"Starvation Mode"

Options
1356

Replies

  • californiagirl2012
    californiagirl2012 Posts: 2,625 Member
    Options
    I agree i also think starvation mode is a myth At least until you get to a very low percentage of body fat... Its very popular these days but dont be fooled it really is a myth If starvation mode were really true no one would be starving in the world their would be no anorexics. People need common sense .... Why would you body hold on to fat for dear life. and your metab come to a sudden hult Nope.. it might slow but you can speed it up by exercising and eating every few hours.

    It's not about what you're eating...it's about hormones! Hormones can tell a morbidly obese body to hold on to all that fat even though that person is no where near starving.

    Kinda sorta. Really, these forums are potentially dangerous due to the amount of absolutes (you can't do that, do this). People need to go get blood tests and a physical to determine dietary requirements.

    I ate approx 1000 calories a day for two years, sometimes less, sometimes only one meal a day, when I was obese and over weight. It was not fun but it did not hurt me. I had the fat reserves for it. My hormones were fine, my doctors said I was healthy. Now I'm under 12% BF and I can't eat that low but I still eat pretty low because I'm small, my RMR is low. I just had my blood work done and my hormones are all just right still.


    "The Reverse Taper Diet " :

    The Theory of Fat Availability:
    •There is a set amount of fat that can be released from a fat cell.
    •The more fat you have, the more fat can be used as a fuel when dieting.
    •The less fat you have, the less fat can be used as a fuel when dieting.
    •Towards the end of a transformation, when body fat is extremely low you
    may not have enough fat to handle a large caloric deficit anymore.

    At the extreme low end, when your body fat cannot ‘keep up’ with the energy deficit
    you've imposed on your body, the energy MUST come from SOMEWHERE. This is
    when you are at risk of losing lean body mass during dieting (commonly referred to
    as ‘starvation mode’). This happens at extremely low levels of body fat, under 6% in
    men and 12% in women [Friedl K.E. J Appl Phsiol, 1994].

    Oddly enough, it seems as though some obese people have an unbelievable amount of fat available as a fuel, but a lower ability to burn that fat, whereas as they get leaner, they have less and less fat available as a fuel, but a greater and greater ability to burn the fat they do have. So at extreme levels of leanness, it is the fat availability that limits a persons ability to lose fat.
  • yo_andi
    yo_andi Posts: 2,178 Member
    Options
    Wouldn't drinking 0 calorie green tea while not eating keep your metabolism working fast since green tea is known to boost metabolism?

    YES. The magic of ancient Chinese dragons come to boost your metabolism in the night

    All I could think about .... was Trogdor. :tongue:

    Burninating the peasants... in their THATCHED ROOF COTTAGGGEEEESSSSSSSS...
  • ealmy
    ealmy Posts: 17
    Options
    Interesting reading. Back in 08, I lost 40 lbs in 5 weeks, I ate less than 2000 calories in the first 14 days TOTAL and then all I took in on average was 500 calories in juice per day. My situation was stress related due to a personal situation, but proves you can loose weight if conditions are right. I will say that I put it all back on PLUS 20 lbs within 8 months after getting my head right. Bottom line, starvation will take it off, but wont keep it off in my opinion.
  • geekyjock76
    geekyjock76 Posts: 2,720 Member
    Options
    I would like to point out that each subject ate approximately 1,560 calories per day (hardly starvation) which is 30% higher than many people on MFP are consuming.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Starvation_Experiment
    They also walked a minimum of 22 miles, burning approximately 3000 calories each week while maintaining active jobs during the entire 6 month period. You missed that.

    So let's break it down..

    The typical TDEE of a man back then was around 2200. By eating 1570 calories, that's a deficit of 630. A minimum of 3000 calories from exercise a week translates to 429 exercise calories daily. Thus, their total deficit was about 1059 calories which would give them an energy availability score of 1141 calories (net). That's roughly a 50% deficit.

    http://www.madsciencemuseum.com/msm/pl/great_starvation_experiment
    Keys, A., Brozek, J., Henschel, A., Mickelsen, O. & Taylor, H. L. (1950) The Biology of Human Starvation I–II University of Minnesota Press Minneapolis, MN.
  • UWZander
    UWZander Posts: 70
    Options
    I ate approx 1000 calories a day for two years, sometimes less, sometimes only one meal a day, when I was obese and over weight. It was not fun but it did not hurt me. I had the fat reserves for it. My hormones were fine, my doctors said I was healthy. Now I'm under 12% BF and I can't eat that low but I still eat pretty low because I'm small, my RMR is low. I just had my blood work done and my hormones are all just right still. ....

    Okay, that worked for you but it may not work for different people. That is why they should get checked out by those that specialize in such areas. Also, congrats on getting featured on bb.com.
  • ironanimal
    ironanimal Posts: 5,922 Member
    Options
    Okay, that worked for you but it may not work for different people. That is why they should get checked out by those that specialize in such areas. Also, congrats on getting featured on bb.com.
    And damn doesn't she like to tell us all about it.
  • SJCon
    SJCon Posts: 224
    Options


    "The Reverse Taper Diet " :

    The Theory of Fat Availability:
    •There is a set amount of fat that can be released from a fat cell.
    •The more fat you have, the more fat can be used as a fuel when dieting.
    •The less fat you have, the less fat can be used as a fuel when dieting.
    •Towards the end of a transformation, when body fat is extremely low you
    may not have enough fat to handle a large caloric deficit anymore.

    At the extreme low end, when your body fat cannot ‘keep up’ with the energy deficit
    you've imposed on your body, the energy MUST come from SOMEWHERE. This is
    when you are at risk of losing lean body mass during dieting (commonly referred to
    as ‘starvation mode’). This happens at extremely low levels of body fat, under 6% in
    men and 12% in women [Friedl K.E. J Appl Phsiol, 1994].

    Oddly enough, it seems as though some obese people have an unbelievable amount of fat available as a fuel, but a lower ability to burn that fat, whereas as they get leaner, they have less and less fat available as a fuel, but a greater and greater ability to burn the fat they do have. So at extreme levels of leanness, it is the fat availability that limits a persons ability to lose fat.



    Humm could support the idea an earlier poster had that she (her mind) and her body disagreed as to what her ideal weight was. Seems genetics would go to the amount an placement of fat cells, ergo body shape etc. How many you have would determine how low you can go or how fast you can lose. Just a thought.
  • windycitycupcake
    windycitycupcake Posts: 516 Member
    Options
    if you are overweight and eat less than 1200 calories a day and exercise you will continue to lose weight and anyone who tells you that you wont is LYING.

    you can always lose weight by starving. you will, however, be extremely unhealthy, weak, lethargic, cranky, upset and moody, have emotional problems, possibly even collapse from exhaustion...long term you might get kidneystones, hair fall out, lose your period, loose teeth etc etc

    finally, the number one reason not to starve your self is that the day you decide to eat like a regular person and have a normal meal you will gain like 8 pounds and keep gaining and it sucks!!!
  • jesz124
    jesz124 Posts: 1,004 Member
    Options
    My thoughts are directed at those who say they loose and are happy on 1200 cals a day or less mainly. I just wonder why really? I don't honestly think anyone (unless you are a mini person) needs to eat at that kind of deficit to loose fat. I think it's been proved again and again that you can loose on a higher amount of cals (obviously this amount varies per individual) so why would you choose to eat less when it's not needed?
  • x_JT_x
    x_JT_x Posts: 364
    Options
    if you are overweight and eat less than 1200 calories a day and exercise you will continue to lose weight and anyone who tells you that you wont is LYING.

    Not long term you won't. And I beg to differ but I am not lying. Care to explain to me how I ate at this large deficit for the past 16 years yet am still overweight?
  • mjj79
    mjj79 Posts: 415 Member
    Options
    Speaking only for me, i have no choice. I GAIN at 1200 or above. I tried the metabolism reset. After 5 weeks at at TDEE i tried eating a "reasonable " amt for a few weeks and kept gaining :/ No thyroid or med issues. I WISH i could eat more and still lose. Maybe others are in the same boat as me :/
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    Starvation mode (it’s not actually a defined term) as it is used on this site usually means one of three things:

    1) Weight loss stops no matter how low calories go: You will not find any studies that show this to be true.

    2) Metabolic adaptation: Outside the impact of short term fluctuations and water retention due to hormonal imbalances there are studies that indicate a lower BMR due to VLCDs outside that normally seen by weight loss itself. As far as I am aware the studies are not conclusive as to the extent but I believe one study showed an approximate decrease of 5%.

    3) Greater muscle loss than experienced on a reasonable calorific deficit.

    It helps when clarifying exactly what is being defined as ‘starvation mode’

    With regard to The Minnesota Experiment, it was a study into the effects of starvation, not in relation to the context it is usually used on this site. It was conducted over 60 years ago (in 1945) and there was no BF% tested (as far as I can tell, and even if it was, techniques nearly 70 years ago were not accurate, heck, they are not totally accurate now), and as such, no testing of LBM loss. Secondly, the average intake was over 1,500 calories which is debatable as to whether that is a VLCD.

    I would also like to point out that most of the people who participated experienced severe emotional distress and depression (including self-mutilation in some of the subjects), decreases in libido, concentration and mental capacity. There were also sigificant declines in their BMR.

    However, all in all, the experiment indicates to me that VLCDs are a really bad idea

    I do agree that this, as well as other studies and experiments, indicate that in the context of the definition in 1) above, yes it is a myth. In the other two definitions, you will find a different answer.

    You mention in your OP that your that your body will use fat stores before muscle – this is contrary to the way weight loss works. As a natural part of losing weight, we lose LBM.

    See a study that has been misquoted or misinterpreted a lot to try to indicate no muscle loss on a VLCD:
    http://www.ajcn.org/content/83/5/1068.full which is a study conducted by Freidl et al. What the study actually shows is that you will lose LBM.


    In addition there is another study from the same group.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10797147
    From that study, I point you to : <snip> After 8 wk, most of group 1 achieved a minimum body fat, serum 3,5,3'-triiodothyronine (T(3)) was below normal (78 +/- 20 ng/dl), testosterone (T) approached castrate levels (4.5 +/- 3.9 nmol/l), insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) declined by one-half (75 +/- 25 microg/l), and cholesterol rose from 158 +/- 31 to 217 +/- 39 mg/dl<snip>

    I particularly like the castrate levels of testosterone!
  • evansjaohseven
    evansjaohseven Posts: 5 Member
    Options
    People shouldn't rely on the he said she said and ask someone who really knows. I'm an RD and I know for a fact that "starvation" mode is real. Your body really will fight to maintain a constant weight, by adjusting the metabolic process. That's why it is also hard to lose weight because your body is in a struggle to maintain a sort of "equilibrium".
  • LorinaLynn
    LorinaLynn Posts: 13,247 Member
    Options
    I *COULD* lose weight while eating less than 1200 calories. Hell, I did. And I got to my goal weight. Eventually. And I also still had back fat rolls, a double chin, a muffin top, ginormous thighs and zero muscle definition anywhere on my body.

    I ate almost twice as much this time and lost the same amount of weight, a lot more effortlessly, and faster, and look a lot better, too.

    I used to believe I had a crappy metabolism and had to eat under 1000 calories to lose. Boy, was I wrong! :happy:
  • LorinaLynn
    LorinaLynn Posts: 13,247 Member
    Options
    *edit* double post... forum hiccup.
  • drmerc
    drmerc Posts: 2,603 Member
    Options
    I have yet to see any proof of starvation mode other than anecdotal evidence
  • chunkydunk714
    chunkydunk714 Posts: 784 Member
    Options
    OMG! Someone made a forum post on a weight loss site. This has dramatically changed my way of thinking. Yeah, no. People need to stop offering unwanted advice they read on the internet.

    ^^ rude and glad were not friends.
  • LorinaLynn
    LorinaLynn Posts: 13,247 Member
    Options
    I have yet to see any proof of starvation mode other than anecdotal evidence

    Well, I would say that if someone invents a time machine, I will gladly go back in time to have a scientist document how stupid eating screwed up my body... but if I could go back in time, I'd really rather just do it right the first time instead. :laugh:
  • Silverkittycat
    Silverkittycat Posts: 1,997 Member
    Options
    "Starvation mode is a myth. It was popularized due to the Minnesota Starvation Experiment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Starvation_Experiment) in which subjects were given 50% of their daily calorie intake for months. The result? Well, they lost weight until they had almost no weight left to lose and their bodies simply could not get the calories ANYWHERE. Concisely put: starvation mode happens when you are, quite literally, wasting away. Not when you have a simple caloric deficit. Your body will make up for it with fat stores. That's what they're for. Do not worry about starvation mode (http://examine.com/faq/how-do-i-stay-out-of-starvation-mode.html).&quot;

    From: http://www.reddit.com/help/faqs/Fitness#WeightLoss

    Thoughts?

    Read the whole book, read up on Ancel Keys. I will share my thoughts then.
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Options
    I agree i also think starvation mode is a myth At least until you get to a very low percentage of body fat... Its very popular these days but dont be fooled it really is a myth If starvation mode were really true no one would be starving in the world their would be no anorexics. People need common sense .... Why would you body hold on to fat for dear life. and your metab come to a sudden hult Nope.. it might slow but you can speed it up by exercising and eating every few hours.
    Your body holds onto fat because that's its survival mechanism when there is no food. You can survive a famine much longer with more fat and less muscle than you can with more muscle and less fat, so the body sacrifices muscle first. The human body doesn't understand the concept of dieting. It only understands that there is no food available, so it needs to conserve as much energy as it can in order to keep you alive until food is found.

    And exercising and eating every few hours doesn't speed up your metabolism, that's a complete myth.

Categories