For those who do NOT believe in starvation mode

emmab0902

I don't believe starvation mode exists in the sense that it's often used on the boards.

What I find interesting is this - my calorie goal is set at 1200 for the day. Now, when I don't exercise (so my goal stays at 1200), if I eat below that by even 100, MFP yells at me that I'll go into starvation mode. BUT, if I exercise and burn 400 cals, so now my goal is raised 1600, if I eat only 1300, MFP no longer yells at me even though I'm 300 cals away from 1600 which would be a net of 1200. Does it only care about the calories you've eaten but not the NET cals?

I find that strange too. The other thing I find amusing is so many people who eat at above the magic mark very very frequently net below that number, yet it seems to be only those whose target is less than 1200 who get flamed if they don't hit their goal.

servilia

I don't believe starvation mode exists in the sense that it's often used on the boards.

What I find interesting is this - my calorie goal is set at 1200 for the day. Now, when I don't exercise (so my goal stays at 1200), if I eat below that by even 100, MFP yells at me that I'll go into starvation mode. BUT, if I exercise and burn 400 cals, so now my goal is raised 1600, if I eat only 1300, MFP no longer yells at me even though I'm 300 cals away from 1600 which would be a net of 1200. Does it only care about the calories you've eaten but not the NET cals?

I find that strange too. The other thing I find amusing is so many people who eat at above the magic mark very very frequently net below that number, yet it seems to be only those whose target is less than 1200 who get flamed if they don't hit their goal.

Yeah I know. There are women (not familiar with men's requirements) who eat 1800 or so, but then burn off a thousand so they're really netting 800.. and then we get yelled at for eating 1150. Go figure

barkin43

Ditto! Why bother exercising! You could just eat the lower calories and relax! Of course, you would not gain the flexibility and energy that exercise affords, and I believe weight would come off faster with both exercise and cutting back on calories.

servilia

Ditto! Why bother exercising! You could just eat the lower calories and relax! Of course, you would not gain the flexibility and energy that exercise affords, and I believe weight would come off faster with both exercise and cutting back on calories.

Yeah I love the exercise I'm looking to get toned and fit too, and exercise has so many long term benefits.

Silverkittycat

As in the way it is sometimes pushed as something that occurs at high levels of body fat, or misquotes or misinterprets the Minessota starvation study.....

What convinced you it doesn't exist the way it is spoken about on these boards??

NB - this is not a thread to debate SM, it is to hear from those who have their doubts about it.

Well, I believe in adaptive thermogenesis or metabolic adaptation, but I think it goes hand in hand with malnutrition, genetics, health, and body composition. Of course the overweight or obese can just as easily be malnourished as those that are normal or under what is considered "ideal" weight. The way your body utilizes/partitions calories can be affected if you're lacking certain macros and micros - if you are permanently eating a low calorie diet I'd hope your nutrition is 100%, or as close as you can possibly get it.

*editing to add that I'm referring to the original poster with the intent/goal of health. I know there are plenty of members eating low calorie for weight loss that are not focused on the nutritional content and that do not need to eat this way permanently.

KavemanKarg

Dont know if it exists or not as described on the forums, anything I have seen it was tested on people WITHOUT excess body fat so I can see a body straining to preserve under that but not if it has excess weight. Its a theory.

But I also do not think I have seen any member on MFP starving, and I think it gets blamed entirely to much for a stall in weightloss which is quite natural in the long term. We all stall if we are losing weight over the long term, no matter what diet you are on. You cannot go 6 months without the odd stall. Often it is accompanied later by a rapid drop.

Its sort of like overtraining on the fitness communities, it gets blamed all the time, when really the guy just needs a tweek or a back off week.

emmab0902

From wikipedia

"The basic cause of starvation is an imbalance between energy intake and energy expenditure"

So we are all in it aaargghh!

lol

Silverkittycat

lol......yeah, you can look to science for guidance, but it's still more art than science. Make your diet fit "you".

LisaMDJ

I'm just trying to reach people who feel like I used to feel, that the only way to lose weight is to eat less and less and less and are frustrated and feel deprived. I want them to see there's another way, that it doesn't take radical changes in the way you eat to have great results.

If someone is happy with what they're eating and happy with their progress, continue doing what you're doing because it's working for you.

BUT... if someone is unhappy, hungry and bummed out, don't be afraid to try eating more. It might be the key to success for you like it was for me. That's all.

Amen, sister! A few years ago I lost 110 pounds and I never dropped below 1500 calories (of course, I was running a lot because I got addicted to it!) I gained 80 back with my pregnancy and now I'm trying to get back in shape. I decided that this time I'm not going to deprive myself at all. I've flirted with anorexia in my past, dropping my calories below 800 and getting freaky about how much I ate, and I refuse to even come close to that madness again. (I'm not saying the people eating below 1200 cals here are anorexic!! We're all different).

Whether it has anything to do with this thread or not, I'm just glad this message is out there. If you want to eat 1100 cals a day, go for it. But if you want to lose weight by eating what you want (within reason) and eating MORE than you thought you could while losing weight, then it's possible for you. I have to do what will work longterm, not what will just get the weight off. And I won't stick to 1100 (or even 1200) calories for long. To enjoy my life, I need good food, sometimes a little junky food included, and I need to run, run, run. So my biggest reason for cutting my calories at all is just so I can be healthy enough to run more. If you're cool with eating a LOT less food, then that's great for you. I've only been on MFP about a week, and I've already seen a lot of people with very low calories. I just hope it doesn't encourage people to drop their calories below the amount they can sustain for a long time. That's my problem with it -- not that it will put you in "starvation mode," whether that exists or not, but that it will put you on a plan that you can't sustain and you'll go kooky after a while and eat everything in sight.

summertime_girl

I think the only way to enter starvation mode is to have no fat reserve left for your body to burn. Until then, no matter the number of calories consumed, the body had stores to fuel from, and therefore, no starvation can occur.

Sublog

While metabolic slowdown will occur during extremd dieting and weight loss, it will NEVER be enough to overcome a calorie deficit.

Simple law of thermodynamics says I am right. Your body's metabolism will never slow down enough to overcome a low enough deficit.

emmab0902

Yep there's a reason they're called the LAWS of thermodynamics, not the SUGGESTIONS of thermodynamics!

jayliospecky

Hmmm. So what do you say to someone like this, for example. 5'3 female, 120 pounds, desperately wants to lose 10 pounds. Eating 1000 or less calories per day and is horrified that they aren't losing weight. I've seen several of these types, and similar, on MFP, and people usually tell these people they are in starvation mode. Whether it's truly "starvation mode" or not, I think what they're doing is not about fitness or health, and may be the beginnings of an eating disorder. I think the people trying to encourage these types to eat more are still doing the right thing. I would rather see that than encouraging people to deprive their body of nutrients it needs to be at its optimum health. Skinny does not necessarily equate healthy.

So, I can see why people think "starvation mode" is overused. But I have been disheartened at the number of people I have seen who are depriving themselves of food to try and meet an unrealistic goal.

nuttyfamily

I agree with this one. Eating under every now and then will not put you in that mode but months and months of it, yes, I believe it.

I can understand why people would not believe in it because the way it is described on the boards sounds absolutely ridiculous. I do believe it exists but it is truly incredibly rare and takes quite a lot of 'starvation' (not a few weeks or so!).

LorinaLynn

Hmmm. So what do you say to someone like this, for example. 5'3 female, 120 pounds, desperately wants to lose 10 pounds. Eating 1000 or less calories per day and is horrified that they aren't losing weight.

What I'd tell someone like that is to do some math. Figure out an estimate of what their body fat percentage is, and whether or not it's even possible for them to reach their goal weight.

When I was in my early 20s and very thin, I was no more than 115 lbs. I'm a little over ten pounds more than that now, 15 years later, but my (estimated) lean muscle mass is around 103 lbs. I couldn't possibly get to 115 again without either losing good chunk of my hard-earned muscle, or dropping to only having 10% body fat. Neither of those are options I'm willing to do just to be able to say I'm 115 pounds again.

The 5'3, 120 lb girl should do the same calculations and see if what she wants is realistic, or based on some kind of media-fueled ideal of what a woman "should" weigh. (IE, how Playboy Playmates always seem to weigh 108 pounds, no matter how tall or voluptuous they are.)

emmab0902

Unfortunately we can only make healthy choices for ourselves not others. Low calorie diets as they relate to those with eating disorder tendencies is beyond the scope of this thread, but yes those individuals need specialist advice.

calibri

There is too many moving parts in the system for one blanket statement to apply to all cases.

opalmel

Bump

bcattoes

I have done no research on it because I know it will never affect me. I don't like to be hungry so when I get hungry, I eat. But I don't believe it's possible to gain weight on a calorie deficit. Sure, you may lose more slowly because your metabolism slowed, but when people start talking about gaining weight because they ate too little, I just roll my eyes.

jedi9393

Once again here we go.

I wish someone would please, please tell me what I'm doing wrong then!!!!!!!!!!!

Look at my diary. I work out almost every day. This week i'm upping it to 2-3 times a day cause frankly I am desperate. I do cardio and strength training. I am not hungry at all. Dont feel deprived. I've been told over and over again I am in starvation mode. I have gained 3lbs in one month. So If starvation mode does not exist then why am I gaining??? Its not anywhere near my time of the month btw. I am 5'11 278.6 as of today. I'm female 35yrs old. No medical issues.

I am looking for answers and if starvation mode doesnt exist then I must be the freak. I've been eating the same since 08/25/11. In the beginning I lost 15lbs and then after a week another 4, then it slowed down to nothing and now i've gained. I am being told by some that it maybe all the weights I lift that causes water retention. Who knows?

And may I add that I get enough nutrients and protein a day even though I am at or under 1000 calories!! I also take a multivitamin daily.