Metabolism problems! Please help

psuLemon

Be sure to list your exercise as well. It will raise your daily calorie intake on your food goal page. You need to eat your exercise calories as well as your normal daily goal.

I also have problems with hypoglycemia. I will suddenly get weak and shaky and feel like I am going to pass out. This is usually due to low blood sugar. Often happens a while after eating to many carbs. The best way I have found to get rid of that feeling quickly is a tablespoon of peanut butter or a glass of orange juice. Peanut butter seems to work faster though. You should still see your doctor as this can be a sign of diabetes.

Oh, thanks for the tip, I usually have something like lucozade when I am dizzy. Will try peanut butter now! I do have diabetes running in the family, will get checked !

If you follow my formula for calories, you dont need to track exercise calories as its inclided in the tdee calculation.

ifyanna

Rubybelle- Thanks for the suggestions!

ably65- My mum suggested the vitamin deficiencies as well. I am taking supplements for the past month now. I will still get myself checked for any deficiencies as I was deficient in Niacin and Iron when pregnant. (was given supplements and nutritional advice for that).

lakrauss- Thanks for the advice. I have been eating small frequent meals today and definitely feel much better.

psulemon- Alright, will do that!

tmauck4472

I have read many articals on "STARVATION MODE" imo it's a made up phrase to scare you into eating more or to replace the word stalling or plateau. The other things I've read says your body will NOT go into starvation mode until your body fat gets below 5%. If it existed I would be in starvation mode and I'm losing about 3 to 4 lbs a week, and the anorexia people would not get so skinny from starving themselves. I'm sure your not there so don't worry about starvation mode, people just like to scare you into eating more. But you def. need to figure something out to kick start your metab. You may just need to eat more often. If your not hungry then I know it's hard but you need something to kick start you. Every person is different, what works for them may not work for you. But I know you have to give it at least two weeks before you make each change.

tmauck4472

Your not eating enough. Your body is in starvation mode. This article is from one of the members here. Read it it's awesome.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/3047-700-calories-a-day-and-not-losing

Use the food and exercise diary's and force yourself to you all your calories including the extras you gain from exercising.

How to do come up with this conclusion?

It is true about your body going into starvation mode. Your body will start to decrease and "eat away" at its own muscle mass and make your body brittle, weak, dehydrated, malnourished, etc. Look at people who have anorexia...very concerned for people who do not want to believe your body can be put into starvation mode.

From all I've read and trust me I've read up on this subject due to people trying to scare me into eating more and from everything I've read you can not and will not start using your muscle for energy until you've used up your body fat or it gets below 5%. If your going to spout this stuff at least get the facts straight instead of scaring people half to death.

skinnyeascolady

I agree with several of the other posters about getting your thyroid checked especially if you just had a child. This is for many when it shows up. A good site to go to, to see if it speaks to you is Stop the Thyroid Madness you can google it to find it. It has a questionaire you get check out. Make sure they check your T4 and T3 levels as well. hope all goes well for you.

Also some people with sluggish moteblizm do well on a low carb diet ( you spoke of pasta) I look at pasta I gain weight . Just a thought though I would ask your doctor first. south Beach is usually doctor friendly.

Sorry for any miss spelling

suziecue66

If OP is possibly hypothyroid 1800 calories will not encourage weight loss. I would try about 1500.

tmauck4472

The Starvation Myth
The idea that "not eating enough" causes the body to stop losing weight because it goes into "starvation mode" is a popular myth among dieters.
Article By: The Weight Watchers Research Department
Restricting calories during weight loss lowers metabolism1 because the body becomes more efficient, requiring fewer calories to perform the necessary daily functions for survival. Consequently, this can slow (but not stop) the anticipated rate of weight loss.

For example, if an individual needs 2,000 calories per day to maintain weight, reducing intake to 1,500 calories, assuming exercise stays the same, should provide a 1 pound per week weight loss (Note: 1 pound of weight is equivalent to about 3,500 calories). Furthermore, reducing to 1,000 calories should result in a weight loss of 2 pounds per week and going down to 500 calories a day should result in a weight loss of 3 pounds per week. However, if an individual actually reduces their intake to 500 calories, the weight loss would not likely be a steady 3 pounds per week because of the reduced metabolic rate. It would likely be around 2¼ to 2½ pounds. This "lower than expected" rate of weight loss is a lot different than "no" weight loss as the "starvation mode" notion proposes.
It is unclear as to whether the relationship between reduced caloric intake and a lower metabolism follows a straight path or becomes more pronounced the greater the caloric reduction. Some studies have found no significant reduction in metabolism until the caloric restriction is quite large (e.g. 800 calories or less per day).2 Others suggest a linear relationship with small reductions in metabolism accompanying small reductions in caloric restriction, with the gap increasing as the caloric deficit is enlarged.

While there is no biologic evidence to support the "starvation mode" myth, there may be behavioral reasons why weight loss stops when calories are severely reduced. Over-restriction of calorie intake, known as high dietary restraint is linked to periods of overeating, hindering successful weight loss.3 (For more information on dietary restraint, read the Science Center article, The Skill of Flexible Restraint).

Metabolism after Weight Loss
The good news is that after the weight-loss goal is achieved and weight has stabilized, it does not appear that the dip in metabolism is permanent. Several rigorous studies done at the University of Alabama in Birmingham showed that metabolism goes back to expected levels with sustained weight loss,4 discounting the theory that a lowered metabolism helps to explain the common phenomenon of weight regain following weight loss.

tmauck4472

Are You In The Starvation Mode or Starving For Truth?
Written by j.novick
Saturday, 03 January 2009 19:23
Recently we discussed the myth that dieting can lead to an eating disorders and saw this common dieting myth was in accurate. Another common dieting myth held by people is that they may not be losing weight because they are in the "starvation mode" from eating to few calories. And, in response to the intake of this low calorie level, their body has gone into "starvation mode" and slowed down their metabolism and is holding on to the weight. The usual recommendation to get out of starvation mode and allow the body to lose more weight, is to consume more calories. Eat more calories, to lose more weight.

Really?


Well, for anyone struggling to lose weight, this may sound sensible, but as you will see, it, like most other dieting myths, it is inaccurate. A few things to consider before we get to the "starvation mode."

First, the human body, as is our world, is governed by the laws of physics. Body weight is a product of energy balance. We can not violate the laws of physics and thermodynamics. The energy we consume must go somewhere and to maintain a certain level of weight, and equivalent amount of energy must be consumed and an equilibrium must be achieved.

Second, in regard to metabolism, about >70% of our base metabolism is driven by our brain and other vital organs and is not really effected by food consumption as I discussed in the metabolism blog. We have little impact on this basal metabolic rate.



Third, most attempts to accurately track food consumption under report (intentionally and/or not intentionally) by about 30 and attempts to tract exercise and activities levels over report by up to 50%. Even professionals can be as much as 30% off or more. This is usually part of the problem tat people are not accurately determining their caloric intake and output.

Now, in regard to the "starvation" mode, someone who has extra body weight and body fat is not in any "starvation mode" where they need to 'kick start" their metabolism by eating more calories. You can not "eat more" calories to force your body to "lose weight".

In regard to metabolism, if you are overweight/overfat, you can not cause your metabolism to decrease below a level needed to lose weight while you have extra weight/fat on you, and you can not "lose more weight by eating more calories/food." This is a misunderstanding of the principles of metabolism that does not apply to overweight people trying to lose weight.

Let's say we look at someone who says they are only eating only 800 calories and not losing weight. A well meaning and good intentioned friend (or professional) has told them they are in starvation mode and in order to lose weight and/or kick-start their metabolism, they need to eat more. But, what if instead of eating more, what do you think would happen if instead they just stopped eating altogether? Would they go further into starvation mode and continue to stay at the same weight or maybe even "gain" weight?

Clearly, they would lose more weight if they stopped eating altogether.


We all know (especially those who are familiar with fasting) that if you were to stop eating completely and just live on pure water, you would start to lose weight almost instantly and would continue to do so.

But according to this theory of the "starvation mode," if you were really in it and you fasted, by its own rational you would lose less weight if any at all, not more. We know this is not accurate.

So, where did this myth come from?

There is a true phenomenon known as the starvation response and it is well documented in the Minnesota Starvation experiments and the Hunger Fasts that have been studied. However, it only happens in humans when they lose enough body fat that they fall below the level of essential fat. In a man, this would be below around 5% fat and in women just above that.

Most humans will look like holocaust survivors at that time. Here is a picture of some of the subjects from the famous Minnesota Starvation experiments from the 1940s. Even at this point, after months of a low calorie diet with heavy exercise, they were not yet in the so-called "starvation mode" where they experienced significant metabolic changes. If you have more weight/fat on you then them, then neither are you





In addition, when this point is truly reached, the body does make several metabolic shifts to preserve itself and if it is not feed more calories, can cease to exist. It is a matter of life and death. Hence the name.

This is not the same thing that happens when someone who is overweight and has a high percentage of body fat, is not losing weight. Usually it is due to an inaccurate assesment of their energy balance.

Now, it is possible that a medical condition, like hypothyroid could contribute to a slowed metabolism. However, if someone was to have a thyroid problem, it is easy to diagnose and can be easily treated. But, then we are right back to my points above and dealing with an energy balance issue.

So, if you are overweight and/or overfat and not losing weight, the most important thing to do is re-evaluate your energy balance. And the best way to do this is to focus on foods that are low in calorie density (and high in nutrient density) and mantain a healthy level of activity

psuLemon

If OP is possibly hypothyroid 1800 calories will not encourage weight loss. I would try about 1500.

Well that would be an assumption. In reality, she should be eating 2200 calories based on her lifestyle. So 1800 might be a sweet spot or it might too much. I think there is a greater chance of her not losing weight due to under eating, rather than a chemical imbalance, or at least this is what I have seen most of the time.


Also take into consideration, that people want to excuse for why they aren't losing weight.. a slow metabolism can be one such excuse, rather than evaluating what they are doing and how much they should be eating. She is definitely not eating enough, even to feed her metabolism.