Starvation Mode
Replies
-
OP you may wish to research the 5:2 diet. Eat normally five days of the week fast for two. Though I would say your weight is fine and you should probably focus on fitness and retaining muscle mass at this point rather than further weight loss. Good luck!0
-
JaneiR36 : Amen to that. I second that.0
-
It needs to be noted that MFP does not advocate VLCD. So this is not the place to push, or even discuss them.
But under certain circumstances even doctors prescribe VLCD. Much of what is discussed on this board, the alarmism, is from the culture of this board. A lot of what has been stated as absolute about VLCD in this thread is actually quite incorrect. The same with fasting.
The bottom line though is that most can't do VLCD responsibly, correctly, and most don't have the willpower to transition off one back into "normal' consumption without going hog wild and regaining their weight.0 -
I'll give you an example. Right now, I am maintaining my weight. Well, if I do a fast or to eat 1,000 calories a day for two weeks when I normally eat around 2,000 or more, I will most definitely lose weight, but it will be very little fat, if any, and mostly/all water. Once I start eating at maintenance again, I will gain most if not all that "weight" back.
If you're already fat, 1,000 calories will make you "skinny fat" if you eat like that for awhile.
This is wrong.
So much of what you people are saying is wrong.
Though I'm sure the starving people all over the world, and those who have perished form undernourishment, encased in skeletal bodies, wish that your assertions that undereating would not burn fat, and instead eventually just make you "skinny fat", were true.0 -
I must politely disagree. The health problems show up pretty quickly.There might not be starvation mode, but there are slow metabolisms and health consequences for not feeding your body properly. It's your choice, a quick fix or a proper healthy way to get to your goal. Oh and a lot of the health problems don't show up till much later in life....0 -
Everyone is different and can get by on different calorie ranges but I wouldn't recommend being under a thousand for too long. You just can't sustain it and it's no way to live. Maybe for a week or so is OK or even like every other day but it's super important to just eat the appropriate amount of calories based on your weight loss goals making sure you get the right amount of fat/protein/carbs daily.
I went for almost a year eating around 1000 to 1200 a day and it was all great, until it wasn't. Then I smartened up. Message me if you want to talk about it. I'm not a professional or anything like that, just based on personal experience. Your body will only go so far on minimum calories and after that it'll just start getting its nutrients from any other source it can e.g., muscle, organs, hair, skin, nails, stamina, etc...0 -
A VLCD is wrong for many reasons...but is 1000 calories a VLCD? Provided that OP doesn't over - exercise?0
-
You've lost me. Please clarify.
It seems to me you're gong on a tangent with my words.
No matter what diet or eating plan you try, if you were fat before ( eating more than your body can use) and go back to that ,you will get fat again. Also define eating normally. Normal for who? The 6'5 linebacker or the 5'2 secretary? Every time someone falls off the wagon it isn't because their diet is bad or wrong. Its is because they went back to their old habits or perhaps " started eating normally again". I think what you meant to say was " The water weight which you initially lost will come back just as with any and every calorie deficit plan known to man. Also if you consume about 3500 more calories than your body can use, you will gain a pound of fat no matter which diet you are following.
Laugh if it makes you feel better, but you will also gain all that weight back once you start eating normally again.
I'll give you an example. Right now, I am maintaining my weight. Well, if I do a fast or to eat 1,000 calories a day for two weeks when I normally eat around 2,000 or more, I will most definitely lose weight, but it will be very little fat, if any, and mostly/all water. Once I start eating at maintenance again, I will gain most if not all that "weight" back.
If you're already fat, 1,000 calories will make you "skinny fat" if you eat like that for awhile.
7000 calories of energy will all come from water?? Muscle, maybe, but that energy has to come from somewhere.
You usually lose water weight at first, especially when the scale goes down quickly. You need to cut your deficit by 3500 to lose an actual pond of fat.0 -
I am talking about people who eat enough or more than enough and then do these crash diets. Anyone you lose weight most of those initial pounds that come off fast are water. You crash diet for a few weeks on 1000 or less calories and you're going to gain it back when you start eating maintenance or above.
I'll give you an example. Right now, I am maintaining my weight. Well, if I do a fast or to eat 1,000 calories a day for two weeks when I normally eat around 2,000 or more, I will most definitely lose weight, but it will be very little fat, if any, and mostly/all water. Once I start eating at maintenance again, I will gain most if not all that "weight" back.
If you're already fat, 1,000 calories will make you "skinny fat" if you eat like that for awhile.
This is wrong.
So much of what you people are saying is wrong.
Though I'm sure the starving people all over the world, and those who have perished form undernourishment, encased in skeletal bodies, wish that your assertions that undereating would not burn fat, and instead eventually just make you "skinny fat", were true.
I am not talking about people who are starving, or who don't get enough to eat on a daily basis. That's a whole different story.
By the way, where are your peer reviewed cites for articles to support "you people" who have it all wrong? I mean, since you imply you're the only one who got it right.t0 -
Do you seriously only eat Gardetto's all day long??!!0
-
So many points of view on that subject, one thing for sure that term should be eliminated and replaced by something more realistic.
I have seen posts where people say that if you eat below 1200 you will gain weight? Gain weight from what exactly? or is it that eating at that level is hard to do long term and once you stop dieting if you revert to your old eating habits you will regain weight. Or is it that as you lose weight your calorie requirement decrease and even if you would like to eat like a 200 pound person it is not possible if you weight 110 pounds.
Gender, height, weight and age make it acceptable or not. Im short and older and a woman my tdee is around 1400 being sedentary if I want to loose weight 1200 is really not much of a difference, 2 slices of bread.0 -
Here's the thing about starvation mode- It doesn't exist, at least as long as you have any body fat to speak of. Starvation mode is what happens when your body has nothing, not even fat to run off of, not just when you're not feeding it.
Well, one extreme with myths of what it is isn't good.
But your extreme of when it only happens isn't good either.
How about merely a 25% deficit for an obese person, lowering their daily metabolism by 20% eventually because of body adapting slower?
Is that only happening when no fat is left? They had plenty of fat left.
Might shock you that it can happen easier than you think.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/heybales/view/reduced-metabolism-tdee-beyond-expected-from-weight-loss-616251
And the why it happens.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2i_cmltmQ6A
OP it might better to start with basics, your height and body fat percentage; plug them in to a BMR calculator and read and learn about BMR and TDEE. So OP, height and body fat % please....0 -
I am talking about people who eat enough or more than enough and then do these crash diets. Anyone you lose weight most of those initial pounds that come off fast are water. You crash diet for a few weeks on 1000 or less calories and you're going to gain it back when you start eating maintenance or above.
I'll give you an example. Right now, I am maintaining my weight. Well, if I do a fast or to eat 1,000 calories a day for two weeks when I normally eat around 2,000 or more, I will most definitely lose weight, but it will be very little fat, if any, and mostly/all water. Once I start eating at maintenance again, I will gain most if not all that "weight" back.
If you're already fat, 1,000 calories will make you "skinny fat" if you eat like that for awhile.
This is wrong.
So much of what you people are saying is wrong.
Though I'm sure the starving people all over the world, and those who have perished form undernourishment, encased in skeletal bodies, wish that your assertions that undereating would not burn fat, and instead eventually just make you "skinny fat", were true.
I am not talking about people who are starving, or who don't get enough to eat on a daily basis. That's a whole different story.
By the way, where are your peer reviewed cites for articles to support "you people" who have it all wrong? I mean, since you imply you're the only one who got it right.t
You said, and I quote:
"Well, if I do a fast or to eat 1,000 calories a day for two weeks when I normally eat around 2,000 or more, I will most definitely lose weight, but it will be very little fat, if any, and mostly/all water."
This is physiologically impossible. If you FAST for two weeks, i.e. eat nothing, you will absolutely lose FAT. To say there is a chance you won't lose "any fat", or "mostly/all water" is a lie. It's such an absolute untruth I am surprised you're trying to defend such physiological nonsense.
Anecdotally take it from someone who has gone two weeks without a morsel of food before; you definitely burn fat. You know, because our bodies are built to use fat in the absence of food. That's what our fat stores exist for.You crash diet for a few weeks on 1000 or less calories and you're going to gain it back when you start eating maintenance or above.
No. If said hypothetical "you" ate at maintenance for their NEW weight they will not "gain it back". People who do VLCD or fast to lose, but end up rebounding all their weight, do so because they overeat after their period of restriction until everything they lost is back. It didn't happen because they ate at maintenance, it happened because they overate...just like ALL weight gain.0 -
Yeah, you're trying to spin my words to satisfy your agenda.
I am talking about people who eat enough or more than enough and then do these crash diets. Anyone you lose weight most of those initial pounds that come off fast are water. You crash diet for a few weeks on 1000 or less calories and you're going to gain it back when you start eating maintenance or above.
I'll give you an example. Right now, I am maintaining my weight. Well, if I do a fast or to eat 1,000 calories a day for two weeks when I normally eat around 2,000 or more, I will most definitely lose weight, but it will be very little fat, if any, and mostly/all water. Once I start eating at maintenance again, I will gain most if not all that "weight" back.
If you're already fat, 1,000 calories will make you "skinny fat" if you eat like that for awhile.
This is wrong.
So much of what you people are saying is wrong.
Though I'm sure the starving people all over the world, and those who have perished form undernourishment, encased in skeletal bodies, wish that your assertions that undereating would not burn fat, and instead eventually just make you "skinny fat", were true.
I am not talking about people who are starving, or who don't get enough to eat on a daily basis. That's a whole different story.
By the way, where are your peer reviewed cites for articles to support "you people" who have it all wrong? I mean, since you imply you're the only one who got it right.t
You said, and I quote:
"Well, if I do a fast or to eat 1,000 calories a day for two weeks when I normally eat around 2,000 or more, I will most definitely lose weight, but it will be very little fat, if any, and mostly/all water."
This is physiologically impossible. If you FAST for two weeks, i.e. eat nothing, you will absolutely lose FAT. To say there is a chance you won't lose "any fat", or "mostly/all water" is a lie. It's such an absolute untruth I am surprised you're trying to defend such physiological nonsense.
Anecdotally take it from someone who has gone two weeks without a morsel of food before; you definitely burn fat. You know, because our bodies are built to use fat in the absence of food. That's what our fat stores exist for.You crash diet for a few weeks on 1000 or less calories and you're going to gain it back when you start eating maintenance or above.
No. If said hypothetical "you" ate at maintenance for their NEW weight they will not "gain it back". People who do VLCD or fast to lose, but end up rebounding all their weight, do so because they overeat after their period of restriction until everything they lost is back. It didn't happen because they ate at maintenance, it happened because they overate...just like ALL weight gain.
A fast does not have to be eating nothing at all, as I'm sure you are well aware. When you cut calories at all, ti's common knowledge that a person loses mostly water at first. [/quote]
A pound of fat is 3,500 hundred calories. So, say your maintenance is 1800 calories, and you choose a 1000 calorie diet. So, in order to lose 1 pound of fat, it would take you a little more than four days. If the scale goes down five pounds in that first week, it will be mostly water, and perhaps a lack of food in your system, and about one pound of fat. You're happy with that five pound loss, so you immediately start eating at maintenance again. When you add that 800 calories back in, do you think that five pounds is going to stay off? You might keep the pound of fat off, but the water will replace itself.0 -
Here's the thing about starvation mode- It doesn't exist, at least as long as you have any body fat to speak of. Starvation mode is what happens when your body has nothing, not even fat to run off of, not just when you're not feeding it.
With your goal weight, you will not EVER have to worry about starvation mode. You could eat 2 calories a day and still be just fine until you got severely underweight.
1,000 is more than reasonable AS LONG AS you're getting enough nutrients, you're only warned against eating under 1200 because it's difficult to get adequate nutrition at that level.
Also, if your goal is 1,000 or fewer (or anywhere below maintenance, really) calories it'd be in bad judgement not to eat back your exercised calories.
This post was an accident and I can't delete it.0 -
Yeah, you're trying to spin my words to satisfy your agenda.
Um no, I actually am not. I am reacting to exactly what you actually said.A fast does not have to be eating nothing at all, as I'm sure you are well aware.
I read a fast, in the context of this discussion, as no food consumption at all. What kind of "fast" are you referring to?When you cut calories at all, ti's common knowledge that a person loses mostly water at first.
Yes water will be lost initially due to changes in glycogen stores. However you said that a person could "fast" for TWO WEEKS and lose little to no fat, just most/all water. This is false.
Just like if a person with a higher TDEE eats only 1000 calories for two weeks they will absolutely lose FAT.
That is what I'm addressing. If you didn't clarify your view initially, that's nobody's fault for taking your words at face value.0 -
Editing options are only good for a certain amount of time after posting.Here's the thing about starvation mode- It doesn't exist, at least as long as you have any body fat to speak of. Starvation mode is what happens when your body has nothing, not even fat to run off of, not just when you're not feeding it.
With your goal weight, you will not EVER have to worry about starvation mode. You could eat 2 calories a day and still be just fine until you got severely underweight.
1,000 is more than reasonable AS LONG AS you're getting enough nutrients, you're only warned against eating under 1200 because it's difficult to get adequate nutrition at that level.
Also, if your goal is 1,000 or fewer (or anywhere below maintenance, really) calories it'd be in bad judgement not to eat back your exercised calories.
This post was an accident and I can't delete it.
0 -
Fast, as in cutting calories drastically, which I could have communicated better.
Yeah, you're trying to spin my words to satisfy your agenda.
Um no, I actually am not. I am reacting to exactly what you actually said.A fast does not have to be eating nothing at all, as I'm sure you are well aware.
I read a fastt, in the context of this discussion, as no food consumption at all. What kind of "fast" are you referring to?When you cut calories at all, ti's common knowledge that a person loses mostly water at first.
Yes water will be lost initially, as in the first few days, do to changes in glycogen stores. However you said that a person could "fast" for TWO WEEKS and lose little to no fat, just most/all water.
That is what I'm addressing. If you didn't clarify your view initially, that's nobody's fault for taking your words at face value.
I said a person could fast or eat 1,000 calories for two weeks and they will lost mostly water and little fat. 3,500 calories is one pound of fat, so it would be only natural for a person to gain that lost "weight" back once they start eating at maintenance again, Many people mistake those quick pounds lost as fat when it's mostly water.0 -
Fast, as in cutting calories drastically, which I could have communicated better.
Yeah, you're trying to spin my words to satisfy your agenda.
Um no, I actually am not. I am reacting to exactly what you actually said.A fast does not have to be eating nothing at all, as I'm sure you are well aware.
I read a fastt, in the context of this discussion, as no food consumption at all. What kind of "fast" are you referring to?When you cut calories at all, ti's common knowledge that a person loses mostly water at first.
Yes water will be lost initially, as in the first few days, do to changes in glycogen stores. However you said that a person could "fast" for TWO WEEKS and lose little to no fat, just most/all water.
That is what I'm addressing. If you didn't clarify your view initially, that's nobody's fault for taking your words at face value.
I said a person could fast or eat 1,000 calories for two weeks and they will lost mostly water and little fat. 3,500 calories is one pound of fat, so it would be only natural for a person to gain that lost "weight" back once they start eating at maintenance again, Many people mistake those quick pounds lost as fat when it's mostly water.
You asked me to clarify my statement, but I would say your clarification helps me see your original point better. When I read your maintenance example, I'm thinking yeah, with a 1000 calorie deficit for seven days they'll lose 2 lbs of something. That something won't be water weight. But it seems you meant they'll show a 10 lb drop on the scale and shout from the roof tops that their diet was "working", return to eating normally or more likely have a binge day, probably show even more than a 10 lb rise and be even more confused about what is happening. I could see how 2 lbs of a 10 lb loss would not be mostly muscle or fat
At the same time, substitute 1000 with 1200, so long as you weren't hangry suddenly your eating would be more or less acceptable on MFP. You'd get the same 2 lb net weight loss and happily take it to the bank *shrug*. Not to mention, if you're doing this for a long time, such scale swings are not that unusual since weight loss is not linear. I could have a 5-10 lb scale rise or drop for any number of reasons not limited to eating 200 calories below the acceptable net point0
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