Starvation mode is a myth.

JumpinJill

To the OP: Thank you so much for the article! I really enjoyed it and have spent the last hour actually reading through the article and it's different links. I think some people that seem to be very against the article, did not even bother to read it or follow the authors train of thought throughout the readings. The whole system is similar to everything I have been reading on mfp. The author even bluntly states why things are this way, why you are losing weight, not losing weight etc. It is all about calories in and calories out. All the author did was correctly define starvation mode. If someone wants to eat 1200 calories fine, if someone wants to eat 1800 fine, whatever works for them. A common response I keep seeing is well the 1200 will just gain all the weight back, or the 1800 are losing weight slowly cause they are over eating, whatever just stop people. It should be up to the individual to decide what is best for them and what is working or not working for them. I thought the article was great thank you for posting it.

ThriceBlessed

I read the article, seemed like it had good information. It does acknowledge a slowdown of progress because of slowing metabolism when not eating enough, which is what I've always thought made sense anyway.

Seriously, if "starvation mode" could actually keep a person from losing weight forever, all of the starving children on telethons would be fine, their bodies would adapt!

So, metabolic slowdown can stall weight loss temporarily, it can make it take longer to lose weight (and make you feel much more miserable while losing), but it can't stop you from losing FOREVER. Eventually, if you are creating a deficit, you will lose weight, unless you have some kind of metabolic disorder or hormone imbalance, in which case you need to see a doctor.

That said, why make a deficit so large that your progress is slowed? Why slow your metabolism to the point that if you do start eating normally you will probably gain? Why not create a reasonable deficit and lose weight at a healthy rate, protecting metabolic rate and muscle mass at the same time, and enabling you lose faster than you would have with a huge deficit anyway?

rroxx89

I really hope this is true because lately I haven't been eating enough calories according to the MFP app. But I've lost a couple of pounds already. I was JUST stressing about this ..

I don't know why, but nothing looks good enough to eat right now.

SandyBeach1982

Lol @ people who eat 1200 or less cals a day trying to lose weight, bunch of crap. You really think that's a lifestyle you can keep up? Even if you get nice and skinny you'll be looking like a starving african child. I eat lots of fat and protein every day and I still lose weight as long as I set the correct defecit, and I eat cookies, ice cream, fried chicken, and all the goods, AKA I'm not miserable or obsessive about my diet, just careful about calories in vs calories out and hitting my macros. This isn't rocket science.

It's not meant to be a "lifestyle change" forever. My doctor put me on a 900 calorie a day diet. 1200 a day did not work for me. I was told to do this for 4 to 6 weeks and then gradually increase my calorie intake over the coarse of the next few months until I was at 1200 a day. 900 cals a day is intended to jump start a metabolism, it is not intended to be an everyday life choice for the rest of your life. That is insane. It is safe under a doctors watch. And for obese people, it is actually a better way to quickly diet especially if they have health ailments due to their weight that need to be corrected quickly. Also, with the food I eat, I am not hungry all day as some others have said. But again, it's all in what you eat.

I'm sorry, but if your doctor told you to do a 900 cal diet to "jump start" your metabolism then you have found one of the worst

doctors to be under the care of.

Where did you go to school to become a doctor? It is a common practice, just because you don't agree with it or it doesn't work for your body doesn't mean it's not right. Like I said in another comment, I will trust a person who has a doctorate before someone ranting on MFP lol.

Mia_RagazzaTosta

Lol @ people who eat 1200 or less cals a day trying to lose weight, bunch of crap. You really think that's a lifestyle you can keep up? Even if you get nice and skinny you'll be looking like a starving african child. I eat lots of fat and protein every day and I still lose weight as long as I set the correct defecit, and I eat cookies, ice cream, fried chicken, and all the goods, AKA I'm not miserable or obsessive about my diet, just careful about calories in vs calories out and hitting my macros. This isn't rocket science.

It's not meant to be a "lifestyle change" forever. My doctor put me on a 900 calorie a day diet. 1200 a day did not work for me. I was told to do this for 4 to 6 weeks and then gradually increase my calorie intake over the coarse of the next few months until I was at 1200 a day. 900 cals a day is intended to jump start a metabolism, it is not intended to be an everyday life choice for the rest of your life. That is insane. It is safe under a doctors watch. And for obese people, it is actually a better way to quickly diet especially if they have health ailments due to their weight that need to be corrected quickly. Also, with the food I eat, I am not hungry all day as some others have said. But again, it's all in what you eat.

I'm sorry, but if your doctor told you to do a 900 cal diet to "jump start" your metabolism then you have found one of the worst

doctors to be under the care of.

Where did you go to school to become a doctor? It is a common practice, just because you don't agree with it or it doesn't work for your body doesn't mean it's not right. Like I said in another comment, I will trust a person who has a doctorate before someone ranting on MFP lol.

Hold up...

Do you go to an ACTUAL doctor? One with a medical license? Or do you go to someone who has a PhD and calls him/herself "Dr."?? BIG difference. Medical doctors don't become doctors because they received a doctorate, though they can have one in addition to their medical degree.

I'm not ranting about anything and I don't have to be a doctor to know that the plan you're on is crap, but I AM a nurse. I know a thing or two about science and how it works.

By all means, continue on with your diet. We'll see you back here in a few months when you're wondering why you stopped losing or when you start over because this great plan didn't work.

AmandaJCole13

Then why did I not lose weight when eating 1200 calories a day, but when I bumped it up to 1400-1500 a day I finally started losing again? I measured the SAME either way. So how does that add up?

Your body is built for SURVIVAL, so YES, if you don't eat enough your body will hold on to stores as long as it can.
What is so hard to understand about that?

BrainyBurro

To the OP: Thank you so much for the article! I really enjoyed it and have spent the last hour actually reading through the article and it's different links. I think some people that seem to be very against the article, did not even bother to read it or follow the authors train of thought throughout the readings. The whole system is similar to everything I have been reading on mfp. The author even bluntly states why things are this way, why you are losing weight, not losing weight etc. It is all about calories in and calories out. All the author did was correctly define starvation mode. If someone wants to eat 1200 calories fine, if someone wants to eat 1800 fine, whatever works for them. A common response I keep seeing is well the 1200 will just gain all the weight back, or the 1800 are losing weight slowly cause they are over eating, whatever just stop people. It should be up to the individual to decide what is best for them and what is working or not working for them. I thought the article was great thank you for posting it.

it's because the OP picked a REALLY bad title for this thread. derpy people are responding based on the title and not the article. the article doesn't say starvation mode is a myth. it simply says that "starvation mode as an excuse for not losing weight" is a myth.

there is a real starvation response/mode, but it will never apply to 99% of the people reading these forums.

BrainyBurro

Then why did I not lose weight when eating 1200 calories a day, but when I bumped it up to 1400-1500 a day I finally started losing again? I measured the SAME either way. So how does that add up?

Your body is built for SURVIVAL, so YES, if you don't eat enough your body will hold on to stores as long as it can.
What is so hard to understand about that?

read the link.

AubreysMommy30

Most people who believe in "starvation mode" are the people on here who are relatively new to nutrition, still moderately-to-severely overweight, and (of course) will lose weight on 1800 calories per day when starting from 300+ pounds.

I have used 1300 calories a day for ages, have a BMI of 19.5 (5'9" tall) and have never gained a single pound from "not eating enough". What a ridiculous notion.

The only reason I have ever gained weight is from eating too much junk and drinking alcohol.

I'm 127 lbs, 37, and lose on 1800 cal per day. I can also drink alcohol and lose weight. No, I'm not a special snowflake. But I do feel sorry for people who think they can only eat 1300 cal/day to either maintain their weight or lose weight. My RMR is 1580 calories (tested). That means I burn nearly 1600 cal/day just sitting. Maintenence for me is about 2100 calories/day.

Food is not the enemy. No one gets a medal from eating too little. They just get hungry.

**So what about those like me who are over 300 yet eat around 1800 w/ exercise who still cannot lose? I'm happy for all those who are in there 100's who eat 1800 and lose... but how??? Someone please explain this because clearly it isn't always about calories in vs calories out...

hmaddpear

adiostrasero, ryry62685, (and others who commented)

Actually, far from hijacking the thread, it's been an education watching your discussion. So thank you - I've now got some more tips for if/when I start to plateau.

H

SandyBeach1982

http://www.nowloss.com/starvation-mode-myth.htm This is a great read as well

Juanwi

Its not that eating 1200 calories a day will make you put on weight, its that your body is hungry so when you do eventually cave and have that little binge, then your body stores it as fat. that has always been my take on it. I eat 1800 calories a day and I am consistently losing. Of course exercise helps

This is a nice way to show you don't like the 1200 route. I wish everyone said it like that :flowerforyou: I stick to the 1200, and am never hungry, because I'm stingy with how I spend calories - I'd rather an enormous salad with a bowl of soup than some chocolate. So I eat a lot of food on 1200, and on days I exercise, most days at the minute, I can have something I really love, or a few drinks. No better motivator to move!

