starvation mode bunk?

sed484

This blog makes a really good case as to why starvation mode is just a myth. Please read/ Plus the first paragraph about MFP people is so true, it's funny. http://fattyfightsback.blogspot.com/2009/03/mtyhbusters-starvation-mode.html

RonSwanson66

Good stuff.

tenax

i suggest anyone who reads the article, read a number of the comments to. they round out the article nicely. and i do agree with the article in general. my body is very smart in it's signals to me. if i'm eating to lose weight, i go to bed feeling a touch hungry. not uncomfortably or disruptively so..just a feeling i'm not "full". if i'm not eating enough for the days physical challenges, i get a dizzy moment and know i need to eat something. not the same for everyone i'm sure but..only time i've ever dramatically lost weight (3 lb per week say) is by eating about 1400-1500 cals less than i take in. the math works. ps- when i lost 86 lb, i noticed no loss of muscle mass. largely elliptical, some weight bearing exercise throughout.

Lozze

think you are doing people a huge disservice with this article and encouraging a very bad and dangerous habit, that ruins 99.99999% of diets. You claim you are going to dispel a myth, then admit the "myth" is true. You admit that your metabolism does slow at low caloric amounts.

YOU ARE TELLING PEOPLE IT'S OK TO DESTROY THEIR METABOLISM BECAUSE THEY'LL LOSE WEIGHT ANYWAY.

In other words you completely missed the point. The point is that even though you will still lose weight the amount of calories you need to maintain the weight loss will go down. Why do that to yourself? even a 20% slowdown is no joke. If poison made you lose weight would you drink it? And I speak from personal experience as some1 who tried both ways, and trust me, it takes a hell of a lot more discipline to lose weight the healthy way, making sure you eat just enough, make sure your not losing your lean muscle, have the right balance of cardio and weights, than to go the way of the anorexic and eat a celery stick a day. You guys are the ones looking for the easy way out, and trying to justify an unhealthy habit.

You say you'll still lose weight if you eat 500 calories a day. Well, after their done with their diet, 99% of people go back to eating as they did before. Now that they have their shiny new -25% metabolism, what do you think is going to happen? That's right, they put on MORE weight than they had before because their metabolism is slower. I have personally experienced that. And from what i've seen in myself and others, when you're body is starving, it packs on the weight FAST. Almost every1 who i've seen fail at dieting is for this reason. Then what do they do? That's right, they starve themselves again, wrecking their metabolism again, and again, and again. This is something your article doesn't discuss, the effect of doing this to yourself multiple times. And what are you left with? A bunch of overweight Americans who don't understand why starving themselves is not working. Not only that but they've probably done all kinds of weird things to their body that wont manifest itself until much later.

And even if they don't gain the weight back, for one they wont be able to go back to eating the same amount of calories they used to. This is something the person above who claimed starvation worked for them failed to mention. I wonder whether she has to eat less calories now to maintain her weight.

Also, muscle is expensive- it costs more calories than fat to maintain. You say it doesn't make sense for your body to break down muscle but it actually makes a lot of sense. Breaking down muscle is one of the ways your lowers it's metabolic rate. That way it gets energy and lowers the amount of energy it needs at the same time.


As for me? I finally learned how to lose weight right, and now I can actually eat MORE than I could before and not gain weight back because my metabolism is actually more efficient now. You guys go ahead and yo yo diet while your body eats itself. Because you'll still lose the weight right?
July 6, 2010 12:23 AM

I'll copy this post from the comments.

Ultimately I only really tell people to try eating more if they're not losing and asking for help. I don't know enough about the science to say one way or the other whether it's true. I'll keep eating my 1600 calories a day and continue to lose weight.

SHBoss1673

The writer of this blog was on here for a while. Unfortunately a lot of the info on the blog is false or misleading.

jimmie25

This blog makes a really good case as to why starvation mode is just a myth.

I remeber reading on the forum rules that we aren't supposed to write anything that encourages people to starve themselves into anorexia (or any other eating disorder). This kinda belongs into that category.

CyberEd312

Totally disagree with this article.... I think the word Starvation mode when used on here is used more loosely than what its actual meaning is. I think people hit Plateau's and weeks with no weight loss and the Starvation mode words are thrown around loosely. Now as far as the eating more to lose weight theory, it is spot on (atleast for me and quite a few other people on this site by what I have read in these forums) You Can Not run high caloric deficits (sure you can get away with it in the beginning but if you do it over long periods of time it could screw up you metabolism permanently and not to mention you are going to sacrifice lean muscle mass. Each person responds to weight loss according to their on make up and what works for one may not work for another. I know for me, My BMR is currently 2450 and that is with a built in 500 calorie deficit to lose a pound a week and I consume 3200 calories a day ( eating back 85% of my exercise calories) and I am losing 1 to 2 lbs. a week and have for the past 31 months. Do I hit Plateau's (of course) and to break through them I up my calories (Yep that means a eat more to lose weight) by a couple hundred calories and it jump starts my system and I am back to losing weight. So again you need to read the info that is out there and do what works best for you, I have been under the care of doctors and working with a dietician since I started and they have always backed the way I have been losing. Slow and steady wins the race, and yes it takes longer to get the weight off but it is the healthy way to do it, both mentally and physically......

May2009 @ 560 lbs.


January 2012@ 267lbs.

vjrose

You look amazing Ed and I loved your post. I have to agree that the OP is very skeptical, however I have to admit that MFP has as many viewpoints as there are members.
I do think this post is giving permission to eat a VLCD, I did my research also after someone else wrote one of these you can eat 800 calories a day and it won't hurt you but consistently the research says if you are working out and eating a VLCD (under 1,000) then it must be under a doctors care. How many people will read beyond the first paragraph where the OP does eventually say that if you want to do a VLCD it needs to be under Medical care. Most will read the first sentence and say YAY I can starve myself, lol.
I had to up my calories to get my weight loss rolling, still eating a bit under my BMR but finally losing.

cheekjrgd

What happens when you eat more than 800 calories a day? What is the maintennance plan after you reach your goal? What stops from you ballooning after you reach your goal? Are you going to maintain the level of exercise needed to burn the calories over 800 everyday?

SHBoss1673

What happens when you eat more than 800 calories a day? What is the maintennance plan after you reach your goal? What stops from you ballooning after you reach your goal? Are you going to maintain the level of exercise needed to burn the calories over 800 everyday?

Questions like these are why I strongly advocate MFP's plan (eating exercise calories back). Yes, weight loss is slower, but you don't have the transition woes of going from a very restrictive diet to maintenance.

Ke22yB

I couldnt agree more I am 64 and tried every diet and lost and gained my way to 367 lbs before I changed my way of life I eat all my meals and consume over 2100 calories a day minimum depending of exercise and since may 2008 I have lost steadily and now have approximately 50 to go over the next year keep it up

grinch031

If you eat too little calories for the needs of your body, it compensates by doing less work, hence expending less energy. That's why cutting calories doesn't guarantee a caloric deficit and associated weight loss.

downsizinghoss

Extremely low calories is a diet. I am trying to adopt a lifestyle that I can maintain. I am not on a diet.

maryjay51

Totally disagree with this article.... I think the word Starvation mode when used on here is used more loosely than what its actual meaning is. I think people hit Plateau's and weeks with no weight loss and the Starvation mode words are thrown around loosely. Now as far as the eating more to lose weight theory, it is spot on (atleast for me and quite a few other people on this site by what I have read in these forums) You Can Not run high caloric deficits (sure you can get away with it in the beginning but if you do it over long periods of time it could screw up you metabolism permanently and not to mention you are going to sacrifice lean muscle mass. Each person responds to weight loss according to their on make up and what works for one may not work for another. I know for me, My BMR is currently 2450 and that is with a built in 500 calorie deficit to lose a pound a week and I consume 3200 calories a day ( eating back 85% of my exercise calories) and I am losing 1 to 2 lbs. a week and have for the past 31 months. Do I hit Plateau's (of course) and to break through them I up my calories (Yep that means a eat more to lose weight) by a couple hundred calories and it jump starts my system and I am back to losing weight. So again you need to read the info that is out there and do what works best for you, I have been under the care of doctors and working with a dietician since I started and they have always backed the way I have been losing. Slow and steady wins the race, and yes it takes longer to get the weight off but it is the healthy way to do it, both mentally and physically......

May2009 @ 560 lbs.


January 2012@ 267lbs.

wow!!!!! congratulations !!!!!

SHBoss1673

Extremely low calories is a diet. I am trying to adopt a lifestyle that I can maintain. I am not on a diet.

Well said!

Articeluvsmemphis

:grumble: :grumble: :grumble: :noway: *FACEPALM* They'll learn :grumble: :grumble: :grumble: :grumble: :grumble: :grumble: :grumble: :grumble:

at this point, I may explode if I see another starvation mode posts, lol

weight loss is about the simplest concept on Earth, move more, eat less.

if you are hungry you need to eat, forget about how many calories you've already counted and eat

or pass out, either way you get what you deserve

BellydanceBliss

I appreciate your response. I believe waht you have said to be true. I have a hard time eating all those calories and trying to work up to it gradually.

Totally disagree with this article.... I think the word Starvation mode when used on here is used more loosely than what its actual meaning is. I think people hit Plateau's and weeks with no weight loss and the Starvation mode words are thrown around loosely. Now as far as the eating more to lose weight theory, it is spot on (atleast for me and quite a few other people on this site by what I have read in these forums) You Can Not run high caloric deficits (sure you can get away with it in the beginning but if you do it over long periods of time it could screw up you metabolism permanently and not to mention you are going to sacrifice lean muscle mass. Each person responds to weight loss according to their on make up and what works for one may not work for another. I know for me, My BMR is currently 2450 and that is with a built in 500 calorie deficit to lose a pound a week and I consume 3200 calories a day ( eating back 85% of my exercise calories) and I am losing 1 to 2 lbs. a week and have for the past 31 months. Do I hit Plateau's (of course) and to break through them I up my calories (Yep that means a eat more to lose weight) by a couple hundred calories and it jump starts my system and I am back to losing weight. So again you need to read the info that is out there and do what works best for you, I have been under the care of doctors and working with a dietician since I started and they have always backed the way I have been losing. Slow and steady wins the race, and yes it takes longer to get the weight off but it is the healthy way to do it, both mentally and physically......

May2009 @ 560 lbs.


January 2012@ 267lbs.

justanotherbrickinthewall

Totally disagree with this article.... I think the word Starvation mode when used on here is used more loosely than what its actual meaning is. I think people hit Plateau's and weeks with no weight loss and the Starvation mode words are thrown around loosely. Now as far as the eating more to lose weight theory, it is spot on (atleast for me and quite a few other people on this site by what I have read in these forums) You Can Not run high caloric deficits (sure you can get away with it in the beginning but if you do it over long periods of time it could screw up you metabolism permanently and not to mention you are going to sacrifice lean muscle mass. Each person responds to weight loss according to their on make up and what works for one may not work for another. I know for me, My BMR is currently 2450 and that is with a built in 500 calorie deficit to lose a pound a week and I consume 3200 calories a day ( eating back 85% of my exercise calories) and I am losing 1 to 2 lbs. a week and have for the past 31 months. Do I hit Plateau's (of course) and to break through them I up my calories (Yep that means a eat more to lose weight) by a couple hundred calories and it jump starts my system and I am back to losing weight. So again you need to read the info that is out there and do what works best for you, I have been under the care of doctors and working with a dietician since I started and they have always backed the way I have been losing. Slow and steady wins the race, and yes it takes longer to get the weight off but it is the healthy way to do it, both mentally and physically......

May2009 @ 560 lbs.


January 2012@ 267lbs.

Congratulations on the weight loss!
I have to disagree with this though. I have gone through starvation mode and I know it isn't just a myth.

grinch031

:grumble: :grumble: :grumble: :noway: *FACEPALM* They'll learn :grumble: :grumble: :grumble: :grumble: :grumble: :grumble: :grumble: :grumble:

at this point, I may explode if I see another starvation mode posts, lol

weight loss is about the simplest concept on Earth, move more, eat less.

if you are hungry you need to eat, forget about how many calories you've already counted and eat

or pass out, either way you get what you deserve

Its really not that simple though. In fact its so complex, that scientists can't even agree on what goes on under the hood. The only thing that they pretty much agree on is that a caloric deficit is needed to lose weight.

But the key to successful weight loss is putting the mind and the body in synch such that the person eats the right amount and does the right amount of exercise to lose enough fat to maintain a healthy weight. This is an art because every body responds differently to changes.

MaximalLife

This blog makes a really good case as to why starvation mode is just a myth. Please read/ Plus the first paragraph about MFP people is so true, it's funny. http://fattyfightsback.blogspot.com/2009/03/mtyhbusters-starvation-mode.html

No thanks. Nowhere in that study was body fat tracked, so for people trying to retain muscle, this means BAD NEWS.
When we restrict diet, our bodies react. Of course they "lost weight", but what was the quality of that weight loss?
They lost more muscle which is why this fact is never mentioned. That's reality.
And having gone down that road personally, I lived it.
And it took me 6 months eating to maintenance and still gaining weight to reset my body.
I went from 265 to 211, then OOPS - back up to 232.
My fruit from that philosophy was stifled metabolism and weight gain.
And what happened after that?
I lost 1 lb per week - sometimes less.
Today I weigh 195 and holding to maintenance going on 4 weeks now.
Again, I am giving my body time to re-feed, catch up - whatever.
And starting next week, I begin the final drive to lose the last 10 lbs.
I plan on this taking 3 months.
None of us are in a race, but if you want to try the crash diet, starvation route, be my guest.
Eat 800 calories per day; let's see you get all the nutrients your body needs for optimal weight loss.
COUNT ME OUT!

MaximalLife

Good stuff.

Really? You advocate a diet under 1200 calories and a 40% stifled metabolism ?

flimflamfloz

Well, this article is almost a joke. The guy does not describe what he means by "starvation mode" (as if everyone agreed on the definition) and then is saying that the metabolism of the test subjects had slowed down by 40%... Great way to lose weight - woohoo!
Mind you if you can stay in bed all day...

Can't see much contradiction with the definition of wikipedia (for argument's sake) of starvation mode:
"Starvation response in animals is a set of adaptive biochemical and physiological changes that reduce metabolism in response to a lack of food."

The author admits that the metabolism of the subjects has reduced, yet does not want to call it starvation mode?

Nana_Booboo

Eat your exercise calories
You should eat back your exercise calories.
Simply stated MFP has already figured out your total calories you need to eat per day to lose 1lb etc. a week.
That's WITHOUT exercise. You'll notice that when you actually add exercise in, the calorie limit goes up.
Why? Because it's telling you to eat your exercise calories.
Large deficits aren't really good to do because while you will lose weight, what kind of weight will it be?
In many cases you'll lose lean muscle tissue which LOWERS your metabolic rate even more.
Then you have to eat even less to compensate for less of a calorie burn to continue to lose the same amount
of weight each week.

Be efficient.
Exercise hard and eat back the calories. The hard exercise will RAISE your metabolic rate and burn more fat at rest.

goldfinger88

This blog makes a really good case as to why starvation mode is just a myth. Please read/ Plus the first paragraph about MFP people is so true, it's funny. http://fattyfightsback.blogspot.com/2009/03/mtyhbusters-starvation-mode.html

The information I personally pay attention to are professional studies. And starvation mode is very real and proven scientifically. In fact, my dog who is overweight, recently was gaining although I had her calories restricted. So, I increased her food and she lost two pounds in as many weeks. Now, that's not a scientific study. But it's easily proven. I know it works for me too.

You can find lots of misleading information online. When it comes to your health, and that includes your weight and eating, you are better off in reading scientific studies or books and reports based on them.

goldfinger88

Extremely low calories is a diet. I am trying to adopt a lifestyle that I can maintain. I am not on a diet.

That's "very" smart and it's the only way that really works long-term and that's healthy.

porcelain_doll

This blog makes a really good case as to why starvation mode is just a myth. Please read/ Plus the first paragraph about MFP people is so true, it's funny. http://fattyfightsback.blogspot.com/2009/03/mtyhbusters-starvation-mode.html

I've read this article before and I completely agree with the author. I think starvation mode does exist, but not until your calories get really low, like below 600 cals or so. Your metabolism may slow down, but you will still lose weight. You don't see kids in poverty-stricken countries walking around chubby because they aren't eating enough.

If you still have energy and can get through your workouts, if you are not dizzy, if your blood sugar is stable, if you have mental clarity; if you basically feel good all around, then you're eating enough. Case closed.

andrejjorje

Here the phrase that I really liked from that blog.
"In the end, it's important to consume enough calories that you have the energy to perform the daily activities you want to and to keep your body healthy."
Thanks for sharing.

MaximalLife

Eat your exercise calories
You should eat back your exercise calories.
Simply stated MFP has already figured out your total calories you need to eat per day to lose 1lb etc. a week.
That's WITHOUT exercise. You'll notice that when you actually add exercise in, the calorie limit goes up.
Why? Because it's telling you to eat your exercise calories.
Large deficits aren't really good to do because while you will lose weight, what kind of weight will it be?
In many cases you'll lose lean muscle tissue which LOWERS your metabolic rate even more.
Then you have to eat even less to compensate for less of a calorie burn to continue to lose the same amount
of weight each week.

Be efficient.
Exercise hard and eat back the calories. The hard exercise will RAISE your metabolic rate and burn more fat at rest.

^^^^^
THIS
Could not have said it better.....

meli_medina

I think that the blog was actually quite contradictory. "Starvation mode doesn't exist; however, when this study reduced calories by xyz, the metabolism reduced by up to 40%." Uhm... slowed metabolism IS a symptom of starvation mode. And besides that, when you eat 800 calories per day, you will lose much more lean muscle than if you eat 1600 calories per day. I would rather lose .25-.5 pounds per week and know that 95-99% of what I lost was fat, plus be able to go do a strenuous, 2-hour workout, and not have to come home and take a nap because I eat enough for my body to afford that kind of energy expenditure and then continue on with my day as normal.

People who eat fewer than 1200 calories per day and then complain about how hungry they are all of the time drive me crazy. You're ravenously hungry because you're not eating enough. When you have that kind of hunger, where all you can do is picture yourself walking into Pizza Hut and eating every slice of pizza in sight, that is usually a sign that you are not eating enough. Heck, I still get that kind of hunger with 1900-2100 calories per day.

Do you know what I do when I'm hungry? I eat. It's a novel concept.

hottamolly00

OP is also posting junk like this: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/468980-has-anyone-tried-the-alternate-day-diet

I think she needs an intervention.

LynneGG

First off...Ed congrats on your amazing success! The blog the OP posted is a joke! But that being said I honestly feel some threads are started to stir the pot. How many times has this subject been posted and debated? There is more research supporting the "starvation mode" than not. But as others have pointed out the term starvation mode is misunderstood. I don't want to be skinny fat. I want to lose fat and build/strengthen muscles.Not lose fat and muscle. We're suppose to be learning how to make this a lifestyle change so when we lose the weight we will be able to keep it off for a lifetime. I started on a medically supervised 1000 calories a day diet. Did fine the first month and lost 16lbs. Then I was tired all the time and had no strength whatsoever.I ditched the program, increased by calores and started working out. Yes, weight loss is slow but for the first time in my life I'm feeling the changes will be permanent.

Most of us know we can lose weight...I've lost hundreds of pounds over the years myself. But the "diets" were not realistic to continue and maintain.