometimes people never figure it out and just go from diet to diet forever.
The Biggest Loser examples only prove that people who have lived one way all their lives, changed for a few weeks under extremely rigorous and heavily scrutinized conditions and then were released back into the wild to fend for themselves will revert to their old habits... Just like almost everyone who goes on a drastic diet and loses a lot of weight in a short amount of time. It doesn't work in the long term to drop 80 lbs in a few months, and then go back to out-eating your burn (which just decreased even more since you now weigh less.) But it doesn't mean you destroyed or even harmed your metabolism.
0 -
Char231023 wrote: »Char231023 wrote: »Sounds like someone's hangry. This may sound bitchy but seriously stop trying to blame starvation mode (that is not what causes thyroid problems btw). You were judging you self to someone who is taller than you, and that obviously makes their metabolism higher. There are a lot of people who have dieting issues. You are not a special snowflake. Stop blaming everything and everyone for your bad decisions on what you put in your mouth.
You didnt read everything, did you. Understandable. Literacy in the US is no longer a top agenda. And no, im not "hangry". Actually eating for me is a nuisance. I dont like to waste time with it and rarely feel hungry. Taller does not equal higher metabolism. Ask the over weight tall people..Or the under 5 foot waif.. Im sure they would disagree with that statement. Your attempt at playing "mean girl" is almost adorable. However, the effort is wasted on the apathetic.
I did read every word. While it was very well thought out and written I don't agree with your attempt of portraying your lack of weight loss on "starvation mode". Thinking you have damaged you metabolism beyond repair by going on three crash diets no it doesn't work that way. The hanry statement was a joke lighten up.
Sorry, that you think you can eat as much as someone who is 7 inches taller than you, and still be under the delusion you will be able lose weight like they can. If you think I am trying to attempt to be a "Mean Girl" you obviously haven't been on the MFP boards that long. Trust me I was being nicer than a lot of other posters.
OK, Ill simplify this for you because if you DID read what I wrote, you misunderstood or skimmed over a few points.
1. ( I don't agree with your attempt of portraying your lack of weight loss on "starvation mode") I never blamed my lack of weight loss on starvation mode. Not ONCE. I blamed it on coming OFF of starving myself and gaining over what my base weight originally started at. 150 to 180 to be precise. My metabolism said, "F U.. You wanna play hard ball, lets" I re-lost the weight QUITE easily by restarving myself. However, I couldnt seem to go below 140 while at it.
2. (Thinking you have damaged you metabolism beyond repair) You seriously did NOT read what I wrote at all. AT ALL. I actually said the OPPOSITE. I said I dont think its possible to damage it beyond repair and in fact you can FIX it.
3. (Sorry, that you think you can eat as much as someone who is 7 inches taller than you, and still be under the delusion you will be able lose weight like they can. ) Where the hell are you getting your info from? I ate LESS than and HEALTHIER than my SAME HEIGHT sister and daughter. SAME. My 7 inches taller friend was the twinkie eating, couch sitting, pot head. She was mentioned ONCE the entire story..and she is what you focus on? Is there something in particular that drew you to that character?
4. (Trust me I was being nicer than a lot of other posters) Perhaps you are missing the whole idea behind "support" group? I dont expect to be "coddled" or "encouraged". Hell, I dont expect empathy at all. I actually didnt come here to gain others support. I came here to OFFER it. I am the first to admit that I dont play well with others, but being able to encourage another person, for me, is the motivation that drives my will to succeed in life. We are to encourage one another and build each other up. Edify and not tear down.2 -
In my opinion starvation mode is the body slowing metabolism to conserve whats left. I don't see how weight gain could be the result unless calories increase over the long term.
That is the basics of what I believe. Weight gain isnt the result of slowing the metabolism, its the result of falling of the wagon. Here is the basic break up of what I have seen and experienced.
Stage 1: 150lbs, consume 2000 calories a day, walk 2 miles a day.
Stage 2: Consume 800 calories a day,Starve myself to 130, Walk 5 miles a day.
Stage 3: 3 day binge just cause.. Start recounting calories after but this time..eh, I feel like I was over doing it, so consume 1500 calories a day and redrop my walking to 2 miles a day. Gain to 180 lbs.
Stage 4: hover at 180 for 2 years. Redrop calories to 800 a day, walk 2 miles every day. Lose to 140. Also lose my gall bladder.. Surgeon said it was because of the yo-yo dieting.
Stage 5: Fall off again.. eat 2000 calories a day, walk 3 miles 3 times a week, gain to 215 and hold steady.
None of this makes sense until this stage
Stage 6: F it. No walking, no exercise, PTSD, consume who knows what at 3pm every night cause eating breakfast and lunch just isnt your thing, gain to 300. (THAT makes sense. I deserved that.)
What doesnt make sense is the holding steady at the other ridiculous levels when everyone else around you does less and eats more but retains their weight they originally started with because they didnt feel the need to starve off the excess fluff. Every hear a skinny girl brag about how much she eats and how much she eats? Ever witness it...
I understand each persons metabolism is unique unto themselves. Two 5' 1 girls can jog 2 miles a day, weight train 30 minutes every other day, and consume 1800 calories each.. And one could be consuming those 1800 calories in nothing but twinkies and ho-ho's while the other is more self-conscious and never touches packaged foods at all. And the Twinkie lover can be 10-15 lbs lighter than her more anxious counter part. I understand this, but I still dont "get' it. And like I pointed out before. I was the active one in my family with no health issues and was the over weight one. My sister was the one who couldnt walk half a mile without sitting down to take a break while I danced in place impatiently wanting to get moving again. This wasnt my need to work out, this was my energy level. I had an entire world to explore and she was holding me up. She had bad asthma so she had her excuse.
To properly diagnose this you have to take yourself out of the equation. Metabolism is not that terribly different from person to person. The predominant physiological factor is lean muscle mass. Still the dominating factor in weight management is caloric intake. You can either accept this and be successful, or continue to construct excuses.
It is very difficult for trained professionals to estimate calories, which is why many weight management professionals discard calorie counting for the average person doing this on their own. You also have to incorporate the 20% margin of error in calorie estimation, hence the 1000 calorie day you just logged per the label is somewhere between 800 and 1200 calories. You can use MFP successfully by checking your logs to see where the error may have occurred if you are not hitting your goals.
Model your behavior to those who have succeeded and lost 100+ lbs and maintained this over years. In all of these situations the successful share distinct common behaviors:
1. They implemented small changes - rarely anything drastic.
2. They continually set small goals, met the goals, and set new loftier goals.
3. Weight loss was a smaller goal to a larger vision (long life, improved life, kids, athletic performance, etc.)
Here's a link to the National Weight Control Registry - one of the most informative sites on long term success:
http://nwcr.ws/2 -
You have to be a yo-yo dieter to truly understand what the starvation mode truly is.
I am not sure what prompted this -- maybe the discussion of dieting myths in which starvation mode was mentioned? Maybe that background would be helpful.
However, as some others have mentioned, I think you seem to be unaware of how starvation mode is so often used: to claim that one can eat too little and as a result your body starts holding onto fat and you cannot lose, and even gain weight. Many people claim to have gotten fat from "eating too little" (NOT from bingeing after a period of eating too little or some such, which I agree happens), or worry too much about hitting a sweet spot where they will lose and if they don't assume it's as likely to be eating too little as eating too much (or just not being patient).
I totally agree there are bad effects from eating too little and that dieting over time (especially with an aggressive deficit) can affect metabolism, but wouldn't call that starvation mode.
The rest of it seems more about a lot of other issues. I'd agree that you don't need to be some idealized weight and there is a range of weights at which people can be healthy (and really it's no one's business). I also think trying to compare how much you eat/workout to others and feeling (or so I sense) that it's unfair is never useful and often not accurate (but even if my sister is effortlessly 110 at 5'3, as I used to think (incorrectly, she put in effort), so what?).2 -
3. (Sorry, that you think you can eat as much as someone who is 7 inches taller than you, and still be under the delusion you will be able lose weight like they can. ) Where the hell are you getting your info from? I ate LESS than and HEALTHIER than my SAME HEIGHT sister and daughter. SAME. My 7 inches taller friend was the twinkie eating, couch sitting, pot head. She was mentioned ONCE the entire story..and she is what you focus on? Is there something in particular that drew you to that character?
4. (Trust me I was being nicer than a lot of other posters) Perhaps you are missing the whole idea behind "support" group? I dont expect to be "coddled" or "encouraged". Hell, I dont expect empathy at all. I actually didnt come here to gain others support. I came here to OFFER it. I am the first to admit that I dont play well with others, but being able to encourage another person, for me, is the motivation that drives my will to succeed in life. We are to encourage one another and build each other up. Edify and not tear down. [/quote]
No. 3 No you were still were comparing yourself to everyone around you not just the Twinkie eating pot head. My point was everyone is different. So what if she was able to eat her weight in Twinkies. There are plenty of people who struggle to lose weight too while having depression and health issues. That is what I mean by saying you are not a special snowflake.
No. 4 This is the debate section you want to motivated and supported post on that board. Not everyone on here is nice and some of us take different approaches when debating a subject. You took it upon yourself to insult my literacy when I was trying to address what I though you meant by you extremely long story on, how you think you can't lose weight like everyone else.
1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »You have to be a yo-yo dieter to truly understand what the starvation mode truly is.
I am not sure what prompted this -- maybe the discussion of dieting myths in which starvation mode was mentioned? Maybe that background would be helpful.
However, as some others have mentioned, I think you seem to be unaware of how starvation mode is so often used: to claim that one can eat too little and as a result your body starts holding onto fat and you cannot lose, and even gain weight. Many people claim to have gotten fat from "eating too little" (NOT from bingeing after a period of eating too little or some such, which I agree happens), or worry too much about hitting a sweet spot where they will lose and if they don't assume it's as likely to be eating too little as eating too much (or just not being patient).
I totally agree there are bad effects from eating too little and that dieting over time (especially with an aggressive deficit) can affect metabolism, but wouldn't call that starvation mode.
The rest of it seems more about a lot of other issues. I'd agree that you don't need to be some idealized weight and there is a range of weights at which people can be healthy (and really it's no one's business). I also think trying to compare how much you eat/workout to others and feeling (or so I sense) that it's unfair is never useful and often not accurate (but even if my sister is effortlessly 110 at 5'3, as I used to think (incorrectly, she put in effort), so what?).
I can't like this post enough.
1 -
singingflutelady wrote: »@Reaverie you do realize that you posted this in the debate forum where the focus is debating things? Debating is not a support group or motivation. It's debating
I concede to that fact. However, disparaging remarks because you disagree with someones post hardly falls under the category of debate. Trigdens "Starvation mode is a myth", as eloquently put as it was, came closer to resembling a debate than accusing me of being hangry and comparing me to a special snowflake. Though I have to agree with the snowflake rhetoric. I am cold, round, pale as the beach sand, and misshapen. Observation courtesy of my 15 year old daughter.3 -
I am rather impressed with the turn this impromptu debate has taken. So many well thought out opinions and beliefs! And some not so well thought out.. But it makes for an entertaining distraction.0
-
That is the basics of what I believe...
So if we move beyond feelz and beliefs, here is an actual scientific explanation of why "starvation mode", as it is commonly defined, doesn't exist - authored by a PhD in the field: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1077746/starvation-mode-adaptive-thermogenesis-and-weight-loss/p1
There's no question that metabolic adaptation exists and is A Thing. But not to the extent that it stops and/or reverses weight loss.4
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 390 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions