This whole "Starvation Mode" Kick

RuthieCass

Although I largely agree with the article, the problem with this blogger's argument is that it is mostly a strawman argument (something s/he somewhat acknowledges in the end). "Starvation mode" is a bit of a misnomer, but I don't think that anyone arguing about this literally believes that a person on a 500 calorie diet will not lose weight (and not eventually starve). They are arguing about the extent of the metabolic slowdown on such a diet. Obviously, a person on 500-1000 calories will lose weight quickly, but s/he will have a very hard time getting the nutrients and strength training necessary to preserve muscle mass. Someone on a 1200+ diet will likely have a much easier time preserving LBM and thus be able to avoid some of the metabolic slowdown.

There is also something to be said for the energy loss on a VLCD. When I was at 1200 calories, I started feeling more easily tired especially during workouts (than I do at 1450). If I have more energy for a kick-a** workout (in comparison to a half-a**ed workout on a lower calorie diet) and to move about more during non-workout times, then that will make up for at least some of the 250 calorie difference. I imagine that this comes into play when people talk about "eating more to lose more."

crisanderson27

Lol, and I love both of you .

By the way, this was the Sara I was talking about last night.

I hope you were saying nice things

Yes Miss!

yarwell

Sarauk- Wow, 500+ calories of fats. I'm a fan of getting in your healthy fats but I've never seen that much recommended.

Bog standard for low carbers. Less than 100 calories from carbs, body can't use more than 600 from proteins, rest has to be fats.

Di3012

So you eat 1000 calories a day and lose weight like crazy. Is that sustainable? Can you eat like that the rest of your life? Obviously not. As soon as you try to maintain that loss you'll gain weight. You haven't learned how to eat properly or make good nutritional choices. Put simply, its not real life and doesn't work for the long run.

Not sure I understand your posting here.

The OP would not remain on 1000 calories per day during maintenance, if she did, she would continue to lose and that is not what maintenance is about.

When a person suddenly goes onto the maintenance part they have to up their calories until they find the level that maintains their goal weight, which means their maintenance may be something along the lines of 1600-1800 calories per day and it is THIS figure that they would have to continue with for life, not 1000 calories. The 1000 calories mark, for the OP would only be until they reached their goal, this goes with those on 1200 calories per day, those on 1500 calories per day, in fact, ANY amount of calories for different people that enables them to lose weight on it.

Once they reach their goal, they must up their daily calorie allowance to their maintenance figure.

Sarauk2sf

Sarauk- Wow, 500+ calories of fats. I'm a fan of getting in your healthy fats but I've never seen that much recommended.

Bog standard for low carbers. Less than 100 calories from carbs, body can't use more than 600 from proteins, rest has to be fats.

Thanks.

But just wanted to be be clear - I am not a low carber by any stretch. I have enough calories to meet the protein and fat minimums to also have quite a lot of carbs (150 - 250g depending on how much fat and protein I get that day).

yarwell

This leaves no room for carbs

Well you don't need them so that is not a problem. There is no molecule in the group "carbohydrates" that we need to eat to survive.

100g of protein is enough for most people, that's 400 cals. 30g of fat is another 270 so 670 total. Take appropriate supplements and job done.

As for exercise, the number of scientific papers pre 1970 that refer to exercise can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Even recent papers say that exercise makes a trivial contribution to fat loss. Frankly, WGAS.

Darlingir

Not enough calories a day sets ME up for failure...There is only so long I can "hang on" with a low, low cal diet. I feel like I'm white knuckling it and then i snap. I need calories I can live with for the long haul.

Sarauk2sf

This leaves no room for carbs

Well you don't need them so that is not a problem. There is no molecule in the group "carbohydrates" that we need to eat to survive.

100g of protein is enough for most people, that's 400 cals. 30g of fat is another 270 so 670 total. Take appropriate supplements and job done.

As for exercise, the number of scientific papers pre 1970 that refer to exercise can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Even recent papers say that exercise makes a trivial contribution to fat loss. Frankly, WGAS.

Not needing carbs - highly debatable - and there are recommendations for the minimum fibre intake (see below). However, what I will say - I need carbs to have a reaonable quality of life. I did then math based on recommendations out there for my goals - your math disagrees with them. As I already noted, the recommended amount of protein for sedentary folks is less. Also, from my reading, 30g of fat is very low. So, I am not sure how the math works for a non-sedentary person who actually wants a relatively normal diet that at least includes some carbs and more importantly, some dietary fibre,

Source: quick search -
The Institute of Medicine's fiber RDI for adult females between ages 18 and 50 is 25 g. Females older than 50 to 70 need 21 g of fiber. For males, ages 14 to 50, IOM suggests 38 g. Males from ages 9 to 13 need 31 g; after age 50, males should consume 30 g.

ETA: not sure why you are bringing exercise into the discussion. Exercise for weight loss was not mentioned, at least not by me.

danysgoal

Hi
I don't know how old you are but I'm in my 50's. When I was in my 20''s very strict or weird diets were the thing. Pretty much the same as today it seems.I believed them when they said what they are saying to your sister and boy did I loose weight fast back then But I always gained it back no matter what promise I made that this time I would never go back to being fat. In my 30's, still battling my weight, you know yoyo style. Not that easy to be on a limited diet with kids. Tired all the time, not a lot of energy and feeling irritable easily. I used to have very thick hair and over the years, I lost a lot of hair and it is now very thin. But it happened so slowly that I didn't realize it. Now when I see women my age with a head full of hair, I can't believe that I did this to myself.
The worst though is that now, at 53, even with 1200 calories and good work outs with running and spinning 3-4 times a week, I am lucky if I loose half a pound a week!!!!! I follow my journal, I exercise and now I weigh myself every 2-4 weeks because it just kicks me in the gut when I know I've done good and the scale doesn't budge. And many of my friends, co-workers who were following the same fad diets, we were actually grouping together to stick with it ,are faced with the same issue.
So don't believe their crap. That's how they make their money , by selling the dream that it works and that once you loose the weight, you will stay at the same weight..
If I could go back, I'd just eat sensibly and exercise strenuously, which I didn't have the energy to do because of lack of calories.
Those friends of mine that didn't know the meaning of diet but whose second home was the gym are today still slim and not fighting the urge to binge whenever they are stressed. They deal with stress healthily, by working out their stress and not eating it.

thistimeismytime

This leaves no room for carbs

Well you don't need them so that is not a problem. There is no molecule in the group "carbohydrates" that we need to eat to survive.

100g of protein is enough for most people, that's 400 cals. 30g of fat is another 270 so 670 total. Take appropriate supplements and job done.

As for exercise, the number of scientific papers pre 1970 that refer to exercise can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Even recent papers say that exercise makes a trivial contribution to fat loss. Frankly, WGAS.

Are you seriously saying that it's healthy to eat 670 calories, zero carbs, and "appropriate supplements"?? And as for exercise, I would assume no one would bother--with that amount of calories, most people would be doing good to drag their miserable butts from the bed to the couch every day. Why would anyone want to live like that?!

danysgoal

This leaves no room for carbs

Well you don't need them so that is not a problem. There is no molecule in the group "carbohydrates" that we need to eat to survive.

100g of protein is enough for most people, that's 400 cals. 30g of fat is another 270 so 670 total. Take appropriate supplements and job done.

As for exercise, the number of scientific papers pre 1970 that refer to exercise can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Even recent papers say that exercise makes a trivial contribution to fat loss. Frankly, WGAS.

Sorry to contradict you but your BRAIN and your HEART' S ONLY FUEL is carbs and carbs produced by fat and protein only diets only create a lot of junk such as ketones. That's why you get headaches with those diets, feel out of breath with exercise. And your heart being a muscle and your brain having some fatty tissue also loose weight, not good for the long term. If your body didn't need carbs, it wouldn't be the end product of digestion ready to be absorbed by your cells

russellma

I don't know about "starvation mode", but my own experience leads me to believe that there is such a thing as "preservation" mode.

Here's my "theory" ...Our bodies adapt to what and how much we are eating. So, of course a person can lose quickly (at least for a while) with a VLCD, but eventually the body adapts the metabolic rate in an effort to preserve itself, making it necessary to continue to lower the calories in order to get the same results.

When I first started, MFP had me set at 1200 calories and so most days, I ate under that and didn't eat back exercise calories. After 5-10 lbs, I hit a brick wall, and no matter how much exercise I did, the scales wouldn't move.

A friend recommended (based on her own experience) that I add calories, which seemed quite counter-intuitive, but guess what...it worked!

I've increased it several times since then, and I've found that as long as I exercise and eat back those calories to stay above my BMR, but below my TDEE, I can still lose weight. Now I've transitioned into maintenance mode and can eat quite normally and still maintain my weight within 3-4 lbs.

So, to be quite honest, I don't know why you would want to suffer through a VLCD when it's possible to eat more and get the same job accomplished.

AmyP619

"starvation" is misused a lot, but to me, those women (or men) going on so few calories are not making a life style change that they can live with, not to mention the fact that most of the time (there are few exceptions) most of these same people "starving" themselves on 1200 calories or less are eating CRAP food... I have seen diaries filled with pizza, donuts, soda, and other processed junk...just so they can reach that "magical" number.

People, it's about making a good life style change and eating QUALITY HEALTHY foods, not just empty calories. If you want to eat so few calories, at least make it good food and remember it cannot be a long term solution. JMO

I agree 100% with this. I"m not saying that her Ideal protein diet is the healthiest way to go...in fact it just looks like a miserable time to me. I would MUCH rather make healthy changes that lead to a lifestyle change that one can stick with, than starve myself for a period of time only to gain it all back once you stop doing it. I don't like those diets...because that's all they are...are DIETS. It's important to make a change you can LIVE with. I just wanted to look into the idea of "starvation mode" and see what people say about it because it's blasted on her endlessly! I also definitely agree with you on the whole eating less Junk to fit your calorie consumption. If you want to lose weight yet you don't want to change your eating style, then you aren't really committed to it and, frankly, you don't deserve it. Eating healthy and being healthy are one in the same. Just because you eat junk but weigh less definitely does not mean you're a healthy person. Great response, thanks!

yarwell

there are recommendations for the minimum fibre intake

Fibre isn't a carbohydrate in our labelling system, I know it is in the US hence "net carbs" are appropriate there (carbohydrates minus fiber).

So when I say 20g of carbs I mean 20g of carbohydrates that are absorbed and give you 80 calories.

yarwell

Are you seriously saying that it's healthy to eat 670 calories, zero carbs, and "appropriate supplements"??

You would have to define "healthy" for me to answer that. I wasn't advocating it as a lifestyle, but pointing out a scenario that provides your necessary dietary nutrient intake on a low calorie level in order to maximise weight loss for the obese - as used in VLCDs.

with that amount of calories, most people would be doing good to drag their miserable butts from the bed to the couch every day

you make the classic error of ignoring the quarter million calories available to an obese person. You don't have to put energy into your mouth to have energy - otherwise we would die overnight or on a one day fast, as opposed to taking 70-odd days (hunger striker) or the Scotsman "AB" fasting for over a year.

yarwell

Sorry to contradict you but your BRAIN and your HEART' S ONLY FUEL is carbs and carbs produced by fat and protein only diets only create a lot of junk such as ketones.

I don't mind being contradicted by correct information, but that's a pile of BS. Go back to the drawing board and learn how the brain utilises ketones as fuel and ditto the heart (along with fatty acids). You are 100% incorrect.

Lotte34

Love it thank you! I am so fed up of being told i eat too little! Thank you hunny

mrob81

It seems like this site focuses on half of the battle: losing weight. I think we should post up some pictures of people that lost a ton of weight eating under 1k calories. They do not look healthy. They do look smaller though.

SweetSammie

Not enough calories a day sets ME up for failure...There is only so long I can "hang on" with a low, low cal diet. I feel like I'm white knuckling it and then i snap. I need calories I can live with for the long haul.

This. Right now I feel like I could do what I am doing to LOSE weight forever, so hopefully maintaining will be a breeze. For years I made this difficult by being so hard on myself, that I would inevitably "fail," then I would feel like a "failure," and then I would ACT like a failure... then I truly would BE a failure at weight loss/ a healthy lifestyle.

dme1977

for the first 4 months of using MFP I ate 1000 calories a day and lost 1 pound a week ... in April i adjusted UP to 1200-1500 and have plateaued since:sad:
... starvation mode my *kitten*...
"body eating fat off " mode is more like it.
I have decided that I am OK to lose the last 5 or 10lb slower than the first 15..only because it takes A LOT of self control to eat 1000/day ( unless you can afford "fresh" foods daily it gets monotonous eating SMALL portions.... I wanted to have bigger portions ... thus = slower weight loss.
(I lost 25 total... 10 before MFP just by cutting out regular soda and junk food)