Is it starvation mode???
Replies
-
yayyyyyy.....BRILLIANT aericle...thank you for sharing:flowerforyou:0
-
Why does this type of thread show up so often - oh I see, it's a newb.
BTW, unsourced web blogs are usually not the best to back up your argument.
Although some call it "starvation mode", it's also referred to metabolic adaptation, starvation response, adaptive thermogenesis, etc. and they pretty much all mean the same thing. No it doesn't happen over night, or even in a week. It's a gradual process that can take months. This is what you would call a "stall" especially when people get close to their goal weight.
You judging the OP by their start date would be like judging you for losing only 10lbs in four years.
Ha!!0 -
MFP threads.....i just HAD to click!! lol
but i`m learning something new every time so I wont complain.
my 2 cents: if it aint broke, dont try to fix it.
if fat loss has stalled...simply expend more energy.
but my observation on the threads has shown me SO many skinny people(especially girls) eating 800 calories and what not with cardio in an attempt to lose weight. Hey, to each his/her own, but NO ONE has a BMR of 800 with daily cardio at an 18+ age (unless you got some medical complication)..do what you want, but your health will come back to bite you where it hurts.
starvation mode? I`m Muslim...i`ve fasted for a month regularly without food and water for years....i didnt starve( but i did eat according to how many calories my body needed to just survive at least)0 -
lol the idea that starvation even has a "mode" is pretty effing stupid.
The light is in the off mode. This inherently superfluous meaning: simply put, you are starving or you're not.
The definition of starvation seems to be connotatively different, but saying that starvation doesn't exist is equally ignorant. Are you saying that children of 3rd world countries dying of malnutrition are not starving? Are you suggesting starving isn't a real word and you're trying to suggest that people only suffer "hunger"?0 -
Also, this article is clearly written by someone who has never seen a contest prep physique athlete regimen.0
-
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1077746-starvation-mode-adaptive-thermogenesis-and-weight-loss
We've been there...
ETA: BTW - Starvation Mode, as most people use it, does exist and is just adapative thermogenesis - a response to reduced calories that results in a miscalculation of the calories deficit needed to lose. The usual repsonses like in the article are
- cut more, you'll lose!
- it doesn't exist, you are lying on what you consume!
- it doesn't exist, you are over calculating your burns!
These answers often lead to frustration and actions that are a direct path to failure.
Yes, the first steps to addressing this is to look very closely to logging and actual calorie burns. It is often the case that the person, after months and months of logging has gotten frustrated and is no longer paying sufficient attention to the details of logging accuracy. Or that the exercise burns that were once high have not dropped either due to weight loss (you burn less as you loss) or exercise efficiency gains (you burn less as you get better at your activity).
1) Assess your cals, dial it in so you can be really certain that what you log is what you eat.
2) Burns are variable and difficult to measure even with a HRM, consider just going to a fixed TDEE and not logging burns. You get to include your excercise in your total activity level and then go to a fixed amount of cals per day - usually a bit higher than the MFP setting (take average weekly exercise/7 as use that as a starting point)
3) Now that logging food and burns are cleaner - you have three choices
3.1) Cut some more - but does it make sense, are you getting enough nutrition, can you handle it? Or will this lead to failure because it is too much. Create a deficit - possibly conside changing eating habits to more filling/less calorie dense food (eat your veggies).
3.2) Burn some more - increase the TOTAL activity level - make your days more active, incresase exercise. Is this feasable, can you integrate it into your day or will that lead to failure? Create a deficit. TOTAL activity - not just exercise.
3.3) Keep at it slowly - Don't cut/ don't increase activity but recognize that the loss will go much slower (but will occur if you are tracking well and consistently)
In any of these, taking a break and going to maintenance (real, not calcluated) can be a useful mentally and physically. Resistance training to build up lean body mass and to tip the balance between metabolism and calories consumed to the loss side can also be useful.1 -
starvation mode? I`m Muslim...i`ve fasted for a month regularly without food and water for years....i didnt starve( but i did eat according to how many calories my body needed to just survive at least)
I grew up Muslim too, and we ate breakfast and dinner throughout Ramadaan and then pigged out on Eid. I believe this played a small part in my issues with eating.
As for the naming convention arguments---
And the literal english interpretation of the term doesn't make sense, but that has nothing to do with whether or not there are a group of real adaptations that the body goes through while someone is on a diet that people call 'starvation mode'
Dissing something because someone called it something silly is kind of silly - because nobody actually means 'starvation' when they say 'starvation mode' - but 'mode' is actually reasonably accurate because it can be reversed and it is temporary.0 -
lol the idea that starvation even has a "mode" is pretty effing stupid.
The light is in the off mode. This inherently superfluous meaning: simply put, you are starving or you're not.
The definition of starvation seems to be connotatively different, but saying that starvation doesn't exist is equally ignorant. Are you saying that children of 3rd world countries dying of malnutrition are not starving? Are you suggesting starving isn't a real word and you're trying to suggest that people only suffer "hunger"?
Starvation - suffering or death caused by having nothing to eat, or not enough to eat.
Malnutrition - the unhealthy condition that results from not eating enough food or not eating enough HEALTHY FOOD: poor nutrition
While both can be caused by not eating enough food, they are not mutual exclusive. You can be malnourished and not starving. Children in third world countries that are dying typically die of diseases or health issues caused by the malnoutrition. Not necessarily Starvation. As a former death investigator I have seen both, but the majority of the time it is a complicaton associated with malnoutrition as opposed to actual starvation. One of the worst cases I ever handled involved an infant in a car seat for 8 days without food or water. It made National news. Everyone assumed the infant perished from starvation..he did not..he perished due to sepsis from a dirty diaper. The human body is an amazing thing. It can survive for 30-40 days WITHOUT food as long as it is properly hydrated. Without hydration sever symptoms begin to manifast around 40-45 days and death can occur anywhere from 45 to 61 days without food AND water. Starvation is NOT a MODE...Adaptive thermogenesis is. Yes Adaptive thermogenesis occurs..but it is not Starvation "Mode"...0 -
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1077746-starvation-mode-adaptive-thermogenesis-and-weight-loss
We've been there...
ETA: BTW - Starvation Mode, as most people use it, does exist and is just adapative thermogenesis - a response to reduced calories that results in a miscalculation of the calories deficit needed to lose. The usual repsonses like in the article are
- cut more, you'll lose!
- it doesn't exist, you are lying on what you consume!
- it doesn't exist, you are over calculating your burns!
These answers often lead to frustration and actions that are a direct path to failure.
Yes, the first steps to addressing this is to look very closely to logging and actual calorie burns. It is often the case that the person, after months and months of logging has gotten frustrated and is no longer paying sufficient attention to the details of logging accuracy. Or that the exercise burns that were once high have not dropped either due to weight loss (you burn less as you loss) or exercise efficiency gains (you burn less as you get better at your activity).
1) Assess your cals, dial it in so you can be really certain that what you log is what you eat.
2) Burns are variable and difficult to measure even with a HRM, consider just going to a fixed TDEE and not logging burns. You get to include your excercise in your total activity level and then go to a fixed amount of cals per day - usually a bit higher than the MFP setting (take average weekly exercise/7 as use that as a starting point)
3) Now that logging food and burns are cleaner - you have three choices
3.1) Cut some more - but does it make sense, are you getting enough nutrition, can you handle it? Or will this lead to failure because it is too much. Create a deficit - possibly conside changing eating habits to more filling/less calorie dense food (eat your veggies).
3.2) Burn some more - increase the TOTAL activity level - make your days more active, incresase exercise. Is this feasable, can you integrate it into your day or will that lead to failure? Create a deficit. TOTAL activity - not just exercise.
3.3) Keep at it slowly - Don't cut/ don't increase activity but recognize that the loss will go much slower (but will occur if you are tracking well and consistently)
In any of these, taking a break and going to maintenance (real, not calcluated) can be a useful mentally and physically. Resistance training to build up lean body mass and to tip the balance between metabolism and calories consumed to the loss side can also be useful.
Well since you've been there and done that I guess there's no need for me to share something with others that I found useful. Oh wait, scratch that... I think I will! Oh wait, I already did!
I read your thread and found it quite insightful, and I agree with a lot of what you have to say above... but yet again I will repeat myself:
Adaptive thermogenesis is a VERY REAL thing. After prolonged deficits an individual's metabolism will slow down and this can affect weight loss in the long run -- to some degree.
MYTHS:
Skipping a meal with throw you into metabolic shutdown.
A morbidly obese person "doing everything right" must be in starvation mode after their weight loss stalled one month into their "journey"
An overweight individual thinks they are "doing everything right" and can't lose weight because they are eating too few calories and sent their body into a downward spiral of starvation mode.
Same individual is somehow gaining weight because of this dreaded starvation mode, even though they "know" they are eating at a deficit.
REALITY:
Caloric deficit = weight loss
BEFORE suggesting someone is in starvation mode, the responsible thing to do is question their logging accuracy.
BTW: I could not agree more when it comes to taking breaks from dieting and eating at maintenance for a period of time. Furthermore, I don't think that anyone should continue to cut calories to an unhealthy level.1 -
lol the idea that starvation even has a "mode" is pretty effing stupid.
The light is in the off mode. This inherently superfluous meaning: simply put, you are starving or you're not.
The definition of starvation seems to be connotatively different, but saying that starvation doesn't exist is equally ignorant. Are you saying that children of 3rd world countries dying of malnutrition are not starving? Are you suggesting starving isn't a real word and you're trying to suggest that people only suffer "hunger"?
Starvation - suffering or death caused by having nothing to eat, or not enough to eat.
Malnutrition - the unhealthy condition that results from not eating enough food or not eating enough HEALTHY FOOD: poor nutrition
While both can be caused by not eating enough food, they are not mutual exclusive. You can be malnourished and not starving. Children in third world countries that are dying typically die of diseases or health issues caused by the malnoutrition. Not necessarily Starvation. As a former death investigator I have seen both, but the majority of the time it is a complicaton associated with malnoutrition as opposed to actual starvation. One of the worst cases I ever handled involved an infant in a car seat for 8 days without food or water. It made National news. Everyone assumed the infant perished from starvation..he did not..he perished due to sepsis from a dirty diaper. The human body is an amazing thing. It can survive for 30-40 days WITHOUT food as long as it is properly hydrated. Without hydration sever symptoms begin to manifast around 40-45 days and death can occur anywhere from 45 to 61 days without food AND water. Starvation is NOT a MODE...Adaptive thermogenesis is. Yes Adaptive thermogenesis occurs..but it is not Starvation "Mode"...
Thank you for using the most disturbing example possible. As a mother, that is the last thing I want to read about... it actually made me tear up. The person responsible deserves something far worse than death. Anyway, I shan't hi-jack my own thread.0 -
lol the idea that starvation even has a "mode" is pretty effing stupid.
The light is in the off mode. This inherently superfluous meaning: simply put, you are starving or you're not.
The definition of starvation seems to be connotatively different, but saying that starvation doesn't exist is equally ignorant. Are you saying that children of 3rd world countries dying of malnutrition are not starving? Are you suggesting starving isn't a real word and you're trying to suggest that people only suffer "hunger"?
Starvation - suffering or death caused by having nothing to eat, or not enough to eat.
Malnutrition - the unhealthy condition that results from not eating enough food or not eating enough HEALTHY FOOD: poor nutrition
While both can be caused by not eating enough food, they are not mutual exclusive. You can be malnourished and not starving. Children in third world countries that are dying typically die of diseases or health issues caused by the malnoutrition. Not necessarily Starvation. As a former death investigator I have seen both, but the majority of the time it is a complicaton associated with malnoutrition as opposed to actual starvation. One of the worst cases I ever handled involved an infant in a car seat for 8 days without food or water. It made National news. Everyone assumed the infant perished from starvation..he did not..he perished due to sepsis from a dirty diaper. The human body is an amazing thing. It can survive for 30-40 days WITHOUT food as long as it is properly hydrated. Without hydration sever symptoms begin to manifast around 40-45 days and death can occur anywhere from 45 to 61 days without food AND water. Starvation is NOT a MODE...Adaptive thermogenesis is. Yes Adaptive thermogenesis occurs..but it is not Starvation "Mode"...
Thank you for using the most disturbing example possible. As a mother, that is the last thing I want to read about... it actually made me tear up. The person responsible deserves something far worse than death. Anyway, I shan't hi-jack my own thread.
I apologize, I can remove it if you wish? I too am a mother, and at the time my son was only a few months older..it ripped me apart...I left that industry and became a Safety Compliance Professional because I could not longer deal with death every day...too emotionally attached..Again, I'm sorry for offending0 -
I lost over a 100 lbs 3 years ago, unfortunately due to medical conditions(ongoing), gained some of it back.BTW, unsourced web blogs are usually not the best to back up your argument.
Although some call it "starvation mode", it's also referred to metabolic adaptation, starvation response, adaptive thermogenesis, etc. and they pretty much all mean the same thing. No it doesn't happen over night, or even in a week. It's a gradual process that can take months. This is what you would call a "stall" especially when people get close to their goal weight.
You can call me a "newb" all you like but take a good look at my ticker
If you took the time to actually read it before commenting, you would have seen the discussion of adaptive thermogenesis in the article.
Typical MFP shenanigans.
Yeah, typical MFP shenanigans is someone claiming starvation mode is a myth, when actually it's not. It's just a different name for something very real.
And yes I did read the article, and it wasn't the first time it's been posted on this forum, but as a newb, you wouldn't know that without using the search function.0 -
ooooooo, you lost 37 lbs. How cute. I lost over a 100 lbs 3 years ago, unfortunately due to medical conditions(ongoing), gained some of it back.BTW, unsourced web blogs are usually not the best to back up your argument.
Although some call it "starvation mode", it's also referred to metabolic adaptation, starvation response, adaptive thermogenesis, etc. and they pretty much all mean the same thing. No it doesn't happen over night, or even in a week. It's a gradual process that can take months. This is what you would call a "stall" especially when people get close to their goal weight.
You can call me a "newb" all you like but take a good look at my ticker
If you took the time to actually read it before commenting, you would have seen the discussion of adaptive thermogenesis in the article.
Typical MFP shenanigans.
Yeah, typical MFP shenanigans is someone claiming starvation mode is a myth, when actually it's not. It's just a different name for something very real.
And yes I did read the article, and it wasn't the first time it's been posted on this forum, but as a newb, you wouldn't know that without using the search function.
I'm sort of a newb...and I'm good at the search function..as well as looking at posting history, if profile's allow...me notices you like to stir the pot...You stay classy San Diego...0 -
I'm sort of a newb...and I'm good at the search function..as well as looking at posting history, if profile's allow...me notices you like to stir the pot...You stay classy San Diego...
Thank you!! :flowerforyou:
I wasn't going to even humor a response to that and now I don't have to. :happy:0 -
Yes she's a newb to this place otherwise she would have known this article was posted several times already, and the "starvation mode" is myth debate shows up every week with the same result. People find a blog post on the internet and think they're going to save the world of misinformation. Instead of educating yourself with unsourced blog posts, start searching the scientific study sites. Then you'll have more credibility.Why does this type of thread show up so often - oh I see, it's a newb.
BTW, unsourced web blogs are usually not the best to back up your argument.
Although some call it "starvation mode", it's also referred to metabolic adaptation, starvation response, adaptive thermogenesis, etc. and they pretty much all mean the same thing. No it doesn't happen over night, or even in a week. It's a gradual process that can take months. This is what you would call a "stall" especially when people get close to their goal weight.
You judging the OP by their start date would be like judging you for losing only 10lbs in four years.0 -
If stirring the pot means not jumping on a bandwagon of "yes people", then I guess I'm a big wooden spoon. Thanks for noticing.
ooooooo, you lost 37 lbs. How cute. I lost over a 100 lbs 3 years ago, unfortunately due to medical conditions(ongoing), gained some of it back.BTW, unsourced web blogs are usually not the best to back up your argument.
Although some call it "starvation mode", it's also referred to metabolic adaptation, starvation response, adaptive thermogenesis, etc. and they pretty much all mean the same thing. No it doesn't happen over night, or even in a week. It's a gradual process that can take months. This is what you would call a "stall" especially when people get close to their goal weight.
You can call me a "newb" all you like but take a good look at my ticker
If you took the time to actually read it before commenting, you would have seen the discussion of adaptive thermogenesis in the article.
Typical MFP shenanigans.
Yeah, typical MFP shenanigans is someone claiming starvation mode is a myth, when actually it's not. It's just a different name for something very real.
And yes I did read the article, and it wasn't the first time it's been posted on this forum, but as a newb, you wouldn't know that without using the search function.
I'm sort of a newb...and I'm good at the search function..as well as looking at posting history, if profile's allow...me notices you like to stir the pot...You stay classy San Diego...0 -
Yes she's a newb to this place otherwise she would have known this article was posted several times already, and the "starvation mode" is myth debate shows up every week with the same result. People find a blog post on the internet and think they're going to save the world of misinformation. Instead of educating yourself with unsourced blog posts, start searching the scientific study sites. Then you'll have more credibility.Why does this type of thread show up so often - oh I see, it's a newb.
BTW, unsourced web blogs are usually not the best to back up your argument.
Although some call it "starvation mode", it's also referred to metabolic adaptation, starvation response, adaptive thermogenesis, etc. and they pretty much all mean the same thing. No it doesn't happen over night, or even in a week. It's a gradual process that can take months. This is what you would call a "stall" especially when people get close to their goal weight.
You judging the OP by their start date would be like judging you for losing only 10lbs in four years.
Or perhaps I could belittle someone's weight loss by calling it cute. Maybe I could go from thread to thread spreading bitterness and insults.
Nah... not my kind of thing.
I'm sorry to hear you gained the weight back that you so proudly tried to rub in my face. I honestly am, and maybe that is the reason you feel the need to dismiss mine. I've lost a total of 60 pounds. Is that cute too? And I've kept it off.1 -
Yes she's a newb to this place otherwise she would have known this article was posted several times already, and the "starvation mode" is myth debate shows up every week with the same result. People find a blog post on the internet and think they're going to save the world of misinformation. Instead of educating yourself with unsourced blog posts, start searching the scientific study sites. Then you'll have more credibility.Why does this type of thread show up so often - oh I see, it's a newb.
BTW, unsourced web blogs are usually not the best to back up your argument.
Although some call it "starvation mode", it's also referred to metabolic adaptation, starvation response, adaptive thermogenesis, etc. and they pretty much all mean the same thing. No it doesn't happen over night, or even in a week. It's a gradual process that can take months. This is what you would call a "stall" especially when people get close to their goal weight.
You judging the OP by their start date would be like judging you for losing only 10lbs in four years.
If it shows up every week with the same result, why continue to post on it? I have stopped posting on the "OMG help me I'm not losing but I swear I'm logging everything 100% accurately" posts...because they usually aren't logging or weighing or doing what they say they are and someone else has already told them. I don't hold much stock in the Starvation Mode isn't a myth camp..even with the scientific research...There is research to support both sides. Whoever pays for the research, generally gets the results they want. To say scientific research is infallable is ridiculous. Weight loss is calories in vs calories out...period..at a deficit you will lose. IF you have nothing else to lose and you continue to eat at a deficit you die. That's about as simple as it gets.1 -
If stirring the pot means not jumping on a bandwagon of "yes people", then I guess I'm a big wooden spoon. Thanks for noticing.
ooooooo, you lost 37 lbs. How cute. I lost over a 100 lbs 3 years ago, unfortunately due to medical conditions(ongoing), gained some of it back.BTW, unsourced web blogs are usually not the best to back up your argument.
Although some call it "starvation mode", it's also referred to metabolic adaptation, starvation response, adaptive thermogenesis, etc. and they pretty much all mean the same thing. No it doesn't happen over night, or even in a week. It's a gradual process that can take months. This is what you would call a "stall" especially when people get close to their goal weight.
You can call me a "newb" all you like but take a good look at my ticker
If you took the time to actually read it before commenting, you would have seen the discussion of adaptive thermogenesis in the article.
Typical MFP shenanigans.
Yeah, typical MFP shenanigans is someone claiming starvation mode is a myth, when actually it's not. It's just a different name for something very real.
And yes I did read the article, and it wasn't the first time it's been posted on this forum, but as a newb, you wouldn't know that without using the search function.
I'm sort of a newb...and I'm good at the search function..as well as looking at posting history, if profile's allow...me notices you like to stir the pot...You stay classy San Diego...
