"Starvation Mode" Party Line

ILiftHeavyAcrylics

The thing that you have to realize is most of the people who ask questions about being at 1200 calories usually start out their posts saying they are doing at least one or two of the following things:

1. Not losing
2. Feeling starved
3. Burning 1000 calories a day and not eating them back by sticking strictly to only the alloted 1200 which means they are netting only 200 calories per day.
4. Bingeing

So, when someone posts on the thread saying they should eat more the warning is that hey are not immediately going to go into starvation mode. We all know it takes time for this to happen. The warning is to let these people know that it is possible if they stick with what they are doing for too long. Of course we know that this doesn't apply to everyone. My mom is 5' tall, very petite and has probably never eaten more than 1200 calories per day in her whole life. That said, if someone is finding that at such a low calorie goal that they are not losing, why NOT give it a couple of weeks at a higher calorie goal to see if it works for them? I personally maintained through Christmas, lost a pound the first week of the year and lost nothing until this morning since then. You know what helped? Upping my calories. No, it won't work for everyone, but what are we supposed to tell these people? Go ahead go down to 500 calories a day and see if that works? Nope, not for me.

Edited to add, when I tried 1200 calories I felt hungry, cranky and literally stupid all of the time! It was awful!

I can't do 1200 calories either! I have to be at 1500+ or I get dizzy and lightheaded, not to mention miserable. I zig-zag my calories also, so some days I'm over 2,000. I'm definitely not saying that increasing calories can't help weight loss, just that it doesn't for everyone, and that "starvation mode" is a severely overused phrase that really is meaningless for most people.

I agree that the term is way overused. BUT, I really really caution people against advising people to eat under 1200 calories. We just don't know what other people's needs are, and I don't want to be responsible for advising someone into a dangerous course of action. It's one thing to know what your needs are and do that; it's something else to tell someone else that they should eat 800 calories. It could easily trigger an eating disorder or a host of other problems. That's why I only "advise" people within the confines of the site's guidelines.

FearAnLoathing

Ive been through starvation mode,and it took me many many years of not eating for it to happen

kateroot

The thing that you have to realize is most of the people who ask questions about being at 1200 calories usually start out their posts saying they are doing at least one or two of the following things:

1. Not losing
2. Feeling starved
3. Burning 1000 calories a day and not eating them back by sticking strictly to only the alloted 1200 which means they are netting only 200 calories per day.
4. Bingeing

So, when someone posts on the thread saying they should eat more the warning is that hey are not immediately going to go into starvation mode. We all know it takes time for this to happen. The warning is to let these people know that it is possible if they stick with what they are doing for too long. Of course we know that this doesn't apply to everyone. My mom is 5' tall, very petite and has probably never eaten more than 1200 calories per day in her whole life. That said, if someone is finding that at such a low calorie goal that they are not losing, why NOT give it a couple of weeks at a higher calorie goal to see if it works for them? I personally maintained through Christmas, lost a pound the first week of the year and lost nothing until this morning since then. You know what helped? Upping my calories. No, it won't work for everyone, but what are we supposed to tell these people? Go ahead go down to 500 calories a day and see if that works? Nope, not for me.

Edited to add, when I tried 1200 calories I felt hungry, cranky and literally stupid all of the time! It was awful!

I can't do 1200 calories either! I have to be at 1500+ or I get dizzy and lightheaded, not to mention miserable. I zig-zag my calories also, so some days I'm over 2,000. I'm definitely not saying that increasing calories can't help weight loss, just that it doesn't for everyone, and that "starvation mode" is a severely overused phrase that really is meaningless for most people.

I agree that the term is way overused. BUT, I really really caution people against advising people to eat under 1200 calories. We just don't know what other people's needs are, and I don't want to be responsible for advising someone into a dangerous course of action. It's one thing to know what your needs are and do that; it's something else to tell someone else that they should eat 800 calories. It could easily trigger an eating disorder or a host of other problems. That's why I only "advise" people within the confines of the site's guidelines.

Honestly, my advice to someone who has been maintaining a calorie deficit and not losing any weight would be to see their doctor. So I agree!

geohow11

I'm so tired of seeing, "you must eat at least 1200 calories or you'll go into starvation mode!"

It's. Not. True.

Starvation mode exists, but it's VERY RARE, and you have to eat less than 50% of your BMR for a prolonged period of time for that to happen, which for most people is much lower than 1200 calories. It is also extremely difficult to go into "starvation mode" unless you have a very low body fat percentage. Telling someone who's not losing weight that they need to eat more to start losing is not sound advice whatsoever. Should someone eat more if they're hungry all the time? Sure. Should someone eat more if they're lethargic? Yep. Should someone eat more when they're not hungry and have plenty of energy, just because they haven't met some arbitrary calorie goal? My vote is no.

"1200 calories" is an arbitrary number. Yes, it's true that *most* people will not function well with less than 1,200 calories a day long-term, but it's not true for everyone. If you eat 1,000 calories a day, or less, and experience no excessive hunger, nutritional deficiencies, or unwarranted fatigue, there's no reason you NEED to eat 1,200. I'm not advocating very low calorie diets, by any means. I eat 15-1800 calories a day. But it's what works for me.

Weight loss is a very individual process. We ought to keep that in mind when giving advice to others.. and the "starvation mode" party line is worn out.

/end rant.

GOOD WORD!!
Each of us have born within us from birth a "way" to do it! ONLY YOUR WAY WILL WORK FOR YOU!!! Find it and you have the key to it ALL! I encourage EVERYONE I come in contact with here on MFP to "Do It Their Way" !!!

Guilt-FREE Living 2012 & Beyond

Peace
Geo

Just_Dot

OP, you do realize that the "warning" is the way that the site covers its *kitten*, legally speaking, right?

JDMPWR

I'm so tired of seeing, "you must eat at least 1200 calories or you'll go into starvation mode!"

It's. Not. True.

Starvation mode exists, but it's VERY RARE, and you have to eat less than 50% of your BMR for a prolonged period of time for that to happen, which for most people is much lower than 1200 calories. It is also extremely difficult to go into "starvation mode" unless you have a very low body fat percentage. Telling someone who's not losing weight that they need to eat more to start losing is not sound advice whatsoever. Should someone eat more if they're hungry all the time? Sure. Should someone eat more if they're lethargic? Yep. Should someone eat more when they're not hungry and have plenty of energy, just because they haven't met some arbitrary calorie goal? My vote is no.

"1200 calories" is an arbitrary number. Yes, it's true that *most* people will not function well with less than 1,200 calories a day long-term, but it's not true for everyone. If you eat 1,000 calories a day, or less, and experience no excessive hunger, nutritional deficiencies, or unwarranted fatigue, there's no reason you NEED to eat 1,200. I'm not advocating very low calorie diets, by any means. I eat 15-1800 calories a day. But it's what works for me.

Weight loss is a very individual process. We ought to keep that in mind when giving advice to others.. and the "starvation mode" party line is worn out.

/end rant.

I am sorry to say but I disagree with you. Many of my MFP friends know I hit starvation mode last year around June/July. I was only living off of about 900-1100 calories a day. I felt weak, tired, I went to the doc, he checked my hormonal level to find them ALL out of whack. After a month or two of trying to work out to the point that I could not keep my HR up or even break a sweat yet all the time feeling like I was going to die I stopped and took a break. I maintained 1900cals as a intake and the weight kept going up and up and up. Finally it dawned on me to look at my caloric intake. I was eating 2200 cals a day and burning something like 1000-1300 a day in exercise. Finally about 2 months ago I started to feel "normal" again.

I just started losing weight again after fighting this and trying to figure out what it was. it was starvation mode. My body was holding on to every calorie it could for dear life and storing it as fat!

You're not actually disagreeing with me here. Your body went into "starvation mode," and it gave you signs that you needed to eat more. Plenty of people can eat 900-1100 calories with no ill effects. That's why I say it's individual, and what's "starvation mode" for some people is normal for others.

Yes and no. It did give me signed to eat more and then I did and my body still kepy packing on the lbs. Ultimately it did stop and get back to normal though.

kateroot

OP, you do realize that the "warning" is the way that the site covers its *kitten*, legally speaking, right?

Oh, of course! I'm fully aware of that. I'm referring to the posters who believe that 1200+ is the ONLY way to stay out of "starvation mode," not what the site says about it. I know the site has to cover its *kitten*, but the "starvation mode" thing is a far too common belief around here.

brittanyjeanxo

I ate 1200-1400 calories a day. Stopped losing. Currently eating 2,000 calories a day with exercise (and eating the cals back). Losing again. Hm. How odd.

Just1forMe

So, when someone posts on the thread saying they should eat more the warning is that hey are not immediately going to go into starvation mode. We all know it takes time for this to happen. The warning is to let these people know that it is possible if they stick with what they are doing for too long. Of course we know that this doesn't apply to everyone. My mom is 5' tall, very petite and has probably never eaten more than 1200 calories per day in her whole life. That said, if someone is finding that at such a low calorie goal that they are not losing, why NOT give it a couple of weeks at a higher calorie goal to see if it works for them? I personally maintained through Christmas, lost a pound the first week of the year and lost nothing until this morning since then. You know what helped? Upping my calories. No, it won't work for everyone, but what are we supposed to tell these people? Go ahead go down to 500 calories a day and see if that works? Nope, not for me.

Edited to add, when I tried 1200 calories I felt hungry, cranky and literally stupid all of the time! It was awful!

MB is correct. Being on 1200 calories or less will "work" for almost everyone and they will lose weight whether they are eating back their exercise calories or not. That is, it will work...for a while. Eventually, your metabolism WILL slow down (sometimes a LOT), causing you to stop losing no matter what you do. Most people at this point will try to up their exercise (and still not eat their exercise calories back) making the situation worse. What they should be doing is eating more and eating their exercise calories. Many of those same people do not understand that MFP already builds in a deficit to lose 1 or 2 lbs per week (whatever you set it for) and the extra calories you burn will increase that deficit to a point where you are neting only a few hundred calories a day. This WILL cause you to stop losing after a while and it's just plain not healthy.

hirensthenameliftinsthegame

I'm so tired of seeing, "you must eat at least 1200 calories or you'll go into starvation mode!"

It's. Not. True.

Starvation mode exists, but it's VERY RARE, and you have to eat less than 50% of your BMR for a prolonged period of time for that to happen, which for most people is much lower than 1200 calories. It is also extremely difficult to go into "starvation mode" unless you have a very low body fat percentage. Telling someone who's not losing weight that they need to eat more to start losing is not sound advice whatsoever. Should someone eat more if they're hungry all the time? Sure. Should someone eat more if they're lethargic? Yep. Should someone eat more when they're not hungry and have plenty of energy, just because they haven't met some arbitrary calorie goal? My vote is no.

"1200 calories" is an arbitrary number. Yes, it's true that *most* people will not function well with less than 1,200 calories a day long-term, but it's not true for everyone. If you eat 1,000 calories a day, or less, and experience no excessive hunger, nutritional deficiencies, or unwarranted fatigue, there's no reason you NEED to eat 1,200. I'm not advocating very low calorie diets, by any means. I eat 15-1800 calories a day. But it's what works for me.

Weight loss is a very individual process. We ought to keep that in mind when giving advice to others.. and the "starvation mode" party line is worn out.

/end rant.

Lol, sorry but some of the people on here shouldn't be using the 1200 cal diet, factoring their height, age, and activity level, most of the times I see their diary and their macros are all screwed up. IT is an individual process, but 1200 is not some magical number that is going to work for everyone. For your info, its not starvation mode you have to worry about, that takes only 4-5 days to set in only after a severe deficit, its leptin you have to worry about. Leptin controls pretty much all of your hormones and in essence has to do alot with actual fat loss.

I wouldn't advocate eating more for anyone unless I know all of their parameters for daily caloric intake...but i do agree with you on the part of people advocating eating more to lose more.

/end rant for me too

kapeluza

"So often people personal message me asking me if I think their calories are correct. It seems that people think there is some magical formula that only a very few can figure out. I see so many people on here just popping in numbers and following them heedless of what the numbers mean. I feel it's ULTRA important to know why MFP (and me, and a few others) gives you certain numbers. To that end I will try to empower YOU to be able to understand the basics about calories, calorie deficits, and why we recommend eating exercise calories. With this knowledge you should be able to easily figure out what your calories should be at for reasonable, healthy weight loss. So without further ado, lets get started.

1st things first, a few givens must be stated:

-Everyone's body is slightly different. ALWAYS keep in mind your numbers may not be exactly what MFP thinks simply because everyone's bodies all burn energy at a different rate. Tweaking may be needed.

- MFP's goals wizard is a "dumb" tool. That means it doesn't care whether a specific goal is healthy and/or right for you, it just subtracts the goal deficit from projected maintenance calories. This means that even if you shouldn't be trying for a 2 lb a week loss, MFP won't care, it will still try to help you get there.

-1200 calories is a generic number. It's not right for everyone. It's a baseline minimum given out as a floor by MFP based on prior research by the medical community. NOT everyone will need a minimum of 1200, very small people can go under, and bigger people need more.


OK with those facts firmly set in your mind (please go back and re-read the givens until you have them firmly planted in your skull!), we can continue. Figuring out your perfect deficit isn't magic, it's a few simple formula's base on some basic, worldwide standards, and generally with slight modefication, will work for just about anyone who (besides weight) is generally healthy.

Here's what you need:
Height, weight, age, activity level, sex

NOTE: activity level isn't as mysterious as it sounds. If you have a desk job, and do very little walking throughout the day and don't really perform any sports or physical activities, then you are sedentary, if you do some walking every day (or at least 4 days a week) or other light activity for at least 30 minutes cumulative at least 4 times a week, you are lightly active. If you do 60 minutes of light activity 5 days a week or do some kind of sport that requires walking or light jogging (say swimming or mailman or warehouse employee) then you are active, If you do a physically demanding activity (one that makes you sweat) for 4 days a week or more and for more than 1 hour a day, you are very active (like a coach that runs drills or you play volleyball). When in doubt, go down 1 level, you'd rather burn more than you think than less.

With all these numbers you can generate your BMI. Now I realize BMI is flawed, but for what we're doing it's good enough. After years on here, and doing lots and lots of research, I've been able to associate general BMI ranges with approximate goal levels. This works for about 80 to 85% of people out there (there's always a few that are outside the curve).

So now we can figure out where your goal should be.
Go to the tools section and figure out your BMI:

Generally someone with a BMI over 32 can do a 1000 calorie a day (2 lbs a week) deficit
With a BMI of 30 to 32 a deficit of 750 calories is generally correct (about 1.5 lbs a week)
With a BMI of 28 to 30 a deficit of 500 calories is about right (about 1 lb a week)
With a BMI of 26 to 28 a deficit of about 300 calories is perfect (about 1/2 lb a week)
and below 26... well this is where we get fuzzy. See now you're no longer talking about being overweight, so while it's still ok to have a small deficit, you really should shift your focus more towards muscle building, and reducing fat. This means it is EXTRA important to eat your exercise calories as your body needs to KNOW it's ok to burn fat stores, and the only way it will know is if you keep giving it the calories it needs to not enter the famine response (starvation mode).

With this quick guide you can figure out your goal rather easily. I know many people will say "I can't eat my exercise calories, I gain weight when I do". Well I have news for you, that's not correct. I submit this, if you eat your exercise calories and gain weight 1 of 3 things happened:
1 you were previously in starvation mode, and you upped your calories, and had an immediate weight gain, that's normal, to be expected, and necessary to get your body on track. Give it a month, that will stop, and you, once again, will begin to lose, but this time, in a healthy manner.
2 you incorrectly calculated something, either your exercise calories, your calorie intake, or you put in to large of a goal. Go back and check all your numbers.
3 you haven't given it enough time to work. This site promotes HEALTHY weight loss people. Healthy weight loss doesn't happen in days or weeks, it takes months and years. Each change you make in how you eat needs a month or more to work, be patient, give it time. It will happen.

And to everyone who has a trainer that doesn't agree with eating your exercise calories. I also submit this: In 90% of the cases (and I have talked to a LOT of trainers about this exact topic) they actually DO agree with this method, you just explained it wrong.
Just saying to a trainer "should I eat my exercise calories?" isn't enough, you have to explain to them that MFP already generates a deficit prior to any exercise, therefore the deficit will remain whether you exercise or not. Once you give them that idea, and you are relatively sure they understand the concept then I'll bet they change their tune.

I hope this helps, it's pretty straight forward if you've been here a while, and to you new guys, I recommend going to the message boards link, clicking on the "general diet and weight loss" area, and clicking on those first few posts that have the little mouse trap next to them, they are sticky and will always be there, and are a wealth of knowledge about this site, exercise calories, starvation mode...etc."

MiniMichelle

@Kapeluza- This is such great information!!!! I am going to look through it and make sure I am doing things correctly!! Thank you!!!!

dietfree2012

I ate 1200-1400 calories a day. Stopped losing. Currently eating 2,000 calories a day with exercise (and eating the cals back). Losing again. Hm. How odd.

Right!!! Eating is normal..not eating is not....this post is debatable as most and everyone is different, but usually eating under 1000 calories is not eating much...Your mom has an amazing system apparently, but most wont be able to continously strength train and run marathons with under 1000 calories a day....we burn more than that by waking up in the morning, therefore, if you dont eat more than 1200 on a daily basis you simply are lacking energy. I just dont understand why anyone would want to eat that little when your body craves more nutrients.