Excellent article on Metabolic Damage and starvation mode

Depictureboy
Depictureboy Posts: 38 Member
http://www.t-nation.com/diet-fat-loss/truth-about-metabolic-damage

excerpt:

Starvation mode, metabolic damage, weight loss resistance, adrenal fatigue... For some reason, these terms get under people's skin. You hear constantly about this myth and that myth, and how these things are bogus. Sort of reminds me of a saying by Osho, my favorite philosopher: "The less a person knows the more stubbornly he knows it."

Feel free to share it around to the other forums. I know right now there are a lot of naysayers in regards to starvation mode, this article is really well written. I don't usually share tnation articles because of the meathead mentality, but sometimes like today I run across a really good article.

Replies

  • conidiring
    conidiring Posts: 230 Member
    I'm thinking this may be what my problem is. I orginally lost 12 pounds, eating 1000-1200 K and exercising an hour a day 6 days a week. Then it stopped. I upped my exercise to 2 hours 6 days a week, and dropped my calories eating between 500-1000 K. Yes, I was weighing/measuring foods, only eating serving sizes, etc., wasn't eating back exercise calories. I gained 15 pounds back. Now I'm maintaining that weight (yuck!). I'm trying to increase my calories to 1500-1700, dropped my exercise to 1/2 hour per day most days, some days more, still 6 days a week. Right now my calories are between 1000-1400, so not there yet. I'm frustrated with people saying that "I'm eating more than I think I am" etc.

    edited for clarification.
  • redheadmommy
    redheadmommy Posts: 908 Member
    great article, thanks for sharing!
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Excellent article, and I agree, that site saying it may have more impact on many that say it won't happen.

    Now, I can already hear it - that is about lifters with low bodyfat doing too much.

    Well, here's the study specifics on overweight folks getting the same "metabolic efficiencies" as I call it, or suppressed maintenance or TDEE as I'll use too.

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/heybales?month=201401
  • interesting article but miffed it didn't actually tell you a great deal - for example how does this help anyone:

    Stage 3: Metabolic Damage Once you're here, you have little choice. "Eat less, exercise less" is the only option. You'll need to focus all your time on rest and recovery. Walking and a few traditional weight training workouts are likely all you'll be able to do.

    Isn't that just perpetuating the eat less ideal - so if I am in stage 3 I am what eat less and less and less... not sure how that works because been there done that and cannot eat any less that I have been!
  • AnexRavensong
    AnexRavensong Posts: 262 Member
    interesting article but miffed it didn't actually tell you a great deal - for example how does this help anyone:

    Stage 3: Metabolic Damage Once you're here, you have little choice. "Eat less, exercise less" is the only option. You'll need to focus all your time on rest and recovery. Walking and a few traditional weight training workouts are likely all you'll be able to do.

    Isn't that just perpetuating the eat less ideal - so if I am in stage 3 I am what eat less and less and less... not sure how that works because been there done that and cannot eat any less that I have been!

    EXACTLY what I was thinking. I was wondering if he made a mistake and meant more? SURELY he meant more.. I mean otherwise it just perpetuates the problem..
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    It's because the studies have shown a 20% max impact on maintenance figures. Eat low enough you will lose. Compliance may be an issue obviously.

    So if you have max suppressed your system, I think he's saying, might as well finish off your fat loss, which means you of course have to eat less than you might have otherwise.

    Or take the 3-15 months to eat at a steadily increasing maintenance while keeping exercise decent and recover.
    But NOT eating at what you think is expected TDEE the whole time, or your weight will soon increase enough to make it reality.
    Of course at that point, the calc's would likely say for new weight the TDEE is even higher yet.
    So that's not a smart method either.

    But I think he knows that's not going to happen, someone waiting that long to recover if they need to lose weight.

    Also remember the context of the article, who it's written for - body builders.
    If you have to cut for a show and you've already done that to yourself, just suck it up and do it.
  • Thanks Haybales

    so really for those of us NOT body building but resetting eating your expected TDEE is ok though.. as we want our TDEE to increase that's the whole point - or am I missing it totally :)
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Thanks Haybales

    so really for those of us NOT body building but resetting eating your expected TDEE is ok though.. as we want our TDEE to increase that's the whole point - or am I missing it totally :)

    Well, as many have pointed out, your system may stay suppressed for a while, increasing slowly is best.

    Study in my blog, after 3 months of eating at the suppressed maintenance and not gaining weight, the maintenance was still a tad more than 250 suppressed more than needed, up from almost 500, so improvement even eating at suppressed maintenance.
    But took 3 months.

    Now, as this article points out, just going all out is just going to flat out cause fat gain.
    If your real maintenance is 1200 and you eat at 2200 - you will gain a good 2 pounds of fat a week until it starts rising and that finally slows down. But now your estimated TDEE is actually 2500 because of the lbs gained.
    Is it worth it, when slowly increasing might cause it to not be so bad?

    Same way truly starving person cannot be fed normal meals, it'll mess up their system.

    So true, want to eat at potential TDEE, but at some point, even slow weight gain showing fat could mean still some suppression, or bad estimate of potential TDEE.

    I always figured bad estimate. Because even a slightly suppressed system can still show a deficit and weight loss. Just not as much as you'd get later when full burning.
  • ok cool thanks - and yes am slowly working my way up to TDEE where I should be until I can see things stablise - its hard taking so long - but understand worth it too! and too many years of the bad stuff - but also understand that my TDEE and actual TDEE will be different so learning to read my own body too!