Starvation Mode is a Myth?

Options
I recently read an article where this guy proclaimed that "Starvation Mode" is a myth. Does anyone agree? Disagree? I'd love to hear your thoughts on this! :smile:

Replies

  • regencywriter
    regencywriter Posts: 5 Member
    Options
    I'd love to hear people's thoughts on this, because I just came from the gym, where for three weeks my weight and body fat percentage haven't budged despite scrupulous calorie-counting and regular exercise. (For anyone out there who thinks, "She must be cheating somewhere," I'm not--I log everything, down to cinnamon and individual grape tomatoes, and I typically underestimate my calorie burn for workouts compared to my chest strap/heart monitor readings.) The gym owner said if I'm not losing weight at 1200 calories, I need to eat 1100, or 900, or whatever it takes. Whenever I drop below 1200 on my food log, however, the little warning displays that I'm not eating enough for proper nutrition and risk going into starvation mode.Wouldn't I at least LOSE some weight before that happens, though?
  • parkscs
    parkscs Posts: 1,639 Member
    Options
    As it's typically used by people and MFP, it's a myth. 1200 calories is not some magical number recognized by your body. It's a general recommendation of a caloric floor because it's really hard to get your RDAs of nutrients when eating less than 1200 calories. You may find it helpful to read this article: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/why-big-caloric-deficits-and-lots-of-activity-can-hurt-fat-loss.html
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,268 Member
    Options
    Yes as people like to explain starvation mode it is a myth

    Your body is not going to hang onto fat if you eat a vlcd lets say 900-1100 calories a day...

    Chances are if you are logging that little food...you aren't weighing it and eating more than you think.

    It also doesn't magically create fat from nothing to make you gain weight

    actual starvation happens after an extended period of time with little to no food...ie 45days with under 500 calories...even then weight is lost..

    Now keeping that in mind adaptive thermogenics starts if you eat too little food for too long in which case your body starts adapting to the few calories by burning less...
  • mmarly88
    Options
    I am interested in this as well. Maybe if you go under those calories, with exercise and have an adequate water intake then you wont enter the starvation mode?
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,017 Member
    Options
    Starvation mode is when the body uses lean body mass when body fat is at very low levels.....this is essentially a last ditch afford for survival, so you wake up the next day, but eventually organs start to malfunction and you die.

    If a person has a fair amount of body fat to use, which is pretty much the demographic here on MFP, it's basically impossible that your body will ever go into starvation mode, why would it.
  • parkscs
    parkscs Posts: 1,639 Member
    Options
    Starvation mode is when the body uses lean body mass when body fat is at very low levels.....this is essentially a last ditch afford for survival, so you wake up the next day, but eventually organs start to malfunction and you die.

    If a person has a fair amount of body fat to use, which is pretty much the demographic here on MFP, it's basically impossible that your body will ever go into starvation mode, why would it.

    It's not really impossible, but it's highly improbable. It's possible that by eating very little and exercising strenuously you will create a higher caloric deficit than your body can manage to pull from your fat stores, causing your body to begin burning lean body mass for the needed calories. That said, for most people trying to lose weight on this site, it's highly unlikely for this situation to occur and there's nothing about "1200 calories" that indicates this situation is likely to occur.
  • farway
    farway Posts: 1,264 Member
    Options
    It is a myth, there are numerous threads on this

    The obvious examples are the thin & hungry, not fat & hungry, people of "insert country here", and the Palestinian refugees starving, literally, to death in Syrian refugee camps, they would love 300 calories a day
  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 34,099 Member
    Options
    Here, the best thread ever by the smartest guy (16 pages of great discussion, too.)

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1077746-starvation-mode-adaptive-thermogenesis-and-weight-loss
  • TheEffort
    TheEffort Posts: 1,028 Member
    Options
    Bump.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,017 Member
    Options
    Starvation mode is when the body uses lean body mass when body fat is at very low levels.....this is essentially a last ditch afford for survival, so you wake up the next day, but eventually organs start to malfunction and you die.

    If a person has a fair amount of body fat to use, which is pretty much the demographic here on MFP, it's basically impossible that your body will ever go into starvation mode, why would it.

    It's not really impossible, but it's highly improbable. It's possible that by eating very little and exercising strenuously you will create a higher caloric deficit than your body can manage to pull from your fat stores, causing your body to begin burning lean body mass for the needed calories. That said, for most people trying to lose weight on this site, it's highly unlikely for this situation to occur and there's nothing about "1200 calories" that indicates this situation is likely to occur.
    Lean mass is generally used as energy somewhere throughout the day and most are going to lose a little lean mass when dieting, that's a given. Actually starvation will use primarily lean mass and hold onto adipose tissue when in this condition, I guess I wasn't too clear, my mistake.
  • stealthq
    stealthq Posts: 4,298 Member
    Options
    I'd love to hear people's thoughts on this, because I just came from the gym, where for three weeks my weight and body fat percentage haven't budged despite scrupulous calorie-counting and regular exercise. (For anyone out there who thinks, "She must be cheating somewhere," I'm not--I log everything, down to cinnamon and individual grape tomatoes, and I typically underestimate my calorie burn for workouts compared to my chest strap/heart monitor readings.) The gym owner said if I'm not losing weight at 1200 calories, I need to eat 1100, or 900, or whatever it takes. Whenever I drop below 1200 on my food log, however, the little warning displays that I'm not eating enough for proper nutrition and risk going into starvation mode.Wouldn't I at least LOSE some weight before that happens, though?

    FYI - it's not unusual for the body to seemingly 'stall' then start losing weight again. Weight loss is not linear. If the stall lasts 6 weeks, then it's pretty clear there's an issue with either logging accuracy or burn estimate accuracy and it's time to figure out which. The fIrst thing to check is if you're weighing your food rather than measuring - can make a big difference.

    1200 cals is really low - are you really short and close to a healthy weight? If not, don't drop below 1200 - it's not necessary. For reference, I was still losing at 5'3", 39, 119 lbs, sedentary, and 1450 cals.
  • fast_eddie_72
    fast_eddie_72 Posts: 719 Member
    Options
    I guess it depends on what you mean by "starvation mode". But yes, the way the term is used here (a lot) is a myth. Lots of research out there and google will turn up a TON of articles that explain what happen when you eat a lot less. I think, for long term weight loss, it's important to be aware of what's happening with your body. I read about it on the interwebs and decided that it is certainly possible to lower your calories to a point where you start burning a good bit of muscle, which I don't think any of us want to do.

    The other factor I don't often see mentioned - lower calories does lower your metabolism. But exercise raises it. It also helps preserve muscle. So if you do some exercise, it should give you some protection from the potential negative effects of calorie deficit. And if you eat REALLY low calories for a long time, it sounds like some bad things can happen. But, again, from what I've read and what I've decided for myself, that doesn't happen in a few days or even weeks.

    Last week I didn't lose anything. So this week I ate a lot less. And the scale started moving again. You just have to monitor what's going on and make smart decisions.

    All my posts about this stuff are long. Sorry. I think it's all more complicated than the trite answers suggest. Do some reading and go with what works for you. At the end of the day (or week) the scale will tell you what's going on in your body.
  • peleroja
    peleroja Posts: 3,979 Member
    Options
    Yes as people like to explain starvation mode it is a myth

    Your body is not going to hang onto fat if you eat a vlcd lets say 900-1100 calories a day...

    Chances are if you are logging that little food...you aren't weighing it and eating more than you think.

    It also doesn't magically create fat from nothing to make you gain weight

    actual starvation happens after an extended period of time with little to no food...ie 45days with under 500 calories...even then weight is lost..

    Now keeping that in mind adaptive thermogenics starts if you eat too little food for too long in which case your body starts adapting to the few calories by burning less...

    Pretty much this. It takes an extended period of time eating VERY few calories for a body to start burning substantially fewer calories. And even then you're still burning them and are not going to gain weight.
  • regencywriter
    regencywriter Posts: 5 Member
    Options
    FYI - it's not unusual for the body to seemingly 'stall' then start losing weight again. Weight loss is not linear. If the stall lasts 6 weeks, then it's pretty clear there's an issue with either logging accuracy or burn estimate accuracy and it's time to figure out which. The fIrst thing to check is if you're weighing your food rather than measuring - can make a big difference.

    1200 cals is really low - are you really short and close to a healthy weight? If not, don't drop below 1200 - it's not necessary. For reference, I was still losing at 5'3", 39, 119 lbs, sedentary, and 1450 cals.

    I'm 5'6", currently 135.3 lbs, 24.7% body fat. Not especially short, and I'd like to get down to around 20-22% body fat. (Since I'm also trying to add muscle, I'm going by body fat more than weight, but both figures have stalled.) I do have a kitchen scale and I weigh food when I'm not sure about the amount (raw chicken, salmon) etc., though admittedly for a lot of the food I eat (oatmeal, flaxseed, protein shakes, etc.) I've been using measuring cups and spoons or just relying on packaged serving size (Greek yogurt).
  • Greenrun99
    Greenrun99 Posts: 2,065 Member
    Options
    I once heard, from this dude, that was talking to himself, that these types of topics show up daily with no substance and you can find numerous ones with a simple Search Button.. This mythical Search feature was never found.. nor was any point of this already beat to death Topic.