Starvation Mode - Interesting Science!

avatarofloki · May 2011

Morning folks! (I know this is long, and will not 'solve' anything, but it is interesting nonetheless.)

I came over to this site a few weeks back from the old pen-and-paper methodology as I decided to assist my SO with a paper for med school during my weight loss process. While she was losing weight, she ran across countless warnings of starvation mode, and followed a proper healthy methodology for weight loss. Kudos to her! While discussing the topic one day, I stated my disbelief in starvation mode having a major impact, and a quarrel ensued. So, when the opportunity came up for her to test my theories with the backing of medical facilities (while using my own stubborness against me to prove my point while losing weight...tricky female gender...), she leapt at the option. So, for the last 8 weeks I have been tested every Friday to get some basic numbers together that I thought you folks may find interesting. But beforehand, the standard:

*****This is not a case study. This is not a statement of 'go do this'. This is applicable to one guy, me. Please do not take this as advice, consent, or an example. This was undertaken under medical observation. ETC ETC ETC I just thought some may find it interesting.*****

Ok, now that is out of the way, here is the deal. I essentially did everything *wrong* to lose weight as directed by the health community to argue the point that physics is physics. I went on a VLCD diet, I drank absolutely no water, ran off of 5-5.5 hours of sleep nightly, loaded myself with caffiene/diarhetics, paid no attention to macro/micronutrients, glared threateningly at puppies, didn't hold the door for people, and was a generally evil individual in the eyes of nutritionists everywhere. We did eight weeks of weekly testing on the following items: RMR, Body Fat %, and a super basic blood test to find nutrient levels. There were two attending doctors at the school that also did a basic physical each week to make sure I wasn't dying. All free in the name of science!

So, now for the statement. I've lost 43 pounds in 6 weeks. Per the docs, I am still healthy. I have no sagging skin, no twitches, no dizzy spells, am not overly exhausted (as a matter of fact, more energetic in comparison), and fit as a fiddle. I am currently raising my caloric intake in stages to ease into my target goal number. I did this with all of the above criteria. A collective gasp from the audience.

I'm not a scientist, nutritionist, doctor, health expert, or anything. So my words mean nothing. But I come with numbers from those peoples! Algebraic! I don't have every number in front of me as I am currently *hard at work* at the office, but here are the hard and fast big ticket numbers:

Week 1: Wgt - 238.6 lbs. Avg Daily Caloric Intake: 2837 RMR: 2321
Week 2: Wgt - 238.8 lbs. Avg Daily Caloric Intake: 2952 RMR: 2333
Week 3: Wgt - 231.2 lbs. Avg Daily Caloric Intake: 648 RMR: 2172
Week 4: Wgt - 225.7 lbs. Avg Daily Caloric Intake: 672 RMR: 2073 (~4% drop)
Week 5: Wgt - 218.6 lbs. Avg Daily Caloric Intake: 688 RMR: 1918 (~5% drop)
Week 6: Wgt - 212.6 lbs. Avg Daily Caloric Intake: 725 RMR: 1842 (~2% drop)
Week 7: Wgt - 202.2 lbs. Avg Daily Caloric Intake: 738 RMR: 1787 (negligible ~0%)
Week 8: Wgt - 195.5 lbs. Avg Daily Caloric Intake: 891 RMR: 1796 (~2% gain)

That brings us to today. First two weeks were to set a baseline to compare against, so I was obviously not doing everything wrong (in a weight loss sense) at that point. What's amazing to me is that "starvation mode" only took 11% off of my base RMR. And as I am climbing up into 'sane' numbers, it is almost recovering alongside (obviously cannot say that with one week of improvement, but it will be a month until tested again courtesy of summer, so the world may never know...).

As for digesting muscle, the weight I have lost has been at a 71% fat/29% lean tissue ratio practically consistently week to week. Higher than healthy methods, but nowhere near the rates proclaimed (for me personally obviously), and actually fairly close to the healthy methods of weight loss. Comically, my macro/micro nutrients all rose *substantially* during this process from a multivitamin nightly in comparison to the ~3k calories of food I ate normally.

So, we are calling it a draw (read as: there is no point in me arguing I am right even with science on my side, as I will lose regardless). I get two more tests done for free (one in July, and one in Sept) just to make sure everything is back to normal, so thats all of the weekly data we will really have from myself.

Currently I am in the process of getting my RMR back up by increasing intake slowly up to the 1600 range over the next 2.5 weeks. Once that stabilizes out, I can start creeping into maintenance mode. So no, I will not be going back to 3k in a week unless my body can sustain it via activity.

So, my personal belief, to each their own, seems to hold true for my own body. *Shrug* Anyhow, thought some folks may be interested in this as anecdotal as it is.

psb13 · May 2011

interesting indeed!! i totally believe in the starvation mode theory as i see it happening to me on occasion in my weight loss journey, however, people who "glare at puppies" clearly have some sort of defect in their makeup!! lol best of luck on your now healthier journey. thanks for an interesting read.

avatarofloki · May 2011

Much obliged. I figured it was dry enough of a topic to try to sprinkle some sad attempts at humor in there. :P

bcpie · May 2011

I very much enjoyed reading this.

hooray science

deeharley · May 2011

That was an interesting read - thanks for sharing. And I, too, appreciated the humor.

ColoradoRobin · May 2011

Thank you for the informative and entertaining post! I am very interested in hearing the continuing results of your personal experiment. I suppose I can forgive the glaring at puppies if it was done in the name of science! :bigsmile:

Lanfear · May 2011

Great post, very interesting read - and I liked the humour in it as well, makes you want to keep reading.

I like the idea of being a generally evil person LOL - I'm already there in the mornings - though haven't found any puppies to glare at!

ATT949 · May 2011

So, my personal belief, to each their own, seems to hold true for my own body. *Shrug* Anyhow, thought some folks may be interested in this as anecdotal as it is.

Thank you for sharing your success story.

I haven't been losing weight at anywhere near your rate, I've been on a similarly low calorie diet for 162 days during which I've lost 81 pounds. Like you, I feel healthier, have no loose skin, etc., etc.

A few thoughts:
In addition to posting this information, I respect the approach that you took — it engenders confidence that your measurements are accurate with lends great credence to the results that you've posted.

Please chart your data and share your results.

One item that you did not share was your medical history. Were you "generally healthy"? Did you have any BP issues?

You did this "the right way" - with medical supervision.

And, the most impressive thing about this is…your attitude (it's pretty bloody funny, too). It's dogma-free.

One last item - you emphasize that this worked well for you and I'm glad that you did because this level of diet is not for everyone. I've been told that eating this level of net calories can be very hard on one's body and, just as important, it takes a lot will power and self-discipline.

Congratulations on a job well done!

Now, on to maintenance mode for the next 50 years! :-)

avatarofloki · May 2011

So, my personal belief, to each their own, seems to hold true for my own body. *Shrug* Anyhow, thought some folks may be interested in this as anecdotal as it is.

Thank you for sharing your success story.

I haven't been losing weight at anywhere near your rate, I've been on a similarly low calorie diet for 162 days during which I've lost 81 pounds. Like you, I feel healthier, have no loose skin, etc., etc.

A few thoughts:
In addition to posting this information, I respect the approach that you took — it engenders confidence that your measurements are accurate with lends great credence to the results that you've posted.

Please chart your data and share your results.

One item that you did not share was your medical history. Were you "generally healthy"? Did you have any BP issues?

You did this "the right way" - with medical supervision.

And, the most impressive thing about this is…your attitude (it's pretty bloody funny, too). It's dogma-free.

One last item - you emphasize that this worked well for you and I'm glad that you did because this level of diet is not for everyone. I've been told that eating this level of net calories can be very hard on one's body and, just as important, it takes a lot will power and self-discipline.

Congratulations on a job well done!

Now, on to maintenance mode for the next 50 years! :-)

Thanks for all the kind words everyone! Like everything in life, a little spice can liven up even the blandest fare! To the responses:

No puppies were actually glared at during the time period of this 'test'. I don't think it truly possible. As a matter of fact, fun fact Friday tip: Puppies can defuse even the most volatile of situations. It's true!

As for my rate of loss, I was actually a little surprised as well. It does not completely add up to the 3500 calories = a pound when you look at the RMR and compare the deficit. The most intriguing thing to me is my largest drop came the same week my 'starvation mode' peaked and levelled out. I can admit to being a bit more active in my daily life than my usual 'living statue' ways, but it is another little intriguing facet of the whole scenario that lends credence to the 'there is no such thing as a rule when it comes to the human body'. Fascinating little machine we've all been handed the keys to.

As for the approach, you can thank the lil' lady for that. We are both analytical people by nature (and too curious for our own good), but she measures according to the recipe...and I go by pinches, dashes, and to taste. That should explain the situation succinctly. :P

As far as charting, she has a gigundo excel spreadsheet that tracked everything that was being measured weekly that is only waiting on todays blood results to be 'complete'. I do have to admit I am a bit hesitant to post said chart, because as soon as you do something like that people see a chart and assume facts can be construed out of it. If anything, I think this trial shows that you can't really predict too much from general numbers, and in my usual style, you just have to go by what feels right. As far as diet/excercise, the last 2 weeks are on here and open, and I may go and backfill the rest this weekend as a reference. I'll probably throw the chart up once I get the greenlight from the keeper of the datakeys.

Medical history. I'm a healthy lad. I've always been on the heavier end of the spectrum, but my first 25 years I stayed around the 'Husky' level. The last 8 have been a steady inexorable march to my starting weight. BP was of course above average, but not in any redline danger areas at the start of this. I'm ex-military (chAir Force, but combat communications [essentially an IT guy that was handed a rifle and a spool of cable and told to not get killed while setting up a network] that did have me training more than most in my youth.) But once there were no longer people with fancy symbols on their sleeves and hats yelling at me to run...or people shooting at me that inspires amazing dexterity...I kept up with the intake and stopped moving.

This does take a lot of willpower/resolve, but I did have an unfair advantage from my early years. Part of my military training was 'survival school' in which I basically lived off of what I found. *THAT* sucked, as I cannot find my car keys every morning let alone edible items in the wild. But my greatest advice for any level of caloric reduction is this: Find a hobby you enjoy, and toss yourself into it full bore. You will be amazed at how quickly the days go by that you don't even think about your sacrifice.

As I caveat'd in the original post. I *WAS* under medical supervision on this. I do not recommend anyone just storming off and doing this on their own.

As for attitude, that's 90% of anything we do. Even the greatest party in the world can suck if you approach it all dour and cranky...but in the same vein, I've been to funerals that had everyone laughing. So I approach life in a very nonchalant manner (courtesy of living too many formative years with our friends in Italy during an economic boom). So the key is to enjoy each step along the way, regardless of which direction that path leads you. It makes life more entertaining, it's infectious, and not enough people do it anymore in my opinion! Celebrate the small victories big, and the big defeats even bigger!

And now for the hard part...keeping it off. :P

JennLifts · May 2011

Thanks for sharing! Quite interesting indeed.

Clonekuh · May 2011

My favorite part is how dedicated/stubborn the both of you were to this to prove your side. Ha ha!

Kera885 · May 2011

I'm not claiming to know everything (or even close to it) about the science here, but supposedly this only applies to people who aren't considered obese by their BMI's. I think it's because the body can readily draw on fat stores and doesn't panic nearly as much as it would if a skinnier person (think just overweight, not obese) were to do it. Because in that instance, the body would feel the need to conserve more whereas on an obese person there's fuel to spare. That's why doctors will advise VLCD's in some instances where the patient is obese, morbidly obese or super obese. So unless you're taller than 6'3 that would've put you into that obese category to begin with. But like I said, I don't really know a whole lot about this, and if you and your friend have done that much research you probably know a lot more about this than I do, I just think it's interesting

daisylovespink · May 2011

Thanks for sharing, it is definitly "food" for thought.

sixxx · May 2011

Thank you for sharing!

shaunshaikh · May 2011

Awesome awesome post. But, please undestand that starvation mode is a long process that happens to people who have been dieting for months and months.

deverez · May 2011

Thank you for the test.

I've always called B*S* on the 'starvation mode' myth. It's great that you measured the change in your RMR and your fat lost, and not just your reduction in bodyweight.

ATT949 · May 2011

Shaun - I see you charted your weight.

Interesting results.

It looks like you went through a similar experience to me - "cycles" of weight loss consisting of a "loss phase" and a "recovery phase" (as I labeled them).

Check out

http://cbeinfo.net/weight.htm

and then check your chart. Similar deltas.

h3h8m3 · May 2011

How did the doctors test the actual RMR? I see estimates regularly, but I'd be curious how they determine the actual number.

Thanks!

4theking · May 2011

I would like to say that although it could have been a lot worse, over 20% muscle lost is not good.

Also, the spectrum of varing degrees of metabolic slowdown is extremely broad. The longer one stays at a large caloric deficit, whether through diet, exercise, or both, the greater a slowdown will occur. But like anything, genetics play a huge role in how any one persons body will react.

ladyhawk00 · May 2011

I would like to say that although it could have been a lot worse, over 20% muscle lost is not good.

Also, the spectrum of varing degrees of metabolic slowdown is extremely broad. The longer one stays at a large caloric deficit, whether through diet, exercise, or both, the greater a slowdown will occur. But like anything, genetics play a huge role in how any one persons body will react.

Yeah, I gotta say I would be pretty upset with almost 30% lean mass loss. And while you can look at it as only 11% decrease in RMR, that's not really indicative of actual loss. You dropped from ~2300 to ~1800. That's a 500 cal decrease overall. Now some of that is normal decrease, but still a 500 cal decrease in RMR? That would seriously derail anyone depending on usual BMR calculators for determining their deficit and would certainly result in overestimating necessary intake.

I don't think I would call it a wash. I'd call it a good reason to avoid VLCDs. JMO.

lennykat · May 2011

Very interesting indeed, but considering this was my life from January to April and I lost nothing I have to question it. I agree with lady hawk that the loss in lean tissue is high and unnerving.

I'll go back to what I've pondered before-- that "starvation mode" or some sort of it can make a significant impact on a person's weight loss goals...but the AMOUNT of impact probably has to do with how much a person is exercising. I can see it having more of an impact on a person who is burning 500+ calories a day working out.

Also, I would love to know if the numbers would be the same for a woman. Considering, biologically speaking, we were made to reproduce, maintain, and birth another human I can see how starvation mode might set in sooner. In the grand scheme of things everything would slow down to preserve life or the ability to make life. Also, the female body, I would think, would pull from lean muscle much sooner for the same reason: the preservation of the organs that enable our species to reproduce.

Just a thought.

deverez · May 2011

Yeah, I gotta say I would be pretty upset with almost 30% lean mass loss. And while you can look at it as only 11% decrease in RMR, that's not really indicative of actual loss. You dropped from ~2300 to ~1800. That's a 500 cal decrease overall. Now some of that is normal decrease, but still a 500 cal decrease in RMR? That would seriously derail anyone depending on usual BMR calculators for determining their deficit and would certainly result in overestimating necessary intake.

I don't think I would call it a wash. I'd call it a good reason to avoid VLCDs. JMO.

He said 30% of the weight that he lost was muscle. He didn't say that he lost 30% of his total lean mass. If you weren't confused about this, my apologies.

Please consider the numbers:

On week 2 (his heaviest) he was burning 9.77 calories PER pound of body mass.
On week 8 (his lightest) he was burning 9.19 calories PER pound of body mass.

This is VERY different than the complete metabolic halt that some people think 'starvation mode' apparently is.

While his overall weight was reduced by about 18%, his RMR (per pound) was only reduced by 6%.

This doesn't seem as outlandish as some of you are making it out to be. Am I missing something here? Did I mess up the calculations?

robertf57 · May 2011

These results are quite similar to well conducted controlled studies of VLCD in obese adults (AM J Clin Nutr 1991;53:826-30 to quote just one). There are slight variations in the actual numbers because of individual diversity and particularly the method used to measure Lean Body Mass. Even in the original Minnesota study demonstrating reduction in RMR during calorie deficit. There were no instances of weight loss stopping because of low caloric intake which is the oft repeated mantra of starvation mode on this site. The bulk of evidence also suggest that resistance training can help to mitigate loss of Lean Body Mass during calorie deficit..

Yocum1219 · May 2011

Interesting. Would like to see a female results, as someone said, but still worth reading for informational purposes.

taso42_DELETED · May 2011

Congratulations on your loss. I am glad you are satisfied with the results.

But wait a second here... Your RMR is now lower by a whopping 525 and you've lost significant muscle mass. For many, those results would be unsatisfactory. These are precisely the reasons many of us here warn about VLCDs.

And this experiment isn't over yet - you have to now ramp back up to maintenance, hopefully getting your RMR back to normal, and hopefully not gain any significant weight. Also, are you planning on building back that lost muscle?

Please post follow-ups as you continue. I am very curious to follow your progress.

Starvation Mode - Interesting Science!

Replies

Categories