Starvation Mode: How It Works

ladyhawk00

It's as simple as this

Metabolism burns body-fat.
Starvation Mode drops Metabolism.
.:frown:
Don't go into Starvation Mode!

Yep. Slow metabolism is no fun at all.

SHBoss1673

bumping for the EST morning crowd

shadow3829

This has been the best and most responsible definition I have seen!! I can buy all of this. I was having trouble with the advise people gives to everyone who doesn't lose for a week or 2. Eat more! Or the ones that warns someone that because they missed one meal they will go into starvation mode.

Awesome job!!

ramseyrose

Bump

Improvised

Good info.

Xaspar

Well done

ladyhawk00

:drinker:

ladyhawk00

I wanted to add a note here to remember that even if you aren't at risk of starvation mode, you still need to make sure to meet your daily requirements for macros and micros. Food isn't just energy, it's vital nutrients that need to be replenished every day. And no, daily multivitamin doesn't do it.

nicole751

bump!!

ladyhawk00

Bump

Schwiggity

bump

lodro

It's as simple as this

Metabolism burns body-fat.
Starvation Mode drops Metabolism.
.:frown:
Don't go into Starvation Mode!

I'm very happy with my metabolism slowed down. Which is not the same as starvation mode, but helps me stay at a consistent low caloric intake. I'm not here to lose weight or diet. I know it's the main reason for people to use MFP, but it isn't for me.

Angela_MA

Thank you for posting this! This article was very informative and eye opening!

Cathy_5011

Thanks for the info. It was explained very well. unlike some other posts

Russellb97

It's as simple as this

Metabolism burns body-fat.
Starvation Mode drops Metabolism.
.:frown:
Don't go into Starvation Mode!

I'm very happy with my metabolism slowed down. Which is not the same as starvation mode, but helps me stay at a consistent low caloric intake. I'm not here to lose weight or diet. I know it's the main reason for people to use MFP, but it isn't for me.

I'm assuming you are trying to live longer, but for me personally I want to be able to eat as much as possible and be ripped. I love food and I love being strong. Will I live to be 100? maybe not, but I also might get hit by a bus tomorrow. So I am going to enjoy it while I can.

lodro

It's as simple as this

Metabolism burns body-fat.
Starvation Mode drops Metabolism.
.:frown:
Don't go into Starvation Mode!

I'm very happy with my metabolism slowed down. Which is not the same as starvation mode, but helps me stay at a consistent low caloric intake. I'm not here to lose weight or diet. I know it's the main reason for people to use MFP, but it isn't for me.

I'm assuming you are trying to live longer, but for me personally I want to be able to eat as much as possible and be ripped. I love food and I love being strong. Will I live to be 100? maybe not, but I also might get hit by a bus tomorrow. So I am going to enjoy it while I can.

Yes, I want to coax my brain tumors into slowing down their growth. Increasingly, studies point out the influence of glucose on tumor metabolism. And of calorie restriction and fasting on the ability of cells to regenerate up to a point (hormesis).

In general: the "living longer" is not so much about reaching 120, but about having more healthy years. And yes, in my case, I'm enjoying life while I can: I have been on a plateau for a little over a year now and I intend to be on that plateau for as long as is possible, but of course I know I won't be there for ever.

Russellb97

It's as simple as this

Metabolism burns body-fat.
Starvation Mode drops Metabolism.
.:frown:
Don't go into Starvation Mode!

I'm very happy with my metabolism slowed down. Which is not the same as starvation mode, but helps me stay at a consistent low caloric intake. I'm not here to lose weight or diet. I know it's the main reason for people to use MFP, but it isn't for me.

I'm assuming you are trying to live longer, but for me personally I want to be able to eat as much as possible and be ripped. I love food and I love being strong. Will I live to be 100? maybe not, but I also might get hit by a bus tomorrow. So I am going to enjoy it while I can.

Yes, I want to coax my brain tumors into slowing down their growth. Increasingly, studies point out the influence of glucose on tumor metabolism. And of calorie restriction and fasting on the ability of cells to regenerate up to a point (hormesis).

In general: the "living longer" is not so much about reaching 120, but about having more healthy years. And yes, in my case, I'm enjoying life while I can: I have been on a plateau for a little over a year now and I intend to be on that plateau for as long as is possible, but of course I know I won't be there for ever.

I really hope this technique really helps you with your brain tumors, there is plenty of reasons to believe that low calorie intake and metabolism slow down will help you age slower. Good luck man.

juliapurpletoes

bumpo!

such a great post !

baisleac

bump

yanicka

Brilliant

Brandicaloriecountess

Thank you!!!!!

maurilax

This post is great, makes a lot of sense to me and is proved by the results I am having.

I have a quick question about how MFP calculates calories burned though and the effect on net calories.

for example lets say I'm supposed to eat 2400 calories a day to maintain my weight. to me that means im burning 100 calories every hour just by living my life. so lets say i burn 400 calories during an exercise. when i add that 400 to MFP does it automatically subtract the 100 calories that i would have burned had I not exercised?

So to summarize does MFP account for the fact that I'm burning 400 instead of 100 and add 300 to my total for the day. or does it just add the 400?

Isn't this somewhat misleading? if i burn 400 from exercise am i really burning 400 or 400 from exercise and 100 from BMR?


I hope the question makes sense.
Thanks,

mommiedawn

I have a question, was going to make a thread about it, but it fits here....

I am having trouble eating! I have anxiety AND I'm trying to lose weight, etc....so several reasons but I am having some crazy low calorie days though I'm not really trying to.

I want to make an effort to keep my calories up there, but I don't think to because I'm busy and then the day is gone and I'm afraid to eat a bunch at once to make up for it. I keep telling myself it's okay as long as I cycle those crazy low days with some maintenance weight days, etc....basically I guess I'm saying to myself - look at the overal deficit for the week.

I have read a 3500 calorie deficit is a pound lost. And healthy is 1-2 lbs per week. So it seems safe to think a 3500 cal/week deficit is okay.

If I have that approach, low days, mod days, etc.....eat healthy foods, and have a deficit as discussed, based on the week.......am I still at risk for starvation mode?

Hopefully someone has an opinion, information to offer, etc......

Thanks!

Mindful_Trent

This post is great, makes a lot of sense to me and is proved by the results I am having.

I have a quick question about how MFP calculates calories burned though and the effect on net calories.

for example lets say I'm supposed to eat 2400 calories a day to maintain my weight. to me that means im burning 100 calories every hour just by living my life. so lets say i burn 400 calories during an exercise. when i add that 400 to MFP does it automatically subtract the 100 calories that i would have burned had I not exercised?

So to summarize does MFP account for the fact that I'm burning 400 instead of 100 and add 300 to my total for the day. or does it just add the 400?

Isn't this somewhat misleading? if i burn 400 from exercise am i really burning 400 or 400 from exercise and 100 from BMR?


I hope the question makes sense.
Thanks,

You totally make sense. I don't know what the answer is, because I've never asked the guys who make this site, nor seen an answer from anyone who has, but I personally assume that MFP does NOT account for the fact that some of the "exercise calories" are really "normal" calories that you would've burned anyways. I take my "Calories burned from normal daily activities" from my goals page, divide by 24, and use that hourly rate to reduce the calorie burn on exercises I put into MFP. I would do this regardless of the source - from MFP's database, a HRM or my BodyMedia Fit. In your example above, I'd book 300 for exercise calories and assume that the 400 given by MFP includes 100 of "normal" calories.

Steph_Marie29

Thank you for sharing that

maurilax

Thanks accountant_boi, generally I don't eat back all of my exercise calories anyway and i don't think 100 is really going to make a huge difference at 1000 calorie deficit for me anyway but I am glad i wasn't the only one who was curious.

justcallmejennifer

bump

puggleperson

bump

SHBoss1673

Thanks accountant_boi, generally I don't eat back all of my exercise calories anyway and i don't think 100 is really going to make a huge difference at 1000 calorie deficit for me anyway but I am glad i wasn't the only one who was curious.

that's a good question to ask Mike (you can PM Mike, he'll answer you), I know that some HRM's take RMR into account, but some don't. I know my polar doesn't account for Resting Metabolic Rate, so you have to manually subtract it (I called and asked).

ladyhawk00

I have a question, was going to make a thread about it, but it fits here....

I am having trouble eating! I have anxiety AND I'm trying to lose weight, etc....so several reasons but I am having some crazy low calorie days though I'm not really trying to.

I want to make an effort to keep my calories up there, but I don't think to because I'm busy and then the day is gone and I'm afraid to eat a bunch at once to make up for it. I keep telling myself it's okay as long as I cycle those crazy low days with some maintenance weight days, etc....basically I guess I'm saying to myself - look at the overal deficit for the week.

I have read a 3500 calorie deficit is a pound lost. And healthy is 1-2 lbs per week. So it seems safe to think a 3500 cal/week deficit is okay.

If I have that approach, low days, mod days, etc.....eat healthy foods, and have a deficit as discussed, based on the week.......am I still at risk for starvation mode?

Hopefully someone has an opinion, information to offer, etc......

Thanks!

There's really no way to know - your body may or may not deal well with that situation. What I can say is that it's not optimal and your metabolism probably won't be running as well as it might otherwise.

Calorie cycling is a valid strategy, but it needs to be done in a fairly precise way to achieve the desired results. Unless you are planning it and make sure that the cal levels are right and that the nutrient levels for each day are right, it doesn't really "average out".

An occasional day far under or over does not undo all of your progress. But when it becomes a habit, your body just can't function at its highest level. While you can get away with an "average" intake over the week if the differences aren't too big from day to day, you can't get away with "averaging" your macros and micros. There are nutrients that need to be replaced on a daily basis to provide power for all of the different systems - such as calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, fats, etc. So the day of far under goal likely isn't meeting the needs for all of the nutrients. Again, not a huge issue on a rare basis, but not a good way to get the most out of your nutrition.

The best advice I can give is scheduling and planning. Plan your meals ahead of time - at least at the start of the day, even better a day or two (or even the week) ahead. Make some snacks or meals ahead of time and keep them in the fridge or freezer for when you don't have time to cook. Make your nutrition (and by extension, YOU) a priority.

Trust me, I know it's hard - I'm one of the least scheduled people you'll find - I HATE schedules. But it will make all the difference in being able to make good food choices and actually removing that anxiety about eating. When it's planned ahead of time, you don't have to stress over it.