"Starvation mode", exercise calories, dillema?
Replies
-
Awesome post! Thank you
0 -
bump.0
-
OK, let me get this straight... My BMR X 1.2 = 1529. In order to lose weight I'd need to eat less than 1529. How much less?
And on days I exercise, I eat those extra calories? Right now my body fat is 18.8 and I'd like to lean down to 16 or so. It seems that if I eat more than 1200 cals a day I start gaining again.
Also, what do you think about cheat days for "priming the pump"? I seem to lose a bit i I go hog wild for a day or 2 and then go back to 1200 or less.
Thanks so much for the help. I'm learning a ton!!0 -
bump0
-
OK, let me get this straight... My BMR X 1.2 = 1529. In order to lose weight I'd need to eat less than 1529. How much less?
And on days I exercise, I eat those extra calories? Right now my body fat is 18.8 and I'd like to lean down to 16 or so. It seems that if I eat more than 1200 cals a day I start gaining again.
Also, what do you think about cheat days for "priming the pump"? I seem to lose a bit i I go hog wild for a day or 2 and then go back to 1200 or less.
Thanks so much for the help. I'm learning a ton!!
last question first, some of that is perception, but it's possible to "trick" your body a little bit, especially when your down to where you are with regards to body fat percent (16% is difficult to maintain unless you're a fitness professional or athlete or have some other highly active job, or your a freak of nature in which case I hate you
) just don't go crazy, it's not the solution to everything, but may be a contributor.
that BMR calculation you did seems a bit conservative to me. BMR X 1.2 is very very sedentary. Are you very very sedentary and do no (very little) exercise? If not I'd set it closer to 1.375 for lightly active, meaning a desk job plus 4-5 days a week of moderate 1 to 2 hour/day exercise.
Lastly, carving off those last few percentages of body fat are tough, take a long time, and require a lot of dedication. Just be aware of that, not saying you shouldn't try, just saying it's going to take some nutrition plan work plus some really difficult exercise to get there (both High intensity interval, and weight training usually).0 -
bump0
-
You are a treasure!! Thank you so much. I'm sure I'm perfectly fine at the weight I'm at and no, I'm not a naturally skinny gal. I carry an extra 15 very easily so I have to keep up my workout to maintain. I'd say I'm an average sedentary with a desk job so I'll go with the 1.30
-
I am 48 years old, 66inches, 180 lbs. Active job 4-10 hours days, up and down from my desk working with cardiac patients. do swim aerobics 3 days a week for 45 minutes. Usually walk my dogs 30 minutes twice a week.0
-
I am 48 years old, 66inches, 180 lbs. Active job 4-10 hours days, up and down from my desk working with cardiac patients. do swim aerobics 3 days a week for 45 minutes. Usually walk my dogs 30 minutes twice a week.
are you looking for deficit numbers? BMR? ...0 -
I don't want this to turn into "Guess my deficit" guys, I'm happy to help but this kind of deficit work generally requires me to do a lot of in-depth work with a client, it's not something I usually just throw together like I've done on this thread. Not that I don't want to help, it'll just become really hard for me if I keep doing it, plus I'll feel like I'm cheating you guys by just spending 5 minutes on your issue, it's really something that takes more time and a lot more discovery to really deal with.0
-
bump for later0
-
bump to read when i get home0
-
bump for later0
-
I totally agree with this! I've been on a 1,000 calorie diet for over a year.. I feel GREAT!0
-
Bump0
-
Great post! I'm a believer! Eat more, weigh less, feel full, happy, energized, watch your strength increase. Skin looks better, healthy hair and nails!! It works!0
-
Starvation mode makes me think of Audrey Hepburn, who suffered from malnutrition during her childhood (during the Nazi occupation of the Netherlands) and was damaged to the extent that she had to give up a career in ballet.
I mean she turned out alright But her being very skinny makes me think of women who want to be like her and don't realize she was literally starved as a child.
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.0 -
I had never heard the term "starvation myth" until I saw this post. But I was so put off by the third paragraph that I didn't want to read the rest - mainly because paragraph 3 was so combative and judgey.
So I googled "starvation myth" and found out some really interesting information.
I liked this post - http://fattyfightsback.blogspot.com/2009/03/mtyhbusters-starvation-mode.html
So many opinions on this but as we are often told, we must do what we think is right for ourselves.
And she basically backtracks that post with this one:
http://fattyfightsback.blogspot.com/2012/07/mythbusters-starvation-mode-revisited.html#more
In other words, she admits that too low of calorie eating over a long enough of a time frame to get you to a loss of 10% will kick you into Famine Mode. Same thing as Starvation Mode.
So your link to her post is moot as any kind of oppositional evidence.
Yes, I find this post rather amusing since it's pretty much a reversal of her prior post. Although some of her information is purely anecdotal (which she admits) and not what I follow as a plateau pattern (and how to avoid it).
Well, I'm a bit put off by her writing style as she may admit it's anecdotal but her statements are made in such an authoritative manner that she can give the uninformed the impression that she knows what she's talking about.
]Also she completely dismisses weight gain possibilities while in starvation mode. She acknowledges that the metabolic rate lowers while in starvation mode but doesn't account for someone eating what they THINK is still a deficit but is actually more than their lowered metabolism (thus weight gain would be possible even if you eat above what your metabolic rate WOULD be if your body were reacting normally).
I know! She writes as if a lowered metabolism has no consequences.0 -
I need to read through this more carefully later.0
-
I totally agree with this! I've been on a 1,000 calorie diet for over a year.. I feel GREAT!
Huh? That would be the exact opposite of what the OP is posting about. 1000 calories/day is what he says you should avoid.0 -
bump0
-
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.0 -
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!0 -
bump0
-
bump great advice!!0
-
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. Thanks0
-
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.0 -
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.0 -
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.0 -
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.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions