A trick around starvation mode?

taso42

What are some signs of "starvation mode"?

Threads with titles like "Help, not losing", "Hit a Plateau, help!", "1200 calories a day and not losing".

I used to keep them in a little folder, but I got tired of it.

tigersword

So anybody can fast for four days without going into "starvation mode" then resume "normal" eating for a day and avoid starvation mode, then four more days of fasting? And can a person starve to death and still be fat? And the body does this for calories only?

What are some signs of "starvation mode"?

No. If you fast for 4 days and then eat 5 days worth of calories on the fifth day and repeat, you will probably be ok, but why would you wanna subject yourself to something so ridiculous?

The danger of the famine response is that there are no signs until it becomes extreme, as you don't really notice your bone density or connective tissue weaknening, or nonessential muscle muscle being catabolized (most muscle is untrained, you'd be amazed how much a small amount of muscle can actually support when trained.) At that point, all you know is you are losing weight. Eventually, extreme fatiigue sets in, hair starts falling out, that's pretty much the first clue that something is wrong, and that can be 6 months down the line. Pretty much the same symptoms of anorexia, as the physical aspect of anorexia is essentially the famine survival response.

scottbrown78

So anybody can fast for four days without going into "starvation mode" then resume "normal" eating for a day and avoid starvation mode, then four more days of fasting? And can a person starve to death and still be fat? And the body does this for calories only?

What are some signs of "starvation mode"?

settle down dude

extreme ranting causes high blood pressure

relax

oh my Bp is looooowwwww, 99/54 when I donated blood last week (she checked manually after she thought the machine was wrong) lol I'm just trying to ask questions to clarify what they're saying. Is that ranting?

scottbrown78

What are some signs of "starvation mode"?

Threads with titles like "Help, not losing", "Hit a Plateau, help!", "1200 calories a day and not losing".

I used to keep them in a little folder, but I got tired of it.

so if I see a thread like that I'm in sm?

scottbrown78

So anybody can fast for four days without going into "starvation mode" then resume "normal" eating for a day and avoid starvation mode, then four more days of fasting? And can a person starve to death and still be fat? And the body does this for calories only?

What are some signs of "starvation mode"?

No. If you fast for 4 days and then eat 5 days worth of calories on the fifth day and repeat, you will probably be ok, but why would you wanna subject yourself to something so ridiculous?

The danger of the famine response is that there are no signs until it becomes extreme, as you don't really notice your bone density or connective tissue weaknening, or nonessential muscle muscle being catabolized (most muscle is untrained, you'd be amazed how much a small amount of muscle can actually support when trained.) At that point, all you know is you are losing weight. Eventually, extreme fatiigue sets in, hair starts falling out, that's pretty much the first clue that something is wrong, and that can be 6 months down the line. Pretty much the same symptoms of anorexia, as the physical aspect of anorexia is essentially the famine survival response.

i said "normal" eating, somewhere around tdee for the day, not five days worth. And hair falling out comes from a lack calories alone? So can a person starve to death and still be fat? Would they just turn into a gumby like glob of fat?

taso42

What are some signs of "starvation mode"?

Threads with titles like "Help, not losing", "Hit a Plateau, help!", "1200 calories a day and not losing".

I used to keep them in a little folder, but I got tired of it.

so if I see a thread like that I'm in sm?

no, people who post threads like that are demonstrating why it's foolish to eat at a huge deficit. they're not necessarily even in "starvation mode"; they're slow and frustrating weightloss mode.

Edit: oh look, here's one! http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/823191-please-help-i-m-so-sad-haven-t-lost-weight-in-forever

There are several of these every single day.

scottbrown78

What are some signs of "starvation mode"?

Threads with titles like "Help, not losing", "Hit a Plateau, help!", "1200 calories a day and not losing".

I used to keep them in a little folder, but I got tired of it.

so if I see a thread like that I'm in sm?

no, people who post threads like that are demonstrating why it's foolish to eat at a huge deficit. they're not necessarily even in "starvation mode"; they're slow and frustrating weightloss mode.

Edit: oh look, here's one! http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/823191-please-help-i-m-so-sad-haven-t-lost-weight-in-forever

There are several of these every single day.

lol yea and every day there is usually more than one "expert" telling them they're in sm. I usually count the posts before sm is mentioned. I love it. Because if they where in true sm wouldn't they be losing weight? I mean muscle and bone do weigh something right? And if the body is consuming them the scale should be moving.

Blondgurl778

There were some great questions asked. I honestly don't know all the answers. I was only giving the information I found for an assignment I recently completed.
There was a study done on men and women who were overweight, and who were not used to regular exercise. 36 of these people were to eat 20% less calories to lose weight. 36 of these people were to work out and burn 20% more calories to lose the weight. (DeNoon, 2006)
Both groups of people lost weight during the study. The dieters did not just lose weight; they lose bone mass as well in their spines, hips, and upper legs. What happened were the ones that did not exercise, but dieted, removed the essential nutrients in their diet to maintain strong bones. The reason a person may lose more weight by just dieting is that their bones weigh less.
Also, if a person does not exercise to lose weight, they can lose muscle mass. When this occurs, being able to do regular activities are harder. If this progresses further, even the ability to exercise sufficiently is reduced. When there is even more muscle loss, there can be a loss of bone mass. A person may be more apt to have osteoporosis, diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and a hunched back when dieting due to not receiving the appropriate nutrients. (Quinene, 2011)

What I was trying to say before was that starving yourself is not the answer. It is not healthy. I do not understand how one might think it is healthy. Can you come up with any proof that the starvation diet is healthy? I never said I was a doctor. I only am a college student who found some facts recently.

Here are my Resources. (take them as you will)

DeNoon, D. J. (2006, December 11). Weight Loss Can Mean Bone Loss. WebMD. Retrieved from http://www.webmd.com/osteoporosis/news/20061211/bone-loss-can-be-effected-by-weight-loss

Quinene, P. (2011, April 3). Dieting and Muscle Loss. Livestrong.com. Retrieved from http://www.livestrong.com/article/414259-dieting-muscle-loss/

scottbrown78

There were some great questions asked. I honestly don't know all the answers. I was only giving the information I found for an assignment I recently completed.
There was a study done on men and women who were overweight, and who were not used to regular exercise. 36 of these people were to eat 20% less calories to lose weight. 36 of these people were to work out and burn 20% more calories to lose the weight. (DeNoon, 2006)
Both groups of people lost weight during the study. The dieters did not just lose weight; they lose bone mass as well in their spines, hips, and upper legs. What happened were the ones that did not exercise, but dieted, removed the essential nutrients in their diet to maintain strong bones. The reason a person may lose more weight by just dieting is that their bones weigh less.
Also, if a person does not exercise to lose weight, they can lose muscle mass. When this occurs, being able to do regular activities are harder. If this progresses further, even the ability to exercise sufficiently is reduced. When there is even more muscle loss, there can be a loss of bone mass. A person may be more apt to have osteoporosis, diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and a hunched back when dieting due to not receiving the appropriate nutrients. (Quinene, 2011)

What I was trying to say before was that starving yourself is not the answer. It is not healthy. I do not understand how one might think it is healthy. Can you come up with any proof that the starvation diet is healthy? I never said I was a doctor. I only am a college student who found some facts recently.

Here are my Resources. (take them as you will)

DeNoon, D. J. (2006, December 11). Weight Loss Can Mean Bone Loss. WebMD. Retrieved from http://www.webmd.com/osteoporosis/news/20061211/bone-loss-can-be-effected-by-weight-loss

Quinene, P. (2011, April 3). Dieting and Muscle Loss. Livestrong.com. Retrieved from http://www.livestrong.com/article/414259-dieting-muscle-loss/

LOL, I'm not the one making claims, I'm just asking questions. Why would I need proof if I am not making claims? The biggest rub I have is the automatic claims made that EVERYONE will/is in starvation mode, if they're not eating the calories that they think they should. Hair loss and feeling fatigued is more from lack of nutrients than from calories. There are so many claims made on this site and so many experts. I just like to play devils advocate on these threads. (I am far from starving myself) While your sources are fine, this is the internet and within a few moments I could list you more than enough sources on the myth of sm.

seansquared

If anyone still has no idea about what "starvation mode" is, take a look at images and videos of malnourished peoples around the world. Read about their caloric intake. The vast, vast majority of Americans and Europeans are nowhere near "starvation mode", or even the threat of "starvation mode". Typically we are in maintenance or in a stall.

Actual "starvation mode" isn't simply the body consuming muscle tissue for energy - your body does this all the time already, hence the constant need for refueling. It's when the body starts consuming fatty tissue around organs, minerals from bone, fatty tissues in the brain, etc., that you are actually in "starvation mode".

Please, please, please stop throwing the term around willy-nilly. You're in a stall, you aren't in starvation, and most of us will thankfully never know what it's like for the body to hit that point.

3dogsrunning

If anyone still has no idea about what "starvation mode" is, take a look at images and videos of malnourished peoples around the world. Read about their caloric intake. The vast, vast majority of Americans and Europeans are nowhere near "starvation mode", or even the threat of "starvation mode". Typically we are in maintenance or in a stall.

Actual "starvation mode" isn't simply the body consuming muscle tissue for energy - your body does this all the time already, hence the constant need for refueling. It's when the body starts consuming fatty tissue around organs, minerals from bone, fatty tissues in the brain, etc., that you are actually in "starvation mode".

Please, please, please stop throwing the term around willy-nilly. You're in a stall, you aren't in starvation, and most of us will thankfully never know what it's like for the body to hit that point.

While I agree it is thrown around out of context, my understanding was that Is when your body starts consuming muscle and there is a slow down (not enough to counteract the deficit) of metabolism. . And that starvation mode and starvation are not the same.

Sorry I looked for y reference but I am on my phone and its just not feasible right now. (Not saying my source is right)

Eta - and I agree most people don't need to worry about it, and it takes a period of time, not a day or two of low calorie intake.

2nd add - where can I find a real reference on what starvation mode is? My google search brings up blogs and websites like this one.

tigersword

So anybody can fast for four days without going into "starvation mode" then resume "normal" eating for a day and avoid starvation mode, then four more days of fasting? And can a person starve to death and still be fat? And the body does this for calories only?

What are some signs of "starvation mode"?

No. If you fast for 4 days and then eat 5 days worth of calories on the fifth day and repeat, you will probably be ok, but why would you wanna subject yourself to something so ridiculous?

The danger of the famine response is that there are no signs until it becomes extreme, as you don't really notice your bone density or connective tissue weaknening, or nonessential muscle muscle being catabolized (most muscle is untrained, you'd be amazed how much a small amount of muscle can actually support when trained.) At that point, all you know is you are losing weight. Eventually, extreme fatiigue sets in, hair starts falling out, that's pretty much the first clue that something is wrong, and that can be 6 months down the line. Pretty much the same symptoms of anorexia, as the physical aspect of anorexia is essentially the famine survival response.

i said "normal" eating, somewhere around tdee for the day, not five days worth. And hair falling out comes from a lack calories alone? So can a person starve to death and still be fat? Would they just turn into a gumby like glob of fat?

Eating at TDEE one day and then fasting for 4 days would put someone into famine response relatively quickly, as they would be taking in significantly less calories than their body needs to survive. And no, a person that starves to death would not be a glob of fat. A person that starves to death would waste away to nothing, no fat, no muscle, no real organs left, that's what starvation is, and that's how the body deals with it. An average person can survive for 60 days with no food before starving to death. In that time, metabolism slows to a crawl, organs shut down, and all muscle and fat are shed, in an effort to prolong survival for as long as possible.

As for hair falling out, there are many possible causes of baldness, a lack of calories is definitely a common one. Why the hell would your body waste precious calories on maintaining hair when it isn't even receiving enough to keep the heart beating and brain functioning properly?

neanderthin

If anyone still has no idea about what "starvation mode" is, take a look at images and videos of malnourished peoples around the world. Read about their caloric intake. The vast, vast majority of Americans and Europeans are nowhere near "starvation mode", or even the threat of "starvation mode". Typically we are in maintenance or in a stall.

Actual "starvation mode" isn't simply the body consuming muscle tissue for energy - your body does this all the time already, hence the constant need for refueling. It's when the body starts consuming fatty tissue around organs, minerals from bone, fatty tissues in the brain, etc., that you are actually in "starvation mode".

Please, please, please stop throwing the term around willy-nilly. You're in a stall, you aren't in starvation, and most of us will thankfully never know what it's like for the body to hit that point.

While I agree it is thrown around out of context, my understanding was that Is when your body starts consuming muscle and there is a slow down (not enough to counteract the deficit) of metabolism. . And that starvation mode and starvation are not the same.

Sorry I looked for y reference but I am on my phone and its just not feasible right now. (Not saying my source is right)

Eta - and I agree most people don't need to worry about it, and it takes a period of time, not a day or two of low calorie intake.

2nd add - where can I find a real reference on what starvation mode is? My google search brings up blogs and websites like this one.

This is the basic misunderstanding. What Sean is describing and I agree with, is the last ditch efforts of the body to preserve life and that is to start consuming these organ and bone protective fats and proteins and that only happens when body fat is already very low, otherwise it would be consuming stored energy (body fat) but when it gets down to the 5 or 4% body fat there's basically nothing left but to start that process.

The other starvation response happens well before resorting to that kind of catabolism. Anytime we eat in a deficit, the body see's this as a potential threat and will, depending on the circumstances lower it's metabolic rate first and foremost trying to rely on the lowered calorie intake. If the deficit continues again depending on the circumstances will begin using muscle as energy to balance out some of that deficit, so basically we see less fat being lost because of the metabolic slowdown and some muscle lost. If a complete stop in body weight happens then the body has matched the calorie intake, but if if someone is an extreme deficit, like well under 1000 calories a day, the likely hood the body has reduced it's metabolic rate to those levels are slim, considering what BMR would have to be for this to happen. Most of the time it's a matter of miscalculation of food intake and exercise calories burned. Also if you look at studies where extra protein is consumed and weight bearing exercise is done, no slowdown of metabolic rate can bee seen for what appears a good amount of time. This topic will never be resolved because of this confusion, imo.

3dogsrunning

This is the basic misunderstanding. What Sean is describing and I agree with, is the last ditch efforts of the body to preserve life and that is to start consuming these organ and bone protective fats and proteins and that only happens when body fat is already very low, otherwise it would be consuming stored energy (body fat) but when it gets down to the 5 or 4% body fat there's basically nothing left but to start that process.


The other starvation response happens well before resorting to that kind of catabolism. Anytime we eat in a deficit, the body see's this as a potential threat and will, depending on the circumstances lower it's metabolic rate first and foremost trying to rely on the lowered calorie intake. If the deficit continues again depending on the circumstances will begin using muscle as energy to balance out some of that deficit, so basically we see less fat being lost because of the metabolic slowdown and some muscle lost. If a complete stop in body weight happens then the body has matched the calorie intake, but if if someone is an extreme deficit, like well under 1000 calories a day, the likely hood the body has reduced it's metabolic rate to those levels are slim, considering what BMR would have to be for this to happen. Most of the time it's a matter of miscalculation of food intake and exercise calories burned. Also if you look at studies where extra protein is consumed and weight bearing exercise is done, no slowdown of metabolic rate can bee seen for what appears a good amount of time. This topic will never be resolved because of this confusion, imo.

I am slightly confused by your post so i want to clarify. Ok so this paragraph (the second paragraph soce my quoting is failing) is basically what I understood to be "starvation mode". And the first one to be starvation. Is it not? You call it a starvation response.


eTA sorry cant seem to fix the quote boxes

neanderthin

This is the basic misunderstanding. What Sean is describing and I agree with, is the last ditch efforts of the body to preserve life and that is to start consuming these organ and bone protective fats and proteins and that only happens when body fat is already very low, otherwise it would be consuming stored energy (body fat) but when it gets down to the 5 or 4% body fat there's basically nothing left but to start that process.
[\quote]

The other starvation response happens well before resorting to that kind of catabolism. Anytime we eat in a deficit, the body see's this as a potential threat and will, depending on the circumstances lower it's metabolic rate first and foremost trying to rely on the lowered calorie intake. If the deficit continues again depending on the circumstances will begin using muscle as energy to balance out some of that deficit, so basically we see less fat being lost because of the metabolic slowdown and some muscle lost. If a complete stop in body weight happens then the body has matched the calorie intake, but if if someone is an extreme deficit, like well under 1000 calories a day, the likely hood the body has reduced it's metabolic rate to those levels are slim, considering what BMR would have to be for this to happen. Most of the time it's a matter of miscalculation of food intake and exercise calories burned. Also if you look at studies where extra protein is consumed and weight bearing exercise is done, no slowdown of metabolic rate can bee seen for what appears a good amount of time. This topic will never be resolved because of this confusion, imo.

I am slightly confused by your post so i want to clarify. Ok so this paragraph is basically what I understood to be "starvation mode". And the first one to be starvation. Is it not? You call it a starvation response.


eTA sorry cant seem to fix the quote boxes

The first one is the actual starvation response of the body when eminent death is upon us........it begins consuming muscle, organ, bone and those last fat stores around our organs...Some one that is obese and decides to consumer 1000 calories a day and complains of no weight loss is not the same thing. This is when the body lowers our metabolic rate to help find homeostasis, and if the deficit continue the body will begin to resort to other energy sources to compensate like muscle. If 1000 calories does equate to eventual death, weight loss will never stop and eventually the other more serious starvation response will happen, then of course death.

Blondgurl778

I understand you are playing devil's advocate, and honestly, I agree with what you say. Normally, what you find online is not always the best. You have to make sure your source is reliable. I do know that my professor agreed with what I said in my report, which makes me believe that it is correct. I also completely agree with you on the reason for the hair loss, fatigue, and etc is because of lack of nutrients, not calories. I harp on a few friends about that. If you are eating only a few calories a day, make sure they count. Also, make sure you include cardio with it. **again, not an expert just a college student, Do what you will**