Very low calorie diets and metabolic damage

There are very few absolutes in the game of life.. black and white is stunning but there is comfort in the many shades of grey - and no, I am not talking 50 shades of

I skimmed most of the responses but I have to point out that, since the OP brought up the Minnesota Starvation Experiment as defense of VLCD (in the arguement that it shows our metabolism doesn't drop THAT much), the NEGATIVE effects of the experiment should also be pointed out.

Yes - their metabolisms might not have slowed down "that much". BUT - they found with semi-starvation, there were "significant increases in depression, hysteria, and hypochondriasis". Also - most of the subjects "experienced periods of severe emotional distress and depressions". They also found there were "extreme reactions to the psychological effects during the experiment including self-mutilation (one subject AMPUTATED three fingers of his hand with an axe, though the subject was unsure if he had done so intentionally or accidentally)." There was also a "preoccupation with food, both during the starvation period and the rehabilitation phase. Sexual interest was drastically reduced, and the volunteers showed signs of social withdrawal and isolation". There were repots of "decline in concentration, comprehension, and judgement capabilites". There were also "marked declines in physiological processes indicative of decreases in each subject's basal metabolic rate, reflected in reduced body temperature, respiration, and heart rate". Also - "some of the subjects exhibited edema in their extremities, presumably due to decreased levels of plasma proteins given that the body's ability to construct key proteins like albumin is based on available energy sources". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Starvation_Experiment#Results

Most nutritionists use the MSE as proof that VLCD can create mental and phyiscal effects similar to eating disorders. The men had a high deficit and, in turn, started obsessing over food, weight, image, and a few even self-mutilated. Their self-reported cognition decreased and their depression and hysteria increased signifcantly. These are important things to point out - the study was more indicative of the negative effects of VLCD than supporting it. Maybe the metabolism "only" reduced 15%, but the psychological and physical effects are something that seriously need to be pointed out. The fact they so closely mimic the symptoms of an eating disorder really should not be skimmed over.

Thanks for such a well written post. I tried to respond to the female in the 800 cal post, but I think MFP may have deleted her as the page bounced back. As someone who has successfully done a VLCD *and* kept the weight off, I found it quite offensive that many comments were rude and demeaning to the poster. Weight loss is a personal journey. What works for one person may not work for another. So people should stop and think before hurling cookie cutter advice to some seeking direction. Consider VLCD a form of fasting which many have been doing for cultural and religious reasons. I'm pretty sure they are not dying from it and neither would the general population.

Bumping, because this will never get old

I think this is the most useful post and followup I have come across. Really appreciate the info and balanced replies.

I lost my original weight by eating almost nothing through emotional stresses. I upped to 1200 after finding mfp and try to stay there or thereabouts.
Unfortunately I do tend to have odd binges when on holiday or celebrating, and I now find it really hard to drop back to my preferred weight. I dont have trouble staying at 1200 cals, but I don't seem to be able to lose weight again.

What I mean is, I went on holiday last summer and put on 8lb in a week. I spent the Autumn trying to lose those pounds but by Christmas had still kept about 4lb too many. Over Christmas I put on about 3lbs and tried to lose them before this year's summer holiday, but still feel about 7lb overweight.

As I said I stay around 1200 cals, often a fair bit below, rarely a bit over (1250/1300).

Any thoughts on how to shift half a stone? And why I am struggling so much?

I am basically vegetarian but when I am struggling to get protein I will try tuna or chicken, though I don't like this.
I eat veg, salads, some fruit, hardly any processed foods, not much bread (I'm cutting this almost completely at the moment) and my special treat sweets might be a piece of chocolate or marshmallow (I know, daft aren't I?)
When I have a stupid day I eat cake (usually at work) but always try really hard to keep that day under calories as compensation.

Sorry if there is a ramble here, or too much information, but I do feel a need for some balanced advice, and I think I would get it from you.
Thanks

I'm not out there advocating VLCDs. Not at all... heck, I wrote the Nutrition 101 article, which everyone should have read by now, and nowhere in it did I advocate VLCD. I'm simply trying to maintain the integrity of information while steering people in an optimal direction. It seems like too many people around here are stuck on absolutes. They believe there is 100% right ways of doing things and 100% wrong ways of doing things. There's no in between. In reality, there are very few absolutes in the game of fat loss.

Cheers :drinker:

Bump

.

This is the most interesting discussion of the "1,200 calorie" topic I've read here so far... thanks for posting, everyone.

In to read later.

Great post!

saving to read later

Sure, most people will screw up VLCDs, as I mention in the original post.

Most people will screw up everything and anything, including the paint-by-numbers MFP approach, as evidenced by the endless parade of posts on these forums.

The dirty little secret in all of this is that anyone with the discipline and self control to succeed using the MFP method will be able to succeed using virtually *any* method. If you look at the MFP champs here, dollars to donuts you could force them to go VLCD and they would find a way to make it work in a nutritionally sound manner.

It's never about the specifics of the diet - it is *always* about the dieter.

PS To be clear, I am NOT advocating VLCD in any way shape or form.