No one mentioned "yes people". In your first comment to her you offered nothing to back up your side, you simply made a rude comment about her being a newb. That is pot stirring..not informative posting..I am respectful of other's opinions and feel everyone is entitled to share theirs in a respectful constructive way...but if you have to resort to name calling and rudeness it cheapens the credibility of what may or may not be educational, informative information. If someone cannot give an opinion without being rude and condescending, I immediately lose the ability to take them seriously. So, don't be a bandwagon hopper, or a yes person, but don't be a rude, condescending jerk either. You'll gain more traction with your arguement.1 -
My goodness! What a GREAT article. Thank you for sharing!0
-
I was told time and time again 1 year ago, that I would stop losing weight, lose my hair, have brittle nails, blah blah blah, if I continued to eat at 1200 calories a day. I was told I would fail, I was told I wouldnt last that long and give up, and I was told that if I did lose weight, I would lose all my muscle (please see pics to know my muscle tone is fine). Well, in 11 months, I lost my weight... 95 pounds, lost minimal muscle, as I made sure to consume adequate protien and incorporated strength training into my dailt routine. My hair is as thick as ever, my nails are great, and even with my busy life of being a wife, mother of 5, full time student, and everything else... I never felt weak, I never felt drained, I was never not able to complete my daily workouts, and I never felt like giving up! I AM IN THE BEST SHAPE OF MY LIFE RIGHT NOW! So, just as I concluded from the begining, the starvation mode myth, as thrown around on MFP, is nothing more than a myth... and I am glad I did my own research and used my own common sense when deciding to continue with my plan, instead of listening to all of the end of the world your going to die stavation mode anti 1200 crowd!1
-
No. The answer is no. Starvation mode, as most define it, is a myth. Please read this article:
http://www.aworkoutroutine.com/starvation-mode/
Love it. Bookmarked for future use.
This should be required reading for everyone0 -
I was told time and time again 1 year ago, that I would stop losing weight, lose my hair, have brittle nails, blah blah blah, if I continued to eat at 1200 calories a day. I was told I would fail, I was told I wouldnt last that long and give up, and I was told that if I did lose weight, I would lose all my muscle (please see pics to know my muscle tone is fine). Well, in 11 months, I lost my weight... 95 pounds, lost minimal muscle, as I made sure to consume adequate protien and incorporated strength training into my dailt routine. My hair is as thick as ever, my nails are great, and even with my busy life of being a wife, mother of 5, full time student, and everything else... I never felt weak, I never felt drained, I was never not able to complete my daily workouts, and I never felt like giving up! I AM IN THE BEST SHAPE OF MY LIFE RIGHT NOW! So, just as I concluded from the begining, the starvation mode myth, as thrown around on MFP, is nothing more than a myth... and I am glad I did my own research and used my own common sense when deciding to continue with my plan, instead of listening to all of the end of the world your going to die stavation mode anti 1200 crowd!
You mean, you are living proof that you can remain on a deficit and continue to lose weight? No way... NO WAY!? What next, unicorns?
ETA: In all seriousness, thank you for sharing that. It's what people need to hear!!1 -
I was told time and time again 1 year ago, that I would stop losing weight, lose my hair, have brittle nails, blah blah blah, if I continued to eat at 1200 calories a day. I was told I would fail, I was told I wouldnt last that long and give up, and I was told that if I did lose weight, I would lose all my muscle (please see pics to know my muscle tone is fine). Well, in 11 months, I lost my weight... 95 pounds, lost minimal muscle, as I made sure to consume adequate protien and incorporated strength training into my dailt routine. My hair is as thick as ever, my nails are great, and even with my busy life of being a wife, mother of 5, full time student, and everything else... I never felt weak, I never felt drained, I was never not able to complete my daily workouts, and I never felt like giving up! I AM IN THE BEST SHAPE OF MY LIFE RIGHT NOW! So, just as I concluded from the begining, the starvation mode myth, as thrown around on MFP, is nothing more than a myth... and I am glad I did my own research and used my own common sense when deciding to continue with my plan, instead of listening to all of the end of the world your going to die stavation mode anti 1200 crowd!
You mean, you are living proof that you can remain on a deficit and continue to lose weight? No way... NO WAY!? What next, unicorns?
ETA: In all seriousness, thank you for sharing that. It's what people need to hear!!
I survived... somehow I lived to tell about it...
0 -
Her body fat supplied the deficit calories (32cals/lb/fat/day) and her diet was protective of lean mass.I was told time and time again 1 year ago, that I would stop losing weight, lose my hair, have brittle nails, blah blah blah, if I continued to eat at 1200 calories a day. I was told I would fail, I was told I wouldnt last that long and give up, and I was told that if I did lose weight, I would lose all my muscle (please see pics to know my muscle tone is fine). Well, in 11 months, I lost my weight... 95 pounds, lost minimal muscle, as I made sure to consume adequate protien and incorporated strength training into my dailt routine. My hair is as thick as ever, my nails are great, and even with my busy life of being a wife, mother of 5, full time student, and everything else... I never felt weak, I never felt drained, I was never not able to complete my daily workouts, and I never felt like giving up! I AM IN THE BEST SHAPE OF MY LIFE RIGHT NOW! So, just as I concluded from the begining, the starvation mode myth, as thrown around on MFP, is nothing more than a myth... and I am glad I did my own research and used my own common sense when deciding to continue with my plan, instead of listening to all of the end of the world your going to die stavation mode anti 1200 crowd!
You mean, you are living proof that you can remain on a deficit and continue to lose weight? No way... NO WAY!? What next, unicorns?
ETA: In all seriousness, thank you for sharing that. It's what people need to hear!!0 -
Of course it's largely a myth. I really believe, deep down, most people know this.
But it's become the perfect excuse to overeat, out of fear of your metabolism "shutting down" (more BS), or you magically gaining weight if you don't get enough calories.
And then when you're failing to keep total food transparency, you can claim that you aren't losing any weight, even though you're supposedly hardly eating anything.
Most of us who got fat got that way, and stayed that way, by investing into a lot of wild implausibilities, excuses, denial, and delusions. So we repeat nonsensical fitness, diet, and food myths that, surprise surprise, always make us feel better, or allow us to eat more/move less.1 -
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1077746-starvation-mode-adaptive-thermogenesis-and-weight-loss
We've been there...
ETA: BTW - Starvation Mode, as most people use it, does exist and is just adapative thermogenesis - a response to reduced calories that results in a miscalculation of the calories deficit needed to lose. The usual repsonses like in the article are
- cut more, you'll lose!
- it doesn't exist, you are lying on what you consume!
- it doesn't exist, you are over calculating your burns!
These answers often lead to frustration and actions that are a direct path to failure.
Yes, the first steps to addressing this is to look very closely to logging and actual calorie burns. It is often the case that the person, after months and months of logging has gotten frustrated and is no longer paying sufficient attention to the details of logging accuracy. Or that the exercise burns that were once high have not dropped either due to weight loss (you burn less as you loss) or exercise efficiency gains (you burn less as you get better at your activity).
1) Assess your cals, dial it in so you can be really certain that what you log is what you eat.
2) Burns are variable and difficult to measure even with a HRM, consider just going to a fixed TDEE and not logging burns. You get to include your excercise in your total activity level and then go to a fixed amount of cals per day - usually a bit higher than the MFP setting (take average weekly exercise/7 as use that as a starting point)
3) Now that logging food and burns are cleaner - you have three choices
3.1) Cut some more - but does it make sense, are you getting enough nutrition, can you handle it? Or will this lead to failure because it is too much. Create a deficit - possibly conside changing eating habits to more filling/less calorie dense food (eat your veggies).
3.2) Burn some more - increase the TOTAL activity level - make your days more active, incresase exercise. Is this feasable, can you integrate it into your day or will that lead to failure? Create a deficit. TOTAL activity - not just exercise.
3.3) Keep at it slowly - Don't cut/ don't increase activity but recognize that the loss will go much slower (but will occur if you are tracking well and consistently)
In any of these, taking a break and going to maintenance (real, not calcluated) can be a useful mentally and physically. Resistance training to build up lean body mass and to tip the balance between metabolism and calories consumed to the loss side can also be useful.
Well since you've been there and done that I guess there's no need for me to share something with others that I found useful. Oh wait, scratch that... I think I will! Oh wait, I already did!
I read your thread and found it quite insightful, and I agree with a lot of what you have to say above... but yet again I will repeat myself:
Adaptive thermogenesis is a VERY REAL thing. After prolonged deficits an individual's metabolism will slow down and this can affect weight loss in the long run -- to some degree.
MYTHS:
Skipping a meal with throw you into metabolic shutdown.
A morbidly obese person "doing everything right" must be in starvation mode after their weight loss stalled one month into their "journey"
An overweight individual thinks they are "doing everything right" and can't lose weight because they are eating too few calories and sent their body into a downward spiral of starvation mode.
Same individual is somehow gaining weight because of this dreaded starvation mode, even though they "know" they are eating at a deficit.
REALITY:
Caloric deficit = weight loss
BEFORE suggesting someone is in starvation mode, the responsible thing to do is question their logging accuracy.
BTW: I could not agree more when it comes to taking breaks from dieting and eating at maintenance for a period of time. Furthermore, I don't think that anyone should continue to cut calories to an unhealthy level.
What have I written that disagrees with any of this?0 -
I love this. So true. I will say (to echo other posters) one of the biggest things I believe people struggle with is overestimating calories. I have a friend who is a waitress and so her activity level is "active" but then she adds in extra exercise calories (300 minutes of walking) every day. She wonders why she doesn't lose weight but she is double counting her exercise calories!
I wish people did more research:/1 -
Her body fat supplied the deficit calories (32cals/lb/fat/day) and her diet was protective of lean mass.I was told time and time again 1 year ago, that I would stop losing weight, lose my hair, have brittle nails, blah blah blah, if I continued to eat at 1200 calories a day. I was told I would fail, I was told I wouldnt last that long and give up, and I was told that if I did lose weight, I would lose all my muscle (please see pics to know my muscle tone is fine). Well, in 11 months, I lost my weight... 95 pounds, lost minimal muscle, as I made sure to consume adequate protien and incorporated strength training into my dailt routine. My hair is as thick as ever, my nails are great, and even with my busy life of being a wife, mother of 5, full time student, and everything else... I never felt weak, I never felt drained, I was never not able to complete my daily workouts, and I never felt like giving up! I AM IN THE BEST SHAPE OF MY LIFE RIGHT NOW! So, just as I concluded from the begining, the starvation mode myth, as thrown around on MFP, is nothing more than a myth... and I am glad I did my own research and used my own common sense when deciding to continue with my plan, instead of listening to all of the end of the world your going to die stavation mode anti 1200 crowd!
You mean, you are living proof that you can remain on a deficit and continue to lose weight? No way... NO WAY!? What next, unicorns?
ETA: In all seriousness, thank you for sharing that. It's what people need to hear!!
and alot of body fat there was 0 -
And you look great.
Her body fat supplied the deficit calories (32cals/lb/fat/day) and her diet was protective of lean mass.I was told time and time again 1 year ago, that I would stop losing weight, lose my hair, have brittle nails, blah blah blah, if I continued to eat at 1200 calories a day. I was told I would fail, I was told I wouldnt last that long and give up, and I was told that if I did lose weight, I would lose all my muscle (please see pics to know my muscle tone is fine). Well, in 11 months, I lost my weight... 95 pounds, lost minimal muscle, as I made sure to consume adequate protien and incorporated strength training into my dailt routine. My hair is as thick as ever, my nails are great, and even with my busy life of being a wife, mother of 5, full time student, and everything else... I never felt weak, I never felt drained, I was never not able to complete my daily workouts, and I never felt like giving up! I AM IN THE BEST SHAPE OF MY LIFE RIGHT NOW! So, just as I concluded from the begining, the starvation mode myth, as thrown around on MFP, is nothing more than a myth... and I am glad I did my own research and used my own common sense when deciding to continue with my plan, instead of listening to all of the end of the world your going to die stavation mode anti 1200 crowd!
You mean, you are living proof that you can remain on a deficit and continue to lose weight? No way... NO WAY!? What next, unicorns?
ETA: In all seriousness, thank you for sharing that. It's what people need to hear!!
and alot of body fat there was 0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions