call it what you want "starvation mode" is REAL
Options
Replies
-
We don't need another "Starvation mode" thread. You are going to believe what you believe. Others will believe what they believe.
Let's give it a rest.
Yes I agree. Honestly, despite all the scientific facts and so much knowledge out there, where it can end up confusing the heck out of people - I think we all learn from our own experiences and perhaps the experience of others and as for myself this is basically it. I eat a little under 1200 and I'm a little hungry, I will lose weight. Hunger is NOT a bad thing. I'm also aware that if I go nuts and eat 5 chocolate bars all at once, I will regain the weight plus more. I've been hungry but not what I would describe as starving. Third world countries are starving and really I think, we in the Western World where food and water is abundant, we have no idea what real starvation is like.0 -
I see ribs, but okay then...
um, where? lol0 -
The OP seems to be well educated - great post!
(btw, I just love it when people are educated and it shows in their responses.)
:bigsmile:0 -
I see ribs, but okay then...
Are you kidding me? This girl busts her butt working out and eats a crap ton of food for her beautiful ABS. I weigh more than Love does and I'm pretty sure she could bench press me any day of the week.
x20 -
We don't need another "Starvation mode" thread. You are going to believe what you believe. Others will believe what they believe.
Let's give it a rest.
Yes I agree. Honestly, despite all the scientific facts and so much knowledge out there, where it can end up confusing the heck out of people - I think we all learn from our own experiences and perhaps the experience of others and as for myself this is basically it. I eat a little under 1200 and I'm a little hungry, I will lose weight. Hunger is NOT a bad thing. I'm also aware that if I go nuts and eat 5 chocolate bars all at once, I will regain the weight plus more. I've been hungry but not what I would describe as starving. Third world countries are starving and really I think, we in the Western World where food and water is abundant, we have no idea what real starvation is like.
we're not talking about "real starvation" ...i am attempting to clarify the misunderstanding about what people call "starvation mode" which is really a decline in the metabolic rate in response to caloric restriction.0 -
That seems to be part of the mechanism. Scientists don't fully understand it yet. Actually, very little is fully understood about the human body. It's just too complex. I saw an ad for Advair the other day and in the fine print it said something like "Scientists do not yet understand how Advair reduces inflammation". It's the same with anti-depressants. They still don't know how, for certain, how anti-depressants work.There have been studies that indicate that a restricted calorie diet might actually improve longevity over the long haul. There are people practicing this. It's something to consider.
I have been losing weight consistently at a 3.2 lbs/week clip for a little over two months. I do this by leaving 500 calories "on the table" every day, thus increasing the 2 lb/week deficit MFP has calculated by another pound. It seems to work for me, though I had a 1 week plateau early on when I restricted my calories too much. I think the key is to find the sweet spot which varies from person to person.
It improves longevity by lowering the metabolic rate.
It's the vaguery created by our wonderful, complex and mysterious corporeal bodies that fuels the confusion in the minds of people inundated by arguments and evidence that is completely contradictory.0 -
x3
I see ribs, but okay then...
Are you kidding me? This girl busts her butt working out and eats a crap ton of food for her beautiful ABS. I weigh more than Love does and I'm pretty sure she could bench press me any day of the week.
x20 -
That seems to be part of the mechanism. Scientists don't fully understand it yet. Actually, very little is fully understood about the human body. It's just too complex. I saw an ad for Advair the other day and in the fine print it said something like "Scientists do not yet understand how Advair reduces inflammation". It's the same with anti-depressants. They still don't know how, for certain, how anti-depressants work.There have been studies that indicate that a restricted calorie diet might actually improve longevity over the long haul. There are people practicing this. It's something to consider.
I have been losing weight consistently at a 3.2 lbs/week clip for a little over two months. I do this by leaving 500 calories "on the table" every day, thus increasing the 2 lb/week deficit MFP has calculated by another pound. It seems to work for me, though I had a 1 week plateau early on when I restricted my calories too much. I think the key is to find the sweet spot which varies from person to person.
It improves longevity by lowering the metabolic rate.
It's the vaguery created by our wonderful, complex and mysterious corporeal bodies that fuels the confusion in the minds of people inundated by arguments and evidence that is completely contradictory.
Thank you0 -
Some additional reading if you'd like...here's a quote..yes, it's complex and I wouldn't trade a few years if it meant giving up the enjoyment of food. but maybe that's just me...
"A study on thyroid function published last year further supported the idea that a slower metabolic rate could prolong lifespan. Now, a new study has measured resting metabolic rate directly and come to the same conclusion. Metabolic rate was measured by two different methods at the start of the study. Subjects were followed for 11-15 years, and deaths from natural causes were recorded. For each 100 calorie increase in 24-hour resting metabolic rate, the risk of natural mortality increased by 25-29%. These results strongly support the hypothesis that a slow metabolic rate promotes longevity.7"
http://www.drfuhrman.com/library/metabolism_longevity.aspx
You can read up on it by looking at the citations.
Also more info that highlights the complexity...
"The bad news (or perhaps good news, depending on your fondness for food) is that our already high metabolic stability means caloric restriction will not lead to dramatic life extension, as it does for mice. Demetrius predicts a one- to five-year gain in human life span at most, largely attributable to reductions in rates of cardiovascular disease and diabetes. Mice, with their low metabolic stability, have "lots of room for improvement."
Demetrius cautions that studies on caloric restriction and longevity were done on healthy-weight animals. Being obese is not healthy. "Drastic changes in the eating habits of healthy-weight individuals," he says, "will not make any critical difference in longevity," but that should not be considered carte blanche for feasting: "People should be wary of too many helpings of Häagen-Dazs!"
http://harvardmagazine.com/2004/11/a-new-theory-on-longevit.html0 -
The majority of that is Greek to me..
If you put it in layman's terms... speak to the masses ...
They might actually get something from what that said...
Dumb it down a little.0 -
While you are restricting calories and losing weight - or "dieting" - your BMR rate slows down. That's the rate at which your body burns calories to perform normal functions like breathing and staying warm. Very low calorie diets (around 800 calories a day) can reduce your metabolic rate by as much as 30 percent. Your body perceives itself to be "starving", so it reduces the calories it burns. It was once thought that this reduction in calorie burning would affect your resting metabolic rate indefinitely, but research does not support that idea. A more recent study showed that women who diet frequently do not have significantly lower metabolic rates than women who have not been chronic dieters. You will sometimes hear dieters say "I've ruined my metabolism", but this is not true or possible. It may seem like you are burning fewer calories than you did at one time and that is true. But the reason is because you have lost muscle through past weight loss efforts and you are not as active as you should be, especially with strength training.0
-
While you are restricting calories and losing weight - or "dieting" - your BMR rate slows down. That's the rate at which your body burns calories to perform normal functions like breathing and staying warm. Very low calorie diets (around 800 calories a day) can reduce your metabolic rate by as much as 30 percent. Your body perceives itself to be "starving", so it reduces the calories it burns. It was once thought that this reduction in calorie burning would affect your resting metabolic rate indefinitely, but research does not support that idea. A more recent study showed that women who diet frequently do not have significantly lower metabolic rates than women who have not been chronic dieters. You will sometimes hear dieters say "I've ruined my metabolism", but this is not true or possible. It may seem like you are burning fewer calories than you did at one time and that is true. But the reason is because you have lost muscle through past weight loss efforts and you are not as active as you should be, especially with strength training.
good explanation. it isn't permanent and can be reversed by eating an appropriate amount; however, usually this results in some weight regain. The effect of caloric restriction is minimized when it's less drastic and coupled with increased activity (specifically weight training) in order to achieve a comparable deficit to the more severe caloric restriction.0 -
I see ribs, but okay then...
I see you lack of adequate caloric intake has effected your eyes sight and reading comprehension skills. Or could it be your heavy consumption of sippin' on that hatorade?0 -
copied this from another post i recently made...
seems to fit here...
the myth that low cal diets will slow your metabolism are unfounded...
In one study, researchers found that the when they made people fast for 3 days, their metabolic rate did not change
-Webber J, Macdonald IA, The cardiovascular, metabolic and hormonal changes accompanying acute starvation in men and women. British journal of nutrition 1994; 71:437-447.
In another study by a different group of researchers, people who fasted every other day for a period of 22 days also had no decrease in their resting metabolic rate
-Heilbronn LK, et al. Alternate-day fasting in nonobese subjects: effects on body weight, body composition, and energy metabolism. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2005; 81:69-73
In addition, people who were on very low calorie diets and on a resistance exercise program (i.e. lifting weights) did not see a decrease in resting metabolic rate, and these people were only eating 800 Calories a day for 12 weeks
In another interesting study, women who ate half the amount of food that they normally eat for 3 days saw no change in their metabolism either
-Keim NL, Horn WF. Restrained eating behavior and the metabolic response to dietary energy restriction in women. Obesity research 2004; 12:141-149.
The bottom line is food has virtually nothing to do with your metabolism. In fact, your metabolism is much more closely tied to your bodyweight. If your weight goes up or down, so does your metabolism. The only other thing that can affect your metabolism (in both the short term and longer term) is exercise and weight loss. Even in the complete absence of food for three days, your metabolism remains unchanged.
Enough with the not eating enough will slow your metabolism people...
This is one of the most ridiculous post I've ever read on MFP.0 -
x3
I see ribs, but okay then...
Are you kidding me? This girl busts her butt working out and eats a crap ton of food for her beautiful ABS. I weigh more than Love does and I'm pretty sure she could bench press me any day of the week.
x2
I'll 4x this. I don't think she can bench press me.... yet.0 -
copied this from another post i recently made...
seems to fit here...
the myth that low cal diets will slow your metabolism are unfounded...
In one study, researchers found that the when they made people fast for 3 days, their metabolic rate did not change
-Webber J, Macdonald IA, The cardiovascular, metabolic and hormonal changes accompanying acute starvation in men and women. British journal of nutrition 1994; 71:437-447.
In another study by a different group of researchers, people who fasted every other day for a period of 22 days also had no decrease in their resting metabolic rate
-Heilbronn LK, et al. Alternate-day fasting in nonobese subjects: effects on body weight, body composition, and energy metabolism. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2005; 81:69-73
In addition, people who were on very low calorie diets and on a resistance exercise program (i.e. lifting weights) did not see a decrease in resting metabolic rate, and these people were only eating 800 Calories a day for 12 weeks
In another interesting study, women who ate half the amount of food that they normally eat for 3 days saw no change in their metabolism either
-Keim NL, Horn WF. Restrained eating behavior and the metabolic response to dietary energy restriction in women. Obesity research 2004; 12:141-149.
The bottom line is food has virtually nothing to do with your metabolism. In fact, your metabolism is much more closely tied to your bodyweight. If your weight goes up or down, so does your metabolism. The only other thing that can affect your metabolism (in both the short term and longer term) is exercise and weight loss. Even in the complete absence of food for three days, your metabolism remains unchanged.
Enough with the not eating enough will slow your metabolism people...
This is one of the most ridiculous post I've ever read on MFP.
We read and we choose what we want to believe or don't want to believe so no-ones opinion in here is so-called "ridiculous" and hey guess what else? It is OK to have a different opinion!0 -
Agreed. Clinical and scientific studies take more than 3-22 days. That's not even enough time for a female to complete a full menstrual cycle and rule out any hormonal effects from that spectrum. Real scientific studies last months if not years.copied this from another post i recently made...
seems to fit here...
the myth that low cal diets will slow your metabolism are unfounded...
In one study, researchers found that the when they made people fast for 3 days, their metabolic rate did not change
-Webber J, Macdonald IA, The cardiovascular, metabolic and hormonal changes accompanying acute starvation in men and women. British journal of nutrition 1994; 71:437-447.
In another study by a different group of researchers, people who fasted every other day for a period of 22 days also had no decrease in their resting metabolic rate
-Heilbronn LK, et al. Alternate-day fasting in nonobese subjects: effects on body weight, body composition, and energy metabolism. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2005; 81:69-73
In addition, people who were on very low calorie diets and on a resistance exercise program (i.e. lifting weights) did not see a decrease in resting metabolic rate, and these people were only eating 800 Calories a day for 12 weeks
In another interesting study, women who ate half the amount of food that they normally eat for 3 days saw no change in their metabolism either
-Keim NL, Horn WF. Restrained eating behavior and the metabolic response to dietary energy restriction in women. Obesity research 2004; 12:141-149.
The bottom line is food has virtually nothing to do with your metabolism. In fact, your metabolism is much more closely tied to your bodyweight. If your weight goes up or down, so does your metabolism. The only other thing that can affect your metabolism (in both the short term and longer term) is exercise and weight loss. Even in the complete absence of food for three days, your metabolism remains unchanged.
Enough with the not eating enough will slow your metabolism people...
Are you really citing these studies to argue this point? One study done for 3days, another for 22 days....Really?????.... Really :huh:0 -
I wonder if some of the longevity benefits of restricting calories have come from just not eating as much crap? I'd like to see what the people in the study were eating, and what they were taking out to restrict their calories.0
-
I see ribs, but okay then...
I see you lack of adequate caloric intake has effected your eyes sight and reading comprehension skills. Or could it be your heavy consumption of sippin' on that hatorade?
^^ Brilliant!! Love it! She is perfect. I would hate on her too, BUT she provides me with ab workouts so I only have love
0 -
copied this from another post i recently made...
seems to fit here...
the myth that low cal diets will slow your metabolism are unfounded...
In one study, researchers found that the when they made people fast for 3 days, their metabolic rate did not change
-Webber J, Macdonald IA, The cardiovascular, metabolic and hormonal changes accompanying acute starvation in men and women. British journal of nutrition 1994; 71:437-447.
In another study by a different group of researchers, people who fasted every other day for a period of 22 days also had no decrease in their resting metabolic rate
-Heilbronn LK, et al. Alternate-day fasting in nonobese subjects: effects on body weight, body composition, and energy metabolism. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2005; 81:69-73
In addition, people who were on very low calorie diets and on a resistance exercise program (i.e. lifting weights) did not see a decrease in resting metabolic rate, and these people were only eating 800 Calories a day for 12 weeks
In another interesting study, women who ate half the amount of food that they normally eat for 3 days saw no change in their metabolism either
-Keim NL, Horn WF. Restrained eating behavior and the metabolic response to dietary energy restriction in women. Obesity research 2004; 12:141-149.
The bottom line is food has virtually nothing to do with your metabolism. In fact, your metabolism is much more closely tied to your bodyweight. If your weight goes up or down, so does your metabolism. The only other thing that can affect your metabolism (in both the short term and longer term) is exercise and weight loss. Even in the complete absence of food for three days, your metabolism remains unchanged.
Enough with the not eating enough will slow your metabolism people...
This is one of the most ridiculous post I've ever read on MFP.
We read and we choose what we want to believe or don't want to believe so no-ones opinion in here is so-called "ridiculous" and hey guess what else? It is OK to have a different opinion!
Are you kidding me? Actually read or reread his post and attempt to comprehend it due to the lack of logic in his 'opinion'.
You're saying no-ones opinion is so-called "ridiculous" Ok then. What if I posted, "In my opinion, the best and quickest way to lose weight is to use Meth. Look at me, I'm shredded, I used meth and I lost 20 pounds in a month without exercise". Wouldn't you agree that's a ridiculous opinion?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 997 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions