Starvation Mode

DavidHomeshield

Help

I am about 6 stone over weight, and have started using the app, but I don't sit and eat much as the meals were a little excessive in calories, so just stuck to fresh raw and fruit, but it is hard to hit the 1400 a day allocated and to be honest I like the loss on 500-1000.

Starvation mode, as the warning says, surely this dose not stop me losing weight rather just slows the excess, so if I were losing x whilst consuming 200 cals under my set the if I doubled this I would only lose 1.5 times x rather than the 2 x expected. Other wise starvation would never be a problem in the world. Is this correct?

Also if there are some things I am low on, can't I just top up with multi tables to enhance the missing?

Raw veg and fruit, I find it easy to eat, If I were to prepare a serious meal, that would probably end it all, feeding the kids is bad enough, I do rather love my food, so is it ok to eat raw and fruit only?

Well I started at 18 stone and want to lose at least 2 stone in a month, I am a little ahead of my pan at the moment so all seems to be working out fine, next month planning just a stone, and running about 750 cals a day, well if my body wants more there is plenty around my tummy.

Thanks and a great app.

D...

AJ_G

Starvation mode is not a real thing, but understand this, if you eat at a larger than 20% deficit from your TDEE, your weight loss will be faster, but a significant amount of your weight loss will consist of muscle loss which is not what you want. The basic guideline is you do not want to lose more than 1% of your body weight per week, so eat at the calorie level that correlates to that.

DavidHomeshield

Thanks for that, also it says I have not consumed enough suger, I thought this was a good thing?

AJ_G

There's no minimum amount of sugar you should be consuming, so just ignore that.

JuantonBliss

While TOO MUCH sugar can be bad, your body still needs the proper food intake in order to turn sugars into energy, which is what carbohydrates do. Have you been eating enough wheats like pastas, breads while also taking in nuts, beans, etc.?

MyouTakaraTriesAgain

"Starvation Mode" is very much a real biological process, but as with this "toxins" nonsense, most people on MPF have no clue what they're talking about. The medical term is "adaptive thermogenesis."

Pubmed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20935667
Pubmed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23535105
Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_thermogenesis

The gist of it is that when you lose weight, your body freaks the hell out because it wants to keep those energy stores. Even losing weight in a healthy manner will result in some adaptive thermogenesis. By not eating enough, you're telling your body there isn't sufficient food around. It learns to be more efficient with the energy it has, which is precisely what you DON'T want. You'll get a much sharper response, thus making it more difficult to lose weight and keep it off.

AJ_G

"Starvation Mode" is very much a real biological process, but as with this "toxins" nonsense, most people on MPF have no clue what they're talking about. The medical term is "adaptive thermogenesis."

Pubmed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20935667
Pubmed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23535105
Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_thermogenesis

The gist of it is that when you lose weight, your body freaks the hell out because it wants to keep those energy stores. Even losing weight in a healthy manner will result in some adaptive thermogenesis. By not eating enough, you're telling your body there isn't sufficient food around. It learns to be more efficient with the energy it has, which is precisely what you DON'T want. You'll get a much sharper response, thus making it more difficult to lose weight and keep it off.

Adaptive thermogenesis/metabolic adaptation and the perpetuated myth of "Starvation Mode" are two very different things. Adaptive thermogenesis is your body's response to a calorie deficit. It is a survival instinct for your body to become more efficient at burning calories and thus slow down your metabolism to prevent depletion of fat stores needed for survival. This process takes months to occur. When people refer to "Starvation Mode", they believe that eating below a certain calorie goal will cause your metabolism to drastically slow down in a matter of hours, days, or weeks, this is not the case. It should also be noted that it takes a consistent high calorie deficit for this to occur in any significant way. The best method in weight lost, which is also the least followed because people are impatient, is to eat the highest number of calories possible that still allows your body to lose weight. This allows for the highest metabolic capacity, and the slowest response of metabolic adaptation.

ron2e

Google "Starvation mode myth". Tells you all you need to know (if the word 'myth' doesn't give it away!).

sofitheteacup

OP is all over the place.

A calorie deficit will result in a loss. Bigger deficit, bigger loss. But you want to stay safe, so I'd advise adhering to the MFP outlines- that's what they're there for. If you want to get into the math of TDEE and such, go ahead, but it sounds like it may raise way more questions than it answers for you.

sofitheteacup

Okay, read through more carefully...
living on 500-1000 calories a day is probably not going to last you long, and as soon as you return to "normal" eating, you are unlikely to sustain the loss because you did not learn good portions and habits.
As for eating all raw fruit, that won't fully meet your nutrition requirements and eventually you'll have issues. You mention taking a multivitamin to avoid having said issues, but it isn't quite that simple. Eat as much fruit and raw food as you want, but unless you're planning on long-term vegan/raw-food-diet, the results you get will not last.

daisyeyes

^^^ if only there was a thumbs up on MFP!!

mahanaibu

"Starvation Mode" is very much a real biological process, but as with this "toxins" nonsense, most people on MPF have no clue what they're talking about. The medical term is "adaptive thermogenesis."

Pubmed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20935667
Pubmed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23535105
Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_thermogenesis

The gist of it is that when you lose weight, your body freaks the hell out because it wants to keep those energy stores. Even losing weight in a healthy manner will result in some adaptive thermogenesis. By not eating enough, you're telling your body there isn't sufficient food around. It learns to be more efficient with the energy it has, which is precisely what you DON'T want. You'll get a much sharper response, thus making it more difficult to lose weight and keep it off.

Adaptive thermogenesis/metabolic adaptation and the perpetuated myth of "Starvation Mode" are two very different things. Adaptive thermogenesis is your body's response to a calorie deficit. It is a survival instinct for your body to become more efficient at burning calories and thus slow down your metabolism to prevent depletion of fat stores needed for survival. This process takes months to occur. When people refer to "Starvation Mode", they believe that eating below a certain calorie goal will cause your metabolism to drastically slow down in a matter of hours, days, or weeks, this is not the case. It should also be noted that it takes a consistent high calorie deficit for this to occur in any significant way. The best method in weight lost, which is also the least followed because people are impatient, is to eat the highest number of calories possible that still allows your body to lose weight. This allows for the highest metabolic capacity, and the slowest response of metabolic adaptation.

well said. this is it exactly. it would be great if every time the words "starvation mode" came up on the forums, this would just automaticallyy pop up.

sexymuffintop

The other problem is sustainability. Can you realistically keep up a deficit that size until you are at your target weight? Can you really face eating so little for the foreseeable future.

Then you have to think about maintenance. You can't just go from eating below 1000 cals a day to eating 2000+ daily once you reach your target weight and not expect to put weight back on.

It's far easier to lose and maintain weight loss if it's done slower on a less drastic deficit. It's not a race at the end of the day.

DavidHomeshield

Nuts and Protine, Ahh no, just apples and carrots mainly, that sort of thing.

yarwell

Then you have to think about maintenance. You can't just go from eating below 1000 cals a day to eating 2000+ daily once you reach your target weight and not expect to put weight back on.

Indeed, but why would you even think of doing that ?

I've lost the weight, so let's go back to the behaviour that put it on in the first place ?

grimendale

2000+ calories is maintenance for a lot of people (myself included). I'm currently eating over 2000 calories and losing. When I switch to maintenance, I'll be eating a little shy of 3000 calories a day. Believe me, I ate a lot more than that to get to the way I was. It is therefore not an unreasonable statement.

notworthstalking

Then you have to think about maintenance. You can't just go from eating below 1000 cals a day to eating 2000+ daily once you reach your target weight and not expect to put weight back on.

Indeed, but why would you even think of doing that ?

I've lost the weight, so let's go back to the behaviour that put it on in the first place ?

I don't know the exact numbers, but the average adult in Australia needs around 2000 calories a day. Of cause maintenance may be more or less, but I would think the average male is up there. Mine is around 3000 and I am a 32 year old woman.

peachfigs

I think you are setting yourself up for failure here. You are eating too little, and restricting your diet too much. If you would like to be strict about your diet, perhaps cut out junk food and sugary treats, but leave it at that. Only eating raw fruits and vegetables will make you extremely inefficient - there is no protein to support your workouts.

My advice would be to raise your calories and enjoy some protein with your meals. Make it more sustainable. Otherwise, in the next few months you'll hit a wall and you'll likely put all of your weight back on when you start eating properly again.

maegmez

I lost about 100 pounds in less than a year by eating 1300-1400 cals a day and burning about 5000-6000 a week. I love running. My weight loss was consistent but I paid the price. I wasn't eating calories back and I started suffering blindness in one eye. After lots of drs visits and tests, it came down to not eating enough calories for the amount of exercise I was doing. Also, it's just not sustainable.

I averaged about 2 pounds a week. I'm 41 and 5' 4.75" tall, starting weight was 258.8

If you look at how little I was eating and the amount I was burning, I should have been loosing 3 pounds a week but your body knows what it needs and will hold onto foods.

Don't put such demanding goals on your body and don't try to eat to lose more than 2 pounds a week at first. You didn't gain all that weight in 2 months so don't expect to lose it in 2 months. As someone mentioned above, this healthy eating MUST be sustainable,if it isn't, you risk gaining it all back. It's not worth it.

You need to eat 3 regular meals a day along with 2 healthy snacks or a combination that works for you but you have to eat more than what you are eating now.

Ultimately, I don't believe you will ever starve BUT you will mess up your metabolism and your body will start storing foods as fat for energy. Yes, you will lose weight but you will also lose lean muscle, you will be weak, you risk causing medical issues with your health...like my blindness. I'm fine now but have learned I really need to take care of all of my health. I still have 30 pounds to lose but it will take nearly a year to lose that because I'm doing the rest the right way.

DavidHomeshield

one of the problems I have is that I had not realised the weight was pilling on, my daily work had changed slightly more r&d than real work, o a lot more sitting around and tinkering with a soldering iron than running around with a screw driver.I have gone from 15 stone years ago to where I am a couple of weeks ago when I tipped the scales at an amazing 18 Stone. Scary I had been noticing that trousers were getting a litttle tight and it was more dificuilt to tie my shoes but it was easy to pass these off as age.

Then the biggy,heat problems, an amazing motivator, so I tend to view it all rather differently from can I maintaine a raw food and fruit diet, compared to, do I want to see my beautiful five year old grow up, or my lovely daughter leave school. I have the disadvantage of having a wonderful wife that is slightly my junior in years, and I feel that in the time we have been together she has matured and I have fallen apart.

I know that my patents levels are low, and I can eat like this for a really long time as long as the results are good, I could starve my self totally for weeks on end if the results slowed, My body is carring a massive spare store that I need to cut into. and if it needs I sort of believe it should be able to tap into these

One of the main things at the moment is I feel great since I have started to lose weight and eat slightly better. most energy i have had for ages. Not sure why but at the moment I feel great.

allifi1

I just joined today as overwhelmed by everything drs saying I got medical issues that made them put me on a low fibre reside diet because I got diabetes I find no or little helps on finding recipes that tasted good so I saw you had recipes but I filled in everything
I ate today in what dr and dietician set out for me but it said at bottom starvation mode I can't eat any more or I become nauseated I never get to 1200 a day