stavation mode is this true
Replies
-
My whole point of commented was to NOT get into a scientific debate on starvation mode. It was to point out that netting BELOW 1000 calories a day is unhealthy...hence the fact that the OP was feeling sickly.
That is simply not true. Although many many overweight people (including me!!) can lose weight at an intake higher than 1000 calories a day, there is no science anywhere stating that going under 1000 is unhealthy for everyone. It would depend on the OP's size, exercise, and other scenarios.
There is no minimum number of calories to eat. Someone above posted a starvation study where a zero calorie diet was followed for over a year. You DO need to monitor your energy levels so you don't become hypoglycemic, but there is nothing unhealthy about it.0 -
I'm sure the lower amount of calories slowed your metabolism a good bit. Thing is, scientific studies show that even when your body does go into starvation mode, it still continues to burn fat at the same (and often greater) rates. There was a Minnesota starvation study back in the 1950s (google it)
Even when the people in the study had their metabolism drop 40% or more, they were still burning fat, until they got down around 5% body fat.
Now, the weakness and hunger is another issue. No diet is worth feeling awful over, especially if it causes you to cheat and go over calories.
I would recommend trying to make sure that a LOT of your 1000 calories are high in fiber and protein to keep you full and give you some energy. I'm sure they already are but if you look for ways to replace calories low in fiber and protein with calories high in fiber and protein you will feel more full and have more energy.
Starvation mode is a real phenomenon, but most of us trying to lose weight have enough body fat that our bodies aren't shutting down on us.... its just typical calorie and food cravings that we try to rationalize by saying "my body is in starvation mode"
What it is with you, only you can know. Good luck
AMAZING EXPLANATION! Finally!0 -
My whole point of commented was to NOT get into a scientific debate on starvation mode. It was to point out that netting BELOW 1000 calories a day is unhealthy...hence the fact that the OP was feeling sickly.
That is simply not true. Although many many overweight people (including me!!) can lose weight at an intake higher than 1000 calories a day, there is no science anywhere stating that going under 1000 is unhealthy for everyone. It would depend on the OP's size, exercise, and other scenarios.
There is no minimum number of calories to eat. Someone above posted a starvation study where a zero calorie diet was followed for over a year. You DO need to monitor your energy levels so you don't become hypoglycemic, but there is nothing unhealthy about it.
^^^Well I think the fact the she began to feel ill is a good indicator that maybe she might want to eat more. Once again common sense.0 -
And for everyone who is thinking eating under 1000 is OK - Could you please give the OP some useful advice then? Maybe tell her to lie down until the weakness passes or something?0
-
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2495396/?page=1
382 days, 0 calories per day, 276 pounds lost.
There is not a single validated scientific case of metabolic adaptation exceeding caloric restriction (i.e. your metabolism will never slow down so much that you stop losing weight at a caloric deficit).
^ this...why is this so hard for so many to grasp?
(Oh, and eating fat makes you fat...)
*facepalm*
*headdesk*
*leavesinternets*0 -
I started eating 'exercise' calories after reading all the 'opinions' about starvation mode. Since I started doing that, I have lost NO weight. As of yesterday I have cut back to what my Dr. suggested, 1200. I'm sure I'll do fine since sometimes, I felt like I was stuffing myself to eat even some of the ex. calories back!
Ask me in 2 weeks what happened. I'd be happy to be the starvation mode guinea pig!0 -
My whole point of commented was to NOT get into a scientific debate on starvation mode. It was to point out that netting BELOW 1000 calories a day is unhealthy...hence the fact that the OP was feeling sickly.
That is simply not true. Although many many overweight people (including me!!) can lose weight at an intake higher than 1000 calories a day, there is no science anywhere stating that going under 1000 is unhealthy for everyone. It would depend on the OP's size, exercise, and other scenarios.
There is no minimum number of calories to eat. Someone above posted a starvation study where a zero calorie diet was followed for over a year. You DO need to monitor your energy levels so you don't become hypoglycemic, but there is nothing unhealthy about it.
You are my new hero and best friend! I get kicked all the time because I routinely eat 900-1100 a day. And I feel great. Would I not feel bad if my body was not getting the nourishment it needs?0 -
My whole point of commented was to NOT get into a scientific debate on starvation mode. It was to point out that netting BELOW 1000 calories a day is unhealthy...hence the fact that the OP was feeling sickly.
That is simply not true. Although many many overweight people (including me!!) can lose weight at an intake higher than 1000 calories a day, there is no science anywhere stating that going under 1000 is unhealthy for everyone. It would depend on the OP's size, exercise, and other scenarios.
There is no minimum number of calories to eat. Someone above posted a starvation study where a zero calorie diet was followed for over a year. You DO need to monitor your energy levels so you don't become hypoglycemic, but there is nothing unhealthy about it.
^^^Well I think the fact the she began to feel ill is a good indicator that maybe she might want to eat more. Once again common sense.
But its also possible the quality of her diet wasn't so good so it could be she was malnourished. Sometimes just adding more calories inadvertently reduces other nutrient deficiencies to make someone feel better. Lots of confounding variables here.0 -
^^^Well I think the fact the she began to feel ill is a good indicator that maybe she might want to eat more. Once again common sense.
What you call common sense I call a complete misunderstanding of the body's metabolic processes. If she was feeling ill, chances are her blood sugar was low, and could have eaten a small healthy snack to give her some energy. You can do that and work it into a 1000 calorie diet. A lot of people eating very low calorie diets eat 5 or 6 small meals throughout the day to deal with this problem.
The fact she felt ill does NOT mean she should instantly start eating more every single day.... at least not if she wants to lose weight.0 -
There is no where online or otherwise that would support eating less than 1200 calories outside of doctor supervision. It is what your body would need to keep going if you never got out of bed in a day. Why not eating 1200 and then work off some of it? At least your body has something to keep your muscle content. Sure you'll lose weight but being aggressive will lose muscle. Muscle burns more calories than fat - losing muscle will make you fatter when you up your calories again. Focus more on activity than cutting out nutrients. And eat well!!!!!0
-
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2495396/?page=1
382 days, 0 calories per day, 276 pounds lost.
There is not a single validated scientific case of metabolic adaptation exceeding caloric restriction (i.e. your metabolism will never slow down so much that you stop losing weight at a caloric deficit).
^ this...why is this so hard for so many to grasp?
(Oh, and eating fat makes you fat...)
*facepalm*
*headdesk*
*leavesinternets*
Oh, and I don't believe that a calorie is a calorie. It's relevant, sure, but two diets of the same calories but different composition will not yield the same results. I actually believe that the *type* of food we eat is relevant to our body weight and composition goals, which I suppose is heresy in the MFP world.
But I'm sure people could pick apart my diary and explain how my 3k/day with almost no weight gain (despite that being the goal) can be explained with a simple calories in/out formula. (And you window peekers feel free...my diary is wide open to the general public...because I don't get enough ridicule from people IRL that I encourage it online as well.)0 -
I have written several blogs about this topic. Even a google search will bring them up. Less than 1k a day is very dangerous, especially if you are eating that and exercising on top without eating exercise calories back. Even gastric bypass patients eat more than 1k a day, and they have a regimine of vitamin therapies to counteract any deficiencies from their food.
It is almost impossible to get the nutrients, vitamins, and minerals you need to have your body work efficiently on that low of a food intake.
Please speak with your doctor about the appropriate calorie levels for you, deficiencies, and how to refeed back to a normal calorie intake.
This may be true... but that still doesnt make it healthy! My sister had lap band surgery several years back, and while the weight loss did happen until recently ( she still has a little more she would like to loose) she is loosing her hair, she has lost most of her muscle mass, and she is chronically tired. That does not sound like a way of life to ME!
Here's my thoughts about starvation mode...I dont know if it exists or not, dont really care to be honest! i know that when I started at the pitiful 1200 cals that MFP set for me... I lost for a bit- and COMPLETLEY stopped loosing anything. I was hungry all the time, very ill ( like bad mood), and felt so deprived all the time... I obsessed thinking about food!
Then, I finally starting reading up and making friends with people that had similar goals and had been sucessful...Turns out...all of them were eating a heck of a lot more than me...I upped my cals- I eat between 1400-2000 cals now ( i vary it up on purpose by eating more some days and less some) I am no longer exhausted... I feel better about my self..and all of my cravings have gone away.... and the best part... I am down 18 pounds since starting in March. So I am not sure which is the correct approach, but I sure do prefer myself EATING...my 2 cents!
Most gastric bypass patients are advised to stay around 700-800 in the weight loss periods. Most also won't go over 1000 til maintenance
0 -
I know if I have not eaten enough that day or even the day before based on how I feel. The same is true for if I eat crap -I don't feel well later that day or the next day.
My personal opion, let me stress that -opinion- is that your body was trying to tell you that you did not do a good job of fueling it and was expecting it to work too hard on too little.
Listen to your body, it knows more than we do and I think it is trying to tell you something.0 -
Bump for later. Is is possible some people don't need 1200 calories a day? Can a 56 year old still be healthy eating less calories than a 22 year old? I always hear in the forums that you have to eat at least 1200 calories a day or it isn't healthy. I've been generally eating 900-1000 calories since 10.1.2011. My skin looks healthy. My hair isn't falling out. I'm not dizzy or lightheaded. I don't feel hungry, ever. Am I killing my body?
I'm wondering the same thing...My Dr. says I'm not but from reading all these posts I'm wondering...0 -
There is no where online or otherwise that would support eating less than 1200 calories outside of doctor supervision. It is what your body would need to keep going if you never got out of bed in a day. Why not eating 1200 and then work off some of it? At least your body has something to keep your muscle content. Sure you'll lose weight but being aggressive will lose muscle. Muscle burns more calories than fat - losing muscle will make you fatter when you up your calories again. Focus more on activity than cutting out nutrients. And eat well!!!!!
1. You should not go on any sort of a diet without speaking to your physician.
2. Eating your exercise calories is counter-productive, despite the way MFP calculates it.
3 Your body will not start eating muscle tissue for food until your body fat is less than 5%.
4. A healthy 1000 calorie diet will cause anyone to lose more weight than a similarly healthy 1200 calorie diet.0 -
Bump for later. Is is possible some people don't need 1200 calories a day? Can a 56 year old still be healthy eating less calories than a 22 year old? I always hear in the forums that you have to eat at least 1200 calories a day or it isn't healthy. I've been generally eating 900-1000 calories since 10.1.2011. My skin looks healthy. My hair isn't falling out. I'm not dizzy or lightheaded. I don't feel hungry, ever. Am I killing my body?
I'm wondering the same thing...My Dr. says I'm not but from reading all these posts I'm wondering...
You see, my doctor placed me on a "Medically Supervised" liquid fast diet years ago. Started around the first week in September and stayed on the liquid fast until the end of March. It consisted of 800 calories a day. For seven months. During that time I saw the doc twice a month and had blood drawn twice a month. My body remained healthy the entire time. Never once did my blood levels indicate anything other than health. And now the 900-1000 calories I eat are nutritionally dense. I do not eat crap. And I take supplements. So really I can't think I am doing any harm.0 -
For the most part, I try not to discuss this, because the general audience here has enough trouble with basic nutrition (I realize that saying that makes me sound like a jerk, and I am ok with that :P). I generally say that 90% of diet is explained by calories in - calories out (assuming adequate protein intake) . HOWEVER, eating whole foods vs. processed foods does have a significant caloric advantage in terms of thermic effect of food (probably around 10%). Also, protein has a net caloric value of 3.2 cals/g due to TEF as well. These factors CAN make a very substantial different over time.Oh, and I don't believe that a calorie is a calorie. It's relevant, sure, but two diets of the same calories but different composition will not yield the same results. I actually believe that the *type* of food we eat is relevant to our body weight and composition goals, which I suppose is heresy in the MFP world.
But I'm sure people could pick apart my diary and explain how my 3k/day with almost no weight gain (despite that being the goal) can be explained with a simple calories in/out formula. (And you window peekers feel free...my diary is wide open to the general public...because I don't get enough ridicule from people IRL that I encourage it online as well.)
E.g. Two 3000 cal/day diets:
Diet 1: 1500 cals fat, 1500 cals processed carbs: Net cals with TEF would be around 2950.
Diet 1: 1000 cals protein, 500 cals fat, 1500 cals whole grains/fruit: Net cals with TEF would be around 2600. That is a 350 calorie/day different, or around 35 pounds a year.
I don't recommend worrying about this until at least some semblance of control has been asserted over diet and exercise, but for people who are looking to optimize their diet, this can be significant.0 -
For the most part, I try not to discuss this, because the general audience here has enough trouble with basic nutrition (I realize that saying that makes me sound like a jerk, and I am ok with that :P). I generally say that 90% of diet is explained by calories in - calories out (assuming adequate protein intake) . HOWEVER, eating whole foods vs. processed foods does have a significant caloric advantage in terms of thermic effect of food (probably around 10%). Also, protein has a net caloric value of 3.2 cals/g due to TEF as well. These factors CAN make a very substantial different over time.Oh, and I don't believe that a calorie is a calorie. It's relevant, sure, but two diets of the same calories but different composition will not yield the same results. I actually believe that the *type* of food we eat is relevant to our body weight and composition goals, which I suppose is heresy in the MFP world.
But I'm sure people could pick apart my diary and explain how my 3k/day with almost no weight gain (despite that being the goal) can be explained with a simple calories in/out formula. (And you window peekers feel free...my diary is wide open to the general public...because I don't get enough ridicule from people IRL that I encourage it online as well.)
E.g. Two 3000 cal/day diets:
Diet 1: 1500 cals fat, 1500 cals processed carbs: Net cals with TEF would be around 2950.
Diet 1: 1000 cals protein, 500 cals fat, 1500 cals whole grains/fruit: Net cals with TEF would be around 2600. That is a 350 calorie/day different, or around 35 pounds a year.
I don't recommend worrying about this until at least some semblance of control has been asserted over diet and exercise, but for people who are looking to optimize their diet, this can be significant.
Another reason not to discuss it...because it apparently absolutely kills threads.0 -
Another reason not to discuss it...because it apparently absolutely kills threads.
I think it might just be me... I seem to have that effect :P0 -
Hi I have been losing weight since june 2010 but was never so strict on calories untill I started logging on here.
All last week I was under calories eating less than 1000 a day while still exercising and then yesterday I had a really bad day felt very weak and so hungry so I went over calories. Is the stavation mode true? do you think its better for me to eat more of my exercise calories so I don't get that feeling again I just feel like I am cheating all the time if I eat more than 1000 I was never like this before please advise.
( I think my mind is set if I want to lose weight I need to be hungry all the time)
I would just like to say thankyou to you all for taking the time to answer my question. I have now decided not to go below 1200 calories a day as after reading about hair loss I am starting to worry as I was diagnosied with Alopecia last year which is just starting to grow back (at the time I was on a very low calorie diet and lost 11lb in 2 weeks which I did'nt think was anything to do with it). I'm now not looking for a quick fix this is for the rest of my life I think in the past I always think once I'm *** weight I can eat what I want but that does not work and I aways gain. As I said I have been on a diet since 2010 which I lost over 5 stone in the first year but after an injury I put on over a stone (comfort eating with out thinking) mind set is now changing thanks again x0 -
I'm sure the lower amount of calories slowed your metabolism a good bit. Thing is, scientific studies show that even when your body does go into starvation mode, it still continues to burn fat at the same (and often greater) rates. There was a Minnesota starvation study back in the 1950s (google it)
Even when the people in the study had their metabolism drop 40% or more, they were still burning fat, until they got down around 5% body fat.
Now, the weakness and hunger is another issue. No diet is worth feeling awful over, especially if it causes you to cheat and go over calories.
I would recommend trying to make sure that a LOT of your 1000 calories are high in fiber and protein to keep you full and give you some energy. I'm sure they already are but if you look for ways to replace calories low in fiber and protein with calories high in fiber and protein you will feel more full and have more energy.
Starvation mode is a real phenomenon, but most of us trying to lose weight have enough body fat that our bodies aren't shutting down on us.... its just typical calorie and food cravings that we try to rationalize by saying "my body is in starvation mode"
What it is with you, only you can know. Good luck
One of the best responses I've found on this site to the whole starvation mode question.
I agree.0 -
The plateau usually happens because after someone loses thirty pounds on a certain diet and exercise regime they don't realize that 170 pound YOU needs to eat less than 200 pound YOU because 170 pound YOU's basal metabolic rate is much less, meaning you burn many less calories just sitting in your chair at work every day. Exercise is the same way, when a 200 pound person does an hour of running it burns way more than a 170 pound person burns doing the same thing. You've got to decrease your intake and increase your exercise very slowly as you go.
Do not listen to all the mumbo-jumbo about your brain eating your body for calories, and cheating every four days on your diet, its insane and not supported by science.
:flowerforyou:0 -
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2495396/?page=1
382 days, 0 calories per day, 276 pounds lost.
There is not a single validated scientific case of metabolic adaptation exceeding caloric restriction (i.e. your metabolism will never slow down so much that you stop losing weight at a caloric deficit).
^ this...why is this so hard for so many to grasp?
(Oh, and eating fat makes you fat...)
*facepalm*
*headdesk*
*leavesinternets*
:flowerforyou:0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions