Very low calorie diets and metabolic damage

Matt_Wild

One of the best, if not the best, thread I have read on here. I need to stop listening to morons who parrot things they know nothing about.

So instead you parrot something you know nothing about and use it back your argument you understand nothing about?

HotrodsGirl0107

While I see what you are trying to do there is an abundance of disorder eaters on MFP that will only use your post as validation to keep "feeding" the disorder. I also believe people won't change unless they absolutely hit rock bottom which is sad because it doesn't always take hitting rock bottom to do permanent damage. I did 800 cals for a long time and now have permanent heart damage and hormone imbalances because of it. At the time though I would have used this post as validation. I think you have to remember your audience.

stroutman81

While I see what you are trying to do there is an abundance of disorder eaters on MFP that will only use your post as validation to keep "feeding" the disorder. I also believe people won't change unless they absolutely hit rock bottom which is sad because it doesn't always take hitting rock bottom to do permanent damage. I did 800 cals for a long time and now have permanent heart damage and hormone imbalances because of it. At the time though I would have used this post as validation. I think you have to remember your audience.

I've said everything I have to say to remarks such as yours earlier on in this thread. Thanks for sharing your opinion.

DebbieLyn63

Bumping

mfpcopine

Thank you for your post. I am very interested in learning more. I have been at a plateau for a few months now. But I'm scared to go below the 1200 mark but maybe I should try. Any thoughts? Oh and I am not new to dieting...I've been at this for 27 years (I will be 28 in April LOL)...

This is almost impossible to answer. Let's start with this:

1. What's your weight?

2. What was your highest weight?

3. How many grams of protein, carbs, and fat do you consume on average, per day?

4. You say you consume 1200 calories per day. How accurate do you believe you are in that assessment? What makes you so sure of that accuracy?

5. How much exercise are you doing per week and what kinds?

6. When's the last time you took a break, meaning reduced or nixed exercise and brought calories up towards maintenance for a period of time?

Good questions. You might add:

What is your lowest weight?
Have you ever been diagnosed with an Eating Disorder?

What is your body fat percentage?
What method do you use to determine or estimate it?
How long have you been using this method?

Do you wear a heart rate monitor during cardio to check the intensity of your workout?

What are your weight loss, health, and fitness goals?

valeriewxy

Bump for reading later when I get home. Sounds like a very interesting discussion

Imaan2012

Bump

lynzbeaner

Bump

Cr01502

Very interesting read and I actually did not know that about VLCD.

However, next time I do see another OP on these forums advocating eating under 800 cals a day (medically supervised or not) I will tell them that slow and steady is a much better option. Unless they plan on having doctors make their meals for the rest of their lives.

Still though very interesting post. Thanks for this.

grim_traveller

Bump

1ynne1a1a

There are very few absolutes in the game of life.. black and white is stunning but there is comfort in the many shades of grey - and no, I am not talking 50 shades of

womac23

A good post! Science is constantly discovering new things about our bodies. Fasting is and has been for centuries a way of life for many people of all religions. What scientists are now discovering is if you keep eating your 5 or 6 or 7 small regular meals a day you never give your body a rest - you simply keep it topped up with fresh supplies of glucose (unless you are on a pure protein diet) and if you are not burning that glucose off within 2 hours of eating it then your body says "let's keep that last bit for later and pack it away in a fat cell" so your fat cells keep on multiplying and getting bigger. A little bit of starvation is Good For You. Not only is it good for you, you have less chance of diabetes, stroke, cancer - and there is a good chance you will live a healthy life for longer - You also get to be more beautiful inside and out . Read the science. And this isn't new - this information has been in the public domain for years.

http://fitness.mercola.com/sites/fitness/archive/2013/03/01/daily-intermittent-fasting.aspx

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19112549

chttp://www.usc.edu/programs/neuroscience/faculty/profile.php?fid=51

bbg67

I skimmed most of the responses but I have to point out that, since the OP brought up the Minnesota Starvation Experiment as defense of VLCD (in the arguement that it shows our metabolism doesn't drop THAT much), the NEGATIVE effects of the experiment should also be pointed out.

Yes - their metabolisms might not have slowed down "that much". BUT - they found with semi-starvation, there were "significant increases in depression, hysteria, and hypochondriasis". Also - most of the subjects "experienced periods of severe emotional distress and depressions". They also found there were "extreme reactions to the psychological effects during the experiment including self-mutilation (one subject AMPUTATED three fingers of his hand with an axe, though the subject was unsure if he had done so intentionally or accidentally)." There was also a "preoccupation with food, both during the starvation period and the rehabilitation phase. Sexual interest was drastically reduced, and the volunteers showed signs of social withdrawal and isolation". There were repots of "decline in concentration, comprehension, and judgement capabilites". There were also "marked declines in physiological processes indicative of decreases in each subject's basal metabolic rate, reflected in reduced body temperature, respiration, and heart rate". Also - "some of the subjects exhibited edema in their extremities, presumably due to decreased levels of plasma proteins given that the body's ability to construct key proteins like albumin is based on available energy sources". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Starvation_Experiment#Results

Most nutritionists use the MSE as proof that VLCD can create mental and phyiscal effects similar to eating disorders. The men had a high deficit and, in turn, started obsessing over food, weight, image, and a few even self-mutilated. Their self-reported cognition decreased and their depression and hysteria increased signifcantly. These are important things to point out - the study was more indicative of the negative effects of VLCD than supporting it. Maybe the metabolism "only" reduced 15%, but the psychological and physical effects are something that seriously need to be pointed out. The fact they so closely mimic the symptoms of an eating disorder really should not be skimmed over.

stroutman81

I skimmed most of the responses but I have to point out that, since the OP brought up the Minnesota Starvation Experiment as defense of VLCD (in the arguement that it shows our metabolism doesn't drop THAT much), the NEGATIVE effects of the experiment should also be pointed out.

Yes - their metabolisms might not have slowed down "that much". BUT - they found with semi-starvation, there were "significant increases in depression, hysteria, and hypochondriasis". Also - most of the subjects "experienced periods of severe emotional distress and depressions". They also found there were "extreme reactions to the psychological effects during the experiment including self-mutilation (one subject AMPUTATED three fingers of his hand with an axe, though the subject was unsure if he had done so intentionally or accidentally)." There was also a "preoccupation with food, both during the starvation period and the rehabilitation phase. Sexual interest was drastically reduced, and the volunteers showed signs of social withdrawal and isolation". There were repots of "decline in concentration, comprehension, and judgement capabilites". There were also "marked declines in physiological processes indicative of decreases in each subject's basal metabolic rate, reflected in reduced body temperature, respiration, and heart rate". Also - "some of the subjects exhibited edema in their extremities, presumably due to decreased levels of plasma proteins given that the body's ability to construct key proteins like albumin is based on available energy sources". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Starvation_Experiment#Results

Most nutritionists use the MSE as proof that VLCD can create mental and phyiscal effects similar to eating disorders. The men had a high deficit and, in turn, started obsessing over food, weight, image, and a few even self-mutilated. Their self-reported cognition decreased and their depression and hysteria increased signifcantly. These are important things to point out - the study was more indicative of the negative effects of VLCD than supporting it. Maybe the metabolism "only" reduced 15%, but the psychological and physical effects are something that seriously need to be pointed out. The fact they so closely mimic the symptoms of an eating disorder really should not be skimmed over.

Great, objective post. If you reread my OP, you'll see this sentence. These words mean something:

"Once you factor in the psychology aspects of them, they're just not right for most long term fat loss plans."

You realize how long the subjects were on the MSE, right? I would never suggest someone go on a long term vlcd.

At the end of the day, any diet needs to be matched to the individual and the circumstances. It's that simple. Which is what the original post was about... it was about fending off the generalist attitude that tends to lump everything into neat little categories of being "right" or "wrong," "good" or "bad."

I do respect that you posted what you did though as it helps drive home the point that I made in the OP... these sorts of diets aren't for long term use and better yet, these sorts of diets aren't things most people should be considering.

jetsetmaven

Thanks for such a well written post. I tried to respond to the female in the 800 cal post, but I think MFP may have deleted her as the page bounced back. As someone who has successfully done a VLCD *and* kept the weight off, I found it quite offensive that many comments were rude and demeaning to the poster. Weight loss is a personal journey. What works for one person may not work for another. So people should stop and think before hurling cookie cutter advice to some seeking direction. Consider VLCD a form of fasting which many have been doing for cultural and religious reasons. I'm pretty sure they are not dying from it and neither would the general population.

Angiehankins77

Great information, I love educated people

CallMeCupcakeDammit

Bumping, because this will never get old

YourLotusFlower11

Bump

stroutman81

Thanks for keeping the thread alive guys.

giveMEbeauty

Bump