Any peer-reviewed, objective evidence for "starvation mode"?

I wonder what it means that no one has offered up a link to peer-reviewed information when a lot of people have an opinion about it?

Quite.

I don't think you're going to find anything showing metabolic reductions beyond a couple of hundred calories a day / 10-15%. I've never seen BMR results below 1000 calories a day reported.

Most obesity research uses VLC diets to achieve statistically significant weight loss in a fairly short period, so you'll find heaps of studies with folks on 800 calorie or less complete nutrition diets that clock up weight loss that keeps going.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2012/07/24/3549931.htm refers to a peer reviewed paper of a Scotsman referred to as "Mr AB" who didn't eat for a year and lost a lot of weight, then kept his reduced weight. Can't find a link to the paper but I have read it.

BTW, whose peers?

You probably are joking about this but in academic communities "peer reviewed" information means that is has been evaluated rigorously by qualified/expert individuals. It's of the utmost importance in the research process.

I wonder what it means that no one has offered up a link to peer-reviewed information when a lot of people have an opinion about it?

I do know what it means, and yes I was joking

It might mean no one has studied it. You know, kind of like when MDs poo-poo eastern or alternative medicine (herbs, homeopathy, etc. that have been used successfully for thousands of years) bc no one has "studied" it. Of course "no one" has studied it. Who does such studies? Pharmaceutical companies. Why would a pharm company sponsor a study on an herb that people have used for thousands of years? They wouldn't bc they can't make any money from proving that it works. They only do studies on meds they have developed, and they often keep certain parts of those studies as quiet as possible.

Not exactly the same, but drug companies and over-prescribing MDs are some of my biggest pet-peeves.

IDK, lots of people have lots of opinions on everything. God, for example. Atheists say "show me proof that God exists". Believers say "show me proof God does not exist". There are no peer-reviewed studies either way.

A little correction, homeopathy has not been around for "thousands of years" Homeopathy was started by Samuel Hahnemann (1755 - 1843) . Many homeopathic "remedies" have been subjected to clinical trials and have failed miserably. The mere notion that a medicine becomes more effective as a result of incredible dilution is, at best, laughable.

Back to the OP.....I'm with you, I'd love to see any scientific evidence to support starvation mode as it is presented and thought of in weight loss circles. One gets the impression that your metabolism is subject to wild and sudden variations and that it needs jump starting etc........seeming very unscientific notions.

I've seen the starvation mode thing associated with two different behaviors on this site. One is just chronically undereating, but the other thing some people get uptight over, that makes people throw that phrase around, is when people go several hours without eating instead of spacing meals just a few hours apart.

For example, I don't eat when I wake up, I usually don't eat for 3-6 hours after I wake up. My Dr tried to tell me this was not advised bc I'll go into starvation mode and I need to jump start my metabolism in the morning. I call BS but, the information out there isn't very solid.

I'm more likely to believe that chronic undereating effects metabolism long term, than I am to believe that humans can't go without eating for half a day without negatively effecting metabolism. THAT is the theory I'd like to see some legitimate studies on, the "oh you have to eat breakfast!" theory.

Me too, that's what I'm looking for.

I don't know if this will help you or not, but it will lead you towards the sources you are looking for. The science says you do not need to worry about meal frequency. http://nutritionfacts.org/video/to-snack-or-not-to-snack/

I have put on a LOT of weight due to surgery and accidents I have had. I have had friends delete me from MFP because of my calorie intake, I eat, but most days no where near what the calorie intake is suppose to be. If I ate that much my weight would climb. I know the only way to get my weight off is to eat smaller amounts of healthy food and many days only 2 times. I do not feel starved. When I am hungry I eat. I think to each his own, everyones body is different. People have to do what is best for them. Glad to see this post!:drinker: :drinker:

Though not a scientific research study - I have personal experience:

A few years ago I was eating ridiculously low calories, maybe a couple hundred a day - maybe. I kept this up consistently for over a year.
When I started eating normally again my weight shot up through the roof.
To me, that would be evidence to the way "starvation mode" effects your metabolism.

The main problem with so called starvation mode in MFP is the claim of short term instant effect. LIke if I don't eat my exercise calories today, I will immediately enter SM.

There is no way that happens. Even in the one study I found that showed a possible effect it was extreme calory deficiency of a test group over a period of many months and a year later, any changes on their BMR were gone.

I do have the feeling than many members love to believe in it, it goes well with undercounting food eaten and overestimating exercise burn to make life comfortable and keep the food coming in.

(BTW in case someone looks - my exercise burn yesterday was probably grossly overestimated by MFP and Fitbit so I'm not planning on eating another 2800)

Energy metabolism after 2 y of energy restriction: the Biosphere 2 experiment1,2
Christian Weyer, Roy L Walford, Inge T Harper, Mike Milner, Taber MacCallum, P Antonio Tataranni, and Eric Ravussin
+ Author Affiliations

1From the Clinical Diabetes and Nutrition Section, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Phoenix, AZ; the Department of Pathology, the Center for Health Sciences, the University of California, Los Angeles; and Paragon Development Co, Tucson, AZ.
Abstract

Background: An adaptive decrease in energy expenditure (EE) in response to 6 mo of severely restricted energy intake was shown in a classic semistarvation study—the Minnesota experiment.

Objective: Our objective was to examine whether such adaptation also occurs in response to less severe but sustained energy restriction.

Design: Body composition, 1-wk total EE (TEE), 24-h sedentary EE, and spontaneous physical activity were measured in 8 healthy subjects (4 men and 4 women) at the end of a 2-y confinement inside Biosphere 2. Unexpectedly, the food supply was markedly restricted during most of the confinement and all subjects experienced a marked, sustained weight loss (9.1 ± 6.6 kg; P < 0.001) from the low-energy (7000–11000 kJ/d), low-fat (9% of energy), but nutrient-dense, diet they consumed.

Results: The TEE inside Biosphere 2, assessed 3 wk before exit, averaged 10700 ± 560 kJ/d (n = 8). Within 1 wk after exit, the adjusted 24-h EE and spontaneous physical activity were lower in the biospherians (n = 5) than in 152 control subjects (6% and 45%, respectively; both P < 0.01). Six months after exit and return to an ad libitum diet, body weight had increased to preentry levels; however, adjusted 24-h EE and spontaneous physical activity were still significantly lower than in control subjects.

Conclusions: In lean humans, an adaptive decrease in EE appears to occur not only in states of life-threatening undernutrition, but also in response to less severe energy restriction sustained over several years.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/72/4/946.short

Metabolic and Behavioral Compensations in Response to Caloric Restriction: Implications for the Maintenance of Weight Loss
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0004377

Malnutrition, extreme lack of energy and other health issues will arise long before "starvation" becomes an issue. It is a general lack of health caused by severe calorie restriction. However, the level at which this occurs varies great from person to person and also depends greatly on the quality of calories consumed.

Bump for reading later.

From a motivational POV, it's a nightmare. I remember reading about an older study in which subjects fixated on food in both the short and long term. One subject's satiety levels got totally messed up and would not stop eating once released.

Are you referring to the Minnesota Starvation Experiment, during WWII? 36 conscientious objectors (out of 200 volunteers) were sequestered for over a year, and underfed for much of that time, to learn the effects of starvation and what would need to be done in Europe after the war was over.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Starvation_Experiment

in addition to the physical effects, the subjects experienced significant psychological effects including depression, a fixation on food, lack of sexual interest, and social withdrawal.

From a weight-loss perspective, I can't see the psychological effects as being worth a faster loss.