The truth about Starvation mode being pushed on MFP boards.

2»

Replies

  • callipygianchronicle
    callipygianchronicle Posts: 811 Member
    I will never understand why people are so invested in convincing people to starve and underfeed. If you, yourself, are interested in being thin at any cost, you're an adult and perfectly capable of making that choice and living with the consequences. But the need people feel to "sell" others on the idea absolutely perplexes me.

    What is so offensive about the idea of losing slowly and wanting to protect and retrain your metabolism? What is so wrong with trying to prevent gallstones and sagging skin?

    There's plenty of evidence, as ladyhawk has cited, that metabolic damage will occur with underfeeding. And that metabolic damage will affect ones ability to maintain a healthy weight and affects your ratio of lean body mass to fat. But there is nothing to stop willing adults from doing it. But if one makes that choice, with all of the knowledge to contrary staring them in the face, why feel the need to convince others that they should do it too?
  • Cletc
    Cletc Posts: 352
    I will never understand why people are so invested in convincing people to starve and underfeed.

    There will always be
    People
    invested in convincing people of
    Something-or-Other.

    It's not limited to dietary topics.

    It's universal.
  • katberz
    katberz Posts: 123
    Well, regardless of whether or not it's effective for weight loss, significantly undereating isn't going to make you healthier. I know because I survived on about 500-800 cals a day, probably around 100 net cals after exercise, for six months or so. Yes, I lost a lot of weight. My hair also fell out, my periods stopped, I was dizzy/fatigued constantly and I grew lanugo (fine blonde hair) on my face. The lanugo was so bad I had to shave like a man. No way am I going down that road again.
  • irridia
    irridia Posts: 527 Member
    After a very long period of inactivity. I got a very physically demanding job. Lots of lifting and moving constantly. I got stronger and then I started getting weaker and weaker despite working harder/faster and lifting heavier. Then I realized I wasn't eating enough!! I started adding a protien bar and a bananna 2 hrs into my shift and holy cow I started putting on muscle. I was the most fit I had been since giving birth. I was all set to keep it but then got a different job that just invoved standing and arm movement. So I was too tired to keep training and lost all that muscle I put on, and gained back the weight I had lost. *sigh* I'm below that weight now, but more of it is fat now and less muscle.

    So yeah, eating more can definately assist w/weight loss.
  • scapez
    scapez Posts: 2,018 Member
    I'm happy to read this, because I've been wondering what I should do regarding eating back my exercise calories. I suppose I just don't get the concept -- when exercising, shouldn't you just fuel your body -- not eat back everything you just worked off?!? If you're eating everything back, how are you burning off stored fat?

    At any rate, I don't know that I *could* eat everything back on high exercise days -- just way too much food for me.
  • Robertlawnicki
    Robertlawnicki Posts: 25 Member
    The last time I asked for help on this subject the response was that I am not eating back my cal. from my work out.
    Soooooo I started to increase my cal. intake, from 1200 per day to about 1700. Prior to my cal. increase I had lost
    71 lbs. Since the cal. increase I put back on 4 lbs. I am now going to try a daily intake of 700 cal. I will see what that will do.
  • Cletc
    Cletc Posts: 352
    when exercising, shouldn't you just fuel your body -- not eat back everything you just worked off?!?
    If you're eating everything back, how are you burning off stored fat?

    I don't know
    I don't get it either!!

    I'm not eating back my calories
  • ladyhawk00
    ladyhawk00 Posts: 2,457 Member
    I'm happy to read this, because I've been wondering what I should do regarding eating back my exercise calories. I suppose I just don't get the concept -- when exercising, shouldn't you just fuel your body -- not eat back everything you just worked off?!? If you're eating everything back, how are you burning off stored fat?

    At any rate, I don't know that I *could* eat everything back on high exercise days -- just way too much food for me.

    This has to do with how MFP is designed. It is different than most other counters/plans. Most plans use your exercise to create your deficit for weight loss, keeping your daily cal goal static.

    MFP was designed with the idea that many people can't exercise regularly, or at all, due to physical limitations or time. They also recognized that most people set up an exercise plan, but as we all know, that's not necessarily what actually happens every day. So they built the site to allow for weight loss with or without exercise.

    MFP creates a built in deficit based on your loss per week goal, regardless of exercise. So when you log exercise cals are added back in to keep that deficit stable. If you don't replace those cals, you've made your deficit larger than you (presumably) intended. A larger deficit does not necessarily mean faster weight loss; it is usually unhealthy and unsustainable. It is important to fuel the body properly. This is explained in more detail in the threads I linked in my previous post.
  • chanstriste13
    chanstriste13 Posts: 3,277 Member
    the fellow that wrote this article is neither a doctor nor a nutritionist - he's a sportsman/salesman! find someone more accredited to argue your point, and then i'll consider it.

    "Neal Spruce - About the Author:

    Neal Spruce is chairman of the board for the prestigious National Academy of Sports Medicine (NASM) and founder dotFIT, LLC. Neal is a fitness specialist, author, licensed teacher, researcher, bodybuilding champion, personal fitness consultant and speaker. dotfit is the leading online fitness and weight loss program."
  • Silvergamma
    Silvergamma Posts: 102 Member
    The goal, in my opinion, is to lose fat and to be healthy. Very large calorie deficits and chronic underfeeding will cause a person to lose weight, but it will be a mixture of fat and lean tissue. To achieve that healthy fat loss goal requires exercise and proper nutrition. You need to fuel your body to keep up with your activity level. To lose fat, you also need to generate a calorie deficit, and there is such a thing as too large of a deficit. Why would you want your body to burn muscle mass? There is an ideal deficit for each of us that will optimize burning fat while allowing your body to maintain and build muscle. Starvation mode isn't just "HUR you are going to get fat by eating too little."
  • ladyhawk00
    ladyhawk00 Posts: 2,457 Member
    The last time I asked for help on this subject the response was that I am not eating back my cal. from my work out.
    Soooooo I started to increase my cal. intake, from 1200 per day to about 1700. Prior to my cal. increase I had lost
    71 lbs. Since the cal. increase I put back on 4 lbs. I am now going to try a daily intake of 700 cal. I will see what that will do.

    What that will do is result in loss of muscle, a slower metabolism and malnutrition.

    If you have been at an extreme deficit for a length of time and increase cals, it is NORMAL to gain a bit temporarily while your body adjusts. Decreasing cals further is NOT going to fix the problem.

    Might want to read this thread:

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/3047-700-calories-a-day-and-not-losing
  • Cletc
    Cletc Posts: 352
    My understanding is the definition of "starving" is 1,199 calories or fewer.

    Is that what we are talking about here?
  • ladyhawk00
    ladyhawk00 Posts: 2,457 Member
    My understanding is the definition of "starving" is 1,199 calories or fewer.

    Is that what we are talking about here?

    Not exactly. MFP uses the lower limit of 1200 because that is the minimum intake recommended by health experts as the amount required for the average woman to receive adequate nutrition in macronutrients and micronutrients.

    But the key words there are "woman" and "average". For men, the recommended minimum is 1500. And if someone is smaller than average or larger than average, they will need a different amount. MFP created a floor to discourage unhealthy and unsafe underfeeding. But the minimum for YOU is determined by your exact stats - height, weight, age, BF%, activity level, exercise, etc.

    Also, we need to think of cal goals as just that - GOALS. It's a number that you should try to meet on a regular basis. It's not a number to see how far under it you can stay, or to frequently go way over. Generally, within a 100 cals over or under is a good range. It is the average over time that is important. So chronically over OR undereating will cause issues; one day won't.
  • MyaPapaya75
    MyaPapaya75 Posts: 3,143 Member
    Nice post.....
  • H_82
    H_82 Posts: 418 Member
    This is getting so annoying. The basic point of this thread, I believe, is just stating that (for most people), if you want to eat hardly any calories, go for it. You'll lose weight, sure. But once you start eating "normally" again, the weight will more than likely be put back on. Period. End of story. You don't need to be a doctor to figure it out.
  • pinAKAl
    pinAKAl Posts: 6 Member
    People fail to realize that you can also enter starvation mode from excessive exercise. Emphasis is placed on overeating all the time, but even people who eat "normally" and exercise a lot can be a risk if they do not eat enough of their exercise calories. A caloric deficit is a deficit no matter how it is acquired. The key is to maintain a balance!!! There are lot's of healthy and unhealthy ways to lose weight, but weight loss shouldn't be the only goal.
  • h3h8m3
    h3h8m3 Posts: 455 Member
    Sorry, but these are just some of the scientific studies that show a significant decrease in RMR and loss of lean mass when at an extreme caloric deficit. Most of these studies focus on obese/morbidly obese persons - the effects are far more dramatic in those who are nearer to a healthy BMI. No, it will not "stop" fat loss entirely, forever. But it can impede weight loss and cause a reduction in metabolic rate that makes it harder to lose weight - and the scenario in which it occurs leads to being unhealthy, regardless of weight lost.

    Starvation mode exists. Yes, the term is used too broadly and applied incorrectly many times on the forums. But that doesn't make it a myth. It's been proven time and again in scientific, reproducable studies.

    http://www.ajcn.org/content/53/4/826.full.pdf+html
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2613433?dopt=Abstract
    http://www.ajcn.org/content/49/1/93.full.pdf+html
    http://www.ajcn.org/content/45/2/391.full.pdf+html
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=6694559&dopt=AbstractPlus
    http://www.ajcn.org/content/57/2/127.full.pdf
    http://www.ajcn.org/content/51/2/167.abstract?ck=nck
    http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v32/n3/abs/0803720a.html
    http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0887/is_n7-8_v15/ai_18602507/
    http://www.amazon.com/Biology-Human-Starvation-I/dp/0816672342/ref=pd_sim_b_3
    http://www.amazon.com/Biology-Human-Starvation-II/dp/0816672334/ref=pd_sim_b_2

    If anyone is interested, here is my explanation of the topic. I did a LOT of research, which included many, many sources, to put it together. I'm not an expert, but I believe I've learned a lot from those who are.

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/230930-starvation-mode-how-it-works

    Also, just an added point: starvation mode is not the only concern when addressing undereating. There are many risks that come from undereating and rapid weight loss. Undereating simply sets you up for failure and losing weight in an unhealthy manner. I discussed this in another thread, which also includes scientific references:

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/222019-60-lbs-in-60-days

    I just spent a pretty good chunk of time reading through the articles you posted, and you know what? I think they agree with the OP's article. Both of them acknowledge that a severely reduced diet can and will result in a reduced RMR. What I saw in those articles was that the RMR would be reduced by between 20-28% below what other folks of a similar body composition would have.

    Also, most of those studies were working on people eating like 300 calories a day. I have not seen many (or maybe not any) people looking at eating that little.

    Am I missing something? If I understand the studies correctly then eating at a >1000/calories per day deficit will STILL be a more effective way to lose weight.

    I am not here to tell anyone to eat less calories. Eat all the calories you feel helps you function best. But for all those people who feel all this pressure to jam down an extra 1000 calories at the end of a day because they worked out more than they intended, so they don't enter the dreaded "STARVATION MODE," it's just not that cut and dried. Eating at a PERSISTENT massive deficit is what will decrease RMR, but it's not going to decrease it down to nothing, and it will bounce back about 8 weeks after you finish eating a low caloric diet.

    If I am wrong please help me by pointing out specific places in some of these studies that I misunderstood. I surely didn't read every word of every one, but I tried to get the gist of most of them.
  • Louiselesley
    Louiselesley Posts: 166 Member
    It depresses me how many people are so desperate to loose weight quickly without so much effort that they are willing to eat so little calories :(

    If something isn't working, simply reducing calories isn't going to make a difference in the long run. You'll have to stick with that for life because if you start eating properly again, it'll just come back.

    Yes, for some people it takes a lot of work to find the right way, but I am a firm believer that this does not mean cutting calories way back.

    Change your foods. Change your workouts. But don't change your calorie intake.

    I will always try to eat back my exercise calories. The only time I don't is when I have a really bad week or I have ate so much that day, but it's all low calorie, that if i ate anymore it would either keep me awake or make me sick.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Myth or not, why would anyone want to eat so few calories to find out?? Maybe it's just me, but I really HATE being hungry.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories