Starvation Mode - Adaptive Thermogenesis and Weight Loss

24567…16

Replies

  • delicious_cocktail
    delicious_cocktail Posts: 5,797 Member
    too early in the morning for this.
    but in to read later . . .
  • newstar44
    newstar44 Posts: 87 Member
    Good info....bump for later reference. Thanks!
  • 4flamingoz
    4flamingoz Posts: 214 Member
    bump
  • melham
    melham Posts: 233 Member
    It's refreshing to see researched and documented information floating like a buoy in the usual sea of "I heard thus-and-such from my brother's yoga instructor" and the like. Nicely done and appreciated, sir!
  • awlosing30
    awlosing30 Posts: 38 Member
    Awesome read...I must admit, I zonked out for a second when things got really confusing, but got right back into it. I think your reply to that post really summed it up for me as i'm on a1,000 c/day diet. I can feel my body needing less calories after a week. But, that means I need to work harder to keep it off. Thanks!
  • delicious_cocktail
    delicious_cocktail Posts: 5,797 Member
    It's refreshing to see researched and documented information floating like a buoy in the usual sea of "I heard thus-and-such from my brother's yoga instructor" and the like. Nicely done and appreciated, sir!

    Excuse me but is this a reference to my thread about the awesome weight loss secrets that I got my brother's Yogi, Schlomo Lipschitz? He has observed a definite weight loss correlation between keeping kosher and gentle stretching exercises.
  • stephv38
    stephv38 Posts: 203 Member
    bump to read as soon as I can...
  • ElliInJapan
    ElliInJapan Posts: 286 Member
    That's a great post, thank you for writing it! This whole "starvation mode" thing was always confusing to me. Are there any data whether this reduction in TDEE changes with time? (in terms of years I mean, assuming that the individual remains at the same level of leanness

    ETA: Also, another question: what is considered a "large" deficit? (how is it defined?) I think VLCD are at ~800kcal, where do the so common 1200kcal diets fall?

    Thanks for the questions.

    In the biosphere 2 study - It was found that at least 6 months after refeed, even when body weight had returned to normal, the TDEE was lower - but possibly this was due to the fact that the majority of the weight re-gain was fat.

    http://ejournals.ebsco.com/Direct.asp?AccessToken=959Q5IJ8X14KKMU1XZMIQJKUUMR48IMJXD&Show=Object&msid=-419407123

    For individuals that remain at the same level of leaness - there is this study:
    http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/88/4/906.full.pdf+html

    The reduction in TDEE does recover and it is addressed in a lot the references they cite. But the duration, presence of TDEE drop, and recovery vary enormously and is a subject of discussion.
    We previously reported persistent reductions in EE—corrected for metabolic mass and age—in subjects maintaining a reduced body weight for periods of >3 mo after cessation of weight loss (3– 6, 37). These reductions in EE could reflect transient carryover of the metabolic consequences of negative energy balance or could be a reflection of physiologic responses to reduced body fat per se (or both). The distinction between these 2 possibilities is critical to an understanding of weight homeostasis in human subjects.

    The major finding of the present study is that there are similar, significant declines in TEE, NREE, and, to a lesser extent, REE in subjects maintaining a reduced body weight, regardless of whether that reduced weight has been maintained for weeks or years. In other words, bioenergetic responses to maintenance of a reduced body weight do not wane with time.

    Studies in this laboratory and elsewhere have previously reported significantly reduced energy requirements in obese women who had maintained a reduced weight for periods of 4 to 6 y (1) and in subjects who were stable at their reduced weight months after substantial weight loss (38). Other studies did not detect significant changes in EE corrected for changes in metabolic mass in weight-reduced subjects (23–27).

    A "large" deficit - yes, probably not clearly defined - VLCDs are diets that have calorie restriction to 800 cals. A large deficit is, I would assume, depends a lot on the starting point, duration, etc - I'm not sure there is a clear area here but let's say that anything beyond -30% TDEE is probably large. This is solely my assumption, I believe MFP goes with less and I welcome any references on this question.

    Thanks, Evgeni, that's a lot of info you've given. More and more questions pop up in my mind but it's probably better to read these links carefully and digest them a bit first.

    But I've got to say this: isn't it fascinating when what happens in reality isn't what equations predict? That's the good stuff. Nature is always much more complex and fascinating than our models. Now off to read...
  • scottaworley
    scottaworley Posts: 871 Member
    Metabolic adaptation =/= starvation mode.

    ETA: While I think we would agree on the concept of metabolic adaptation, I think that it is dangerous to call metabolic adaptation "starvation mode".

    It might be, but this is what is often confused by these two terms both in lay terms and even in the scientific literature. If you have different non-overlapping definitions that correspond to how people use the terms - please go ahead and post them.

    But the core of the info isn't about MA vs SM - I think that is a somewhat strerile debate but rather what is MA, what does it mean for the overweight person losing weight and how does it impact weight loss and do diet breaks help.

    I feel that starvation mode is synonymous with metabolic damage. Metabolic damage, to my understanding, is severe and prolonged downward metabolic adaptation. Anyone who is dieting experiences metabolic adaptation to an extent. My problem with using the term "starvation mode" is that it is not descriptive of what is actually occurring and it leaves no room for downward adjustment. Someone could be eating 1800 calories and be in "starvation mode", but they still have room to move out of their adjusted TDEE, where as someone who is eating 900 calories and is not losing weight might actually have metabolic damage (and be in "starvation mode"). The latter has no room to adjust downwards and must begin adapting their metabolism upwards.
    It may be an argument of semantics, but I think that it would be beneficial for people on MFP to lay off of the term "starvation mode" except for in the most extreme cases of downward metabolic adaptation and focus on the more versatile and descriptive term of "metabolic adaptation".
  • diannethegeek
    diannethegeek Posts: 14,776 Member
    bump for later
  • Cranquistador
    Cranquistador Posts: 39,744 Member
    Awesome read...I must admit, I zonked out for a second when things got really confusing, but got right back into it. I think your reply to that post really summed it up for me as i'm on a1,000 c/day diet. I can feel my body needing less calories after a week. But, that means I need to work harder to keep it off. Thanks!

    :noway:
  • Shara126
    Shara126 Posts: 144 Member
    bump to read later
  • TheEffort
    TheEffort Posts: 1,028 Member
    bump.

    8488541.png
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Tagging to nerd out later.
  • EmilyJackCO
    EmilyJackCO Posts: 621 Member
    Bump to read after coffee...
  • AlsDonkBoxSquat
    AlsDonkBoxSquat Posts: 6,128 Member
    Excellent information, even in the TL sections. I'll have to come back and read in detail later.
  • Monkeyca_Rodriguez
    Monkeyca_Rodriguez Posts: 11 Member
    Thanks a lot for this! :flowerforyou:
  • ajaxe432
    ajaxe432 Posts: 608 Member
    Finally! A post that has good credited information on it! How dare you:smokin: !Thank you for the good info!
  • MoreBean13
    MoreBean13 Posts: 8,701 Member
    Bump to follow
  • DragonSquatter
    DragonSquatter Posts: 957 Member
    ping to read
  • MicheleWE
    MicheleWE Posts: 179 Member
    bump
  • 55in13
    55in13 Posts: 1,091 Member
    ETA: By the way the study reports adaptation at "Maintenance of a 10% or greater reduction in body weight in lean or obese individuals is accompanied by an approximate 20%-25% decline in 24-hour energy expenditure" And we are only using a 15% decline...
    Maybe I am confused by all the info you provided, but I thought that 10% to 15% was distilled out as actual impact on metabolic rate (actual versus expected).

    BTW, there is still my other question:
    In any of these studies you looked at, was there ever a point at which lowering consumption did not increase the deficit?
    I don't believe such a point exists.

    There is also the matter of likelihood - I don't think most people should expect the worst case scenario.

    ETA - BTW, I am one of those annoying people who did the drastic cut, lost nearly 2 pounds a week consistently for about 4 months, upped to lose slower a little while and then adjusted to maintenance after a 55 pound loss. I think I need some toning, but I do not "look like poo". I don't seem to have altered my metabolic rate significantly; calculators are pretty close on what I need to maintain.
  • Otterluv
    Otterluv Posts: 9,083 Member
    Thank you for posting this.


    Bumping for it to show on my feed.
  • pinkpanthers1995
    pinkpanthers1995 Posts: 41 Member
    Thanks for putting the work into this. It is very informative and gives a lot to think about.
  • elleryjones
    elleryjones Posts: 88 Member
    I'm on my 2nd cup of coffee and it still requires a re-read. So far I'm getting that it's not as easy as one would think to shrink oneself. ;)
  • Cliffslosinit
    Cliffslosinit Posts: 5,044 Member
    Awesome read...I must admit, I zonked out for a second when things got really confusing, but got right back into it. I think your reply to that post really summed it up for me as i'm on a1,000 c/day diet. I can feel my body needing less calories after a week. But, that means I need to work harder to keep it off. Thanks!

    :noway:

    WAT!? :noway: :noway: :noway: :noway: :noway:
  • TyTy76
    TyTy76 Posts: 1,761 Member
    My head hurts...
  • Robin_Bin
    Robin_Bin Posts: 1,046 Member
    Thank you!
    (Also posting to make it easier to read more carefully again later.)
  • cmcollins001
    cmcollins001 Posts: 3,472 Member
    Note to self: Topics that have research and stuff and things need to be held off until afternoon reading.

    TL;DR Too early in the morning
  • ajaxe432
    ajaxe432 Posts: 608 Member
    Awesome read...I must admit, I zonked out for a second when things got really confusing, but got right back into it. I think your reply to that post really summed it up for me as i'm on a1,000 c/day diet. I can feel my body needing less calories after a week. But, that means I need to work harder to keep it off. Thanks!
    :noway: Did you understand the point of the post?

Categories