"Starvation mode", exercise calories, dillema?

bevtyndall · September 2012

bump

mfpcopine · September 2012

I remember reading something a few years back where Audrey's weight was discussed and friends/family were quoted in the article saying that she was obsessed with staying thin and that she ate very little and was very strict with herself. The article also said that she would get very stressed out over gatherings and events where food was a big part of the celebration because she feared she would get out of control. Wish I could remember where I read it. Love Audrey but hearing this made me think that she didn't turn out quite alright. I mean, it just makes me sad that she couldn't find a way to stay relatively slender while still enjoying these types of life events more.

I'm sure this problem is shared by dancers and actors all over the world.

alzaman5925 · September 2012

Does anyone actually know how much of a deficit it takes to drag your body into starvation mode?? I know that like BMR's and TDEE's it's going to be different for everyone, but similarly to those numbers there must be a way to work out where the danger zone lies for each individual person if they were to keep up with such a deficit over a number of weeks. People keep using phrases like 'under-feeding' or 'very, very low calorie intake'... but I find such descriptions too vague and relative to be meaningful!

There was one article I found which said 50% of your daily energy need is the most you could safely cut down on before your body began to store fat... and then another suggested a 35% reduction... I know there are the 'recommended' daily deficit percentages such as 20% or 25%, in order to chuck the weight off and remain healthy, but actually I'd be really interested to know how to calculate one's own borderline starvation mode deficit.

The reason I'm asking is because my daily calorie intake is only about 800-900, as it has been for exactly seven weeks and two days. This isn't including exercise burns where I work out on average 300 cals, 4 days a week... some weeks less than others. My only redeeming factor is that I've been every meaning of the word 'sedentary' during these holidays, minus the odd exercise and work day which I log in anyway.

So I've been sat here twiddling my thumbs for the past few weeks waiting for my hair to start falling out. I've been waiting for crazy bouts of light-headedness, and wondering whether my TOM is going to be late this time around. I'm 4'10.5" weighing roughly 128.5lbs with a BMR of 1,251 according to MFP. This means my TDEE until busy term time begins will be pretty much 1500 cals. I've been losing steadily so far at a rate of 1.5lbs a week, and I've worked out using my deficit calculations for each day that my metabolism is running at about 91% efficiency.

I am trying to go by these signs, and it seems clear to me that I am not in starvation mode. My heart jumps into my throat each time I read another post warning against eating below 1000 calories, and that 800 calories is for sure a starvation diet. I suddenly realise that I AM that eater, yet I eat regularly and get hungry regularly. There's just nothing peculiar going on with me, so WHEN is too little truly too little?? There must be a definitive answer out there!

jamkat · September 2012

bump

Italiano7 · September 2012

bump great advice!!

Betsnikel · September 2012

I agree with your findings.... I have found that the cycling type diets work because they have figured out how the body is burning the fat. You really state it so that it is easy to comprehend. Thanks

SHBoss1673 · September 2012

Does anyone actually know how much of a deficit it takes to drag your body into starvation mode?? I know that like BMR's and TDEE's it's going to be different for everyone, but similarly to those numbers there must be a way to work out where the danger zone lies for each individual person if they were to keep up with such a deficit over a number of weeks. People keep using phrases like 'under-feeding' or 'very, very low calorie intake'... but I find such descriptions too vague and relative to be meaningful!

There was one article I found which said 50% of your daily energy need is the most you could safely cut down on before your body began to store fat... and then another suggested a 35% reduction... I know there are the 'recommended' daily deficit percentages such as 20% or 25%, in order to chuck the weight off and remain healthy, but actually I'd be really interested to know how to calculate one's own borderline starvation mode deficit.

The reason I'm asking is because my daily calorie intake is only about 800-900, as it has been for exactly seven weeks and two days. This isn't including exercise burns where I work out on average 300 cals, 4 days a week... some weeks less than others. My only redeeming factor is that I've been every meaning of the word 'sedentary' during these holidays, minus the odd exercise and work day which I log in anyway.

So I've been sat here twiddling my thumbs for the past few weeks waiting for my hair to start falling out. I've been waiting for crazy bouts of light-headedness, and wondering whether my TOM is going to be late this time around. I'm 4'10.5" weighing roughly 128.5lbs with a BMR of 1,251 according to MFP. This means my TDEE until busy term time begins will be pretty much 1500 cals. I've been losing steadily so far at a rate of 1.5lbs a week, and I've worked out using my deficit calculations for each day that my metabolism is running at about 91% efficiency.

I am trying to go by these signs, and it seems clear to me that I am not in starvation mode. My heart jumps into my throat each time I read another post warning against eating below 1000 calories, and that 800 calories is for sure a starvation diet. I suddenly realise that I AM that eater, yet I eat regularly and get hungry regularly. There's just nothing peculiar going on with me, so WHEN is too little truly too little?? There must be a definitive answer out there!

What is your body fat %? It says on your profile that you're trying to lose 98 lbs of which you've lost 11 so far. That being the case (and based upon what I wrote), it'll take longer for your body to see symptoms than it would someone with less body fat. Because this whole process is based around the principle of energy delivery. The more that can be delivered (regardless of means) the longer this process takes. The body doesn't flip a switch and hit starvation mode, it's different for everyone, there's no set number. after 2 to about 5 or 6 days (depending on the above energy delivery) your body will REALIZE that it's not getting enough calories and begin a gradual and slow reduction in metabolic rate, that doesn't mean you wake up the next day or week or maybe even month bald and tired. It means over the course of the next several months there will be decreases that may include any of the symptoms I've listed above.

That's the reason I stated "The more body fat you have, the greater your deficit can be. " in my notes section (near the bottom). You may or may not see all the symptoms I've listed, you may recognize none of the symptoms, that's a factor of genetics and individual body chemistry. That doesn't mean the metabolic rate hasn't diminished or that it's not happening for you, it just means your body deals with an energy deficit in other ways.

alzaman5925 · September 2012

Hey SHBoss, lol no my 'goal weight' is 98lbs! :laugh: From 140lbs I'm trying to lose 42lbs so that I can go down to around 7st. But to be perfectly honest with you, at this stage my short term goal weight is really 7st 9lbs. That's a loss of 2 stones and 5 lbs. I've already cut down on 12 lbs now so I'm looking to lose one and a half stones further.

My current BMI is around 26.3. I'm sorry, I don't really know my body fat percentage. I've been trying to work it out but I firstly don't trust my measuring tape skills, and I don't trust the online body fat calculators because I've been getting wild percentage variations! I'm also very pear shaped, so I hold most of my weight around my hip and thighs, and I think that might be confusing the calculations... I understand what you're saying, that if I've got lots to lose I won' t really notice the negative effects of a low cal diet for a little while, but I don't think that's the case with me.

So far 800-900 is working really well for me. I eat every meal with my family, the only difference is that I use a slightly smaller plate so that it's easier to reduce my portion size, and I put on my plate exactly what I feel will fill me up before I ever weigh the amount, and in the end it always comes to a little under 900.

I've been keeping a detailed spreadsheet charting my calorie deficits each day, including exercise, so that I can work out how efficiently my metabolism is running. Based on my deficits I calculate a hypothetical value of pounds that I 'should' be losing, and then going by the weight I've actually lost, I've worked out that my metabolism hovers around the 90% mark consistently. There's just a 1 pound difference between the hypothetical value and my actual. I've been at this for almost two months.

geebusuk · September 2012

Thanks for the list of links.
I had trawled through a few pages, but obviously not enough.

I'd agree that "elite atheletes" are going to work differently to the average joe - I suspect I'm somewhere in between; happily ran a 10k race and did 40k cycling either side of that, but certainly far from an 'elite' time.
However for a start it would seem most 'elite' are likely to have a lower body fat percentage than average; putting them already at a disadvantage as far as losing fat goes.

My point which made me question the rest of it is that alone what you had written wasn't "a fact". Perhaps with some more clarification, but even then it wouldn't be congruent with my or many other people's experiences that in fact an average joe can lose weight and gain muscle on a calorie deficit.

When I was losing weight a couple of years ago I did have days that were 1000 calories with a load of exercise, but more likely they were 1300-1500 with a load of exercise realistically.
Generally on here people have a go at people eating at a good chunk more than a 1000 calorie deficit, as well as below 1200. I've always been quite happy to do more exercise to get a healthy deficit, though now I'm getting nearer my goal I'm more sticking to the 1000 calories and not feeling too bad if I have a few more calories to eat, as I did yesterday.

SHBoss1673 · September 2012

Hey SHBoss, lol no my 'goal weight' is 98lbs! :laugh: From 140lbs I'm trying to lose 42lbs so that I can go down to around 7st. But to be perfectly honest with you, at this stage my short term goal weight is really 7st 9lbs. That's a loss of 2 stones and 5 lbs. I've already cut down on 12 lbs now so I'm looking to lose one and a half stones further.

My current BMI is around 26.3. I'm sorry, I don't really know my body fat percentage. I've been trying to work it out but I firstly don't trust my measuring tape skills, and I don't trust the online body fat calculators because I've been getting wild percentage variations! I'm also very pear shaped, so I hold most of my weight around my hip and thighs, and I think that might be confusing the calculations... I understand what you're saying, that if I've got lots to lose I won' t really notice the negative effects of a low cal diet for a little while, but I don't think that's the case with me.

So far 800-900 is working really well for me. I eat every meal with my family, the only difference is that I use a slightly smaller plate so that it's easier to reduce my portion size, and I put on my plate exactly what I feel will fill me up before I ever weigh the amount, and in the end it always comes to a little under 900.

I've been keeping a detailed spreadsheet charting my calorie deficits each day, including exercise, so that I can work out how efficiently my metabolism is running. Based on my deficits I calculate a hypothetical value of pounds that I 'should' be losing, and then going by the weight I've actually lost, I've worked out that my metabolism hovers around the 90% mark consistently. There's just a 1 pound difference between the hypothetical value and my actual. I've been at this for almost two months.

Yeah, don't be in such a rush. Slow and steady wins this particular race. With a BMI of 26 (that's a terrible way to predict weight loss by the way, BMI is a deeply flawed number). you should be above your BMR at a minimum. That's all I'll say about it I think, I've already covered everything else you've asked about.