This whole "Starvation Mode" Kick

ajbltn

Part of this has to do with keeping your metabolism moving. If you dont eat enough and often enough, you'll slow it down and it won't burn properly. Not eating enough also leads to "binging" later. I gained the bulk of my weight during a time when I ate barely nothing all day... I'm losing more weight eating meals/snacks of HEALTHY foods!!

sunny_yogi

of course you loose lots fast if you don't eat enough, but then when you try to stop "dieting" and go back to eating healthy normal portions your body goes into overdrive storage mode in order to prepare for the next time it wont get enough.

This happens with most dieters, it isn't a function of how much they eat while dieting it's the giving up and retuning to old habits that gets them.

^yep.....

sunny_yogi

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)

i bet you took a lot of slack from fellow mfpers regarding eating 'only' 1000 a day...

mkenyon78

Part of this has to do with keeping your metabolism moving. If you dont eat enough and often enough, you'll slow it down and it won't burn properly. Not eating enough also leads to "binging" later. I gained the bulk of my weight during a time when I ate barely nothing all day... I'm losing more weight eating meals/snacks of HEALTHY foods!!

How did you manage to break the cycle of not eating all day?

crisanderson27

Part of this has to do with keeping your metabolism moving. If you dont eat enough and often enough, you'll slow it down and it won't burn properly.

I'm sorry, the part in bold is 150% incorrect. I understand your message was intended to be helpful...but its because of that that I felt the need to correct the only part that was false.

dme1977

do what works best for YOU. :flowerforyou:

BlueDahlia77

There is a diet by the Center for Medical Weight (CMWL) loss where you buy your meals from them--primarily shakes and bars packed with nutrients and protein. On this diet you consume 800 calories a day. So 800 calories a day can be done but only on the right diet. The CMWL diet also requires weekly or bi-weekly doctor visits to make sure patients are not losing too much water. These kind of diets long term can be very hard on the kidneys if not done or guided by experts. So there are certain diets people can be on where the calorie count is very restricted, but it is extremely hard to find a diet where you get enough nutrients to stay healthy on such restricted calories. "Starvation mode" might sound kind of harsh, but it makes sense that if your body does not get enough fuel (calories) it slows down the metabolism to savor and hold on to the calories it is getting and a slower metabolism is not what you want unless you are trying to gain weight.

I just don't understand why medical profoessionals would think a diet like this is going to be effective. Sure, the participants will lose weight but are they going to eat bars and drink shakes for the rest of their lives? No, of course they aren't. Until you deal with the underlying issues related to morbid obesity, no diet is going to work.

Most likely the people who use this service and go on this diet are people preparing for bariatric surgery. All bariatric patients have to lose at least 10% of their body weight before they can receive the surgery.

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)

i bet you took a lot of slack from fellow mfpers regarding eating 'only' 1000 a day...

I did.. even had MFP "friends" delete me because of it...
just remember YOU sign in with YOUR name into YOUR diary and this is YOUR journey. . .
we ALL came here needing help not knowing ALL the anzwerz. . .
dont let anyone try to make you feel bad for doing what works best for YOU.

ajbltn

I just started to eat. It took a while, but now I have to or I feel horrible.

And I beg to differ that my statement "150%" incorrect. Based on what I've read, and on what's working for me, I firmly believe you need to "fuel" your body. So EVERYTHING works properly. Thanks.

happyfeetrebel1

There is a diet by the Center for Medical Weight (CMWL) loss where you buy your meals from them--primarily shakes and bars packed with nutrients and protein. On this diet you consume 800 calories a day. So 800 calories a day can be done but only on the right diet. The CMWL diet also requires weekly or bi-weekly doctor visits to make sure patients are not losing too much water. These kind of diets long term can be very hard on the kidneys if not done or guided by experts. So there are certain diets people can be on where the calorie count is very restricted, but it is extremely hard to find a diet where you get enough nutrients to stay healthy on such restricted calories. "Starvation mode" might sound kind of harsh, but it makes sense that if your body does not get enough fuel (calories) it slows down the metabolism to savor and hold on to the calories it is getting and a slower metabolism is not what you want unless you are trying to gain weight.

I just don't understand why medical profoessionals would think a diet like this is going to be effective. Sure, the participants will lose weight but are they going to eat bars and drink shakes for the rest of their lives? No, of course they aren't. Until you deal with the underlying issues related to morbid obesity, no diet is going to work.

Most likely the people who use this service and go on this diet are people preparing for bariatric surgery. All bariatric patients have to lose at least 10% of their body weight before they can receive the surgery.

Not all do, only some. It depends on the program. My particular program did NOT have that requirement

BlueDahlia77

What she was told was kinda true. The thing is though, your metabolism DOES slow down, no matter how big you are, on such an extreme calorie deficit. Yes, you will loose, and you will loose fast, but guess what? When she starts eating normal amounts again she is gonna gain weight again because her metabolism will be so slow. That's what we call the yo-yo effect.

Eat, eat healthy, eat junk in moderation, just EAT. The loss will be slower, but it won't come back.

If they go back to eating 10,000 calories a day, they will gain it back. If they eat a normal caloric intake they will not. I don't see where metabolism enters into this. It's not like the metabolic downregulation lasts very long after a normal caloric intake is resumed. The body is amazing at maintaining homeostasis.

You don't magically regain weight by eating normally.
It takes years of eating at a large caloric surplus to become obese.
If you diet and become fit, it still takes years of eating at a large caloric surplus to become obese, regardless of whether you lost the weight in 1 year or in 10.

Let's say "eating normally" is 1200 calories a day, but on the "diet" they're only taking in 600-800 calories a day. When they go back to 1200 that is 400-600 extra calories a day the body will be processing, but because bodies have their own signals that they follow those extra calories will not be recognized as "eating normally" calories, they'll be recognized as "holy cow we've got some extra energy, so we better save it for a rainy day" calories. The weight gain might not be significant, but there will be weight gain.

BlueDahlia77

There is no molecule in the group "carbohydrates" that we need to eat to survive.

So, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so not true. Carbohydrates are an energy source just like fats and proteins. They are VERY needed to survive.

BlueDahlia77

Two things continue to amaze me:

1) "Maintainable, lifestyle, 1000 calories forever or you'll gain it all back, blahblahblah!"

No. It's not forever. It's until you lose the weight. At which point you maintain that weight. And that applies to every single diet. If you are currently losing weight, at some point you are going to increase your intake in order to avoid loss of further weight. If you go back to your original habits, obviously you will gain weight again. How do you think you got to that weight in the first place? Gradually increasing your calorie intake post-diet will redress any (slight) slowdown in your metabolism.

2) Everyone who thinks it's possible to defy all the laws of Physics.

I have read, on a disturbing number of occasions, a statement to this effect: "If you don't eat enough, you could even gain weight!!!". Seriously, what planet are you living on? Energy is required to move things, break things and make things - i.e. in order to be alive. If you don't put this energy in your mouth, your body doesn't go "screw it, I'll just stop performing bodily functions like moving and breathing and continuing existence". It goes looking for alternate energy sources - and if you're overweight, it finds them quite easily. As someone posted above - remember that a morbidly obese person is essentially walking around wearing a quarter-of-a-million calorie cake.

Obviously that's not to say that VLCDs aren't without pitfalls. But, again as mentioned, the main issue is maintaining acceptable levels of nutrients. Fortunately, it just so happens that a lot of really low calorie foods are nutritionally quite awesome. If given the choice between 1,000 calories of awesome, healthy stuff (and people going "AHHH STARVATION MODE") and 1,300 calories of junk, I know which I'd choose.

EDIT: Also quoting this, as it's possibly the best post in this thread:

YUP, THEM STARVING AFRICAN KIDS ARE A RIGHT BUNCH OF FAT FECKERS

There seems to be a disturbing belief that because an obese person has extra fat on their body that they have all of this extra energy and it doesn't matter how little they eat because, heck, they have soooooooooo much extra fat! It's bull. An obese person on a VLCD will react the same way a normal-sized person does when they significantly lose their intake amounts. There may be rapid weight loss (at first), but they'll also get irritable, lethargic, and malnourished. The extra fat on their body doesn't give them magical powers of energy.

BlueDahlia77

YUP, THEM STARVING AFRICAN KIDS ARE A RIGHT BUNCH OF FAT FECKERS

They never have the opportunity to develop muscle mass nor excessive fat stores, so their situation is ever so slightly different.

Although I think that (reasonably obviously) the original poster was making a hyperbolic statement for effect, I'll amend that quote so that it's more to your first-world liking (and ignore the fact that physiologically there's barely any difference between this and the original):

YUP, THEM ANOREXICS DYING OF PROLONGED MARASMUS ARE A RIGHT BUNCH OF FAT FECKERS

Obviously, neither of you have seen someone dying from starvation with their stomachs so distended that it looks like they have a beer gut....

BlueDahlia77

All these years of The Biggest Loser, they manage to rack up double-digit losses week after week after week eating well below their BMR and not adding back their exercise calories. They burned off their body fat in place of their food calories. Their metabolisms didn't grind to a halt. I'm not advocating that method but there must be a hundred or more examples there.

Just Google "biggest loser past participants" and you'll see that many of the people who participated on that show have gained back significant amounts of weight because the way they originally lost is completely unsustainable in the real world. Of course a person will lose weight if someone else makes your food and they're working out all day long.

BlueDahlia77

I listen to my body. It's been getting full around 700-800 calories, so I choose to listen to it lately and ignore MFP's "not eating enough." Eating too much got me the weight I am today.

I figure, if I'm full and have energy while losing weight, it shouldn't matter what anyone says I *should* be at.

Many people get straight up fat on sub 1000cal diets. Others diet and diet and diet for years at a similar calorie level...and still somehow remain obese.

Hunger is a very misunderstood thing...and is so often confused with other hormonal signals...it's nearly useless as an indicator of the proper diet.

I know you won't listen to me...but I had to say it anyhow. Maybe someone will.

Thank you :drinker:

wackyfunster

There seems to be a disturbing belief that because an obese person has extra fat on their body that they have all of this extra energy and it doesn't matter how little they eat because, heck, they have soooooooooo much extra fat! It's bull. An obese person on a VLCD will react the same way a normal-sized person does when they significantly lose their intake amounts. There may be rapid weight loss (at first), but they'll also get irritable, lethargic, and malnourished. The extra fat on their body doesn't give them magical powers of energy.

That is actually incorrect. As someone with around 10 pounds of body fat, I could get at most 300ish calories per day from fat stores. That means eating 500 calories per day would be extremely bad for me. Someone with 200 pounds of body fat could pull 6000ish calories from fat stores, more than enough to satisfy TDEE with no health effects (assuming vitamin/mineral/electrolyte supplementation). Obese people DO have much greater ability to generate energy from fat. Otherwise there would be no point in the body storing it. I know several formerly morbidly obese folks who have lost 150+ pounds on a VLCD without any issues.

tamsinwhitfield

YUP, THEM ANOREXICS DYING OF PROLONGED MARASMUS ARE A RIGHT BUNCH OF FAT FECKERS

Ahh, the rampant ignorance abounds. Anorexics usually have nigh 0 muscle mass either, and people undereating to intentionally achieve the look lose their lean mass prior to their fat which is why they appear skinny-fat on their way down.

I have to wonder if you're deliberately obtuse? Please explain to me where I advocate this "diet" - obviously, I don't, because it's moronic (in fact, I also said that it was physiologically no different to "starving Africans"). I'm using it as an argument against the absurd broscience that's running rampant in this thread, namely the "OMG IF U GO INTO STARVATION UR METABOLISM WILL SHUT DOWN" ridiculousness.

That is actually incorrect. As someone with around 10 pounds of body fat, I could get at most 300ish calories per day from fat stores. That means eating 500 calories per day would be extremely bad for me. Someone with 200 pounds of body fat could pull 6000ish calories from fat stores, more than enough to satisfy TDEE with no health effects (assuming vitamin/mineral/electrolyte supplementation). Obese people DO have much greater ability to generate energy from fat. Otherwise there would be no point in the body storing it.

^ Exactly this.

Fat storage is evolutionary, it's not just happening to piss you off. In times of famine (i.e. "diet"), you've got something to effectively live off. VLCDs are prescribed to extremely obese patients every day - under medical supervision, there is absolutely no reason why someone with a huge amount to lose shouldn't be following one (particularly if the health benefits of weight loss vastly outweigh any potential downside - Type 2 Diabetes, high cholesterol, the imminent heart attack or death from sleep apnea that's just waiting to happen). And this is why it infuriates me when I see people here actively discourage others from following their physician's advice solely on the grounds that it falls below this "magic 1200".

yarwell

So, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so not true. Carbohydrates are an energy source just like fats and proteins. They are VERY needed to survive.

Afraid not. There are indeed an energy source, but they can be completely replaced by other energy sources.

On the other hand you can't replace protein with carbs, or essential fatty acids with carbs.

That's why the RDA for carbohydrates is zero - there is no carbohydrate molecule that your body has to be fed in order to maintain its full function.

So go do some reading.

yarwell

There seems to be a disturbing belief that because an obese person has extra fat on their body that they have all of this extra energy and it doesn't matter how little they eat because, heck, they have soooooooooo much extra fat! It's bull.

So the Scotsman "AB" who fasted for over a year to reduce his obesity, then kept the weight off for several years was a myth ? a different species ?

An obese person on a VLCD will react the same way a normal-sized person does when they significantly lose their intake amounts. There may be rapid weight loss (at first), but they'll also get irritable, lethargic, and malnourished.

People on VLCD trials are not hungry, plenty of evidence published about that. Hunger shuts down pretty quickly. Malnourished ? the commercial VLCD preparations are 100% nutrient balance by design.

Have a read at http://www.diabetologia-journal.org/Lim.pdf to see VLCDs inaction - for diabetes reversal in this case, but interesting anyway.