Don't believe in "Starvation Mode"?

nuimproved

bump

mariasheehan

I couldn't agree with you more!!!! thank you.

Katherine_Nelson

To be clear:

What 75% (my estimate) of MFP users would define "Starvation Mode" as...

THAT, I do not believe in.

Testimonials, anecdotal evidence, all of it means NOTHING in my opinion. Show me scientific evidence of a starving person that gains weight as a direct result of their starvation.

Thank you!!

LMP1979

Bump! :flowerforyou:

YeaILift

I think the main problem is that people are more concerned with losing weight and not concerned with lowering their body fat %. If more people, especially women, would "buy in" to body recomposition, then starvation mode wouldn't be this huge blown out of proportion thing on this website. In fact, the vast majority of users would end up eating way more than 1200 calories a day instead of fighting hunger urges on minimal amounts of nutrients. Of course, most people want instant gratification ,it's the just the type of society we live in.

SHBoss1673

I think the main problem is that people are more concerned with losing weight and not concerned with lowering their body fat %. If more people, especially women, would "buy in" to body recomposition, then starvation mode wouldn't be this huge blown out of proportion thing on this website. In fact, the vast majority of users would end up eating way more than 1200 calories a day instead of fighting hunger urges on minimal amounts of nutrients. Of course, most people want instant gratification ,it's the just the type of society we live in.

Amen brotha! Keep preaching that. The more you say it, the more popular the idea becomes,

One of my personal phrases to clients is "Weight is arbitrary, body fat is key!" Love that phrase, and live it.
.

morganadk2_deleted

BUMP!!!!

CatchMom11

So this is something that I was very confused about so I asked the trainer at my gym. She's not one of those trainers that just went and got a certificate. She's got her BA and has worked with professional athletes so she is one of very few people that I trust when it comes to weight loss and exercise.

She said that if you are trying to lose weight that you should not be eating the calories that you burn from exercise. It makes exercising a moot point. She said that if you're looking to maintain weight, then it's okay. As far as hitting a plateau, you just need to shock your system and completely switch up your exercise routing once every 1-1.5 months to avoid this from happening.

I see that you've been very successful so do whatever works for you. My sister is also a firm believer in eating the exercise calories. I personally think it makes working out a moot point.

:happy:

SHBoss1673

I am just wondering if the contestants on the biggest loser were also told to eat back their exercise calories. Would be good to see what kind of diet plan those guys were all on.

As a trainer, it offends me often how this show portrays itself. I'm not mad at Bob and Jillian or anything (although it's ugly the way Jillian pimps just about any product out there sometimes). I'm mad at the way it's produced.

Look, First you must understand a few things about TBL, 1) there are doctors there, at the ranch, who have a specialization in weight disorders, metabolic disorders, hormone problems...etc. monitoring the clients. So choosing ANY person and comparing them to TBL is going to be inaccurate.
2) these people are considered to be morbidly obese, and in some cases in "immanent risk of sudden death via stroke or heart failure"; In situations like this, and in the presence of EMT's, certain risks are considered acceptable, I.E. Very Low Calorie Diets (VLCD's), pushing beyond safe cardiovascular limits in the presence of medical staff, even certain weight loss supplements and aids. Anything to get the first 20 to 30 lbs gone to get them out of the extreme danger zone.

-For most of us, none of these things apply, even for someone who's considered morbidly obese, most of those people aren't in a situation where they're risking immanent death. And I would wager a guess that 99% of us don't have an EMT or doctor waiting 10 feet behind us in case we collapse.

-You have to remember, your deficit should be based on the amount of stored energy you have available to make up the difference. We HAVE to understand what we are trying to accomplish with the deficit. The body will always strive to reach a balance between calories available and calories burned. That balanced IS ALWAYS reached. Sometimes through food eaten, or a combination of food eaten and body fat released, or that plus protein, or all those plus forcing the metabolic rate to slow down to meet the goal.
That being the case, the more body fat available to the body, the bigger the deficit can be. So someone with 100 lbs of body fat is going to be able to utilize more body fat than someone with 25 lbs of body fat. So someone who is morbidly obese may be able to eat 1200 calories or 1000 calories NET or what ever, where, myself for instance, with about 25 lbs of body fat total and a maintenance of about 2700, can't come even close to that consistently without my body panicking and starting to throttle back energy usage.

Here's where the myth and the fact needs to be separated. The facts are above, the myth says you can gain weight if you eat to little. I generally disagree with that thought process, but there are very infrequent situations where this can appear to be true. How? Well, 1st remember that most people incorrectly calculate some of their statistics and calorie counts, whether that be their exercise calories, or their nutrition, matters little, they're wrong on occasion. That's fine, but when the deficit is to large for their body to handle and they are incorrectly stating their calories, this combines to make them possibly gain a lb or two here and there. I can get deeper into that concept if people like, but generally speaking "starvation mode" or long term underfeeding (greater than 3 days usually) or the famine response or what ever you want to call it is real, it DOES cause hormonal and metabolic changes in the body, and is a problem people on MFP encounter, I've seen it first hand, and I recognize when it happens. Determining the solution is difficult some times, especially for smaller women where the margin for error is very small, but it does happen. You can call things myths all you want, it doesn't change that the only myth is in people's understanding of it, not the term itself.

My plea is this, don't just say "it's a myth" because that perpetuates the "starvation mode is a myth" theory. Say rather something like "starvation mode is real, but many people on here don't understand what it truly is and does.

I've started a separate blog on this topic, and my first post was describing, in detail, the process of long term fasting and underfeeding. You can check it out here if you like, it's long and very technical, but it describes "starvation mode" more fully.

http://banks1850-machinations.blogspot.com/2011/02/inaugural-blog-short-and-long-term.html

SHBoss1673

So this is something that I was very confused about so I asked the trainer at my gym. She's not one of those trainers that just went and got a certificate. She's got her BA and has worked with professional athletes so she is one of very few people that I trust when it comes to weight loss and exercise.

She said that if you are trying to lose weight that you should not be eating the calories that you burn from exercise. It makes exercising a moot point. She said that if you're looking to maintain weight, then it's okay. As far as hitting a plateau, you just need to shock your system and completely switch up your exercise routing once every 1-1.5 months to avoid this from happening.

I see that you've been very successful so do whatever works for you. My sister is also a firm believer in eating the exercise calories. I personally think it makes working out a moot point.

:happy:

the big question, and this is important, is whether you told her that you keep a deficit whether you exercise or not. This is vital and is why MFP is different. You can't just ask your trainer whether it's ok to eat exercise calories, OF COURSE they'll say no, you have to say this: "The website I use to track calories creates a deficit based on my maintenance calories, regardless of whether I exercise or not then exercise calories are added after and the deficit remains the same." I'll bet if you put it that way, if the trainer isn't confused at first (this is not the normal way weight loss is achieved) , they'll then agree that this is fine. I have yet to talk to a trainer, who is correctly briefed on how MFP works, that disagreed with the process. They may not like the way it's model works, and would rather choose another way to achieve a deficit, that's fine, but the concept of creating a specific deficit to lose weight and keeping that deficit regardless of exercise, is a perfectly reasonable and valid concept.

meggonkgonk

To be clear:

What 75% (my estimate) of MFP users would define "Starvation Mode" as...

THAT, I do not believe in.

Testimonials, anecdotal evidence, all of it means NOTHING in my opinion. Show me scientific evidence of a starving person that gains weight as a direct result of their starvation.

Starvation (as a clinical term) and "Starvation Mode" (technically adaptive thermogenesis or famine response) are NOT one and the same. They can be related, and can correlate, but trying to use the terms interchangeably is part of the problem.

Yes- what most posters are referring to ISN'T the act of starving- it IS the famine reseponse (or whatever the correct designation is) where people eat well below their calories for a prolonged period of time, and in response their metabolism slows- here the body is not actually starving YET, but has few enough calories to run on that the possibility of starving seems real. It manifests most obviously in those near a healthy weight or with a smaller body fat % because low body fat is one of the signals to the body that starvation is a danger. The biggest problem of starvation mode is that though the people are eating well below their calories, they cant go over the average (and very low) amount that they normally eat without gaining- So they think "Oh I've been so good for WEEKS! I can have a huge pizza night, or go on a pub crawl with my friends!" because they've "earned" all these extra calories. BUT all they have done is slow their metabolism which will now store all the extra it can in case things get tight again.

Nobody is contending that people who are actually starving gain weight, but rather pointing out why people who abstain from food exessively can still gain, even with just one "splurge".

Which posters have you seen defining "starvation mode" and "starvation" as the same thing?

meggonkgonk

I see that you've been very successful so do whatever works for you. My sister is also a firm believer in eating the exercise calories. I personally think it makes working out a moot point.

So I just wanted to address this, because it is the common kernal of discontent with the "eating exercise calories".

MFP works a bit differently than most calorie/point counters. Most nutrition plans incorporate workouts into your overall activity level- ie I have a desk job, but if I workout 5 days a week most plans would put me at "lightly active". This would figure into my daily calorie goal - so most nutritionists would assume I am working out a certain number of times a week and then recommend that I eat 1500-1800 calories everyday, regardless of my workout.

MFP is built on a system that enables you to lose without working out, if you so choose. Because of this, you get a lower starting goal but it has you manually account for specific workouts or anything outside your normal level of activity. so you get a lower starting goal everyday (so you continue to lose regardless of whether or not you workout), but when you workout more, you should be eating more. So on days I workout, I eat 17-2000 (total), and on days that I don't I eat 13-1400 (total), but my net (the amount my body gets to run off of) is always 1300-1400

You can do what ever you want in regard to exercise calories but it doesn't change the fact that MFP is designed for you to eat these calories. The equation on the homepage:

GOAL FOOD -(minus) EXERCISE =(equals) NET

Your supposed to be aiming to make your NET calories match your NET calories-- that is how the tool is designed.

SHBoss1673

megg, I think, and correct me if I'm wrong, she's primarily referring to the people who reference that caloriecount.about.com article that's been floating around the internet for a few years (the one referenced earlier), where the guy interchanges starvation diets and starvation mode. I've seen it in a few other places as well, and a few posts on MFP.

marianne_s

adding, so I can read later

Trafty024

Interesting reading. Thanks!

shannonshock13

I feel confused.

bahahaha man, you and me both.

whatever happened to eat less move more lose weight?

gillleeman

Bumping for my topics

lovetowrite73

whatever happened to eat less move more lose weight?

And therein lies the problem and why this argument will forever remain.

123nikki123

BUMP!

DJH510

The theory of starvation mode as it is presented in forums such as these IS a myth. It breaks the laws of thermodynamics; there's no way around that.

SHBoss1673

The theory of starvation mode as it is presented in forums such as these IS a myth. It breaks the laws of thermodynamics; there's no way around that.

Please explain. This is how myths are perpetuated, people making open ended statements with not description and nothing to back it up. Making this statement opens up the field for anyone and everyone to throw out their wild theories.

There are plenty of us trying to explain the phenomenon with science and logic, please don't just dismiss that with a simple "you're wrong" type of argument.

rachel1975f

"Tanks for Nuttin"

Still as confused as I was when I started reading:noway:

techie30

bump

meggonkgonk

The theory of starvation mode as it is presented in forums such as these IS a myth. It breaks the laws of thermodynamics; there's no way around that.

I agree with Boss, this is a very open statement- In what way is it presented in the forums? The links the OP cited had an entire section citing scientifc information on how/why starvation mode exists. Boss and several others have spent a good amount of time explaining the concept in a basic understandable way. You don't eat enough, your body believes that starvation is a possibility. It slows down your metabolism to avoid actual starvation- thus requiring you to eat less calories, so people are not getting the deficit they believe. In what forums is it presented as breaking "laws of themodynamics" (which as far as I can tell are only tangentially applicable here)

I have come across many people who DIDN'T believe in starvation mode who incorrectly explain what it is, but most people who advocate eating your exercise calories and getting a minimum of net calories, in my experience, explain as I have above.

cutmd

The theory of starvation mode as it is presented in forums such as these IS a myth. It breaks the laws of thermodynamics; there's no way around that.

I agree with Boss, this is a very open statement- In what way is it presented in the forums? The links the OP cited had an entire section citing scientifc information on how/why starvation mode exists. Boss and several others have spent a good amount of time explaining the concept in a basic understandable way. You don't eat enough, your body believes that starvation is a possibility. It slows down your metabolism to avoid actual starvation- thus requiring you to eat less calories, so people are not getting the deficit they believe. In what forums is it presented as breaking "laws of themodynamics" (which as far as I can tell are only tangentially applicable here)

I have come across many people who DIDN'T believe in starvation mode who incorrectly explain what it is, but most people who advocate eating your exercise calories and getting a minimum of net calories, in my experience, explain as I have above.

I think more than a few times someone starts a thread that says "I haven't lost anything" or "I gained weight", and one of the solutions offered by many posters is that they must be in starvation mode and need to eat more. If their metabolism slows down by 10% because they are eating less it should not completely eliminate their deficit, they should continue ton lose but at a slower rate; you should not GAIN because you are not eating enough, THAT is a violation of the laws of thermodynamics because energy cannot be created or destroyed (the body doesn't have as much energy as it needs to survive, it should tap into the fat energy stores, not create new fat - from what?).

The resident experts don't communicate it this way, but many times the layperson translates it into "if I eat 1000 calories today instead of 1200 I will gain 2 lbs of fat" :noway: . My guess is that is what DJH510 was referring to

CatchMom11

@Boss - I have to know where you got your Red Sox banner! I need to get one for my Yankees. lol.

lukimakamai

bumb...just wanting to come back and read some links later )

SHBoss1673

@Boss - I have to know where you got your Red Sox banner! I need to get one for my Yankees. lol.

C'mon, why would I EVER give that kind of information out to a yankee's fan.

But seriously, I made it. It's simple, you just find your favorite Yankee's image on the web, save the image locally on your machine, open up mspaint or what ever image editor you like, resize to fit the banner section, and re-save it as a jpeg file, it's not difficult.

CatchMom11

@Boss - I have to know where you got your Red Sox banner! I need to get one for my Yankees. lol.

C'mon, why would I EVER give that kind of information out to a yankee's fan.

But seriously, I made it. It's simple, you just find your favorite Yankee's image on the web, save the image locally on your machine, open up mspaint or what ever image editor you like, resize to fit the banner section, and re-save it as a jpeg file, it's not difficult.

Thanks! I will give it a try. Apparently it's not true what they say about Boston fans. lol. jk. Btw - my husband cheers for you guys. He's not a Boston fan per se, but he absolutely with every inch of his being, hates my Yankees. It's certainly a good thing I didn't know that when we started dating. lol.

LorinaLynn

whatever happened to eat less move more lose weight?

Well, in my experience, eating more and moving more made me lose more than eating less.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/LorinaLynn/view/the-pennsylvania-hillbilly-less-isn-t-always-more-75272

I don't claim to fully understand the science behind it, but I know what's working for me. And when I didn't eat enough, my body would not release the pounds. Now I'm eating more and the weight is dropping faster than I ever expected. Best of all, I'm happy and don't feel deprived at all.