Weightloss has stalled at the most frustrating point
Options
Replies
-
-
tinkerbellang83 wrote: »
Also, I don't weigh daily but I probably would if I was that close to a milestone!1 -
gabriellejayde wrote: »Starvation mode?
I'm not going into the mysterious and illusive (and mythical) starvation mode because it doesn't exist
This threw me for a loop for a second. As a scientist, I could not understand how a basic cellular/molecular biology principle could be interpreted as a myth?!
After doing a Google search I saw the misunderstanding. "Starvation mode" in diet/nutrition speak refers to some weird (and abusive!) human starvation study done 100 years ago that has been used to alternatively support and refute individual views on weight loss.
I was completely unaware of this definition and certainly never intended to perpetuate any myth!
I had meant to refer to the "starvation reaction" of cells and associated metabolic/endocrine/neural/etc pathways affected by low energy intake which may temporarily stall or mask weightloss.
Mistakenly, I had used the term "mode," which to me meant a system of functions, not goofball's 1917 "study." Oops!
Thank you so much for pointing this out! I love learning and I have enjoyed reading the abstracts of cited research in some of the articles debunking the "starvation mode" myth this week.
No need to discuss this topic further in this thread (there's plenty in MFP stickies.) I only wish to acknowledge my error in terminology and thank @gabriellejayde and @kommodevaran for bringing it to my attention.
P.S. @gabriellejayde How has this week gone? Hope you are blissfully in Onederland!
Best Regards!4 -
Pound 200 is stickier than the others and takes extra time to lose. ;-)5
-
40lbslighter wrote: »gabriellejayde wrote: »Starvation mode?
I'm not going into the mysterious and illusive (and mythical) starvation mode because it doesn't exist
This threw me for a loop for a second. As a scientist, I could not understand how a basic cellular/molecular biology principle could be interpreted as a myth?!
After doing a Google search I saw the misunderstanding. "Starvation mode" in diet/nutrition speak refers to some weird (and abusive!) human starvation study done 100 years ago that has been used to alternatively support and refute individual views on weight loss.
I was completely unaware of this definition and certainly never intended to perpetuate any myth!
I had meant to refer to the "starvation reaction" of cells and associated metabolic/endocrine/neural/etc pathways affected by low energy intake which may temporarily stall or mask weightloss.
Mistakenly, I had used the term "mode," which to me meant a system of functions, not goofball's 1917 "study." Oops!
Thank you so much for pointing this out! I love learning and I have enjoyed reading the abstracts of cited research in some of the articles debunking the "starvation mode" myth this week.
No need to discuss this topic further in this thread (there's plenty in MFP stickies.) I only wish to acknowledge my error in terminology and thank @gabriellejayde and @kommodevaran for bringing it to my attention.
P.S. @gabriellejayde How has this week gone? Hope you are blissfully in Onederland!
Best Regards!
This is the best response!
I love it.
I broke through the 200 mark. After a week of no loss, it poured off.
I didn't change anything so it was just water i guess.7
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 400 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 988 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions