Starvation Mode - Adaptive Thermogenesis and Weight Loss

Mariekegetsfit

Great read, bookmark

scolaris

Yes, very worth a bookmark...

sunnyeuphoria

So am I correct in my understanding that a persons daily caloric needs can be maintained by doing strength training and building or maintaining muscle mass during the weight loss phase? So that whereas I may be able to avoid the depressed TDEE due to loss of muscle. I understand my energy requirements will be lower because of having less total body mass to move about. I am eating at the caloric level that a calculator told me I would need to maintain my goal weight with the assumption that eventually by eating that way I will reach my goal weight and be accustomed to eating that way so I dont regress to old eating habits. I would hate to have to further lessen my caloric intake just to maintain. Thanks!

EvgeniZyntx

sunnyeuphoria wrote: »

So am I correct in my understanding that a persons daily caloric needs can be maintained by doing strength training and building or maintaining muscle mass during the weight loss phase? So that whereas I may be able to avoid the depressed TDEE due to loss of muscle. I understand my energy requirements will be lower because of having less total body mass to move about. I am eating at the caloric level that a calculator told me I would need to maintain my goal weight with the assumption that eventually by eating that way I will reach my goal weight and be accustomed to eating that way so I dont regress to old eating habits. I would hate to have to further lessen my caloric intake just to maintain. Thanks!

To some extent yes, we still lose LBM when dieting, especially if the amount of weight to be lost is significative. But strength training can certainly offset some of the reduction in TDEE or even increase TDEE.

Now don't expect huge changes, as the energy needs of muscle are close to 7-21 cals per pound per day (depending on activity level). So 10 lbs retained or newly developed are 70-210 cal increase in baseline TDEE.

concordancia

This is why I need to set auto correct to change "starvation mode" to "you may become sluggish and conserve energy in ways that you aren't even aware of."

blues4miles

10/10 would read again.

It's a shame RMR was not measured in these fellows: (http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/early/2016/01/26/ajcn.115.119339.abstract?sid=78fc4efb-e348-43c3-9701-2a59be984e27)

I notice in the study that seems to show a 10-15% TDEE drop (http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199503093321001#t=articleMethods) that the participants were on an 800 calorie a day liquid diet consisting of only 15% protein. I know they are supposedly accounting for the LBM loss in their math, but the more recent study is such a departure from expected it makes you wonder.

diannethegeek

No one reads the stickies anymore. Just giving some of them a bump.

Thomaskerrya

It's fantastic that three years on this is still helping people! As a habitual crash and yo-yo dieter, becoming heavier than ever over the last year (now finally trying to get my *kitten* together) this article has been the BEST thing I have ever read, it explains so much - why my crash diets don't work after the initial couple of weeks, why I am afraid to increase my calories (as instructed by the doc and thus piling on the pounds when I suddenly increase from 800 to 1600) and why I never succeed in a decent, sustainable weight loss. I had to re-read the article several times to get my head around it, and I went on to read up about Leptin - very interesting.

So I am now going to slowly (not just jump straight in as doc instructed) increase my calorific intake so my deficit isn't so huge and concentrate on my LBM (increase resistance over cardio) - hopefully leading to a sustainable, decent weight loss. I never thought it would be so difficult seeing as I have 4 stone to lose now I do understand 'trying too hard'. Thank you so much!

Thomaskerrya

ha ha, love how 'getting my **** together' changed to '*kittens*'!!!

DebSozo

EvgeniZyntx wrote: »

And in Practice?

1) Weight loss reduces TDEE in a way that is goes 10%-15% beyond what is expected from LBM. In order to combat this, it is either essential to maximize LBM during the weight loss process or one is likelier to struggle with that reduced calorie allowance.
2) Reevaluate working TDEE not from the equations but what you experience from tracking.
3) Take diet breaks and go to maintenance with the most calories that do not result in a weight gain when needed to reduce or recover the effect of adaptation. These diet breaks can be extensive (And this creates a logical framework for me for the Eat More to Loss process – if eating more “resets” the metabolism, then a loss will occur at what was maintenance)
4) Yes, there are factors that help create plateaus by increasing hunger, decrease energy expenditure and affecting various physiological functions: Understanding them and how exercise and diet interact will help in defining personal strategies for successful weight loss.
5) Success is measured in years, plan for it and adjust.

Finally, another bit of speculation - one of the reasons the bulk and cut cycles work so well beyond developing LBM, is that the refeed period of a bulk creates an efffecive diet break allowing for restabilization of hormonal and the other factors discussed...

Thanks for reading!

Awesome! This explains why the TDEE online doesn't match my experience. Thank you for taking the time to compile this thread.

DebSozo

BeachGingerOnTheRocks wrote: »

Thank you for compiling all this together into one post. I do think "starvation mode" is an overused and misunderstood term on MFP, and it is very helpful to understand what it happening and why there is a real need for going slow with weight loss. Thank you!

I agree. There seems to be a lot of confusion about the term so people tend to argue about semantics a lot. Maybe there should be a glossary on MFP so we can all discuss the same terms. I appreciate the validation that we really do slow down our metabolism when dieting and need to take breaks to give our bodies a chance to recover and adjust. Plateaus are normal ways for our bodies to do this, but people freak out when the body tries to take a break instead if riding them out.

k80flec

DebSozo wrote: »

. . . . . There seems to be a lot of confusion about the term so people tend to argue about semantics a lot. Maybe there should be a glossary on MFP so we can all discuss the same terms.

ETA

. . . . a glossary . . . .


https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1069278/acronyms-and-terms-for-new-mfp-members-v-6#latest

robertw486

@EvgeniZyntx I'm glad you mentioned this thread recently in another thread I read. I already had it bookmarked, and hadn't finished reading the last few pages yet.

Beyond the great science backed input by you and a few others of the crowd that often do post in such ways, it could be an excellent thread to use as an example of what happens when people discuss, dialogue and/or debate in a civil way, rather than try to win the internet. I've even bookmarked some of the "drifting topic" threads as well.

And as broken down, I'm still not quite sure where the line is where true long term adaptation takes place. But I've avoided quick losses for that and other reasons. I like food, and I don't want to work my tail off or suffer to not be able to eat as much of it.

Even in the short term, I think extremes can cause issues, but more in line with negative energy balance to 4 digits. I been led to believe the military has actually changed some of their extremes in survival training for the more elite groups, as they were doing multiple days of thousands of calorie deficits to teach the worst case scenario's of where it puts a persons body and mindset. Having done the very mild versions of the military training, I'd venture to say that very few people with internet access have ever come remotely close to true "survival mode" shutdowns, or any short or long term adaptations. It makes a "bonk" seem like childs play. I can't see why anyone just on a weight loss bender would go to such extremes, but people do some wild stuff.

Even though the government still picks up my medical bills (well mostly) I'd rather just not have to go in for medical care, or even worse get shorted a slice or a beer (gasp) on pizza night.


Some good science backed stuff up in here. Worthy of regular bumps.

EvgeniZyntx

robertw486 wrote: »

@EvgeniZyntx I'm glad you mentioned this thread recently in another thread I read. I already had it bookmarked, and hadn't finished reading the last few pages yet.

Beyond the great science backed input by you and a few others of the crowd that often do post in such ways, it could be an excellent thread to use as an example of what happens when people discuss, dialogue and/or debate in a civil way, rather than try to win the internet. I've even bookmarked some of the "drifting topic" threads as well.

And as broken down, I'm still not quite sure where the line is where true long term adaptation takes place. But I've avoided quick losses for that and other reasons. I like food, and I don't want to work my tail off or suffer to not be able to eat as much of it.

Even in the short term, I think extremes can cause issues, but more in line with negative energy balance to 4 digits. I been led to believe the military has actually changed some of their extremes in survival training for the more elite groups, as they were doing multiple days of thousands of calorie deficits to teach the worst case scenario's of where it puts a persons body and mindset. Having done the very mild versions of the military training, I'd venture to say that very few people with internet access have ever come remotely close to true "survival mode" shutdowns, or any short or long term adaptations. It makes a "bonk" seem like childs play. I can't see why anyone just on a weight loss bender would go to such extremes, but people do some wild stuff.

Even though the government still picks up my medical bills (well mostly) I'd rather just not have to go in for medical care, or even worse get shorted a slice or a beer (gasp) on pizza night.


Some good science backed stuff up in here. Worthy of regular bumps.

Thanks! :drinker:

And the other reasons for avoiding rapid weight loss are very important - from depression to gallstones to thyroid damage to lbm loss... it makes sense to try to lose sensibly. There are individuals that are better served by rapid loss - but generally under strict medical supervision.

AnnPT77

So much useful information here - the initial post for sure, but also the comments & dialog. I wish they were all like this! I'm commenting mostly to bump it.

I have to say, though I definitely harvested a lot of useful info from this, that I still feel like an outlier: I came through and out of weight loss able to eat substantially more than I ever expected - hundreds of calories more daily than the calculators predict - and I don't understand why. I'm curious . . . but there's also that "don't look a gift horse in the calorie allowance" thing. Don't want to jinx my maintenance!

I 'only' lost 60-some pounds, but did so fairly rapidly, over 10 months or so, around 2 pounds/week initially, dropping to 1 pound at maybe 20 or so to go, then 0.5 at 10 to go or a little less, then adding 100 or so daily calories every week or two to ease into maintenance over the last few pounds. Exercise all the way, though limited weight training (I'm a rower - have been for a decade, even while fat - so my 'cardio' is kinda strength-oriented, but I try for more weight work in off-season). I wonder if it's helped that I haven't yo-yo-ed over the years much, unlike most women my age (60)?

Thanks, @EvgeniZyntx especially, but also everyone who's contributed thoughtful comments of substance. Good stuff!

(Now I gotta go read all those linked threads . . . . ).

PAV8888

In view of some of the discussions in other threads, and even though this thread is in the stickies... maybe it *IS* time for a bump!

SueSueDio

Seems like there are a few threads that could use a bump today...

stanmann571

@monicahullinger

This should help if you want a more exhaustive explanation

Nony_Mouse

Time for a bump!

Nony_Mouse

Bump, again, cos I'm sick of multiple 'starvation mode' and 'plateau' threads every damn day, when people could just take a little time to educate themselves.