Why no less than 1200 - Minnesota Starvation Exp

LauraDotts

I read the full report of the Minnesota Semi Starvation Experiment several years ago. I can't find it online anymore but here is a summary of the study.


Has anyone else read this study?

Link: http://www.possibility.com/wiki/index.php?title=EffectsOfSemiStarvation

DanaDark

Problem with eating too few calories is it GREATLY increases the chance of not getting proper nutrition. Without proper nutrition, the body becomes more stressed and also does not burn nearly as many calories.

Additionally, constantly having to use large amounts of stored energy also contributes to stress.

Stress levels will eventually halt weight loss. From there, people freak and will then eat even LESS< only aggravating the problem.

Notice no one worth their weight in salt here or elsewhere has suggested simply eating nothing at all until you've reached your weight loss goals?

LauraDotts

Here's a good link: http://www.possibility.com/wiki/index.php?title=EffectsOfSemiStarvation

yarwell

Notice no one worth their weight in salt here or elsewhere has suggested simply eating nothing at all until you've reached your weight loss goals?

There is a well documented Scotsman called AB who fasted for a year. He lost a lot of weight, and kept it off. He didn't have a load of overeaters screaming at him on an internet forum though, as it was about 1970.

I don't recall that the Minnesota guys got to a point of not losing weight ?

melsinct

Problem with eating too few calories is it GREATLY increases the chance of not getting proper nutrition.

Exactly.

It is a sad state of affairs when one starts focusing on getting skinny at their body's expense.

norcal_yogi

Notice no one worth their weight in salt here or elsewhere has suggested simply eating nothing at all until you've reached your weight loss goals?

There is a well documented Scotsman called AB who fasted for a year. He lost a lot of weight, and kept it off. He didn't have a load of overeaters screaming at him on an internet forum though, as it was about 1970.

I don't recall that the Minnesota guys got to a point of not losing weight ?

...so when AB started eating 'normally' again, he didn't 'gain it all back'?

hellohappylisa

Who wants to be skinny anyway? Toned is the way to go! You can be slim and toned, but without food, you'll just be fat-skinny.

angiechimpanzee

Who wants to be skinny anyway? Toned is the way to go! You can be slim and toned, but without food, you'll just be fat-skinny.

Unless you do strength exercises. People who diet the "healthy way" by aiming for lower deficits still turn out skinny fat. The key is workouts that will tone the body.

I followed this girl's blog who was seriously starving herself. She started at aorund 1000 a day but got down to 500 a day. Crazy. But before she lost a sickening amount of weight, she actually looked amazing at one point despite her super low intake. Why? She did something like 200 crunches and 200 squats, & 1000 jumping jacks a day religiously. She was TONED, you wouldn't even be able to tell she was starving herself to look like that because she was the furthest possible thing from skinnyfat.

Plus, in her case & anyone's case whos eating a low amount of calories (I'm not advocating this, I'm just stating facts). The reason why some people can do it and be fine is because they KNOW how to make their calories go a long way. Eating foods HIGH in nutrients and macros for their calorie amounts. Lets say a person wants to aim for 20 grams of fiber and 60 grams of protein in a day:

breakfast;
a cup of plain greek yogurt 80 calories, 13g protein
half a cup of raspberries, 30 calories, 1g protein, 5g fiber

lunch;
one can of tuna in water 90 calories, 16g protein
9 whole grain triscuit crackers 150 calories, 4g fiber, 4g protein
one small apple 60 calories, 4g fiber

dinner;
4oz of grilled chicken breast 130 calories, 23g protein
two cups steamed broccoli with lemon & spices 40 calories, 4g fiber, 4g protein

total:
580 calories
61g protein
17g fiber

I'm not saying it's HEALTHY. I'm just saying it's possible. All that stuff about not being able to get enough nutrients on 1200 a day is a load of bull.

fastforlife1

I read the full report of the Minnesota Semi Starvation Experiment several years ago. I can't find it online anymore but here is a summary of the study.


Has anyone else read this study?

Link: http://www.possibility.com/wiki/index.php?title=EffectsOfSemiStarvation

I don't see how this study applies to overweight or obese individuals since the subjects (young healthy men)
began their semi-starvation diet at a normal weight. Imagine giving a normal 20 year old guy only half the amount of calories his body needs. Of course they became food obsessed.
As for Yarwell's Scotsman, who knows if he was sneak eating or not. His case is an undocumented anomoly. People I know who have fasted for more than a week, gain all their weight back within a few weeks of eating. It is not a very effective method for permanent weight loss.

yarwell

As for Yarwell's Scotsman, who knows if he was sneak eating or not. His case is an undocumented anomoly.

Don't be silly, if it's undocumented how come I know about him. I was 11 at the time and hundreds of miles away. "People I know" are undocumented apocryphal tales. Sorry to have busted your prejudices :-)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2495396/?page=1

He went from 456 lbs to 180 lbs in 382 days. Five years later his weight was about 196 lbs.

So he lost 0.72 lbs per day which implies a calorie deficit on average of 2529 calories. Not much room for food in that and this was before anyone thought exercise was even vaguely relevant to weight loss.

Only in your crazy world would he need to "sneak eat" in order to lose weight. Energy restriction always produces weight loss except in free living humans (primarily women) and their pets. Please don't spread nonsense.

Forevertiny23

If you dont eat anything- of course you will lose weight faster. Thats how anorexics drop weight so fast. But your hair might fall out, and your teeth might break, and you might feel terrible, and you might damage your metabolism permanently, and it might spiral out of control, and you might make everyone close to you really really worried... so.. kinda not worth it.

ladymiseryali

I have trouble getting to 1000 cals. It's not that I'm starving myself. I'm just not hungry all the time. I'm not going to force-feed myself to reach a calorie amount. Plus, I'm working out too. So I'm not starving. I'm just not hungry.

annehart00

If you already have an overeating or binge eating problem, a starvation diet will only contribute to a continued problem. Please read Chiristopher Fairburn's Overcoming Binge Eating if you're in that catagory. He is considered an expert in this arena and was the go-to book provided by my therapist. Also, its my experience that it's near impossible to get your DVs in all the macro and micro nutrient catagories when eating too far below maintainance level. I am currently eating around 250 below and it's difficult for me to get all my iron and potassium - not sure about my Vitamin Bs, K, and minerals because MFP doesn't track those. Also, there are mountains of anecdotes about people who dramatically reduce their calories but are not able to sustain that effort (the yo-yo dieter). To quote Einstein, "Insanity: is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results."

That being said, I can't speak for people who naturally have less hunger - whether they should force themselves to eat more or not. I've never experienced that nor have I studied the health issues/nonissues related to lack of hunger.

annehart00

Poetic description of a 19 day fast woven with studies showing the benfits of fasting - http://www.colorado.edu/eeb/courses/buchwald/1040/hrap_files/Starving.pdf

fastforlife1

As for Yarwell's Scotsman, who knows if he was sneak eating or not. His case is an undocumented anomoly.

Don't be silly, if it's undocumented how come I know about him. I was 11 at the time and hundreds of miles away. "People I know" are undocumented apocryphal tales. Sorry to have busted your prejudices :-)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2495396/?page=1

He went from 456 lbs to 180 lbs in 382 days. Five years later his weight was about 196 lbs.

So he lost 0.72 lbs per day which implies a calorie deficit on average of 2529 calories. Not much room for food in that and this was before anyone thought exercise was even vaguely relevant to weight loss.

Only in your crazy world would he need to "sneak eat" in order to lose weight. Energy restriction always produces weight loss except in free living humans (primarily women) and their pets. Please don't spread nonsense.

I have read the article before. I could go to my doctor and say I haven't eaten any food for two weeks - It's not like Tanner was under constant observation. The lady below (annehart) article shows a man under observation who fasted for 19 days at the end of the fast when he started eating again.
"After three days he had regained nineteen
and a half, and after five more he
had recouped all of the lost thirty-six."
This summer I did many 24 hour fasts and one 40 hour fast. In past years I have fasted on only water for 3 days at a time and juice for 1 week. I think there are many health and spiritual benefits to fasting. Short fasts may be helpful in losing weight, long ones are not. I saw a girlfriend of mine go on a 3 week fast and lose 24 pound. After 1 week of hardly eating any food, she put almost all that weight back on.