Starvation Mode Myths and Science

ivykivy

Not to mention starvation/malnutrition not only occurs when calories are restricted they can occur when calories are abundant because you do not have proper nutrients. So if you're eating 1200 calories, exercising 2 hours and eating snack packs and non-fat this and that on very little protein, your are looking for trouble in the long term.

Honestly if most people actually took the time to read the study and after study they would not be so gung ho to eat at starvation level. And like Boss said the study was done on a group of fit men not unhealthy men or women. Add starvation issues on top of PMS and you have a straight mess:laugh:

http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-weve-came-to-believe-that.html

http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/abstract/135/6/1347?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=minnesota+experiment&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=HWCIT

iplayoutside19

Let's be honest though. There are Starvation Mode Nazi's who would have you beleive that missing your mid-morning snack would cause you to spiral into starvation mode. I think a lot of that is proliferated by people trying to sell something. I think that's what Fit4Europe was getting at. And I agree.

leavinglasvegas

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

What he said!

LittleSpy

I agree it's a shame so many folks here are in the dark about starvation mode and I thank you for posting the research. There's so much good and factual information on this site already about starvation mode, however, don't be disappointed if this post falls on deaf ears (It's too lengthy for a vast majority of MFPers to take the time to read anyway :frown:).

But I have to say I honestly think it's healthier for people (to be derogatory and crass, "sheeple") to believe that they're going to go into starvation mode with a few days of undereating than it is for them to believe they have to eat as little as possible to lose weight. :ohwell:

toots99

Saving to read later when I've got more time.

HonestOmnivore

There's a current study underway that looks at the health impacts caused by restricted calorie diets in NORMAL HEALTHY ADULTS - it's not a diet-to-lose-weight study. The NYT had an article about a few months ago. Healthy adults were restriced to about 75% of their maintenance calories for an extended period of time (one year?). Changes in Blood Pressure, sugar levels, and other health markers were studied. It did some good things for them but again - losing fat was not the objective of the study.

One of the things I learned from the NYT article was a minor side note- hungry people learn to love apples - I now love apples! funny how a body sees a food source differently once there's REAL hunger. Another interesting item in the study was that people lost for the first three months then leveled off and never lost more. These people were underweight but their metabolism leveled dropped to stop the weight loss. The last interesting point was how hard it was for normal healthy adults to live on a restricted calorie diet. The test subjects needed a lot of support to keep at it!

The human body is an interesting thing!

I track my calories each day, and follow a five day average. I'm not advocating eating 300 calories one day and 3000 the next, but I have been losing weight by not worrying about the day's calories as much as the five day average.

Fun stuff! Thanks for the post!

stormieweather

I ate an average of 700 calories a day for nearly 4 years trying to lose weight. Not only did I not lose any weight, I gained several pounds. Prior to this time period, I never had any issues with food, diet, or weight. Tomorrow, I'm having my metabolism professionally tested. Will be interesting to see what the effect of my low calorie diet was on my metabolism. Of course, I've also spent the last 8 months trying (not so successfully) to reset my metabolism.

If anyone's interested to know what the results are, let me know.

bellinachuchina

It's a complicated subject, since everyone's body reacts differently.

Reality is this...you became obese from over-eating, high fat, high carb, high sugar foods, over whatever period of time. So dramatically decrease your food intake and you will lose weight, it's common sense, starvation mode or not. You CAN maintain this weight loss by slowly increasing you calories to maintaining level. You can't gain weight back if you don't consume the calories!

Dom_m

Thanks a lot for these comments, its cleared up a concern I've had since I joined MFP. I do try to eat to my target, and my daily deficit is relatively constant, but some days I do too much exercise (Saturday's I go through around 2,000 calories) and just can't eat that much food. I wont worry about it so much any more. I'm going to set a minimum gross calorie level of 1,800 for large deficit days and as long as I eat that much, I'll just go with whatever's comfortable from now on, rather than trying to stuff calorie dense things down my throat in an urgent calorie grab

Jax67

Bumping to read later

jbuffan218

Interesting topic
Thank you

HotChick10

VERY helpful info!!! Thanks for posting!!!

Azdak

There is also some research that suggests that someone who is, say, 35%+ body fat reacts differently to a low-calorie eating plan than someone who is 20%-25%. IMO, someone who is obese should not be concerned with "starvation mode" while following a low-calorie (by that I mean 1000-1200 Cal/day) intake plan. Even in instances where BMR does decrease, it goes back up again once the person increases caloric intake.

I think it is important to realize that weight loss is a process that can require different interventions at different stages; and also that it is a complex issue that includes many variables. People should be very wary about repeating cliches and making "absolutist" statements (unfortunately, few of the people who make those kinds of statements would ever read this topic or get this far on the comment list).

Overall, I was impressed by most of the comments in this thread--a lot of good thinking.

guamchar

very informative

Fit4Europe

Thanks a lot for these comments, its cleared up a concern I've had since I joined MFP. I do try to eat to my target, and my daily deficit is relatively constant, but some days I do too much exercise (Saturday's I go through around 2,000 calories) and just can't eat that much food. I wont worry about it so much any more. I'm going to set a minimum gross calorie level of 1,800 for large deficit days and as long as I eat that much, I'll just go with whatever's comfortable from now on, rather than trying to stuff calorie dense things down my throat in an urgent calorie grab

Glad to have helped. I see several people talk about having calories "left" at the end of the day and trying to cram in food. If you're not hungry, don't eat! Your BMR is not going to drop off a cliff with short-term calorie deficits and as long as you are not in one of those "ultra-lean" categories, you won't start losing lean muscle right away.

futfurd

Very useful information. I have been worried about cuttting some fat because of muscle loss. That sets my mind at ease some.

msarro

Thanks for at least backing up your post with some science. I think that is one of maybe 3 posts on here that I've seen actually containing a citation that hasn't been from Banks or Songbyrd.

However there is one part that appears to be missing from your analysis (and it is brushed on in some of the other posts). If the human body is deprived of any nutrient necessary for something it will make up the difference by taking it from whatever source is readily available that needs it 'less'. For instance, the liver can be broken down to provide iron, bones to provide calcium and phosphorous, etc. When people intensely restrict their diets, even for a few days, this deficit in other vitamins and minerals has to be supplied from the body. Now the amount pulled in a day or two is nothing that would really be out of the ordinary for catabolic reactions. However if this begins to happen frequently, or for longer stretches of time there could be some pretty bad issues, including permanent damage to the heart and other organs.

Fit4Europe

Thanks for at least backing up your post with some science. I think that is one of maybe 3 posts on here that I've seen actually containing a citation that hasn't been from Banks or Songbyrd.

However there is one part that appears to be missing from your analysis (and it is brushed on in some of the other posts). If the human body is deprived of any nutrient necessary for something it will make up the difference by taking it from whatever source is readily available that needs it 'less'. For instance, the liver can be broken down to provide iron, bones to provide calcium and phosphorous, etc. When people intensely restrict their diets, even for a few days, this deficit in other vitamins and minerals has to be supplied from the body. Now the amount pulled in a day or two is nothing that would really be out of the ordinary for catabolic reactions. However if this begins to happen frequently, or for longer stretches of time there could be some pretty bad issues, including permanent damage to the heart and other organs.

There is some research on the effects of starvation/semi-starvation on POWS during various wars - WWII, Korean, and Vietnam. The results are mixed. Some report long term health effects, another study looked at a control group and Vietnam POWs and found no difference 20 years later. Keep in mind these were people who were forced to starve over long term periods.
I would agree that long term effects are detrimental and using "starvation mode" as a long term solution to weight loss is just plain stupid and risky. That being said, I also think it is crazy when people do a short term calorie stuff at the end of the day because they exercised a lot and "need" to eat more calories lest they force their body into starvation mode (not going to happen in just a few days).

chicynth

As someone who does Fasting throughout the year (religious purposes), I appreciate this information! I have read it somewhere before, because of course you want to be educated when you do Fast.

But having had to battle this weight loss issue, in large due to medical issues and medications, I know that I have had days when I was just simply not hungry. Today being one of those days. My point? I have ALWAYS lost weight. I have never Fasted or eaten well below my suggested daily caloric levels and not lost weight.

Prior to my medical issues, I was extremely active; and had a very "functional" metabolism. In fact, my docs tell me that it is because my being so active prior, it is partly the reason I can still do quite a bit comparably to someone with same conditions who was not as active; which equals ability to lose the weight. Metabolism is a funny thing and it is not a ONE SIZE fits all topic.

But this posting helps to despel some of the falsehoods being thrown out to us.

This was a very informative post. Thanks, again, for sharing with all of us!

MommyDaisy76

This was a great post...thank you