But back to this comment, a 1200 calorie diet can easily lead to a breakdown of will if you only have two sandwiches and a bowl of cereal in a day.

I love this. It is exactly what I do. I exercise to eat, essentially. I'm at 1200 a day, but on most days, I burn enough from exercise to eat much more than this.

Briko3

Hormones. "Starvation mode" in the true sense of the word doesn't exist until you're VERY thin, but to think your hormone levels aren't affected by eating too little is to deny what our bodies are designed to do. It's like cutting grass. You shouldn't take off too much at one time. If you do, you'll end up with short grass, but it won't be the results you're looking for.

michail71

**So what about those like me who are over 300 yet eat around 1800 w/ exercise who still cannot lose? I'm happy for all those who are in there 100's who eat 1800 and lose... but how??? Someone please explain this because clearly it isn't always about calories in vs calories out...

While the basic laws of thermodynamics apply to everyone the same way (they have to, it's a fundamental part of the universe) what can differ significantly is an individuals BMR and TDEE.

Different people can respond and adjust their BMR and TDEE according to intake to some extent. While research shows it's minor I don't think it's as insignificant as many like to claim. In a highly controlled experiment it's one thing but in real life we'll start messing with the control variables (reducing activity, overeating, etc.).

I'm 5'9" 175 lbs and maintain on 3200 calories. I'm on a cut now at 2690 calories and losing weight. That's because I have a high lean body mass and a high TDEE from being highly active.

At one point I was on 1800 calories per day and stalling out at 154 lbs. My lean mass had taken a hit and my athletic performance was in the tank. I had essentially lost lean mass and the ability to be highly active. I could have reduced calories more but I would have taken a lean mass hit.

So as crazy as it sounds I've maintained weight at 1800 calories and 3200 calories.

Mia_RagazzaTosta

Most people who believe in "starvation mode" are the people on here who are relatively new to nutrition, still moderately-to-severely overweight, and (of course) will lose weight on 1800 calories per day when starting from 300+ pounds.

I have used 1300 calories a day for ages, have a BMI of 19.5 (5'9" tall) and have never gained a single pound from "not eating enough". What a ridiculous notion.

The only reason I have ever gained weight is from eating too much junk and drinking alcohol.

I'm 127 lbs, 37, and lose on 1800 cal per day. I can also drink alcohol and lose weight. No, I'm not a special snowflake. But I do feel sorry for people who think they can only eat 1300 cal/day to either maintain their weight or lose weight. My RMR is 1580 calories (tested). That means I burn nearly 1600 cal/day just sitting. Maintenence for me is about 2100 calories/day.

Food is not the enemy. No one gets a medal from eating too little. They just get hungry.

**So what about those like me who are over 300 yet eat around 1800 w/ exercise who still cannot lose? I'm happy for all those who are in there 100's who eat 1800 and lose... but how??? Someone please explain this because clearly it isn't always about calories in vs calories out...

In the past 7 days, you've only logged your intake for 4 days. One day was blank and two days were partial. So how can you say how many calories you're taking in when you don't really know? If you aren't losing, you aren't eating at a deficit. Period.

husseycd

**So what about those like me who are over 300 yet eat around 1800 w/ exercise who still cannot lose? I'm happy for all those who are in there 100's who eat 1800 and lose... but how??? Someone please explain this because clearly it isn't always about calories in vs calories out...

What is your activity like? Have you had your RMR tested. Body Fat %? Do you weigh foods? Do you log every drop of oil, ketchup, drop of honey, etc.? Have you had your thyroid tested?

There are actually very few calories between a sedentary woman at 140 lb and 200 lb (like, 600). I'm a pretty active person. I have a low BF%. But in order to drop from 138 lb to 127 lb (where I am now), I had to start weighing/measuring/counting my food. I was stuck at 138 lbs forever (2 years). I also quit eating grains (90% of the time), which I totally recommend. Mostly because it forces me to make better decisions when it comes to food. And too much wheat makes my stomach kinda icky. But that's another discussion all together.

I can't say why you aren't losing. You are welcome to look at my diary and see what I eat. I don't usually track on weekends because I'm lazy and I no longer track exercise. I was wearing a body media for a while and got all the information I needed from it (July had that info). However, to get an idea what my exercise is like, last night I went to an aerial silks class. We spent a half an hour stretching with the contortionist (ouch) and then an hour on fabric. This involves climbing, lifting the body upside down, manipulating different poses, over and over and over again. Today I will take my mountain bike out for a quick 2.5 mile ride on some single-track. My husband and I are going backpacking, so it'll be hiking tomorrow. I have a desk job, but I get up no less than every hour because I cannot sit still. I exercise daily. I lift weights. I do minimal cardio.

If I were not an active person with a relatively low BF%, 1800 calories would be way too many for me. My actual maintenance calories are about 2100, but I tend to go over on weekends so I try to stay low on weekdays. Personally, for you, I'd start by having my RMR tested and go from there. I also highly recommend a body media or fitbit, and of course, a food scale if you don't have one.

adiostrasero

adiostrasero, ryry62685, (and others who commented)

Actually, far from hijacking the thread, it's been an education watching your discussion. So thank you - I've now got some more tips for if/when I start to plateau.

H

Why, thank you I have found it quite educational, myself.

WendyTerry420

Thanks for the article. It drives me nuts how so many uninformed people regurgitate what they read about "starvation mode" to others who complain about not losing weight by eating x amount of calories.

The common thing I read is something like: You're only eating (usually a number 1500 or less) calories a day. You're in starvation mode and your body is holding onto (or gaining) fat to preserve itself. You need to eat more in order to lose more.

That's complete bull. It's also dangerous to tell people who are overweight that they need to eat more in order to lose, because I'm betting they aren't losing because they aren't accurately tracking their calories and are actually eating over maintenance.

If you're overweight or not dangerously thin, you could eat 0 calories a day for quite some time and not experience starvation. Why? Your body gets its energy from your fat store. Is it recommended? No. People get fixated on calories and ignore what else food provides us - nutrients that are essential for bodily functions. VLCDs will make you lose weight and not go into starvation mode until you have no fat to burn, but they also make you malnourished and unhealthy.

Speaking of uniformed....

LOL, how so? What specifically is uninformed about my post that you would like to argue about? But hey, way to contribute to the discussion and adding something worthwhile.

You left out metabolic adaptation and especially for women, hormonal issues. VLCDs are no bueno unless the person is extremely obese and under supervision of a doctor. Most people need to use TOPS: Take Off Pounds Sensibly. That means eating a minimum of fats and protein and keeping your deficit less than 1000.

Bobbiezilla

**Gets popcorn ready**

Oh it's gonna get good once the 'I eat 200 cals a day and I'm not losing weight!' crew gets here.

Bahahahaha I'm in.....for popcorn....for laughs....and for shaking my head at some forum drama today!

brooks4320

Reading the comments in these types of posts drives me up a wall because I think the moral of the story is this:

DO WHAT WORKS FOR YOU!

Some people eat 1800+ calories a day and lose weight and some people (like me) set goals at 1200 a day and STILL LOSE WEIGHT.

Which by the way to the people who say this is not maintainable, I've been eating at this level for over a month and I don't feel starved and I don't feel the urge to binge. And I'm not a small person--I'm 5'9" and 199lbs. And no, I'm not underestimating because I weigh and measure EVERYTHING that goes into my mouth. I don't feel the need to readjust and eat more because this is not achievable--if that changes I will recant my statement but I dont' see that happening.

BUT, I'm not going to tell the people who eat 1800+ calories a day are stupid for eating more if they're happy with their progress. I'm also not saying that people should go out and eat 500 calories a day every day for a year.

As long as you're putting good things into your body and exercising regularly, it shouldn't matter whether you're more successful with a higher or lower calorie count. If one stops working for you, maybe you should consider switching things around!

But there's no reason to come on a message board and act like your method is the "correct" way to do something just because it has been working for you. Everyone has a different body with a different metabolism which is why a One-Size-Fits-All weightloss method is not and will never be realistic. The only proven method for weight loss is calories in < calories out. The spread between the two is not important as long as it works for your body and your lifestyle.

Very well put. I agree 100%. There is no need for finger pointing or higher than mighty claims of grandier. If a particular weight loss solution works for you, stick with it. If not, try something new and keep trying until you get it right. As long as weight loss is "healthy" weight loss, that is all that matters.