Starvation Mode is a Myth: The Science

Skye76

Hello, all. Since I've been on MFP, I've seen quite a bit of pseudoscience (unfortunately, propagated by the site itself) that declares that the body will go into "starvation mode" if you do not eat X amount of calories per day. I don't know the origin of this myth, but here is an article published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition which puts the lie to the myth:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3661473

For those of us who don't wish to wade through the scientific and technical jargon, here's a summary. If a person goes without eating AT ALL for SIXTY HOURS, their metabolism will slow by roughly 8%. Until you hit the sixty-hour threshold, without having eaten at all, your metabolism remains unchanged. Should you reach that point of sixty hours without food, your metabolism will come back to normal soon after you begin eating again.

Two other studies (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2405717 and http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10837292) show that the metabolism actually INCREASES during periods of intermittent fasting, but at an equally negligible rate: 3.8 to 10%.

As well, it appears that the arbitrary number which has been chosen for "starvation mode" (1200 kCal) is the same for everyone, which makes absolutely no sense. Why would this threshold be the same for me, at 185 lbs., as it would be for someone who weighs 260 lbs., or even 110 lbs.?

So here's the science: "starvation mode" is a myth. There is danger in restricted-calorie diets, but it comes from the possibility of not getting the vitamins and minerals your body needs, not from a magical, instantaneous slowdown of your metabolism.

Edit: grammar error

momof7withchrist

As well, it appears that the arbitrary number which has been chosen for "starvation mode" (1200 kCal) is the same for everyone, which makes absolutely no sense. Why would this threshold be the same for me, at 185 lbs., as it would be for someone who weighs 260 lbs., or even 110 lbs.?

So here's the science: "starvation mode" is a myth. There is danger in restricted-calorie diets, but it comes from the possibility of not getting the vitamins and minerals your body needs, not from a magical, instantaneous slowdown of your metabolism.

Thank you. I knew it didn't make sense, but didn't know where to even begin to find the answer.

twooliver

Finally!! Thanks so much for setting this straight....

I've been disturbed by some of the discussion around this because it just didn't sound right. This however makes perfect sense!!

momof7withchrist

Thank you so much for the information. I have been having trouble reaching the magic 1200 when I eat healthy. I feel full & wonder around the kitchen looking for something that will help me reach 1200 without adding a bunch of fat or carbs. This takes a load off! Thank you soooo much!

resptech97

THANK YOU!! I have been trying to tell people this for months!!!

skinnylizzard

Hmmm, never heard that! However I have heard that you can safely reduce your calories to very low amount for no more that 3 days at a time, then take a break, bring it back up to a reasonable amount for 4 days and do it again. It's supposed to work quite well without triggering the "starvation mode". I have never tried this though because I get sick if I don't eat enough.

melissatacker

Amen!

VialOfDreams

1200 calories is the absolute minimum amount necessary for the body to function. Of course, it will vary depending on the person, but if one eats below 1200, they can get seriously ill in a short period of time.

Starvation mode refers to a prolonged period of time that a body is denied the nutrients necessary for its survival. Just because you fast for a day, doesn't mean your body will enter starvation mode. I try to fast every month, having a 1-day water-only fast. This does not mean that my body enters starvation mode, and I don't think MFP or any personal trainer or nutritionist will disagree.

heyitsmekatie

thanks for posting this. there are lots of articles online that seem to back this up as well. i just took for granted that it was true without doing any research on the topic myself (which i will now do).

Edited to add a link to an interesting, plain English, article: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1574882/starvation_mode_dispelling_the_myths.html?cat=5

rileysowner

Thanks for the link to the source. I knew starvation mode was as much a myth as metabolism boosters. The changes are negligible.

luv2ash

1200 calories is the absolute minimum amount necessary for the body to function. Of course, it will vary depending on the person, but if one eats below 1200, they can get seriously ill in a short period of time.

Starvation mode refers to a prolonged period of time that a body is denied the nutrients necessary for its survival. Just because you fast for a day, doesn't mean your body will enter starvation mode. I try to fast every month, having a 1-day water-only fast. This does not mean that my body enters starvation mode, and I don't think MFP or any personal trainer or nutritionist will disagree.

hmmmm...I stay under 1200 calories every day, exercise every day, and my health has done nothing but improve

luv2ash

Amen!

I ditto that ---AMEN!

Skye76

1200 calories is the absolute minimum amount necessary for the body to function. Of course, it will vary depending on the person, but if one eats below 1200, they can get seriously ill in a short period of time.

Can you give me some sort of study which backs this up?

Starvation mode refers to a prolonged period of time that a body is denied the nutrients necessary for its survival. Just because you fast for a day, doesn't mean your body will enter starvation mode. I try to fast every month, having a 1-day water-only fast. This does not mean that my body enters starvation mode, and I don't think MFP or any personal trainer or nutritionist will disagree.

Of course, I agree with you. The problem lies in the misunderstanding of MFP's prompt, which tells us that we are in danger of going into "starvation mode" if we don't eat 1200 kCal per day. The prompt is poorly worded, and often misunderstood.

samb

Thank you so much for posting this because I have never believed in the starvation mode that people refer to and it drives me crazy when MFP tells me I need to eat more when I don't feel that I do because I am already full & have eaten enough, just worked out too. I understand the body will go into a starvation mode after a period of time, but many act as though it will if you don't eat for a few hours! The whole thing about eating your calories back also seems to be false to me because it seems that it would be pointless to workout if you were going to end up eating the calories back, and I know for a fact I have lost a lot of weight in the past without eating my calories back! In addition, I never understood the "minimum" because I never could see how I should eat a minimum of 1200 calories to lose weight when my body only burns 1400...while the 1200 would be a minimum for someone who is 3x the size of me! Thanks again, this just completely proved my previous thoughts and now I think I will be able to lose weight easier without being brainwashed that I need to eat more, when I know I don't!

muth3rluvx2

OMG - THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You have NO idea ...

I'm friending you. lol...

Truly, I've gotten alot of flak because I will NOT LOSE at 1200 a day. My metabolism is so slow that that is maintenance for me. And there's reasons my metabolism is that slow (fat:muscle ratio) and it can/will change - but that's what it is for now and no one has believed me. I know my body damnit - I'm the one that's lived in it for 37 years. and you are very dead on with the nutrient issue.. that's a real challenge at a lower calorie count and one I actually do worry about.

194Days

What I appreciate most about what you posted is that you cited several sources... I get tired of seeing "facts" stated and re-stated (most often the "1200 calorie rule") with no credible sources to back them up.

stormieweather

1200 calories was the minimum amount a WOMAN would need to eat daily to avoid starving to death, as determined by the WHO (World Health Organization). This was arrived at in an effort to determine the amount of aid that would need to be sent to a region without resources, such as war or natural disaster. It really wasn't related to "starvation mode", per se.

Caper88

See this what makes changing your life style so hard. Some people say you must eat x amount or you are going to go into starvation mode and others say no. I know people talked about the Eat Stop Eat Diet and it is based around the concept of fasting. So has anyone tried it?

mideon_696

yeah that all makes sense really.

however anyone wanting to eat that few calories for weight should be much more careful about what they are eating...
clean food. clean clean clean!!!
they'd wanting to be balancing thier meals perfectly IMO. 1/3 cals from protein (100g), 1/3 cal's from carbs(100g), 1/3 cal's from healthy fats(44-45 g).

doing that, i'd see no reason why it wouldnt be safe. empty calories, like booze, and other ****ty calories would be your undoing on such a low caloric intake.

itsmerobin

Thank you for posting this! It was helpful, as I've been considering the validity of this "starvation mode."

jenX1174

Okay.....so please explain to me why it is, after my initial 30 pound drop w/the Lap-band, why for 2 years I couldn't lose weight at 500-700 cals a day without exercise or 200 Net cals with exercise??? And by some miracle now, I consume 1300 Net cals with exercise, and the weight is just melting off?

Everyone's body reacts differently....but for me, I know my metabolism took a serious dive with so few daily calories. I could feel it. Before I was sluggish, hardly ever hungry, constantly tired. And now? I have tons of energy and get hungry when it's time to eat -- which is about every 2 1/2 - 3 hours.

myukniewicz

thank you very much for this post!!!!!

samb

1200 calories was the minimum amount a WOMAN would need to eat daily to avoid starving to death, as determined by the WHO (World Health Organization). This was arrived at in an effort to determine the amount of aid that would need to be sent to a region without resources, such as war or natural disaster. It really wasn't related to "starvation mode", per se.

See I understand this, for some people, but saying "woman" vs. "person" doesn't really make any difference because there still are women of all different sizes so I don't understand how 1200 could be the minimum for every single woman. Maybe the average woman? But how is that defined?

Skye76

Okay.....so please explain to me why it is, after my initial 30 pound drop w/the Lap-band, why for 2 years I couldn't lose weight at 500-700 cals a day without exercise or 200 Net cals with exercise??? And by some miracle now, I consume 1300 Net cals with exercise, and the weight is just melting off?

Everyone's body reacts differently....but for me, I know my metabolism took a serious dive with so few daily calories. I could feel it. Before I was sluggish, hardly ever hungry, constantly tired. And now? I have tons of energy and get hungry when it's time to eat -- which is about every 2 1/2 - 3 hours.

You're right, everyone's body does react differently. I can't answer your anecdotal evidence; all I can do is cite scientific studies.

rileysowner

See this what makes changing your life style so hard. Some people say you must eat x amount or you are going to go into starvation mode and others say no. I know people talked about the Eat Stop Eat Diet and it is based around the concept of fasting. So has anyone tried it?

I use Eat Stop Eat. It is a great read, and a useful way to 1) Learn what being hungry really feels like 2) Cut out about 20% of your calories in a week in flexible way. The first while it is difficult to do without eating all the calories you cut out that day, but after a while I have started to learn that a good hearty supper will satisfy me.

dwarfer22

I totally disagree w/ this post. It is referring to a sixty hour study not a prolonged peroid of time. For all the girls out there wanting to be thin, tired of being teased or whatever this post is very misleading. It says, don't believe what you've heard, you can eat as little as you want and you'll be fine. MFP puts the warning up when we go under the recommended limit for the day. For most of us it's a rare occurance. We are trying to eat healthy, we know we need to nourish our body to keep it functioning at peak performance. We don't eat 600 cals every day. I don't think you can summarily dismiss "starvation mode" because a study done say it will be fine after 60 hours no problems. New dieters, desparate teenagers, and all the rest of the misinformed masses will think all will be well. They can starve themselves to their target weight and then everything will be fine. Except that it won't. Some will lose weight, some will get sick, some will end up anorexic, some will gain weight. 60 hours is not a sufficient length of time to determine if the metabolism will be permanently damaged. So say 60 hours is ok, what then? how often should you starve yourself? three days on, one off? twice a month? At what point does your body say, enough is enough, I quit. How do you know when to stop? When you are so tired you want to sleep all the time? When your hair falls out? Where do you draw the line? A plant needs sun and water to grow strong. If you put it in a closet w/ no water does it get thin, delicate leaves and morph into a dainty flower? No. It dies. End of.

elid

To clarify, what definition are you using for "starvation mode"? I've seen a few conflicting ones. Is it a slowdown of metabolism that happens (or does not happen) after a couple days' worth of eating very few calories? Or is it a slowdown of metabolism that happens (or does not happen) after a prolonged period of eating very few calories? (Or something else entirely?)

Starvation mode refers to a prolonged period of time that a body is denied the nutrients necessary for its survival. Just because you fast for a day, doesn't mean your body will enter starvation mode. I try to fast every month, having a 1-day water-only fast. This does not mean that my body enters starvation mode, and I don't think MFP or any personal trainer or nutritionist will disagree.

I think that's VERY important for people to see, because people will cut their calories to insanely low amounts in the pursuit of weight loss, and completely ruin their health. I think your definition of "starvation mode" is unclear in your original post, and am afraid someone will see it and say "hey yeah, that means eating 500 calories a day every day is OK!"

rileysowner

Okay.....so please explain to me why it is, after my initial 30 pound drop w/the Lap-band, why for 2 years I couldn't lose weight at 500-700 cals a day without exercise or 200 Net cals with exercise??? And by some miracle now, I consume 1300 Net cals with exercise, and the weight is just melting off?

Everyone's body reacts differently....but for me, I know my metabolism took a serious dive with so few daily calories. I could feel it. Before I was sluggish, hardly ever hungry, constantly tired. And now? I have tons of energy and get hungry when it's time to eat -- which is about every 2 1/2 - 3 hours.

That is sort of an unusual situation. You were forced by the lap-band to eat extremely low calories for a protracted amount of time. That is a little different than say intermittent fasting, or having low calories for a short period of time including days where a person eats more than those low calories. Why exactly it happened like that for you I could not say, but this study supports that metabolism is difficult to slow down significantly or for that matter to speed it up significantly.

pyro13g

There's no myth. What you are burning is revealed easily via what you expel through your lungs.

stormieweather

More info...including SCIENTIFIC studies and EXPERTS...on what starvation mode is and is not.

http://caloriecount.about.com/truth-starvation-mode-ft28742

http://unu.edu/unupress/food2/UID07E/UID07E11.HTM


I have stopped using the term "starvation mode" and instead, am using "nutritional deprivation". You may not starve by eating too little, but you will definitely deprive yourself of necessary nutrition.

Personally, I will continue to encourage people to learn to eat reasonable quantities with a small, sustainable deficit, in order to maintain a healthier lifestyle permanently while feeling in top form. As opposed to...crashing to their desired goal with a enormous deficit, all without learning a single tool to prevent a recurrence of the habits that got them to the overweight point.

muth3rluvx2

1200 calories was the minimum amount a WOMAN would need to eat daily to avoid starving to death, as determined by the WHO (World Health Organization). This was arrived at in an effort to determine the amount of aid that would need to be sent to a region without resources, such as war or natural disaster. It really wasn't related to "starvation mode", per se.

This is a great bit of detail too as CONTEXT MATTERS! Alot. We aren't in a war-torn or droughted nation (U.S.) and therefore, our bodies are responding to a very different set of environmental factors from physical to psycho-emotional - which can take a toll on energy, nutrition and alter responses to nutrients and how our bodies physiologically respond to food or lack thereof. Context is huge so I feel that to apply this number arbitrarily to people living outside of the realities that were the cause for the determinations is a massive clinical error.

What a great example of research misrepresentation/misuse. My gosh.. the diagnostic criteria from a physical standpoint alone are so extremely variant from what WHO determined under the conditions.........wow. But then, if I recall right, WHO has been put in the spotlight for questionable research data before. I don't know what came of those instances, though.