Starvation mode is a myth.
Replies
-
I have been stuck at a plateau for weeks now and I am definitely logging calories accurately. I measure/weigh EVERYTHING I eat, I don't drink any calories (water only), I overestimate calories when in doubt, and I don't eat back my exercise calories.
I don't believe I'm in starvation mode - my only point is, when you say things like, "If you're not losing weight, you're eating too many calories", when the truth could be that you're retaining water or losing fat but gaining muscle.
There are some of us who have legit issues with losing despite being very accurate at counting ... it's frustrating/annoying to bring it up only to have everyone tell you "You're obviously underestimating what you're eating."
My understanding is that if you are in a calorie deficet you will loose weight. Even weight training and maintaining or even building muscle will not offset the lost of fat to that extent. As for water weight that wouldn't be significant enough or long term enough to even count I wouldn't think.
I read the article as well and it made sense to me. I have often heard that phrase and use it myself prior to learning more...it was a good article and informative...
But isn't that essentially saying then that there's no such thing as plateaus, only a plateau of calorie consumption?
There's no way there's not something else going on with me, other than "eating too many calories." I'm really not in denial here. I'm measuring/counting everything, I work out 6 days a week and I'm eating less than 1400 calories. Something else has to be happening.0 -
The amount of times I've seen "Eating 800 calories, I'm not losing weight" your advice would be to eat less?
I think the advice would actually be, Track your calories accurately!0 -
Ladies and gentlemen, everyone knows starvation mode is a fact, it's indisputable. All the opinions of the doctors, nutritionist, and rocket scientist that post in the general diet and weight loss help section of MFP say so. I once questioned it as well until one of the top heart surgeons in the country posted a reply with a yahoo article about it AND it was rule #7 under the top 10 diet tricks you never knew about.
I have figured out a way around it though. It's a dirty little secret I will share with you. What I do is eat exactly 1200 calories. (As everyone knows that regardless your weight, bf%, height, gender, activity level, etc. etc.that if you eat anything less than 1200 calories you will go into instant starvation mode and your metabolism will stop completely. Thus gaining weight from breathing the air, the definite sign of starvation mode has been activated and the only thing in the universe that can defy all known physics.) But back to the my secret. I eat exactly 1200 calories a day but at 11:59pm I quickly pop in a stick of orbit sugar free gum. This is 3 calories. This puts me at 1203 calories exactly but I have to chew it fast to get at least that 1 calorie in before the clock strikes midnight. It's pretty intense. Sometimes I have two sticks of gum because I get too excited from the adrenaline rush and am weary of burning too many calories at that exact moment of time.
So now that I have spilled the beans on the ultimate weight lose plan, go and be healthy, merry, and happy. You're welcome.0 -
There's no way there's not something else going on with me, other than "eating too many calories." I'm really not in denial here. I'm measuring/counting everything, I work out 6 days a week and I'm eating less than 1400 calories. Something else has to be happening.
is 1400 your gross or net? if it's your gross, then i think you've mucked up your hormones and your body is adapting to what it sees as a large calorie deficit by slowing down your overall BMR. this is NOT starvation mode or metabolic damage. this is the adaptive thermogenesis discussed in the link. some bodily functions get more efficient and some get put on the back burner (e.g. hair health) while your body reacts to being overstressed. this is why people suggest "eating more". it's to get your body back into a non-stressed state.0 -
Lol @ people who eat 1200 or less cals a day trying to lose weight, bunch of crap. You really think that's a lifestyle you can keep up? Even if you get nice and skinny you'll be looking like a starving african child. I eat lots of fat and protein every day and I still lose weight as long as I set the correct defecit, and I eat cookies, ice cream, fried chicken, and all the goods, AKA I'm not miserable or obsessive about my diet, just careful about calories in vs calories out and hitting my macros. This isn't rocket science.0
-
Just kind of curious, but what's your suggestion if it turns they aren't under-counting? It's not a lot of help if someone is eating 800 calories, and logging accurately, and the only response is "Well that sucks." What do you tell them then?
See a doctor. If that is indeed what is going on, something is very wrong that MFP members won't be able to help with.0 -
I have been stuck at a plateau for weeks now and I am definitely logging calories accurately. I measure/weigh EVERYTHING I eat, I don't drink any calories (water only), I overestimate calories when in doubt, and I don't eat back my exercise calories.
I don't believe I'm in starvation mode - my only point is, when you say things like, "If you're not losing weight, you're eating too many calories", when the truth could be that you're retaining water or losing fat but gaining muscle.
There are some of us who have legit issues with losing despite being very accurate at counting ... it's frustrating/annoying to bring it up only to have everyone tell you "You're obviously underestimating what you're eating."
My understanding is that if you are in a calorie deficet you will loose weight. Even weight training and maintaining or even building muscle will not offset the lost of fat to that extent. As for water weight that wouldn't be significant enough or long term enough to even count I wouldn't think.
I read the article as well and it made sense to me. I have often heard that phrase and use it myself prior to learning more...it was a good article and informative...
But isn't that essentially saying then that there's no such thing as plateaus, only a plateau of calorie consumption?
There's no way there's not something else going on with me, other than "eating too many calories." I'm really not in denial here. I'm measuring/counting everything, I work out 6 days a week and I'm eating less than 1400 calories. Something else has to be happening.
Then, unless you are already very small, see a doctor.0 -
I have been stuck at a plateau for weeks now and I am definitely logging calories accurately. I measure/weigh EVERYTHING I eat, I don't drink any calories (water only), I overestimate calories when in doubt, and I don't eat back my exercise calories.
I don't believe I'm in starvation mode - my only point is, when you say things like, "If you're not losing weight, you're eating too many calories", when the truth could be that you're retaining water or losing fat but gaining muscle.
There are some of us who have legit issues with losing despite being very accurate at counting ... it's frustrating/annoying to bring it up only to have everyone tell you "You're obviously underestimating what you're eating."
My understanding is that if you are in a calorie deficet you will loose weight. Even weight training and maintaining or even building muscle will not offset the lost of fat to that extent. As for water weight that wouldn't be significant enough or long term enough to even count I wouldn't think.
I read the article as well and it made sense to me. I have often heard that phrase and use it myself prior to learning more...it was a good article and informative...
But isn't that essentially saying then that there's no such thing as plateaus, only a plateau of calorie consumption?
There's no way there's not something else going on with me, other than "eating too many calories." I'm really not in denial here. I'm measuring/counting everything, I work out 6 days a week and I'm eating less than 1400 calories. Something else has to be happening.
Can you open your diary?0 -
Super, so glad you posted this. Really helpful.
Wish you were around to help me stay on task when I was eating 300 calories a day for 3 months. The only thing I lost is my metabolism and my ability to function.
1. I was not new to nutrition. Had been losing on 1200 cals/day for a year. I lost 50lbs and maintained for a year before I got pregnant and fat. Twice. Lost another 60lb in a year before the weight loss stopped. I maintained that loss for two years before I started losing again two months ago.
2. I had been using the same set of measuring cups and scales (I always double measure and take the smaller...)
3. I was not severely obese. I was a healthy weight for my height.
For two years, every time I tried to lose weight by cutting my calories to 1000 or 1200 a day I would lose one or two pounds, and then gain another back - WHILE STILL EATING THE SAME 1200 CALORIES EVERY DAY.
I finally gave in and started eating more than my BMR. And now I am losing weight.
I am 5'4, I weigh 124, and I eat 1800+ calories a day. I am losing an average of 1.8lbs a week.
Gee. Maybe I should just go back to 1000/day so I could lose more.
*rolls eyes*0 -
My doctor actually recommended a 900 calorie a day diet for me, which is what I am doing now. I was informed to stay on 900 calories a day for 4 to 6 weeks, and then gradually increase calorie intake to 1000 for the next 4 weeks, then 1100 for 4 weeks after that, until I am able to do 1200 a day without weight gain, but no more than 1200 a day. I have been doing this for 2 weeks now and am doing great on a 900 calories a day diet. I exercise 6 days a week. My energy is high, my mood is great, and I don' t feel hungry all the time, but probably because I am eating the right things and things I already like to eat, . When I lowered my calorie intake to 1200 a day, I did not loose weight. I gained. Which caused me to stop exercising after a few months. Everyone is different and our calorie needs are also different, what works for some doesn't mean it will work for everyone. I will trust my doctor on this one and not those without a doctorate.0
-
There's no way there's not something else going on with me, other than "eating too many calories." I'm really not in denial here. I'm measuring/counting everything, I work out 6 days a week and I'm eating less than 1400 calories. Something else has to be happening.
is 1400 your gross or net? if it's your gross, then i think you've mucked up your hormones and your body is adapting to what it sees as a large calorie deficit by slowing down your overall BMR. this is NOT starvation mode or metabolic damage. this is the adaptive thermogenesis discussed in the link. some bodily functions get more efficient and some get put on the back burner (e.g. hair health) while your body reacts to being overstressed. this is why people suggest "eating more". it's to get your body back into a non-stressed state.
I'm not sure what you mean by gross/net - like I'm eating 1440 after exercise, or before? (I get what the words themselves mean, just not sure in this context), But maybe this will help - MFP tells me to eat 1440 a day based on a "sedentary" activity level. (I am not actually sedentary and do not eat back my exercise calories unless I'm legitimately hungry - then I have something reasonable and healthy.) My TDEE is 2080 (according to IIFYM), so I'm supposedly eating a 600 calorie deficit.
I will glady eat more if that will help! Although I'm honestly rarely hungry on 1440.0 -
I have been stuck at a plateau for weeks now and I am definitely logging calories accurately. I measure/weigh EVERYTHING I eat, I don't drink any calories (water only), I overestimate calories when in doubt, and I don't eat back my exercise calories.
I don't believe I'm in starvation mode - my only point is, when you say things like, "If you're not losing weight, you're eating too many calories", when the truth could be that you're retaining water or losing fat but gaining muscle.
There are some of us who have legit issues with losing despite being very accurate at counting ... it's frustrating/annoying to bring it up only to have everyone tell you "You're obviously underestimating what you're eating."
My understanding is that if you are in a calorie deficet you will loose weight. Even weight training and maintaining or even building muscle will not offset the lost of fat to that extent. As for water weight that wouldn't be significant enough or long term enough to even count I wouldn't think.
I read the article as well and it made sense to me. I have often heard that phrase and use it myself prior to learning more...it was a good article and informative...
But isn't that essentially saying then that there's no such thing as plateaus, only a plateau of calorie consumption?
There's no way there's not something else going on with me, other than "eating too many calories." I'm really not in denial here. I'm measuring/counting everything, I work out 6 days a week and I'm eating less than 1400 calories. Something else has to be happening.
Can you open your diary?
Just unlocked it ... didn't realize it was not public already!
I'm not going to say I'm the world's greatest eater, nutritionally speaking. (That's something I'm working on ... breaking my Subway habit, lol!) But I rarely go over my calories.
I really am open to insights. I'm not trying to cheat when it comes to counting calories. I realize that is only cheating myself!0 -
Lol @ people who eat 1200 or less cals a day trying to lose weight, bunch of crap. You really think that's a lifestyle you can keep up? Even if you get nice and skinny you'll be looking like a starving african child. I eat lots of fat and protein every day and I still lose weight as long as I set the correct defecit, and I eat cookies, ice cream, fried chicken, and all the goods, AKA I'm not miserable or obsessive about my diet, just careful about calories in vs calories out and hitting my macros. This isn't rocket science.
It's not meant to be a "lifestyle change" forever. My doctor put me on a 900 calorie a day diet. 1200 a day did not work for me. I was told to do this for 4 to 6 weeks and then gradually increase my calorie intake over the coarse of the next few months until I was at 1200 a day. 900 cals a day is intended to jump start a metabolism, it is not intended to be an everyday life choice for the rest of your life. That is insane. It is safe under a doctors watch. And for obese people, it is actually a better way to quickly diet especially if they have health ailments due to their weight that need to be corrected quickly. Also, with the food I eat, I am not hungry all day as some others have said. But again, it's all in what you eat.0 -
Great article showed up in my friend feed:
http://www.aworkoutroutine.com/starvation-mode/
The TL;DR is this: For virtually all people, if you aren't losing weight, it is for one reason only: You aren't really maintaining a calorie deficit.
Starvation mode only happens once you have lost so much body fat that you can't lose anymore without dying. If you are overweight, and you eat a calorie deficit, you will lose weight no matter what.
If you think you are dieting and you are not losing weight the most likely explanation is you aren't accurately tracking your calories.
re: TL:DR The problem is "starvation mode" is like "eating clean". People use it to mean whatever they want it to mean.
I agree that other than a medical issue being the cause, a deficit will cause weight loss. People who say they are gaining weight by eating too big a deficit are usually just ignorant of how the body works. People who say it's impossible to not lose while eating at a deficit are also wrong.
But then, I don't think any of that is what is usually meant by starvation mode.0 -
There's no way there's not something else going on with me, other than "eating too many calories." I'm really not in denial here. I'm measuring/counting everything, I work out 6 days a week and I'm eating less than 1400 calories. Something else has to be happening.
is 1400 your gross or net? if it's your gross, then i think you've mucked up your hormones and your body is adapting to what it sees as a large calorie deficit by slowing down your overall BMR. this is NOT starvation mode or metabolic damage. this is the adaptive thermogenesis discussed in the link. some bodily functions get more efficient and some get put on the back burner (e.g. hair health) while your body reacts to being overstressed. this is why people suggest "eating more". it's to get your body back into a non-stressed state.
I'm not sure what you mean by gross/net - like I'm eating 1440 after exercise, or before? (I get what the words themselves mean, just not sure in this context), But maybe this will help - MFP tells me to eat 1440 a day based on a "sedentary" activity level. (I am not actually sedentary and do not eat back my exercise calories unless I'm legitimately hungry - then I have something reasonable and healthy.) My TDEE is 2080 (according to IIFYM), so I'm supposedly eating a 600 calorie deficit.
I will glady eat more if that will help! Although I'm honestly rarely hungry on 1440.
are you eating 1400 calories of food in total? = gross
or are you eating 1400 calories + all of your exercise calories? = net
if 1400 is your gross, then that's the first likely culprit. you are not giving yourself enough fuel. your body is reacting to that.0 -
I am amazed this garbage still has life.0
-
I researched quite a bit into 'starvation mode' when I began to undertake fasts. Let's use the plain water fast just now as a median.
I found I lost significant amounts of weight in the first 3-4 days which then ground to a halt and my weight barely budged after that. My longest fast was 10 days and after the initial couple of days of weightloss it didn't return. How else can you explain what happened other than that my body realised the lack of calorie input? This causes the body to start burning body fat at an extremely slow rate and you feel tired and lethargic, you just want to stay in bed. This is commonly experienced by long-term fasters.
I noticed immediate weightloss after slowly introducing food again. This was still at a massive deficiate to what a 'maintenence allowence of calories' would be. My weighhtloss returned to normal on my usual diet of 1200 calories.
I have no idea whether repeated phases of putting your body into starvation mode damages your metabolism like some people believe. I can only think of animals in the wild who repeatedly go through these starvation cycles when it's hard to find food, like in Winter. It seems natural to me.
This is an opinion only based on my own experiences. I'm not saying I'm right but saying starvation mode is a myth is just an uneducated guess.
Note: my 1200 calorie intake is based on a 300 calorie deficit of my BMR, I routinely eat more on a day where I work out a lot so as not to deprive myself too much.0 -
[/quote]
Just unlocked it ... didn't realize it was not public already!
I'm not going to say I'm the world's greatest eater, nutritionally speaking. (That's something I'm working on ... breaking my Subway habit, lol!) But I rarely go over my calories.
I really am open to insights. I'm not trying to cheat when it comes to counting calories. I realize that is only cheating myself!
[/quote]
Thats fine. We all have to start somewhere and tracking your intake is a great place to start. I have some thoughts. Also several questions. What was your top weight in the last two months ? What was your lowest weight? What is it now? Is it safe to assume you started consistently tracking in mid july?0 -
Lol @ people who eat 1200 or less cals a day trying to lose weight, bunch of crap. You really think that's a lifestyle you can keep up? Even if you get nice and skinny you'll be looking like a starving african child. I eat lots of fat and protein every day and I still lose weight as long as I set the correct defecit, and I eat cookies, ice cream, fried chicken, and all the goods, AKA I'm not miserable or obsessive about my diet, just careful about calories in vs calories out and hitting my macros. This isn't rocket science.
It's not meant to be a "lifestyle change" forever. My doctor put me on a 900 calorie a day diet. 1200 a day did not work for me. I was told to do this for 4 to 6 weeks and then gradually increase my calorie intake over the coarse of the next few months until I was at 1200 a day. 900 cals a day is intended to jump start a metabolism, it is not intended to be an everyday life choice for the rest of your life. That is insane. It is safe under a doctors watch. And for obese people, it is actually a better way to quickly diet especially if they have health ailments due to their weight that need to be corrected quickly. Also, with the food I eat, I am not hungry all day as some others have said. But again, it's all in what you eat.
I'm sorry, but if your doctor told you to do a 900 cal diet to "jump start" your metabolism then you have found one of the worst doctors to be under the care of.0 -
Reading the comments in these types of posts drives me up a wall because I think the moral of the story is this:
DO WHAT WORKS FOR YOU!
Some people eat 1800+ calories a day and lose weight and some people (like me) set goals at 1200 a day and STILL LOSE WEIGHT.
Which by the way to the people who say this is not maintainable, I've been eating at this level for over a month and I don't feel starved and I don't feel the urge to binge. And I'm not a small person--I'm 5'9" and 199lbs. And no, I'm not underestimating because I weigh and measure EVERYTHING that goes into my mouth. I don't feel the need to readjust and eat more because this is not achievable--if that changes I will recant my statement but I dont' see that happening.
BUT, I'm not going to tell the people who eat 1800+ calories a day are stupid for eating more if they're happy with their progress. I'm also not saying that people should go out and eat 500 calories a day every day for a year.
As long as you're putting good things into your body and exercising regularly, it shouldn't matter whether you're more successful with a higher or lower calorie count. If one stops working for you, maybe you should consider switching things around!
But there's no reason to come on a message board and act like your method is the "correct" way to do something just because it has been working for you. Everyone has a different body with a different metabolism which is why a One-Size-Fits-All weightloss method is not and will never be realistic. The only proven method for weight loss is calories in < calories out. The spread between the two is not important as long as it works for your body and your lifestyle.0 -
Just unlocked it ... didn't realize it was not public already!
I'm not going to say I'm the world's greatest eater, nutritionally speaking. (That's something I'm working on ... breaking my Subway habit, lol!) But I rarely go over my calories.
I really am open to insights. I'm not trying to cheat when it comes to counting calories. I realize that is only cheating myself!
[/quote]
Thats fine. We all have to start somewhere and tracking your intake is a great place to start. I have some thoughts. Also several questions. What was your top weight in the last two months ? What was your lowest weight? What is it now? Is it safe to assume you started consistently tracking in mid july?
[/quote]
Thanks for the encouragement
My highest weight ever was around 190 back in October 2012. My weight hovered in the mid-180s for many months after that. I have lost weight verrrrry slowly over the last 6 months or so - I was doing Weight Watchers and was very inconsistent - so my weight yo-yo'd for a while, but overall went down a few pounds.
Started MFP (or restarted, rather) in mid-July and yes, I have been consistently tracking since then. I lost some weight right away, then started a new exercise program and have been stuck at the same weight (170-173 depending on the day) for several weeks. 170 or right around there is my lowest weight since I started this time around.
I've been told plateaus are normal, but I just didn't expect to encounter one when I still have 50 pounds left to lose!0 -
What was your weight in mid july when you started? How long did it take to get down to 170? Did you really only eat 800 cals last saturday? I'm almost done I promise.
Just unlocked it ... didn't realize it was not public already!
I'm not going to say I'm the world's greatest eater, nutritionally speaking. (That's something I'm working on ... breaking my Subway habit, lol!) But I rarely go over my calories.
I really am open to insights. I'm not trying to cheat when it comes to counting calories. I realize that is only cheating myself!
Thats fine. We all have to start somewhere and tracking your intake is a great place to start. I have some thoughts. Also several questions. What was your top weight in the last two months ? What was your lowest weight? What is it now? Is it safe to assume you started consistently tracking in mid july?
Thanks for the encouragement
My highest weight ever was around 190 back in October 2012. My weight hovered in the mid-180s for many months after that. I have lost weight verrrrry slowly over the last 6 months or so - I was doing Weight Watchers and was very inconsistent - so my weight yo-yo'd for a while, but overall went down a few pounds.
Started MFP (or restarted, rather) in mid-July and yes, I have been consistently tracking since then. I lost some weight right away, then started a new exercise program and have been stuck at the same weight (170-173 depending on the day) for several weeks. 170 or right around there is my lowest weight since I started this time around.
I've been told plateaus are normal, but I just didn't expect to encounter one when I still have 50 pounds left to lose!0 -
I have been stuck at a plateau for weeks now and I am definitely logging calories accurately. I measure/weigh EVERYTHING I eat, I don't drink any calories (water only), I overestimate calories when in doubt, and I don't eat back my exercise calories.
I don't believe I'm in starvation mode - my only point is, when you say things like, "If you're not losing weight, you're eating too many calories", when the truth could be that you're retaining water or losing fat but gaining muscle.
There are some of us who have legit issues with losing despite being very accurate at counting ... it's frustrating/annoying to bring it up only to have everyone tell you "You're obviously underestimating what you're eating."
My understanding is that if you are in a calorie deficet you will loose weight. Even weight training and maintaining or even building muscle will not offset the lost of fat to that extent. As for water weight that wouldn't be significant enough or long term enough to even count I wouldn't think.
I read the article as well and it made sense to me. I have often heard that phrase and use it myself prior to learning more...it was a good article and informative...
But isn't that essentially saying then that there's no such thing as plateaus, only a plateau of calorie consumption?
There's no way there's not something else going on with me, other than "eating too many calories." I'm really not in denial here. I'm measuring/counting everything, I work out 6 days a week and I'm eating less than 1400 calories. Something else has to be happening.
That's the first issue I see.
you are "measuring" and/or counting not weighing your food. I did that up until 3 weeks ago as well and would have losses but nothing to speak of over 10 weeks(4lbs)...then I saw this thread watched the video and immediately bought a digital scale and now weigh everything I can and in the last 3 weeks have lost 3lbs...
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/872212-you-re-probably-eating-more-than-you-think0 -
My highest weight ever was around 190 back in October 2012. My weight hovered in the mid-180s for many months after that. I have lost weight verrrrry slowly over the last 6 months or so - I was doing Weight Watchers and was very inconsistent - so my weight yo-yo'd for a while, but overall went down a few pounds.
Started MFP (or restarted, rather) in mid-July and yes, I have been consistently tracking since then. I lost some weight right away, then started a new exercise program and have been stuck at the same weight (170-173 depending on the day) for several weeks. 170 or right around there is my lowest weight since I started this time around.
I've been told plateaus are normal, but I just didn't expect to encounter one when I still have 50 pounds left to lose!
Stop eating fast food 5-6 days a week and I promise that you will see the scale move again. Also, I am not gonna call bs on you but a good majority of fast food you eat are combo meals yet there is not a drink recorded...0 -
Reading the comments in these types of posts drives me up a wall because I think the moral of the story is this:
DO WHAT WORKS FOR YOU!
Some people eat 1800+ calories a day and lose weight and some people (like me) set goals at 1200 a day and STILL LOSE WEIGHT.
Which by the way to the people who say this is not maintainable, I've been eating at this level for over a month and I don't feel starved and I don't feel the urge to binge. And I'm not a small person--I'm 5'9" and 199lbs. And no, I'm not underestimating because I weigh and measure EVERYTHING that goes into my mouth. I don't feel the need to readjust and eat more because this is not achievable--if that changes I will recant my statement but I dont' see that happening.
You've been doing this for a month. That's not very long.
And I think you misunderstand most people's intentions when they say you should be able to eat more and still lose weight. Look, I want you to lose weight. I want people to be happy. And I want to see them succeed long term. Unless a person has a special condition that makes them different than the bulk of the population, it isn't that hard to calculate your body's caloric needs. At 5'9" and 199 lbs (and 30 but that was just a high-ball guess) you need 2037 calories to maintain your weight if you are completely sedentary. Which is consequently what I need to maintain a weight of 125 lbs while moderately active.
I don't know how I feel about starvation mode, though it appears our bodies are somewhat adaptive to caloric conditions.... However, I do want to people to succeed. And when I see overweight friends try to eat super low calories and then binge and then give up because it's too hard, it makes me feel bad.
But if you're happy with what you're doing, keep doing it. I wish you luck. I personally think there's an easier way. It may be slower but it's maintainable for years and years and years. Eat at your goal weight TDEE. That way when you get there nothing changes, you don't revert to old habits, and you maintain that weight.0 -
[/quote]
Stop eating fast food 5-6 days a week and I promise that you will see the scale move again. Also, I am not gonna call bs on you but a good majority of fast food you eat are combo meals yet there is not a drink recorded...
[/quote]
I don't get the drinks ... I am too cheap
And yes, I need to break my McDonald's and Subway habit. Although I understand completely why from a nutritional standpoint, you should technically be able to eat fast food every meal and lose weight as long as you're under your calories. Not that I'm suggesting that's a good plan for one's health, nor is it something I want to test ... I'm just saying you can't point to a certain food on someone's list and say "That's why you're not losing" if you're also going to argue "The only reason you're not losing is because you're eating too many calories." (Not that you specifically did that - just the thread in general.)0 -
I have been stuck at a plateau for weeks now and I am definitely logging calories accurately. I measure/weigh EVERYTHING I eat, I don't drink any calories (water only), I overestimate calories when in doubt, and I don't eat back my exercise calories.
I don't believe I'm in starvation mode - my only point is, when you say things like, "If you're not losing weight, you're eating too many calories", when the truth could be that you're retaining water or losing fat but gaining muscle.
There are some of us who have legit issues with losing despite being very accurate at counting ... it's frustrating/annoying to bring it up only to have everyone tell you "You're obviously underestimating what you're eating."
My understanding is that if you are in a calorie deficet you will loose weight. Even weight training and maintaining or even building muscle will not offset the lost of fat to that extent. As for water weight that wouldn't be significant enough or long term enough to even count I wouldn't think.
I read the article as well and it made sense to me. I have often heard that phrase and use it myself prior to learning more...it was a good article and informative...
But isn't that essentially saying then that there's no such thing as plateaus, only a plateau of calorie consumption?
There's no way there's not something else going on with me, other than "eating too many calories." I'm really not in denial here. I'm measuring/counting everything, I work out 6 days a week and I'm eating less than 1400 calories. Something else has to be happening.
That's the first issue I see.
you are "measuring" and/or counting not weighing your food. I did that up until 3 weeks ago as well and would have losses but nothing to speak of over 10 weeks(4lbs)...then I saw this thread watched the video and immediately bought a digital scale and now weigh everything I can and in the last 3 weeks have lost 3lbs...
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/872212-you-re-probably-eating-more-than-you-think
Sorry if it wasn't clear ... I am weighing and measuring. I have a digital scale. I measure if it's more appropriate, like say, 8 ounces of milk or something.0 -
[/quote]
Stop eating fast food 5-6 days a week and I promise that you will see the scale move again. Also, I am not gonna call bs on you but a good majority of fast food you eat are combo meals yet there is not a drink recorded...
I don't get the drinks ... I am too cheap
And yes, I need to break my McDonald's and Subway habit. Although I understand completely why from a nutritional standpoint, you should technically be able to eat fast food every meal and lose weight as long as you're under your calories. Not that I'm suggesting that's a good plan for one's health, nor is it something I want to test ... I'm just saying you can't point to a certain food on someone's list and say "That's why you're not losing" if you're also going to argue "The only reason you're not losing is because you're eating too many calories." (Not that you specifically did that - just the thread in general.)
I did say it....you are measuring your food not weighing it...to loose weight you have to be in a caloric deficet.
But not to hijack this thread any longer as it is about an article on the often over used phrase of "STARVATION MODE"0 -
No. My advice would be to make sure that they are drinking enough water and make that they are eating "good" foods not junk.0
-
I have been stuck at a plateau for weeks now and I am definitely logging calories accurately. I measure/weigh EVERYTHING I eat, I don't drink any calories (water only), I overestimate calories when in doubt, and I don't eat back my exercise calories.
I don't believe I'm in starvation mode - my only point is, when you say things like, "If you're not losing weight, you're eating too many calories", when the truth could be that you're retaining water or losing fat but gaining muscle.
There are some of us who have legit issues with losing despite being very accurate at counting ... it's frustrating/annoying to bring it up only to have everyone tell you "You're obviously underestimating what you're eating."
My understanding is that if you are in a calorie deficet you will loose weight. Even weight training and maintaining or even building muscle will not offset the lost of fat to that extent. As for water weight that wouldn't be significant enough or long term enough to even count I wouldn't think.
I read the article as well and it made sense to me. I have often heard that phrase and use it myself prior to learning more...it was a good article and informative...
But isn't that essentially saying then that there's no such thing as plateaus, only a plateau of calorie consumption?
There's no way there's not something else going on with me, other than "eating too many calories." I'm really not in denial here. I'm measuring/counting everything, I work out 6 days a week and I'm eating less than 1400 calories. Something else has to be happening.
That's the first issue I see.
you are "measuring" and/or counting not weighing your food. I did that up until 3 weeks ago as well and would have losses but nothing to speak of over 10 weeks(4lbs)...then I saw this thread watched the video and immediately bought a digital scale and now weigh everything I can and in the last 3 weeks have lost 3lbs...
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/872212-you-re-probably-eating-more-than-you-think
Sorry if it wasn't clear ... I am weighing and measuring. I have a digital scale. I measure if it's more appropriate, like say, 8 ounces of milk or something.
Did u see my follow up post? I wanted to clarify a few pieces of info.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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