"Starvation Mode" As explained by WeightWatchers.

airlily

http://www.weightwatchers.com/util/art/index_art.aspx?tabnum=1&art_id=35501 (source)

Copied from site:

The Starvation Myth

The idea that "not eating enough" causes the body to stop losing weight because it goes into "starvation mode" is a popular myth among dieters.

Article By: The Weight Watchers Research Department

Restricting calories during weight loss lowers metabolism because the body becomes more efficient, requiring fewer calories to perform the necessary daily functions for survival. Consequently, this can slow (but not stop) the anticipated rate of weight loss.

For example, if an individual needs 2,000 calories per day to maintain weight, reducing intake to 1,500 calories, assuming exercise stays the same, should provide a 1 pound per week weight loss (Note: 1 pound of weight is equivalent to about 3,500 calories). Furthermore, reducing to 1,000 calories should result in a weight loss of 2 pounds per week and going down to 500 calories a day should result in a weight loss of 3 pounds per week. However, if an individual actually reduces their intake to 500 calories, the weight loss would not likely be a steady 3 pounds per week because of the reduced metabolic rate. It would likely be around 2¼ to 2½ pounds. This "lower than expected" rate of weight loss is a lot different than "no" weight loss as the "starvation mode" notion proposes.

It is unclear as to whether the relationship between reduced caloric intake and a lower metabolism follows a straight path or becomes more pronounced the greater the caloric reduction. Some studies have found no significant reduction in metabolism until the caloric restriction is quite large (e.g. 800 calories or less per day).2 Others suggest a linear relationship with small reductions in metabolism accompanying small reductions in caloric restriction, with the gap increasing as the caloric deficit is enlarged.

While there is no biologic evidence to support the "starvation mode" myth, there may be behavioral reasons why weight loss stops when calories are severely reduced. Over-restriction of calorie intake, known as high dietary restraint is linked to periods of overeating, hindering successful weight loss. (For more information on dietary restraint, read the Science Center article, The Skill of Flexible Restraint).

Metabolism after Weight Loss

The good news is that after the weight-loss goal is achieved and weight has stabilized, it does not appear that the dip in metabolism is permanent. Several rigorous studies done at the University of Alabama in Birmingham showed that metabolism goes back to expected levels with sustained weight loss,4 discounting the theory that a lowered metabolism helps to explain the common phenomenon of weight regain following weight loss.

Weight Watchers Approach
The <PointsPlus system is designed to provide a caloric intake that supports a healthy rate of weight loss, produces a minimal reduction in metabolism and avoids inducing too-high levels of dietary restraint.

This content is reviewed regularly. Last updated December 17, 2011.

Does anyone have any further light they could shed on this issue? People everywhere -- this site included -- vary in their belief and definition of this issue. It's confusing.

Thanks!

HeidiLynnM

It is way too confusing!!!!!! I know that you need the calories so that your body doesnt go into starvation mode......I just dont get it? Not a big help here!

airlily

It is way too confusing!!!!!! I know that you need the calories so that your body doesnt go into starvation mode......I just dont get it? Not a big help here!

I know! I've read several different studies, and have pursued the forums here, and at other sites, and all I seem to find is more of the same. I'm tempted to just experiment on myself and keep a record of symptoms and effects.

Dave198lbs

It is way too confusing!!!!!! I know that you need the calories so that your body doesnt go into starvation mode......I just dont get it? Not a big help here!

I know! I've read several different studies, and have pursued the forums here, and at other sites, and all I seem to find is more of the same. I'm tempted to just experiment on myself and keep a record of symptoms and effects.

one of the final symtons is death. so maybe you should stop just before that one.

appleseeds

I think it comes down to this: There is a lot of debate because no one knows for certain. End.

capaxinfiniti

There just needs to be a group for people who want to discuss this topic.

And experiment yourself? That's taking a big risk.

appleseeds

There just needs to be a group for people who want to discuss this topic.

lol

dbratton87

I think it is different for different people. I think some people have super efficient metabolisms and if they lower their calorie intake their body is quick to compensate and use less to function. That slows their weight loss. Some people's bodies are kinder and don't make that adjustment, making weight loss easier.

I think different conclusions are drawn from research because it just isn't the same for everyone. I have no problem losing weight by creating a large deficit. I don't seem to go into "starvation mode". Do what works for you.

saritabandita

"Beaten horse" topic or not, thanks for posting this. It's nice to see the other side of the issue when so many people claim it is bad to not eat back your calories. This makes it less confusing to me. I take this to mean that I don't have to beat myself up for falling a few calories short of my calorie goal.

Mcgrawhaha

well, i was advised by my doctor back 5 years ago that i could safely go on a 1200 calorie a day diet, granted i used those 1200 calories wisely with nutrient rich foods. i did so, and in 3 months, lost 40 pounds. (all i needed to loose was 50 pounds) i then went back to my normal eating habits, and my weight maintained and i did not gain. fast forward a few years, to when i quit smoking. only then, did i gain my weight back, plus an extra 20 pounds. instead of smoking, i ate flaming hot cheetos and rolos. i am now back on my 1200 calorie a day diet, and have lost 19 pounds in a little over a month. i feel great, im not starving, and its working FOR ME! everyones body is different, and everyone has different needs and requirementws. my body tolerates a very low calorie diet, and my doctor is in no way concerned with the amount of calories i consume. my body never went into starvation mode, and i did not regain tthe weight when resuming a normal 2000 calorie per day diet. i only regained my weight when i went up to about 3500-4000 calories a day with cheetos and candy to compensate for not smoking... basically, all i can say, is to each thier own... find what works, listen to your body, and give it your best! GOOD LUCK TO EVERYONE!!!

MassiveDelta

To read later

xraychick77

its true..its a myth.

this whole myth is based on a study done in the 40s. Its called the Minnesota starvation study. It took like 30 healthy muscular service men and basically 'starved' them. they intook 3000 some calories, normal intake for these men. then they cut it in half for a few months. They all lost weight steadily, and the scientists adjusted the calories of each man, because everyone's metabolism is different, as to make sure they lost weight at a predictable manor. (this is where the myth comes from). the fact is, they all lost weight period. this study wasnt about weight loss, but mostly about how the body reacts to starvation, and ultimately how to re feed someone who is technically starving.

its not healthy to starve yourself to lose weight. and i never endorse this. but, the fact is, there is no such thing as starvation mode. It is physiologically impossible for a person to 'hold onto fat' on a calorie deficit. and even more so impossible to 'store fat' on a calorie deficit. our bodies need a certain amount of energy/calories to function. our brains, livers, muscles, other organs etc. if we dont feed our bodies enough, it takes that energy from fat. and if we restrict too much to some extent gets energy from muscle. but mostly it catabolizes muscle to provide amino acids and enzymes for biological reactions/functions in the body.

In true starvation, you use your fat, then muscle. after that is gone, your body starts to basically eat itself to survive. it'll break down organ tissues and organs will shut down. this how people die from starvation..organ failure. so all our talk about starvation mode.."i only eat 1400 calories a day", "oh you are in starvation mode eat more"..all this is a slap in the face to those who are truely starving. go tell them you cant lose weight because you arent eating enough.

Mcgrawhaha

its true..its a myth.

this whole myth is based on a study done in the 40s. Its called the Minnesota starvation study. It took like 30 healthy muscular service men and basically 'starved' them. they intook 3000 some calories, normal intake for these men. then they cut it in half for a few months. They all lost weight steadily, and the scientists adjusted the calories of each man, because everyone's metabolism is different, as to make sure they lost weight at a predictable manor. (this is where the myth comes from). the fact is, they all lost weight period. this study wasnt about weight loss, but mostly about how the body reacts to starvation, and ultimately how to re feed someone who is technically starving.

its not healthy to starve yourself to lose weight. and i never endorse this. but, the fact is, there is no such thing as starvation mode. It is physiologically impossible for a person to 'hold onto fat' on a calorie deficit. and even more so impossible to 'store fat' on a calorie deficit. our bodies need a certain amount of energy/calories to function. our brains, livers, muscles, other organs etc. if we dont feed our bodies enough, it takes that energy from fat. and if we restrict too much to some extent gets energy from muscle. but mostly it catabolizes muscle to provide amino acids and enzymes for biological reactions/functions in the body.

In true starvation, you use your fat, then muscle. after that is gone, your body starts to basically eat itself to survive. it'll break down organ tissues and organs will shut down. this how people die from starvation..organ failure. so all our talk about starvation mode.."i only eat 1400 calories a day", "oh you are in starvation mode eat more"..all this is a slap in the face to those who are truely starving. go tell them you cant lose weight because you arent eating enough.

SOUNDS GREAT TO ME!

hansnson

My, dad has now lost 108 pounds since July 14th, 2011. After he lost the 100lbs he was at a stand-still for a while. So I set him up on here just this month and we went through his daily food dairy and entered his food intake from Jan 2012 and found that he was only eating a average of 700 cals a day... Anyways, after I set him up on here he has started to lose more weight and now he's taking in a average of 1150-1300 cals a day, so I think that he was in starvation mode and now since he is eating a little more he has come out of it.

funnylida

Personally... a month and a half ago when I started to the weight loss journy I started consuming probably about 500-700 calories a day. (Stupid...I know) and hitting the gym twice a day doing intense cardio for an hour each time. I'm not going to lie... I lost three pounds fast, but I stayed there. I did that for a week and a half and I began to get weak physically and I was grouchy all of the time. Then I my body was not losing anymore after that even though I kept at the same regimen. Then my brother told me that I wasn't eating enough and brought me to this site. I started eating all of my calories recommended and my exercise calories and since I have 10 lbs. I have logged in 20 days in a row today and I can attest that eating the exercise calories has not done any harm to me but given me energy. So I do think that your body can go in to starvation mode by not eating the cals you exercise... however, that's my personal story.

twinmom430

Wow, it's a shame someone that posts a topic/question has to be made to feel ashamed to ask it. Most of us are here for support ....why click on a topic if you know it's been beaten to death? To the OP, I'm glad you posted this, there is lots of controversy in regards to this and i would love to know the truth behind this....as I often go under 1200 calories, not on purpose but I'm eatting much healthier foods and my calories just don't add up since I get full faster.

kevinlynch3

Read here


http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/81391-starvation-mode-myths-and-science

j4nash

I mentioned this in another thread.. but the starvation mode thing is "crap" IMO until you get closer to your goal. If you're obese then not eating back your exercise calories isn't really going to affect you much, other than some muscle loss (oh noz!). I think the benefits to your body of carrying less weight far outweighs the potential muscle loss that you could potentially endure. You're going to hit a plateau, seems everyone does at some point.. just recognize when it occurs and start eating more. But if you have 150lbs to lose it probably won't happen until you've already lost 120lbs.

I'm not advocating eating 500 calories a day.. because that's just too little, but eating the recommended MFP caloric intake and skipping out on the exercise calories? oh well.. at least until you plateau.

BlackRangerX

It's sooooooooooooooo:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: funny how certain people on this site think that they can explain "starvation mode" better than researchers/dietitians/doctors/etc!!

airlily

My, dad has now lost 108 pounds since July 14th, 2011. After he lost the 100lbs he was at a stand-still for a while. So I set him up on here just this month and we went through his daily food dairy and entered his food intake from Jan 2012 and found that he was only eating a average of 700 cals a day... Anyways, after I set him up on here he has started to lose more weight and now he's taking in a average of 1150-1300 cals a day, so I think that he was in starvation mode and now since he is eating a little more he has come out of it.

Thank you! This makes sense to me. Part of the research I discovered was the restrictive diets given to those considered extremely to morbidly obese -- diets consisting of 800, 600, or even 400 calories a day in the form of nutrient rich shakes. I could not understand how this could be prescribed, and yet have such a mode exist. I guess once you begin to exit that "obese" classification, such diets cease to work. I've been on this site for about three weeks, and have been researching this issue for over a week. I'm exhausted by it, honestly. I think the only time I sat in the library for longer than this was when I was working on my master's thesis. Literally.

Thanks so much!

grinch031

I think starvation mode as it is explained is a myth and violates the laws of thermodynamics. The problem is it usually talks about a significant slowdown in metabolism, but neglects to mention that there would also be a corresponding slow down in physical activity as well.

So for instance, if you are on a calorie restrictive diet and exercising frequently, then as long as you are feeling energized and not feeling lethargic, then you are unlikely to be in any kind of starvation mode. Otherwise your body is massively increasing in its efficiency in order to fuel your exercises, which if it is capable of being so efficient, why would it remain in such an inefficient state when in a more calorically balanced state? Doesn't make much sense. However over a longer period of time I can see the body going into a state where it is very lethargic and the metabolism slows down quite a bit. But you will be unable to exercise at any reasonable intensity, which should be an obvious clue that you are in starvation mode.

Dave198lbs

Wow, it's a shame someone that posts a topic/question has to be made to feel ashamed to ask it. Most of us are here for support ....why click on a topic if you know it's been beaten to death? To the OP, I'm glad you posted this, there is lots of controversy in regards to this and i would love to know the truth behind this....as I often go under 1200 calories, not on purpose but I'm eatting much healthier foods and my calories just don't add up since I get full faster.

I was merely pointing out that this topic has been discussed many times and if the OP really wants alot of different explanations she could search it. how on earth can you see that as making her feel ashamed? over sensitive are we? and dont you like horses either?



moderator comment

Merely pointing out this guideline

1. No Attacks or Insults and No Reciprocation

a) Do not attack, mock, or otherwise insult others. You can respectfully disagree with the message or topic, but you cannot attack the messenger. This includes attacks against the user’s spelling or command of written English, or belittling a user for posting a duplicate topic.

CatCrazy

LittleMissDoll

this.

its true..its a myth.

this whole myth is based on a study done in the 40s. Its called the Minnesota starvation study. It took like 30 healthy muscular service men and basically 'starved' them. they intook 3000 some calories, normal intake for these men. then they cut it in half for a few months. They all lost weight steadily, and the scientists adjusted the calories of each man, because everyone's metabolism is different, as to make sure they lost weight at a predictable manor. (this is where the myth comes from). the fact is, they all lost weight period. this study wasnt about weight loss, but mostly about how the body reacts to starvation, and ultimately how to re feed someone who is technically starving.

its not healthy to starve yourself to lose weight. and i never endorse this. but, the fact is, there is no such thing as starvation mode. It is physiologically impossible for a person to 'hold onto fat' on a calorie deficit. and even more so impossible to 'store fat' on a calorie deficit. our bodies need a certain amount of energy/calories to function. our brains, livers, muscles, other organs etc. if we dont feed our bodies enough, it takes that energy from fat. and if we restrict too much to some extent gets energy from muscle. but mostly it catabolizes muscle to provide amino acids and enzymes for biological reactions/functions in the body.

In true starvation, you use your fat, then muscle. after that is gone, your body starts to basically eat itself to survive. it'll break down organ tissues and organs will shut down. this how people die from starvation..organ failure. so all our talk about starvation mode.."i only eat 1400 calories a day", "oh you are in starvation mode eat more"..all this is a slap in the face to those who are truely starving. go tell them you cant lose weight because you arent eating enough.

NoAdditives

There just needs to be a group for people who want to discuss this topic.

And experiment yourself? That's taking a big risk.

It's not a risk at all. Everyone's body is different, everyone needs a different amount of calories in order to lose weight efficiently while still remaining healthy. Without a little experimentation I never would have figured out that I need 1500-1600 net calories in order to burn fat and lose weight. I'd be stuck at 1200 cals, miserable, hungry, and not losing anything. But because I experimented with the amount of calories I consumed I figured out what worked for me. I highly recommend that everyone do the same if their initial results are not what they are expecting.

Mcgrawhaha

Wow, it's a shame someone that posts a topic/question has to be made to feel ashamed to ask it. Most of us are here for support ....why click on a topic if you know it's been beaten to death? To the OP, I'm glad you posted this, there is lots of controversy in regards to this and i would love to know the truth behind this....as I often go under 1200 calories, not on purpose but I'm eatting much healthier foods and my calories just don't add up since I get full faster.

I was merely pointing out that this topic has been discussed many times and if the OP really wants alot of different explanations she could search it. how on earth can you see that as making her feel ashamed? over sensitive are we? and dont you like horses either?

however this is a public message board, and we should be able to post as we please, instead of reading through hundreds of older posts, right? i mean, realistically, those of you who dont like a specific topic could over look it with enough will power... dont you think?

j4nash

its true..its a myth.

this whole myth is based on a study done in the 40s. Its called the Minnesota starvation study. It took like 30 healthy muscular service men and basically 'starved' them. they intook 3000 some calories, normal intake for these men. then they cut it in half for a few months. They all lost weight steadily, and the scientists adjusted the calories of each man, because everyone's metabolism is different, as to make sure they lost weight at a predictable manor. (this is where the myth comes from). the fact is, they all lost weight period. this study wasnt about weight loss, but mostly about how the body reacts to starvation, and ultimately how to re feed someone who is technically starving.

its not healthy to starve yourself to lose weight. and i never endorse this. but, the fact is, there is no such thing as starvation mode. It is physiologically impossible for a person to 'hold onto fat' on a calorie deficit. and even more so impossible to 'store fat' on a calorie deficit. our bodies need a certain amount of energy/calories to function. our brains, livers, muscles, other organs etc. if we dont feed our bodies enough, it takes that energy from fat. and if we restrict too much to some extent gets energy from muscle. but mostly it catabolizes muscle to provide amino acids and enzymes for biological reactions/functions in the body.

In true starvation, you use your fat, then muscle. after that is gone, your body starts to basically eat itself to survive. it'll break down organ tissues and organs will shut down. this how people die from starvation..organ failure. so all our talk about starvation mode.."i only eat 1400 calories a day", "oh you are in starvation mode eat more"..all this is a slap in the face to those who are truely starving. go tell them you cant lose weight because you arent eating enough.

The most interesting thing is the participants of the study.. I'd be curious to see if the same "test" was run on a group that was 100lbs over their "ideal weight"

xraychick77

I think it comes down to this: There is a lot of debate because no one knows for certain. End.

no we do know for certain..but the staying power of this myth is due to the fact that a lot of people believe it and continue to spread it..
and to the other person who said they read several studies..no you havent. there have been no real studies, especially on this 'starvation mode'. the only studies that have been done on true starvation is the one i mentioned above and another in the netherlands..but that wasnt a study, as it was a famine and provided scientists with some thing to study..since it is unethical to starve someone for science.

Mcgrawhaha

Wow, it's a shame someone that posts a topic/question has to be made to feel ashamed to ask it. Most of us are here for support ....why click on a topic if you know it's been beaten to death? To the OP, I'm glad you posted this, there is lots of controversy in regards to this and i would love to know the truth behind this....as I often go under 1200 calories, not on purpose but I'm eatting much healthier foods and my calories just don't add up since I get full faster.

I was merely pointing out that this topic has been discussed many times and if the OP really wants alot of different explanations she could search it. how on earth can you see that as making her feel ashamed? over sensitive are we? and dont you like horses either?

additionally, could it be that maybe you are indeed the one who is a bit on the sensetive side, being that another persons posts has the ability to bother you so much? i mean, i see posts on here that look really immature and dumb, and I just pass right over it... nothing to get you panties all bunched up about, dont you think?

NoAdditives

Never mind.

capaxinfiniti

There just needs to be a group for people who want to discuss this topic.

And experiment yourself? That's taking a big risk.

It's not a risk at all. Everyone's body is different, everyone needs a different amount of calories in order to lose weight efficiently while still remaining healthy. Without a little experimentation I never would have figured out that I need 1500-1600 net calories in order to burn fat and lose weight. I'd be stuck at 1200 cals, miserable, hungry, and not losing anything. But because I experimented with the amount of calories I consumed I figured out what worked for me. I highly recommend that everyone do the same if their initial results are not what they are expecting.

She wasn't talking about experimenting to find out what calories worked with her in that post. She said that she was going to experiment to figure out the "symptoms and effects of starvation mode". That sounds like, to me, she is seeing how it would affect her negatively. Just my view in that statement.

Mcgrawhaha

its true..its a myth.

this whole myth is based on a study done in the 40s. Its called the Minnesota starvation study. It took like 30 healthy muscular service men and basically 'starved' them. they intook 3000 some calories, normal intake for these men. then they cut it in half for a few months. They all lost weight steadily, and the scientists adjusted the calories of each man, because everyone's metabolism is different, as to make sure they lost weight at a predictable manor. (this is where the myth comes from). the fact is, they all lost weight period. this study wasnt about weight loss, but mostly about how the body reacts to starvation, and ultimately how to re feed someone who is technically starving.

its not healthy to starve yourself to lose weight. and i never endorse this. but, the fact is, there is no such thing as starvation mode. It is physiologically impossible for a person to 'hold onto fat' on a calorie deficit. and even more so impossible to 'store fat' on a calorie deficit. our bodies need a certain amount of energy/calories to function. our brains, livers, muscles, other organs etc. if we dont feed our bodies enough, it takes that energy from fat. and if we restrict too much to some extent gets energy from muscle. but mostly it catabolizes muscle to provide amino acids and enzymes for biological reactions/functions in the body.

In true starvation, you use your fat, then muscle. after that is gone, your body starts to basically eat itself to survive. it'll break down organ tissues and organs will shut down. this how people die from starvation..organ failure. so all our talk about starvation mode.."i only eat 1400 calories a day", "oh you are in starvation mode eat more"..all this is a slap in the face to those who are truely starving. go tell them you cant lose weight because you arent eating enough.

Then why didn't I lose a single pound when I was eating 400-700 net calories a day for 6 months?

i think each of our bodies are different, and what works for me, might not work for you, and vice versa... take my cousin, she pukes everything up... yes, dumb, stupid, and dangerous... she maybe absorbes 300 calories a day, and shes as thin as a rail... not in starvation mode... me, i actually attempted the "starve yourself" thing in high school, and ate around 800 calories a day... and i never lost a pound!!! here i am now, eating 1200 GOOD calories a day, and the weight is dropping off! to each thier own, i guess!