Don't believe in "Starvation Mode"?

jlsAhava

Bump

mrjason

So what about sick people, or people on those medical 500 calorie optifast diets, or people who had weight loss surgery? Why isn't this starvation mode impact those people?

dawnemjh

bump

pghfan

Intrigued by this whole debate, I did a little poking around and this is probably the best article I have found. My theory has always been that people vastly under report their caloric intake and over report their caloric expenditures through excercise (MFP, as much as I love this site, greatly over-rates calories burned, compared to everything else I see, including cardio machines, trainers, and every other source I have found).

Take it with a grain of salt, but it makes a lot of sense to me:

http://www.healthscience.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=512:are-you-in-the-starvation-mode-or-starving-for-truth&catid=102:jeff-novicks-blog&Itemid=267

lolojones

Hey everyone!! I'm new to the site & I was just browsing the Community Tool and saw this topic. As a personal trainer (my personal road block is my diet), I totally understand the concept of undereating. I would warn my clients about this! I would liken consuming calories to putting gas in your car. I'd say, "Would you drive cross country with half a tank of gas and expect to get to Florida??" (I was in Los Angeles at the time). Well, the same concept applies to our bodies. We get so obsessed with pushing our bodies to their limits and obsessing over the numbers that we often overlook taking care of the "machine" that is going to get us to our goal. So think of your body as a machine-you've got to have the proper fuel in order to reach your goals. When I broke it down to them simply, they understood. I would also remind them about MIcheal Phelps and how many calories he consumes a day to replenish his body when he is competitively training- 12,000!! Do you think he looks fat?! Lol-athlete or not, our bodies all need to be replenished-no exception. The harder you work out, the more fuel you will require.

Anyways, I think this site is a great tool and I'm glad I joined!

SHBoss1673

So what about sick people, or people on those medical 500 calorie optifast diets, or people who had weight loss surgery? Why isn't this starvation mode impact those people?

It can impact them. but you have to look really closely at the science here.

First you have to remember, Doctors aren't worried about muscle mass for someone who is morbidly obese and risking immanent death, they're worried about the death part, so sacrificing muscle mass to create a huge deficit for short (2 to 4 week) periods is perfectly reasonable assuming they monitor nutrient levels and make sure the patient's vital systems are functional.

Second, Nobody's saying that you won't still lose weight in starvation mode, the body can only reduce it's metabolic rate so much before it reaches a baseline required to remain conscious and active. Please note, this is not the same as a HEALTHY metabolic rate, things are compromised in this scenario, such as kidney function, gallbladder function, skin, hair, and nail health, energy levels, and maybe most importantly, immune system function. Essentially, the bigger the deficit, the more secondary (but still important) systems that are effected. The perfect, if extreme, example of this is anorexia. The patient still loses weight, but their teeth eventually rot, they gain a yellow gaunt look to their skin, their hair falls out, their gallbladder eventually stops working, they have minimal energy, their nails look yellow and really bad. And they are constantly fighting off infections that a healthy body would simply shrug off with ease.

Third, and this is IMPORTANT to grasp, so please re-read this as many times as you need to until you completely understand what I'm saying here.
The more fat you have available, the bigger your deficit can be without entering a state of long term underfeeding. So someone who's had WLS can have a large deficit because simply their body can keep generating energy from the fat stores in their body, why do you think they lose the weight so fast? You lose fat like an ice cube melts, from the outside in, the bigger the area available to pull energy from, the bigger the deficit can be. Until the body recognizes a deficit it can't compensate for by using fat stores, it won't begin making hormonal (and metabolic) changes to compensate. This means if you're obese, you can have a larger deficit than if you are at a healthy body fat %. the other thing to remember is that for people who have had WLS, 2 things happen, 1 their stomach volume gradually increases to allow for a more healthy amount of food, and they are monitored for nutrient levels during the recovery process to make sure that they are receiving the right amount of micronutrients for their body.

Someone at home creating a giant deficit won't have that luxury, and can thus be subject to multiple syndromes and deficiencies that are associated with malnutrition. And it's not like these things jump right out at you immediately, someone with anemia doesn't know they have it from one day to the next, it's a gradual onset, most people won't even recognize the symptoms of malnutrition until they become so severe that they cause physical changes. That doesn't mean the problem hasn't been occurring for a while, and causing harm.

I, and most people on here are trying to council healthy weight loss, maybe someone can have a bigger deficit than this site recommends, maybe they can't, but we take the approach of "it doesn't hurt to keep a slightly smaller deficit, so why risk that extra quarter or half lb loss if you don't have to? In the grand scheme, what are you gaining? A few extra months at a lower weight? Is that really worth losing your gallbladder over, or suffering a major internal infection, or losing your hair?"

lacroyx

lots of info. thanks for the post

dartany

"Starvation Mode" is not possible for someone who is overweight. If you haven't met your weight loss goal you will not go into a starvation mode. You have to much fat stored in your body to do this. Your body will simply use your stored fat as energy resulting in calorie lost...resulting in losing weight. It is really a logical thing that we think too hard about. I think somewhere we just want to justify eating more which is probably why we are overweight. Once you have reached a healthy weight...then starvation mode becomes a factor. I am 6.2 and weight 264. I am maintaining a 1510 calorie diet. I work out about 3 times a week right now...(trying to improve that daily number). Of course when I work out my net calorie is lower than 1510. Sometimes even though I eat three meals a day and two snacks I don't reached 1510. However I have lost 11lbs in less than a month. I view it as more calories out....My body is not going to go in a starvation mode I still weigh 264lbs.....It has plenty of stored fat to survive. If you eat 1510 and work out to lose 300 and then go back and eat 300 your net loss is 0 calories. Remeber calories in - calories out equals weight lost.

kevbrinks

"Starvation Mode" is not possible for someone who is overweight. If you haven't met your weight loss goal you will not go into a starvation mode. You have to much fat stored in your body to do this. Your body will simply use your stored fat as energy resulting in calorie lost...resulting in losing weight. It is really a logical thing that we think too hard about. I think somewhere we just want to justify eating more which is probably why we are overweight. Once you have reached a healthy weight...then starvation mode becomes a factor. I am 6.2 and weight 264. I am maintaining a 1510 calorie diet. I work out about 3 times a week right now...(trying to improve that daily number). Of course when I work out my net calorie is lower than 1510. Sometimes even though I eat three meals a day and two snacks I don't reached 1510. However I have lost 11lbs in less than a month. I view it as more calories out....My body is not going to go in a starvation mode I still weigh 264lbs.....It has plenty of stored fat to survive. If you eat 1510 and work out to lose 300 and then go back and eat 300 your net loss is 0 calories. Remeber calories in - calories out equals weight lost.

Close, but it almost sounds like you are suggesting that an obese person can't starve to death. Even if you weighed 400lbs, it's not like you can drink water and eat a multivitamin and be healthy because your body will just live off of fat.

It's too bad humans can't hibernate We'd fatten up over the holidays and come out in Spring lean and skinny!

SHBoss1673

"Starvation Mode" is not possible for someone who is overweight. If you haven't met your weight loss goal you will not go into a starvation mode. You have to much fat stored in your body to do this. Your body will simply use your stored fat as energy resulting in calorie lost...resulting in losing weight. It is really a logical thing that we think too hard about. I think somewhere we just want to justify eating more which is probably why we are overweight. Once you have reached a healthy weight...then starvation mode becomes a factor. I am 6.2 and weight 264. I am maintaining a 1510 calorie diet. I work out about 3 times a week right now...(trying to improve that daily number). Of course when I work out my net calorie is lower than 1510. Sometimes even though I eat three meals a day and two snacks I don't reached 1510. However I have lost 11lbs in less than a month. I view it as more calories out....My body is not going to go in a starvation mode I still weigh 264lbs.....It has plenty of stored fat to survive. If you eat 1510 and work out to lose 300 and then go back and eat 300 your net loss is 0 calories. Remeber calories in - calories out equals weight lost.

Scientifically speaking, this is false. Starvation mode can be reached by almost any person theoretically. It takes a much larger deficit for someone who is obese, but it can still be reached. which is why doctors who assign VLCD's only assign them for a few weeks. Please read the scientific studies posted by the OP, they show that hormone changes happen to the body no matter whether you are obese, or at a healthy weight, the only thing that changes is the deficit required to force these changes.

dartany

Both of you are abosultely right...I wasn't trying to imply that it was impossible but as you stated it takes a MUCH HIGHER deficit. More than likely we are not reaching this deficit by exercising unless you are some type of professional athlete. So I was just suggusting when you are significantly overweight "starvation mode" is reallY ONE LESS thing you have to worry about.

SHBoss1673

You are abosultely right...I wasn't trying to imply that it was impossible but as you stated it takes a MUCH HIGHER deficient. More than likely we are not reaching this deficient by exercising unless you are some type of professional athlete. So I was just suggusting when you are significantly overweight "starvation mode" is reallY ONE LESS thing you have to worry about.

I understand what you were trying to say. The problem is there are a lot of very inexperienced users on MFP, and some things are taken very literally on here. You really have to be precise with a topic like this or else it is inevitably misinterpreted. If you say it's impossible for someone who is overweight, well remember, overweight means technically (for a woman) anything above 28% body fat, and a woman with 29% body fat can absolutely enter starvation mode by creating a large deficit. It wouldn't be that big of a stretch to have that be misinterpreted. See where I'm coming from?

zcosborne86

Bump for later.

meggonkgonk

If you eat 1510 and work out to lose 300 and then go back and eat 300 your net loss is 0 calories. Remeber calories in - calories out equals weight lost.

Also need to point out that is is not correct. If MFP is recommending you eat 1510, you should be eating 1510 NET as far as MFP is concerned (GOAL FOOD -EXECISE=NET, you should be aiming to make NET match the GOAL number, that's just how the tool is designed).


Just to give you an idea, I checked out what my maintenence cals would be at my different "goal weights" (because I'm not sure where I'll be most comfortable) and at 5'3", my body would need 1600-1620 calories to MAINTAIN at 130 -135lbs. The 1510 that MFP is recommending for you includes a deficit, so that if you don't workout, you will still lose. Right now you are overweight enough that you can get away with not eating at least some (if not all/most) of your exercise cals and yes your body is working from it's fat stores and all that good stuff, but you lose body fat there will come a point where you will need to eat these back.

If you want to see your "maintenence calories" go to "My Home" tab, click "Goals" and on the top right hand side you should see the cals MFP estimates you burn on a daily basis, before exercise.

ladyhawk00

"Starvation Mode" is not possible for someone who is overweight. If you haven't met your weight loss goal you will not go into a starvation mode. You have to much fat stored in your body to do this. Your body will simply use your stored fat as energy resulting in calorie lost...resulting in losing weight. It is really a logical thing that we think too hard about. I think somewhere we just want to justify eating more which is probably why we are overweight. Once you have reached a healthy weight...then starvation mode becomes a factor. I am 6.2 and weight 264. I am maintaining a 1510 calorie diet. I work out about 3 times a week right now...(trying to improve that daily number). Of course when I work out my net calorie is lower than 1510. Sometimes even though I eat three meals a day and two snacks I don't reached 1510. However I have lost 11lbs in less than a month. I view it as more calories out....My body is not going to go in a starvation mode I still weigh 264lbs.....It has plenty of stored fat to survive. If you eat 1510 and work out to lose 300 and then go back and eat 300 your net loss is 0 calories. Remeber calories in - calories out equals weight lost.

I continue to be baffled as to why people don't understand how MFP works.

MFP creates a built in caloric deficit, based on your chosen loss per week goal, regardless of exercise. Your MFP deficit is NOT created through exercise. So, if you choose a 1 lb per week loss goal, MFP creates a deficit of 500 cals from your maintenance cals (BMR + Activity). This deficit remains whether you exercise or not. If you then exercise, and do not replace the cals added for exercise, you make the deficit larger. A larger deficit is not necessarily desirable.

Rapid weight loss carries many risks, the most notable of which is weight regain. In addition to this, all the issues Banks referred to above.

Lack of hunger when at a large deficit is actually a signal of slower metabolic rate and an effect of poor eating habits. When you've had poor eating habits for a while, the body adapts and your body may no longer be sending reliable hunger cues, and your brain may not be recognizing them. Overeating and undereating are both poor eating habits, and it takes just as long to fix them (and their effects) as it did to get them set. And going from overeating to undereating is hardly a logical solution.

pghfan

I think some of the problem also lies in the BMR itself. What MFP calculates for me is around 600-700 calories MORE than any other site I have found that calculates BMR. That in itself can lead to a big problem! Again, I love the site, I just don't take all the calculations here as gospel.

meggonkgonk

Lack of hunger when at a large deficit is actually a signal of slower metabolic rate and an effect of poor eating habits. When you've had poor eating habits for a while, the body adapts and your body may no longer be sending reliable hunger cues, and your brain may not be recognizing them. Overeating and undereating are both poor eating habits, and it takes just as long to fix them (and their effects) as it did to get them set. And going from overeating to undereating is hardly a logical solution.

*high fives you*

stormieweather

I think some of the problem also lies in the BMR itself. What MFP calculates for me is around 600-700 calories MORE than any other site I have found that calculates BMR. That in itself can lead to a big problem! Again, I love the site, I just don't take all the calculations here as gospel.

MFP calculates my BMR as less than most sites. Even so, it's not more than 100-120 calories. You sure you aren't confusing BMR with Maintenance?

Sammyk50

Bumping! Thanks. One minute I think I get it, the next I feel confused! And other times I'm just scared to do anything!

RachVR6

This thread needs to be *thumbtacked*!

:drinker: