Starvation mode?
Options
Replies
-
Be right back... Must go hibernate all season long.
Oh wait, that's right I am a human, not a bear.
Back to discussing metabolic function of HUMANS now....0 -
There's a big difference between "starvation" and "starvation mode," to respond to some of the concerns here. Of course starvation is real, and if you feel horrible and are having serious physical problems like weakness or hair falling out, then that's a signal something is really wrong. Starvation mode, on the other hand, is that whole, "You have to eat six small meals spaced out every two hours or else your metabolism shuts down and you'll never lose any weight" sort of thing. While it's popular and often thrown around, I see no evidence that it's a real phenomenon.
The last few times I tried losing weight, that's exactly the advice I followed. And I felt AWFUL. I was stressed and moody all the time, and barely lost any weight. This time around, I decided to just do what felt right. I usually don't eat until early afternoon, and don't eat a whole lot until about 8PM when I have the majority of my calories. If I feel hungry earlier, I eat earlier. If I don't, then I don't. I feel fantastic, lots of energy, steady good mood, and on top of that, the weight is flying off (and has been consistently for three months now). If my metabolism were going to start working against me, I think it would have happened by now.
As far as I can tell, everybody's different. Everybody has a different method that will work for them, different preferences and circumstances, different body issues and pressures. If following a particular plan or piece of advice makes you feel bad, don't do it. If it works and makes you feel better, then keep doing it, regardless of what conventional wisdom has to say about it.0 -
lol i didnt read earlier posts. Fair point x0
-
I keep reading these posts about starvation mode......I haven't commented, but I will now. This is only my opinion based on nothing other than my personal experiences...and I'm no doctor or anything so....
I think "starvation" is an incorrect description. What I believe is when you cut way down on calories your body just gets more efficient on how it uses what you eat. Once it gets into that efficient mode if you do increase for a few days it is still being very efficient and will store up what it considers "extra" which may actually be what was only "sufficient" before. To actually be in some kind of "starvation" mode it would take days of very low food intake, or being anorexic or some kind of other issue in my opinion.
I think it's more about paying attention to eathing healthy...getting the correct mix of vitamins, nutrients, protein, etc than how much food or how may calories you eat. I occasionaly drop below 1000 calories, but only for a day or two at the most. I continue to lose weight when I eat my 1400 just the same. Even when I do drop below I am eating healthy food and I have not experienced any problems.0 -
Be right back... Must go hibernate all season long.
Oh wait, that's right I am a human, not a bear.
Back to discussing metabolic function of HUMANS now....
This made me laugh :laugh:0 -
Be right back... Must go hibernate all season long.
Oh wait, that's right I am a human, not a bear.
Back to discussing metabolic function of HUMANS now....
Or you can understand the point being made there; no humans (outside of rare, isolated cases) do not have the ability to induce a reduced metabolic state as a whole.
However; if you have excess fat stores, guess what goes first.
I guess next time I'll clarify the points that should fall under implied understanding.0 -
It's not necessarily "starvation mode" but it does slow your metabolism over time. I've heard it like this: Your metabolism is like a fire. And in order to keep the fire burning optimally, you need to feed it by putting logs on the fire. So, to translate that to food, you should eat regularly spaced small meals throughout the day to keep your metabolism running at optimal levels. Skipping meals makes the fire burn slowly, so you're not burning as many calories.0
-
It's not necessarily "starvation mode" but it does slow your metabolism over time. I've heard it like this: Your metabolism is like a fire. And in order to keep the fire burning optimally, you need to feed it by putting logs on the fire. So, to translate that to food, you should eat regularly spaced small meals throughout the day to keep your metabolism running at optimal levels. Skipping meals makes the fire burn slowly, so you're not burning as many calories.
While I am one that believes that you will suffer a reduced metabolism if you are on a VLCD for a length of time - it DOES NOT happen if you skip breakfast or even if you eat low calories for a few days. There is no evidence to suggest this.0 -
It's not necessarily "starvation mode" but it does slow your metabolism over time. I've heard it like this: Your metabolism is like a fire. And in order to keep the fire burning optimally, you need to feed it by putting logs on the fire. So, to translate that to food, you should eat regularly spaced small meals throughout the day to keep your metabolism running at optimal levels. Skipping meals makes the fire burn slowly, so you're not burning as many calories.
Your body does not magically require half as much energy to keep the involuntary action of your heart working and your relatively static volume of blood pumping.
Your body does not magically require half as much energy to keep cellular ATP production going.
Your body does not magically require half as much energy to keep the neurons in your brain firing.
Your body does not magically require half as much energy to keep producing new skill cells to replace dead ones or to keep your hair and fingernails going.
All these things are true. Your metabolism may slow; slightly.
However, to keep all those functions going your body will take anything it can to fuel them. Excess fat stores go first, then muscle, then your everything else. Then all the *kitten* I mentioned above stops happening and you die.
The whole thing of regularly spaced small meals will not play roulette with your metabolism, it's advice for fat people with no self control to keep themselves from being 'hungry" and going and buying a bag full of sliders from White Castle.
Your body has set input/output requirements and you cannot -substantially- change that by what you put in you and how often. If you be The White Whale o Legend and you start eating 500 calories, you will lose fat fast. You may not feel the best, you will probably be grouchy, but your body will keep doing what it is doing and oh baby you have buckets of effing oil to keep that fire burning.0 -
It's not necessarily "starvation mode" but it does slow your metabolism over time. I've heard it like this: Your metabolism is like a fire. And in order to keep the fire burning optimally, you need to feed it by putting logs on the fire. So, to translate that to food, you should eat regularly spaced small meals throughout the day to keep your metabolism running at optimal levels. Skipping meals makes the fire burn slowly, so you're not burning as many calories.
Do you have a source for this? LeoQuin posted a thread from last year with a few good sources that indicate that a person's metabolism doesn't change for a few day after they stop eating. And when it does change, it changes negligibly.0 -
It's not necessarily "starvation mode" but it does slow your metabolism over time. I've heard it like this: Your metabolism is like a fire. And in order to keep the fire burning optimally, you need to feed it by putting logs on the fire. So, to translate that to food, you should eat regularly spaced small meals throughout the day to keep your metabolism running at optimal levels. Skipping meals makes the fire burn slowly, so you're not burning as many calories.
Do you have a source for this? LeoQuin posted a thread from last year with a few good sources that indicate that a person's metabolism doesn't change for a few day after they stop eating. And when it does change, it changes negligibly.
I have a lot of excess body fat.
I'm enough of a prick to use myself to prove the folks who don't understand basic biology/physiology wrong here.
Brb going to eat 500 calories a day.0 -
It's not necessarily "starvation mode" but it does slow your metabolism over time. I've heard it like this: Your metabolism is like a fire. And in order to keep the fire burning optimally, you need to feed it by putting logs on the fire. So, to translate that to food, you should eat regularly spaced small meals throughout the day to keep your metabolism running at optimal levels. Skipping meals makes the fire burn slowly, so you're not burning as many calories.
Do you have a source for this? LeoQuin posted a thread from last year with a few good sources that indicate that a person's metabolism doesn't change for a few day after they stop eating. And when it does change, it changes negligibly.
I have a lot of excess body fat.
I'm enough of a prick to use myself to prove the folks who don't understand basic biology/physiology wrong here.
Brb going to eat 500 calories a day.
Although I appreciate the offer, a sample size of 1 is probably not going to provide enough power to reach statistical significance. Scientist here...I'm not too terribly impressed with case studies.0 -
It's not necessarily "starvation mode" but it does slow your metabolism over time. I've heard it like this: Your metabolism is like a fire. And in order to keep the fire burning optimally, you need to feed it by putting logs on the fire. So, to translate that to food, you should eat regularly spaced small meals throughout the day to keep your metabolism running at optimal levels. Skipping meals makes the fire burn slowly, so you're not burning as many calories.
This is so wrong, please understand that there is no evidence to indicate eating 6 small meals makes your metabolism faster. Your metabolism and food are really not that closely related. Your weight is what influences your metabolism. The heavier you are, the faster your metabolism, as you lose weight your metabolism slows down. It has nothing to do with eating regularly - this is a myth.0 -
It's not necessarily "starvation mode" but it does slow your metabolism over time. I've heard it like this: Your metabolism is like a fire. And in order to keep the fire burning optimally, you need to feed it by putting logs on the fire. So, to translate that to food, you should eat regularly spaced small meals throughout the day to keep your metabolism running at optimal levels. Skipping meals makes the fire burn slowly, so you're not burning as many calories.
Do you have a source for this? LeoQuin posted a thread from last year with a few good sources that indicate that a person's metabolism doesn't change for a few day after they stop eating. And when it does change, it changes negligibly.
I have a lot of excess body fat.
I'm enough of a prick to use myself to prove the folks who don't understand basic biology/physiology wrong here.
Brb going to eat 500 calories a day.
Although I appreciate the offer, a sample size of 1 is probably not going to provide enough power to reach statistical significance. Scientist here...I'm not too terribly impressed with case studies.
Not trying to 'bust your *kitten* here' but you gave your own experience, a sample of one, as an example in the opening thread. Also, as a scientist, you know that in order to even make those assertions on a sample of one you would need to measure your base readings - for example, metabolism and BF%.
I can give my own experience where I believe that my metabolism was shot due to being on a VLCD due to an illness - now there was absolutely no control there either - so I get where you are coming from. Until there are studies that categorically show one way or the other, there will always be this debate, a lot of which comes from peoples beliefs due to their own experiences or anecdotally from others.
The way I look at it really - is why risk it? That being said, I do not have a huge amount of weight to lose and I understand people have different circumstances and the cost/benefits will be different for everyone.0 -
Did you check your metabolism and BF% before and after?
Nope...wasn't really planning on losing weight at all.0 -
Agree. Starvation mode is a myth per every real study done on the subject. It takes months for substantial metabolic down regulation, and even then it only accounts for a couple hundred calories per day in a worst case scenario. People here confuse undercounting calories, over counting calories burned in exercise, not tracking "cheat days" and water retention for "starvation mode".0
-
It's not necessarily "starvation mode" but it does slow your metabolism over time. I've heard it like this: Your metabolism is like a fire. And in order to keep the fire burning optimally, you need to feed it by putting logs on the fire. So, to translate that to food, you should eat regularly spaced small meals throughout the day to keep your metabolism running at optimal levels. Skipping meals makes the fire burn slowly, so you're not burning as many calories.
Do you have a source for this? LeoQuin posted a thread from last year with a few good sources that indicate that a person's metabolism doesn't change for a few day after they stop eating. And when it does change, it changes negligibly.
I have a lot of excess body fat.
I'm enough of a prick to use myself to prove the folks who don't understand basic biology/physiology wrong here.
Brb going to eat 500 calories a day.
Although I appreciate the offer, a sample size of 1 is probably not going to provide enough power to reach statistical significance. Scientist here...I'm not too terribly impressed with case studies.
Not trying to 'bust your *kitten* here' but you gave your own experience, a sample of one, as an example in the opening thread. Also, as a scientist, you know that in order to even make those assertions on a sample of one you would need to measure your base readings - for example, metabolism and BF%.
I can give my own experience where I believe that my metabolism was shot due to being on a VLCD due to an illness - now there was absolutely no control there either - so I get where you are coming from. Until there are studies that categorically show one way or the other, there will always be this debate, a lot of which comes from peoples beliefs due to their own experiences or anecdotally from others.
The way I look at it really - is why risk it? That being said, I do not have a huge amount of weight to lose and I understand people have different circumstances and the cost/benefits will be different for everyone.
Sorry...wish I had done some research before posting. I did provide a scientific source about when "starvation mode" (AKA loss of lean muscle mass) actually DOES occur a few posts down the front page. (At a net caloric intake of -1200.)0 -
It's not necessarily "starvation mode" but it does slow your metabolism over time. I've heard it like this: Your metabolism is like a fire. And in order to keep the fire burning optimally, you need to feed it by putting logs on the fire. So, to translate that to food, you should eat regularly spaced small meals throughout the day to keep your metabolism running at optimal levels. Skipping meals makes the fire burn slowly, so you're not burning as many calories.
Do you have a source for this? LeoQuin posted a thread from last year with a few good sources that indicate that a person's metabolism doesn't change for a few day after they stop eating. And when it does change, it changes negligibly.
I have a lot of excess body fat.
I'm enough of a prick to use myself to prove the folks who don't understand basic biology/physiology wrong here.
Brb going to eat 500 calories a day.
Although I appreciate the offer, a sample size of 1 is probably not going to provide enough power to reach statistical significance. Scientist here...I'm not too terribly impressed with case studies.
Not trying to 'bust your *kitten* here' but you gave your own experience, a sample of one, as an example in the opening thread. Also, as a scientist, you know that in order to even make those assertions on a sample of one you would need to measure your base readings - for example, metabolism and BF%.
I can give my own experience where I believe that my metabolism was shot due to being on a VLCD due to an illness - now there was absolutely no control there either - so I get where you are coming from. Until there are studies that categorically show one way or the other, there will always be this debate, a lot of which comes from peoples beliefs due to their own experiences or anecdotally from others.
The way I look at it really - is why risk it? That being said, I do not have a huge amount of weight to lose and I understand people have different circumstances and the cost/benefits will be different for everyone.
Sorry...wish I had done some research before posting. I did provide a scientific source about when "starvation mode" (AKA loss of lean muscle mass) actually DOES occur a few posts down the front page. (At a net caloric intake of -1200.)
I was more referring to the metabolism aspect (which I know is not true starvation mode - but its often used in that context).0 -
U would definitely have to have basically no body fat at all and hardly eat anything to enter a real "starvation mode". It drives me crazy when people correct my diet saying that I am putting myself in "starvation mode". Umm, no.. I'm fat! LOL
Heather0 -
It's not necessarily "starvation mode" but it does slow your metabolism over time. I've heard it like this: Your metabolism is like a fire. And in order to keep the fire burning optimally, you need to feed it by putting logs on the fire. So, to translate that to food, you should eat regularly spaced small meals throughout the day to keep your metabolism running at optimal levels. Skipping meals makes the fire burn slowly, so you're not burning as many calories.
Do you have a source for this? LeoQuin posted a thread from last year with a few good sources that indicate that a person's metabolism doesn't change for a few day after they stop eating. And when it does change, it changes negligibly.
I have a lot of excess body fat.
I'm enough of a prick to use myself to prove the folks who don't understand basic biology/physiology wrong here.
Brb going to eat 500 calories a day.
Although I appreciate the offer, a sample size of 1 is probably not going to provide enough power to reach statistical significance. Scientist here...I'm not too terribly impressed with case studies.
Not trying to 'bust your *kitten* here' but you gave your own experience, a sample of one, as an example in the opening thread. Also, as a scientist, you know that in order to even make those assertions on a sample of one you would need to measure your base readings - for example, metabolism and BF%.
I can give my own experience where I believe that my metabolism was shot due to being on a VLCD due to an illness - now there was absolutely no control there either - so I get where you are coming from. Until there are studies that categorically show one way or the other, there will always be this debate, a lot of which comes from peoples beliefs due to their own experiences or anecdotally from others.
The way I look at it really - is why risk it? That being said, I do not have a huge amount of weight to lose and I understand people have different circumstances and the cost/benefits will be different for everyone.
Sorry...wish I had done some research before posting. I did provide a scientific source about when "starvation mode" (AKA loss of lean muscle mass) actually DOES occur a few posts down the front page. (At a net caloric intake of -1200.)
I was more referring to the metabolism aspect (which I know is not true starvation mode - but its often used in that context).
Ahhh! Too many definitions for "starvation mode."0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.8K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 396 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
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 970 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions