I'm taking issue with those telling people it's ok to starve

I'm not familiar with the post you're talking about, but I get your frustration. After all, it is called "My FITNESS pal" not my "Skinny at all costs pal" or my "Losing my gall bladder but who cares I'm a size 4 pal"
Your outrage is healthy!
karin

I strongly believe starvation mode exists !!! I totally agree with your post .......good on you for posting this !!!!

WOW!!! I could not agree more with you guys. Diets do not work. They are a short term state of mind and in my opinion they are punishment for liking food. I believe that people should commit to a life style change and that change should be about eating sensibly and healthy. Weight loss shold be slow and controlled for it to (a) be effective and (b) to be healthy. Fast/Crash dieting only give short term improvements and vcan lead to long term health problems. For me it has been a hard struggle to change the way I eat. And although it has been hard I am seeing the changes. I don't think twice about measuring my food or working out the calories. And if I want the odd little treat I either work out harder at the gym or sacrifice something esle from my daily allowance. My allowance is 1600 calories a day and am averaging 1.5 pounds loss a week.

Starvation mode is a myth. In studies of starvation, where they had guys in a compound so they could control what they ate and how much they worked out, the people in them continued to lose weight right to the bitter end even though their metabolism slowed down as much as 40%.

I think this is what was being referred to, and if you read what is written, there is a denial of starvation mode, and then a statement that metabolism slowed by 40%, which is what starvation mode basically is. Which also shows that "starvation mode" can affect brain functions as much as it can affect the metabolism.

Haha! Welcome to my world Brenda! If I had a nickle for every time I explained about the human metabolism, well... horrible saying but...

You make a good point regarding basic nutritional needs. Sometimes it seems there's a lot of talk about "starvation mode" if somebody doesn't meet their calories for a day or couple of days. I think it takes a longer time of consistently going below your needs to actually get to that point. The Minnesota experiment took over a year, with the last 6 months or so for rehabilitation. And the men still lost weight while they were starving, except after a while they lost weight more slowly than expected. But meeting your nutritional requirements does take at least 1,000-1,200 calories a day, unless you're under medical supervision for some condition.

IMO, there is a difference between a "starvation" level or a supposed "malnutritive" level and a very high caloric deficit.

Absolutely agree that going below 1200 Cal/day, except in specific cases such as the doctor-recommended post earlier, is not a good thing--either short or long-term.

However i do believe that, especially for those with higher BF levels or a lot of weight to lose that maintaining deficits of greater than 1000 Cals/day is not necessarily a bad thing. If you are eating sufficient calories of nutrient dense foods to maintain your body's needs and following a quality exercise program, than I wouldn't discourage someone who was having success this way.

A body with 35%-50% body fat is more likely to use stored body fat to supply a caloric deficit, and eating the right foods and the right exercise will help conserve lean body mass. At some point, yes, the person will have to restructure their program. But I also think that the benefits of someone losing 60, 80, 100+ pounds more than outweigh any temporary metabolic disruption that might occur with a larger calorie deficit.

But I agree 100% that, most of the time, trying a do-it-yourself VLCD is not only unhealthy, but almost guarantees long-term failure.

I'll start off by saying that I believe that you do need to eat enough to keep you going and your body healthy. You all have valid points and I agree to a point. I also do believe that its not a complete must to meet 1200 calories.

My situation is that I dont meet my 1200 cal goal daily. With that being said I do however meet all of my other goals and go over them. I eat a ton of veggies. I have over a cup with each meal. I go over my protein from the rec 45 on MFP to 61 rec from my doctor. My fiber, calcium and iron are all met. My calories for the day can range between 600-1000 depending on what I choose to eat. Chicken or turkey my calories are higher. Beans not so much. I by no means am starving and I lose weight at a healthy pace. I also have blood work and doctors visits on a regular basis.

If I sat there trying to eat 1200 calories a day after I met all of my other goals I would have so many health issues from my body not being able to process the extra protien etc. I've talked to my doctor and my SIL who is a nutritionist and they both say that I'm on the right track as long as all of the other goals are met.

You are free to flame away

As I started this diet, my motivation was double fold: bring down the weight and bring down the blood pressure, BUT I decided I wanted to do it slowly. There have been days when, for whatever reason, I just didn't feel like eating much of anything, and could have gone through the day eating as low as 400 calories, but I made a conscious decision that if I was going to do this, then I wanted to do it my way (the healthiest way that I was aware of), and the starvation route didn't make any sense to me. I think my husband is happy that I made that decision, because I'm losing weight, but NOT MY SMILE. So what if it takes me a little longer to get to the weight I wish to be, I'm not giving up enjoying living as I make this journey.

So to increase the calories on those super low days, I pulled something nutritious out of the refrigerator (plus I enjoyed some walnuts, etc.) No, I admit that I don't usually use the entire 1200 calories. This is partly because I'm unsure of just how accurate my calorie tally is, since I make so many things from scratch, and I prefer error on the low side of the 1200, but I do try to stay close to the goal. And I'm getting a better feel for the caloric (and nutritional) value of foods and recommended portion sizes without constantly looking them up. Since I started at this site, my frig is always full ---- of all kinds of fresh foods (applesauce or fresh fruit salad, leafy salads, steamed vegetables, etc). Today's treat is a fresh pineapple that I'm looking forward to cutting up! Starvation diet? For me, it is out of the question. (Plus, did anyone ever consider the Negative Calorie foods? Maybe choosing a starvation diet is counter productive.)

I visited mypyramid.gov to research current recommendations for a healthy diet, and now I'm enjoying so many foods that I didn't eat before. My blood pressure has come down to normal (without meds) and I've dropped 21 pounds since joining this site. For me, choosing a starvation diet may have indeed caused me to lose weight, but I truly believe it would have resulted in my ending up in the hospital (and I started this diet to AVOID that option). I am 65, and I've been told it's harder for seniors to lose weight, but increasing fresh fruits and vegetables, new spices and herbs, homemade low sodium soups, more fish, etc (plus my morning "basement steps" exercises) have benefited me greatly.

We all make choices, and when I started my diet, I CHOSE not to use the starvation diet. For me, the slow and steady nutritious route is helping me to accomplish my goal. And I believe that after I have reached my goal, the habits that I'm now acquiring will insure my maintenance of it.

I'm not familiar with the post you're talking about, but I get your frustration. After all, it is called "My FITNESS pal" not my "Skinny at all costs pal" or my "Losing my gall bladder but who cares I'm a size 4 pal"
Your outrage is healthy!
karin

LMAO

Because I haven't been able to lose anything for months and people keep telling me, you must not be in a deficit, eat less! I was so afraid it was true and that I would have to drop below 1,200 calories so I went and had my metabolism tested by a lab. Turns out my BMR is 1800 and my body has been refusing to give up it's fat stores because I have not been adequately fueling it. So, slowly I'm working back up to 1800 calories so my body won't think it's starving anymore. I weigh, measure and log every single thing, so I'm positively sure of my intake. I eat very few processed carbs and never eat fast food or hfcs/msg.

By the way, I have no idea if my metabolism slowed down, right now, it's 24% faster than average, but who knows what it was a year ago? Or 4 years ago (before i started trying to lose weight by eating next to nothing)??

So when I say eating LESS is not always the answer, I'm basing it on personal experience...not broscience.

I eat way more now than when I weighed 90 pounds more....I just eat WAY better stuff!

I'm hungry, like clock work, every 2.5 hrs. I have been my entire life. I immediately go into starvation mode (get dizzy, blurred vision, tingly fingers, nauseous, etc) if I don't eat right away. I can't function on 1200 calories a day. I plan my food for each day the night before and if we are on vacation, I get stressed out when I can't have the things I normally have to snack on. My day revolves around eating every 2.5 hrs and drinking a ton of water. On the days I don't exercise I really struggle to stay at my 1200 calorie mark. But there are people who's metabolisms are not the same or who are in the mind set that eating makes them fat. Which is not the case. You have to eat to lose weight and you have to make good choices when you do eat.

Starvation mode is a myth. In studies of starvation, where they had guys in a compound so they could control what they ate and how much they worked out, the people in them continued to lose weight right to the bitter end even though their metabolism slowed down as much as 40%.

I think this is what was being referred to, and if you read what is written, there is a denial of starvation mode, and then a statement that metabolism slowed by 40%, which is what starvation mode basically is. Which also shows that "starvation mode" can affect brain functions as much as it can affect the metabolism.

of course on a caloric deficit such as this you WILL lose weight........from your muscles, kidneys, heart, lungs......I was 89 pounds at one time and was the LEAST healthy ever....EVER!!!

Obvioulsy the people in the concentration camps continued to lose weight and survive.....somehow......but I have met more than one survivor who had severe bone issues, teeth gone at 50 yrs old, bent over with kyphosis from lack of nutrition. NOT to mention the heart defects, diabetes and kidney disorders.

:flowerforyou:

Sorry if I didnt post this the right way. Someone asked what I do for workouts and how long I've been trying to lose weight. The answer is:

I do cardio for about 45 minutes a day 4-5 days a week. I alternate fitness dvds.
DVD's in my rotation are:
30 day shred
10 minute solutions (arms, thighs, buns, back, abs, stretch)
windsor pilates (butt and thigh are my favorite)

I also have the total gym and an ab roller. In addition we have some workout games for the WII that I do with my step son every night.

I started MFP in Dec. I didnt start paying attention until mid Jan. Between Jan and Feb I have lost 6-10 pounds. It varies.

Before I started MFP I lost 20 pounds on my own but wanted something to keep me on track when an off day would come around.

no flaming girl...........just justified concern, but you said you are seeing a doctor and so you must be OK.

I just wonder if this is something you can do for the rest of your life? I too lost weight, but gained it back when I had to eat for realsies.

Good luck, stay healthy!!:flowerforyou: