Starvation mode

REDI4CHANGE60

All those starving fat people in 3rd world countries. They are starving, but their bodies just won't let go of the fat because they need to eat more.

Hmmm ... I am thinking you are either being a smart azz OR you misinterpreted what I was saying. I wasn't saying that people were fat in 3rd world countries. I was saying that it would stand to reason that due to the lack of food that some people experience in the 3rd world countries, it would be feasible that some bodies might actually go into starvation mode to stay ALIVE. Haven't you seen the pictures of starving people in Africa, etc. and wonder how they are even living? That's what I was referring to. Just wanted to clarify my statement.

sugar37fl

I agree, I eat less than 1200 calories most days. Some days I come pretty close but I also don't eat the calories I have "earned" through exercise. I have lost 3lbs in 5 days. Everyone is different. I like this site because before I do eat something I can look and see what it will cost me 1st

REDI4CHANGE60

Thanks, I hadn't heard the term "dieters edema" before, stumbled on this (part 1 of 2) which some may find interesting:

http://www.leangains.com/2010/01/how-to-deal-with-water-retention-part.html

Interesting reading DeadVim ... will keep this in mind when dieting. I have felt the whoosh before ... not to get to 'personal' but when you 'vacate' it has a very 'urgent' feel to it, as in it is not your regular urine, but more of a letting loose of a huge amount of fluid - you feel much lighter immediately. During those periods I lose three to six pounds in a couple of days. Also happens when I drastically cut my sodium intake (I have a bad habit of adding salt to everything :grumble: ). Thanks again for posting.

Gwen_B

I have eaten less than 1200 practically my whole adult life and my weight doesn't fluctuate.
Starvation-mode is the popular theory that the body “reacts” to dieting by lowering its metabolic rate in order to preserve itself. According to the theory a dieter could be following a reduced-calorie eating plan—to the letter—and still not lose an ounce. Furthermore, the purported solution is that one needs to eat more in order to lose weight.

The theory is an attempt to explain why people aren't losing weight although they report (to their weight loss coach, or fellow dieters) that they are indeed following their diet and exercise program.

What are the problems with the theory?

Metabolic rates don’t actually drop enough to significantly slow weight loss (if someone is indeed adhering to a reduced-calorie target). There can be a small reduction in (resting) metabolic rate when you reduce your calorie intake. For most people—since they're eating 1,200 or more calories per day—that drop won’t be more than 5%. For the minority of people that eat fewer calories (which should only occur under medical supervision) the reduction may be 5- to 15%. In neither case will weight loss STOP, or stall, beyond what’s explainable by those changes. Under no circumstances will EATING MORE be necessary. Not everyone will experience this reduction in metabolism, but for those that do it dissipates a week or so after they resume a calorie intake level that matches (or exceeds) the physiolgical needs of their current body weight.[ii]

The Bottom Line: Given the laws of physics, the notion that some people need to eat more to kick start weight loss is inherently flawed. Starvation mode is simply VERY popular mythology. Carefully tracking your calorie intake and exercise can actually reinforce that your body works just as it should.
http://www.beyonddiets.com/beyonddiets-blog/2012/3/9/starvation-mode-fact-or-fiction.html

judychicken

Bump