"Starvation mode", exercise calories, dillema?

Low calorie diets can be effective and preferable in some circumstances so I imagine it's also infuriating for those people to read posts like this. Maybe studies like these are why doctors prescribe very low calorie diets and don't seem to fear "starvation mode" in their obese patients? This is what a quick search turned up:

VLCD compliance and lean body mass.

Abstract

Very low calorie diets (VLCD) have many advantages, as they are inexpensive, safe and easy to comply with, and give rapid and encouraging weight loss. On the other hand, many patients complain of hunger and constipation. We have shown that these drawbacks can be reduced by the supplementation of 30 g of dietary fibre to VLCD. By the use of a VLCD which provides approximately 60 g of protein for women and approximately 70 g for men, the dietary regimen is safe and no excessive loss of lean body mass seems to occur during VLCD in obese patients. However, the changes in body composition that may occur after cycles of weight loss and regain have not been clarified. After weight cycles with weight losses obtained by conventional diets, obese women have lower lean body mass than obese non-dieting controls. Hence, more information about the changes in body composition during dieting on conventional diets and VLCD are needed.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2559044

Factors influencing body composition during very-low-calorie diets.

Abstract

Apparent body composition changes with weight loss on very-low-calorie diet (VLCD) can depend on the method of fat-free mass estimation. In this report the implications of differences in measurement by direct versus indirect methods are examined. The nitrogen sparing and protein economy associated with ketosis is relevant and results of clinical trials with diets of varying composition are presented. The analytical findings of a multicenter, multimethod long-term VLCD study illustrate protein and metabolic conservation during VLCD. Protein losses, by total body nitrogen, over 10 wk dieting, independent of body mass index, were 4.75% of weight lost, as conservatively expected from obesity tissue reduction with no degradation of total energy expenditure. The implications of utilization of glycogen (water and potassium release) in interpretation of diet success and of body compositional change is evaluated. Evidence is presented that ultimate compositional changes with weight change may be individually specific and that body composition may be predicted from weight considerations alone.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1615887

Reduction of body mass and change in body composition on a very low calorie diet.

Abstract

The quality of weight loss was estimated during a very low calorie diet (VLCD) weight-reducing regime by determining the body composition every second week using near-infra-red interactance (NII). The study was performed on 127 overweight volunteers, aged 18-72 years, who, for eight consecutive weeks, used a VLCD to lose weight. Mean weight reduction was 12.7 kg (12.6% of initial weight). Mean body fat (BF) loss was 9.5 kg (23.8% of initial BF), which constitutes 75% of the weight loss. Mean reduction in lean body mass (LBM) was 3.2 kg (5.2% of initial LBM). We found no correlation between initial body mass index (BMI) and loss of LBM, or between initial body composition and weight loss. Weight reduction observed in this study is mainly due to reduction in body fat, and the loss of LBM is considered not to be larger than acceptable.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8383636

If you're concerned about the loss of lean body mass that occurs with dieting, lift weights.

Effects of resistance vs. aerobic training combined with an 800 calorie liquid diet on lean body mass and resting metabolic rate.

Abstract
OBJECTIVE:

Utilization of very-low-calorie diets (VLCD) for weight loss results in loss of lean body weight (LBW) and a decrease in resting metabolic rate (RMR). The addition of aerobic exercise does not prevent this. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of intensive, high volume resistance training combined with a VLCD on these parameters.
METHODS:

Twenty subjects (17 women, three men), mean age 38 years, were randomly assigned to either standard treatment control plus diet (C+D), n = 10, or resistance exercise plus diet (R+D), n = 10. Both groups consumed 800 kcal/day liquid formula diets for 12 weeks. The C+D group exercised 1 hour four times/week by walking, biking or stair climbing. The R+D group performed resistance training 3 days/week at 10 stations increasing from two sets of 8 to 15 repetitions to four sets of 8 to 15 repetitions by 12 weeks. Groups were similar at baseline with respect to weight, body composition, aerobic capacity, and resting metabolic rate.
RESULTS:

Maximum oxygen consumption (Max VO2) increased significantly (p<0.05) but equally in both groups. Body weight decreased significantly more (p<0.01) in C+D than R+D. The C+D group lost a significant (p<0.05) amount of LBW (51 to 47 kg). No decrease in LBW was observed in R+D. In addition, R+D had an increase (p<0.05) in RMR O2 ml/kg/min (2.6 to 3.1). The 24 hour RMR decreased (p<0.05) in the C+D group.
CONCLUSION:

The addition of an intensive, high volume resistance training program resulted in preservation of LBW and RMR during weight loss with a VLCD.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10204826

As to the finer points of recognizing how many calories are "enough" for you. That's easy enough to estimate (with some impressision I admit, but it'll get you in the ballpark). Just find your approximate BMR (there's a ton of sites out there that do this, go to webMD and put metabolism calculator in, you'll find their tool for TDEE) and multiply by 25% and you'll get close to your TDEE.

I posted this thread on my news feed and someone pointed out that they didn't understand what the 25% thing was for. I kind of glazed passed it under the assumption that (BMR+BMR*.25) was approximately your TDEE (a little more then sedentary?) so yes 25% would be closer to anyones TDEE. But since I'm not positive and since everyone has different activity levels and because I'm half wondering why 25, could you clarify for me? Thanks

I enjoyed reading your post, and I concur mostly although I think some of the points can be up for interpretation depending on what study you go by. My frustration with "starvation mode" is that the term is used very loosely around here, and it's used in a judgmental "holier than thou" manner. What you said is right on for someone who is truly headed in that direction. A lot of people on here including myself eat below BMR and TDEE range at about 1000-1500 calories, and are not in starvation mode. I suppose real starvation mode does exist, but it's not something we see here in the USA very often other than people with ED's or chronic diseases, etc.

It's impossible for someone with excess body fat, eating 1200 calories a day to go into any kind of "starvation mode." When you have plenty of fat stores to use, you are by no means starving (in the true meaning of the word). As long as you have fat to burn, your body will use it for energy. Balancing muscle and fat loss is the challenge though. Personally, I've avoided this b/c I eat a high protein and low starch diet and jogging. And I had my LFT and KFT checked 3 weeks ago and they are in normal range. Not saying this is the case for everyone, but it's how I found balance.

So, the misuse of this term is one of the factors that hindered my weight loss for YEARS and I know it has affected other people too. It was because I felt like I had to eat more to avoid the dreaded starvation mode, so therefore I should have a "cheat day" where I ate anything and everything so as to "restart my metabolism." Also, having it be the end of the day and craving a bowl of cereal and then telling myself I had to have it b/c I had only had 1100 calories that day so I needed to eat even though I wasn't particularly hungry.

I believe that people who don't have ED related thought processes can balance out calorie deficits just fine if they listen to their body. We all don't want to be extremely hungry and uncomfortable all day with no energy, so we find a strategy within ourselves to make it work using common sense.