Starvation mode hysteria

david081

Can anyone here post me a picture of a fat African famine victim? Those people twittering on about starvation mode need to get a life, start losing weight, and stop scaremongering. I don't advocate starving as a weight-loss method, but fasting for a day or two never did anyone harm. I am SICK and TIRED of hearing the SM term used on here, and feel it is a popular phrase used by people who eat too much...

Sorry for the short rant, but this has bugged me for a while. Feel free to crucify me...

Regards, David

Sullerson

Agreed! The most over used term in the diet communities. If you're not losing weight, eat less or move more.

JazzBar9363

So you are advocating 700 or less calories for people unable to lose weight? I have seen some diets of people trying to lose weight and that is their calorie count for the day, not even mentioning the amount of exercise they are doing besides. Yet they haven't lost any weight. So they eat even less! And exercise more! And they still aren't losing. What do you call that then? They are told to eat more and viola! They start losing weight again. Why? In your most infinite wisdom, how do you explain that?

emmaruns

I disagree, respectfully.

I am very active and my body is very smart. I was eating 1300 calories a day and burning 1300 calories a day. So, I was moving plenty and eating less. Guess what? No weight loss.

Your body doesn't know you're on a diet. It thinks that there's a food shortage. So, yeah, starving kids in Africa are skinny but because the body is so smart they are alive. Their bodies are using the few calories they get extremely efficiently. The body wants you to survive. If I kept at 1300 calories a day, I would eventually lose weight. Muscle is "active" tissue so it's the first thing my body would want to stop supporting. Fat doesn't need much to keep it on you.

For people who think that starving their bodies of food is the right way to lose weight, I just flat disagree. Yes, you need a calorie deficit to lose weight, I get it. But a combination of moving and slight calorie deficits are, in my opinion, the best way for permanent fat loss.

Oh, and after increasing my calories to 2000 I broke through. I guess you can call me a convert

CyberEd312

I think the term is used for lack of a better word.... No one is using the term starvation mode in the context of not eating food for days on end, or some sort of famine diet..... They are basically using this term in the form when you run a large caloric deficit for sometime that it eventually will cause your metabolism to slow to the point that your weightloss stalls and you hit weeks of plateau's. That is the way I have used the term in the past and will continue too for lack of a better one....... And I don't use it because I eat to much but through trial and error I can tell you for me now I have to eat more to lose weight. I am in the camp of eating to fuel my workouts and I am losing a pound a week 32 months and 302 lbs. lost into this journey..... Just my 2 cents.......

melsinct

If you're not losing weight, eat less or move more.

The problem is this blanket statement doesn't apply to all situations (the inherent danger of blanket statements). While I think there is a bit of hysteria revolving around "starvation mode" and exercise calories on MFP, I think the most dangerous thing someone can do is drop blanket statements everywhere on the message boards.

If you aren't losing weight the only solution is to eat less.

You absolutely need to eat more to lose.

Never eat your exercise calories.

Always eat your exercise calories.

No wonder newbies here are overwhelmed. I prefer to take a "hey, this works for some, but it may not work for you" approach. There is no one size fits all when it comes to weight loss. These boards would be a little more friendly if people were a little less opinionated and a little more open. People lose a couple of pounds and suddenly we are all weight loss and nutrition experts.

vim_n_vigor

I think the term is used for lack of a better word.... No one is using the term starvation mode in the context of not eating food for days on end, or some sort of famine diet..... They are basically using this term in the form when you run a large caloric deficit for sometime that it eventually will cause your metabolism to slow to the point that your weightloss stalls and you hit weeks of plateau's. That is the way I have used the term in the past and will continue too for lack of a better one....... And I don't use it because I eat to much but through trial and error I can tell you for me now I have to eat more to lose weight. I am in the camp of eating to fuel my workouts and I am losing a pound a week 32 months and 302 lbs. lost into this journey..... Just my 2 cents.......

OMG - fantastic lost. I am so happy for you! Absolutely incredible!

melsinct

I think the term is used for lack of a better word.... No one is using the term starvation mode in the context of not eating food for days on end, or some sort of famine diet..... They are basically using this term in the form when you run a large caloric deficit for sometime that it eventually will cause your metabolism to slow to the point that your weightloss stalls and you hit weeks of plateau's. That is the way I have used the term in the past and will continue too for lack of a better one....... And I don't use it because I eat to much but through trial and error I can tell you for me now I have to eat more to lose weight. I am in the camp of eating to fuel my workouts and I am losing a pound a week 32 months and 302 lbs. lost into this journey..... Just my 2 cents.......

I completely agree and HOLY CRAP. Phenomenal weight loss, you are an inspiration!

PepeGreggerton

I disagree, respectfully.

I am very active and my body is very smart. I was eating 1300 calories a day and burning 1300 calories a day. So, I was moving plenty and eating less. Guess what? No weight loss.

Your body doesn't know you're on a diet. It thinks that there's a food shortage. So, yeah, starving kids in Africa are skinny but because the body is so smart they are alive. Their bodies are using the few calories they get extremely efficiently. The body wants you to survive. If I kept at 1300 calories a day, I would eventually lose weight. Muscle is "active" tissue so it's the first thing my body would want to stop supporting. Fat doesn't need much to keep it on you.

For people who think that starving their bodies of food is the right way to lose weight, I just flat disagree. Yes, you need a calorie deficit to lose weight, I get it. But a combination of moving and slight calorie deficits are, in my opinion, the best way for permanent fat loss.

Oh, and after increasing my calories to 2000 I broke through. I guess you can call me a convert

I think more or less the OP was trying to say you're not actually starving.

http://johnbarban.com/starving-a-word-you-should-never-use-lightly/

TrailRunner61

Wow Ed! Congrats on the weight loss. I love to hear from people with experience and thanks for the info!

30yearssincebikini

Agreed! The most over used term in the diet communities. If you're not losing weight, eat less or move more.

That and "exercise calories". haha!

Bridget0927

I love your rant and think your on tghe money with this one :happy:

KareninCanada

Would you feel better if we said people were bringing themselves to a point of "inadequate overall nutrition leading to the body's need to leach from itself, and insufficient metabolic support to encourage efficient mobilization of fat stores as fuel" ?

It's a lot longer, but if it would help.....

:flowerforyou:

mandiemma

I think the term is used for lack of a better word.... No one is using the term starvation mode in the context of not eating food for days on end, or some sort of famine diet..... They are basically using this term in the form when you run a large caloric deficit for sometime that it eventually will cause your metabolism to slow to the point that your weightloss stalls and you hit weeks of plateau's. That is the way I have used the term in the past and will continue too for lack of a better one....... And I don't use it because I eat to much but through trial and error I can tell you for me now I have to eat more to lose weight. I am in the camp of eating to fuel my workouts and I am losing a pound a week 32 months and 302 lbs. lost into this journey..... Just my 2 cents.......

WOW! You are SUCH and inspiration! Congrats on your weight loss and your journey to get healthy! :-)

tinawharrison

Sod the thread! 302 lbs lost! Wow! Amazing, well done you!

KareninCanada

I think the term is used for lack of a better word.... No one is using the term starvation mode in the context of not eating food for days on end, or some sort of famine diet..... They are basically using this term in the form when you run a large caloric deficit for sometime that it eventually will cause your metabolism to slow to the point that your weightloss stalls and you hit weeks of plateau's. That is the way I have used the term in the past and will continue too for lack of a better one....... And I don't use it because I eat to much but through trial and error I can tell you for me now I have to eat more to lose weight. I am in the camp of eating to fuel my workouts and I am losing a pound a week 32 months and 302 lbs. lost into this journey..... Just my 2 cents.......

^^^^ When this guy speaks up, I tend to listen.

david081

Thanks all!

Bridget0927

If you're not losing weight, eat less or move more.

The problem is this blanket statement doesn't apply to all situations (the inherent danger of blanket statements). While I think there is a bit of hysteria revolving around "starvation mode" and exercise calories on MFP, I think the most dangerous thing someone can do is drop blanket statements everywhere on the message boards.

If you aren't losing weight the only solution is to eat less.

You absolutely need to eat more to lose.

Never eat your exercise calories.

Always eat your exercise calories.

No wonder newbies here are overwhelmed. I prefer to take a "hey, this works for some, but it may not work for you" approach. There is no one size fits all when it comes to weight loss. These boards would be a little more friendly if people were a little less opinionated and a little more open. People lose a couple of pounds and suddenly we are all weight loss and nutrition experts.

HAHAHHAHAHAHAH AWESOME and to the point

juliekaiser1988

I think the term Starvation Mode is aptly named. It isn't "slamming" the starving children in Africa. This isn't where it's coming from. Starvation Mode is a term that relates the body/ mind of our ancestors during the caveman days. Thier bodies had to learn to compensate (preserve energy= calories) through the long cold winter months and times of famine. It really has nothing to do with today's plight of the Africans. This is an evolutionary term, not a current day tragedy of over-breeding in a famine struck country.

tinawharrison

Oh and the huge tummy, that's Kwashiorkor's disease caused by lack of protein in the diet Poor kids

harlanJEN

I disagree, respectfully.

I am very active and my body is very smart. I was eating 1300 calories a day and burning 1300 calories a day. So, I was moving plenty and eating less. Guess what? No weight loss.

Your body doesn't know you're on a diet. It thinks that there's a food shortage. So, yeah, starving kids in Africa are skinny but because the body is so smart they are alive. Their bodies are using the few calories they get extremely efficiently. The body wants you to survive. If I kept at 1300 calories a day, I would eventually lose weight. Muscle is "active" tissue so it's the first thing my body would want to stop supporting. Fat doesn't need much to keep it on you.

For people who think that starving their bodies of food is the right way to lose weight, I just flat disagree. Yes, you need a calorie deficit to lose weight, I get it. But a combination of moving and slight calorie deficits are, in my opinion, the best way for permanent fat loss.

Oh, and after increasing my calories to 2000 I broke through. I guess you can call me a convert

GREAT POST - You summed it up very well.

rileysowner

Starvation mode is a not particularly helpful term because it is not really starvation. It is more a matter of over a prolonged period of time having too large a deficit for the amount of fat a person has, but not so much that it is actually starvation. To say losing weight is as simple at "eat less, move more" is to deny the fact that there are a lot of people here who are measuring their food careful, making good eating choices, are very active, but are not losing weight because their calorie deficit is too large for the amount of fat they have and they have been eating that low for a long time. The key to weight loss is a moderate deficit. Many people want to lose 2-4 pounds a week when they should really be only trying for 1 pound per week. If they have less than 15 pounds to lose even that is probably too much, yet I see people here who follow the mantra "eat less, move more" eating 1200 calories, burning off 500-600 of those and not eating those exercise calories back and thus ending up not having a moderate deficit, but a large one. Yet they are eating enough not to be officially starving. What happens when they do that for days on end, their weight loss stalls completely because their body doesn't like it. Some will have a hard time even getting the weight loss started. It is this that people call "starvation mode".

sma83

The swollen belly is caused by a severe lack of protien. The body has to have protien to regulate the movement of fluid between the body tissue and its cells. Without protien to regulate this movement the fluids build up in the tissues and cause swelling. Its horrible to see children in this state.

MrDude_1

Can anyone here post me a picture of a fat African famine victim? Those people twittering on about starvation mode need to get a life, start losing weight, and stop scaremongering. I don't advocate starving as a weight-loss method, but fasting for a day or two never did anyone harm. I am SICK and TIRED of hearing the SM term used on here, and feel it is a popular phrase used by people who eat too much...

Sorry for the short rant, but this has bugged me for a while. Feel free to crucify me...

Regards, David

Just realize that most people are uneducated... they dont have a damn clue about how anything works. brush it off and move on.

p0stdramatic

What Ed said. It's no one's fault but your own if you read "starvation mode" and then stop without understanding the concept. You don't eat enough, your metabolism adjusts, and your body hangs on to every bit it can. Simple as that. It does not refer in any way to people who fast for 2 days. It takes weeks or months of under-eating to enter starvation mode. It's a term that I would assume was coined to make it easier for people to understand, but failed miserably in that respect, apparently.

pauljsolie

LOL!!! Some of you are WAY too easy today. Thanks for the chuckle!!!!

teagin2002

I think the term is used for lack of a better word.... No one is using the term starvation mode in the context of not eating food for days on end, or some sort of famine diet..... They are basically using this term in the form when you run a large caloric deficit for sometime that it eventually will cause your metabolism to slow to the point that your weightloss stalls and you hit weeks of plateau's. That is the way I have used the term in the past and will continue too for lack of a better one....... And I don't use it because I eat to much but through trial and error I can tell you for me now I have to eat more to lose weight. I am in the camp of eating to fuel my workouts and I am losing a pound a week 32 months and 302 lbs. lost into this journey..... Just my 2 cents.......

^^ this :flowerforyou:

downsizinghoss

Ok, I don't have any pics of fat African Famine victims, but I bet you can't find any pics of healthy ones either.

If all you are worried about is the number on the scale, then yep, it will go down if you don't eat.

Your body adapts to the amount of calories it is expecting to get. If every time you hit a plateau you cut your net calories more, eventually there is nothing left to cut. It is a short sighted solution that isn't healthy.

mes1119

Thank you for this!!!!

Why do you think doctors put morbidly obese people on 800 calorie diets? It isn't JUST about calories. It is about where your calories are coming from and how often you are eating. If you're eating 1300 calories throughout the day (and not just in one big meal) your body knows that there is an adequate supply of food in the world.

Insulin responses from high carb diets have a large effect on weight gain and stubborn weight loss. Hormones are your enemy in weight loss and as long as you are eating wholesome, natural foods high in protein, your body wont conserve all of your fat and only burn your muscle.

CallmeSbo

Agreed! The most over used term in the diet communities. If you're not losing weight, eat less or move more.

That and "exercise calories". haha!

lol true.

Runnermadre

I can't make a blanket statement about "starvation mode" or "exercise calories," but from personal experience, I can say that for me, eating under 1500 calories a day resulted in a weight loss plateau. Guess what, I was running 5 days a week for 30 minutes, and strength training, so it wasn't from a lack of activity either. As soon as I upped my calorie intake the weight started to fall off again, for an average of 1.2 lbs per week for a total weight loss of 30 pounds in about 5 months. So, maybe you would prefer a different label for the condition of your metabolism slowing to take care of your body's necessary functions instead of shedding the extra pounds, but at some point (perhaps not the same point for everyone), I do believe this can happen for any given person.

* Please note I don't mean to sound snotty or rude, just sharing.