is starvation mode real?

Options
hissweetpea461
hissweetpea461 Posts: 27 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I've been eating under 1200 calories for over a year and no weight has come off. So now two months no sugar still no weight coming off. I seem to be stuck and want to get to a healthy size for me.
«134567

Replies

  • minties82
    minties82 Posts: 907 Member
    Options
    130lbs overweight and not losing weight eating under 1200 = you're not logging properly.
  • maidentl
    maidentl Posts: 3,203 Member
    Options
    How are you determining how many calories you eat? Do you weigh everything on a food scale?
  • Faithful_Chosen
    Faithful_Chosen Posts: 401 Member
    Options
    'Starvation mode' as I think you intend it ("I only eat a super low amount of food and I am still not losing! I am not losing because I eat a super low amount of calories!") is complete BS. Sorry. If you are not losing, you are not eating at a deficit. You may thing you are only eating 1200 calories but I assure you that you are, in fact, not if you are not losing. Your diary is closed, but the biggest issue, ususally, is that people who say this do not weigh all their food, do not log their 'cheat days' or binges, or don't log that one little midnight snack that no one saw so it did not happen. Weight loss is super simple: calories in versus calories out. Sugar intake has zero influence on that, only the amount of food you eat, the drinks you drink, and the amount of calories you burn. Take in less than you burn and you lose, take in what you burn and you maintain, take in more than burn and you gain weight. Simple as that :)
  • 999tigger
    999tigger Posts: 5,235 Member
    Options
    minties82 wrote: »
    130lbs overweight and not losing weight eating under 1200 = you're not logging properly.

    +100
    You are not eating 1200, but much more than you think. FACT.
  • mousie1973
    mousie1973 Posts: 438 Member
    Options
    ok...
    1. If you have 130 pounds to lose, there is no way that MFP says you should be eating only 1200 cals. What does MFP say that you should be eating?? How active are you?
    2. How tall are you? what are your stats (current weight/goal weight)
    3. Logging accurately is very important...
    4. You say you are eating under 1200 calories... that is likely not true... Make sure you are Weighing all your foods...

    CICO WORKS!! I started at 292 and I am currently at 261 (31 pounds since May 20th) (I also started with a 130 lb weight loss goal....)
  • NikiChicken
    NikiChicken Posts: 576 Member
    Options
    minties82 wrote: »
    130lbs overweight and not losing weight eating under 1200 = you're not logging properly.

    This. It is not "Starvation Mode." Are you using a digital food scale to weigh everything you eat and then are you logging it correctly? Someone on the forums has a great video about weighing portions vs. measuring with spoons/cups and how much of a difference it makes. I'm too lazy to go find it for you, but if you are interested, it shouldn't be hard to find.

    Also, you need to be very careful about what entries you pick for logging. Double check your nutritional information (if you have the packaging) against the entry in MFP. Also, pick verified entries when possible. There are many, many entries out there that are waaaayyyy off. Also, avoid "homemade" food entries unless you, yourself, are entering the recipes and know the exact measurements and size of a portion.

    If you are exercising and using exercise calories, make sure you are not overestimating your calorie burn. That will easily get you into trouble. The calorie burn counts on the machines and here in MFP are notoriously high.

    Finally, if you are positive you are weighing (with a food scale) all portions and logging them correctly and are not eating overestimated exercise calories, go visit your doctor.
  • NikiChicken
    NikiChicken Posts: 576 Member
    Options
    mousie1973 wrote: »
    ok...
    1. If you have 130 pounds to lose, there is no way that MFP says you should be eating only 1200 cals. What does MFP say that you should be eating?? How active are you?
    2. How tall are you? what are your stats (current weight/goal weight)
    3. Logging accurately is very important...
    4. You say you are eating under 1200 calories... that is likely not true... Make sure you are Weighing all your foods...

    CICO WORKS!! I started at 292 and I am currently at 261 (31 pounds since May 20th) (I also started with a 130 lb weight loss goal....)

    I also have to say CICO works. I've lost 99 pounds so far of my 120 pound loss goal. If you weigh your portions and log accurately, it DOES work.
  • sakurablush
    sakurablush Posts: 104 Member
    edited September 2015
    Options
    I came to the conclusion when I researched the subject that there was no such thing as starvation mode. I'm hardly an expert, but I got the impression eating too high a deficit for an extended period of time (6 months+) will see your body adapting to this. You'll still lose weight, but your metabolism readjusts to running on the fuel you're giving it.

    As people are saying here, logging every bite and weighing food could help.
  • momoharuno
    momoharuno Posts: 141 Member
    Options
    Here is a helpful and funny article explaining clearly the myth of starvation mode
    http://www.aworkoutroutine.com/starvation-mode/

    Calories In vs Calories Out (CICO) will work you need to be honest with your diary and yourself and log absolutely everything, getting a scale will help you immensely and I urge you to get one. I hope you listen to all the suggestions given and understand everyone is trying to help you, I wish you the best of luck! :)
  • zoeysasha37
    zoeysasha37 Posts: 7,089 Member
    Options
    Get honest with yourself. Buy a food scale. Weigh foods properly, log them here.

    Weight loss is about cico. Its that simple
  • MKEgal
    MKEgal Posts: 3,250 Member
    Options
    Read this. Then read it again. Bookmark it so you can use it to explain to other newbies what
    "starvation mode"is and is not. What you're thinking it is, it's not.
    http://www.aworkoutroutine.com/starvation-mode/

    The body needs energy (calories) to run.
    It prefers to use glucose (blood sugar, easily-available carbs),
    then it prefers to use glycogen (slightly more complex carbs stored in liver & muscles),
    then it prefers to use fat,
    and as a distant 4th it uses protein (muscles).
    {Yes, we're all burning some of those all the time, but that's generally the order they're used.}

    Burning muscle is starvation.
    Part of the reason it's 4th is that it's an inefficient conversion. The body gets more energy per gram of
    tissue from the other sources.
    Also, it's a hail mary, hoping you will find (and EAT!) food before you lose so much muscle tissue that
    you can't move, or can't eat, or can't breathe, or your heart stops.
    It takes a long time of eating way below your healthy range to get there.

    The body WILL NOT "hold onto" _any_ calories (fat) if you're eating below maintenance.
    (Use a little common sense.)
    If it did, anorexia wouldn't be deadly.
    Neither would famine.
    POW's would be robust, not walking skeletons.
  • MKEgal
    MKEgal Posts: 3,250 Member
    Options
    Read these, especially sexypants.

    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1080242/a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants

    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10012907/logging-accuracy-consistency-and-youre-probably-eating-more-than-you-think

    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/819925/the-basics-dont-complicate-it/p1

    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/872212/youre-probably-eating-more-than-you-think/p1

    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/833026/important-posts-to-read/p1


    "Most weight loss occurs because of decreased caloric intake.
    However, evidence shows the only way to maintain weight loss is to be engaged in regular physical activity."
    http://www.cdc.gov/healthyweight/physical_activity/index.html


    Goal setting, including weight, calories, and macros
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/MKEgal/view/2014-06-08-setting-goals-667045

  • MKEgal
    MKEgal Posts: 3,250 Member
    Options
    sweetpea wrote:
    I've been eating under 1200 calories for over a year and no weight has come off.
    So now two months no sugar still no weight coming off.
    I seem to be stuck and want to get to a healthy size for me.
    How short are you, that you (or MFP) thought "under 1200" was a healthy calorie level?

    How do you know how many calories you're eating? Are you weighing & measuring everything, logging accurately?

    Why did you cut out sugar? And is that all sugars (so no fruits), or just white sugar, added sugars, corn syrup, etc.?

    How did you determine your goal weight? Is it somewhere in the healthy range on a BMI chart? Or did your doctor OK it?
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    Options
    Starvation mode as you present it in this thread is as real as Elvis and Bigfoot riding a unicorn together over a rainbow.
  • booksandchocolate12
    booksandchocolate12 Posts: 1,741 Member
    Options
    Starvation mode is not real.

    But people thinking they only eat a certain number of calories when they're really eating a lot more? That's very real.
  • arb037
    arb037 Posts: 203 Member
    Options
    sakurablush wrote: »
    I came to the conclusion when I researched the subject that there was no such thing as starvation mode. I'm hardly an expert, but I got the impression eating too high a deficit for an extended period of time (6 months+) will see your body adapting to this. You'll still lose weight, but your metabolism readjusts to running on the fuel you're giving it.

    As people are saying here, logging every bite and weighing food could help.

    Indeed, the term is called "adaptive thermogenesis" and takes a large deficit with a good amount of time before this happens.
    But to answer the question " starvation mode" is a myth.
    Just to put it out there, as it seems every single response so far has been to tell you, how youre lying to yourself in regards to logging food.
    In certain instances especially with women. Where they do crazy amounts of cardio and eat like 900 calories a day the body will flip out and not lose weight. In fact can quite possibly gain.
    Doubtful that is the case here as you did not mention those specifics.
  • kk_inprogress
    kk_inprogress Posts: 3,077 Member
    Options
    brianpperkins wrote: »
    Starvation mode as you present it in this thread is as real as Elvis and Bigfoot riding a unicorn together over a rainbow.

    That's just the visual my night needed.
  • sheldonklein
    sheldonklein Posts: 854 Member
    Options
    arb037 wrote: »
    sakurablush wrote: »
    I came to the conclusion when I researched the subject that there was no such thing as starvation mode. I'm hardly an expert, but I got the impression eating too high a deficit for an extended period of time (6 months+) will see your body adapting to this. You'll still lose weight, but your metabolism readjusts to running on the fuel you're giving it.

    As people are saying here, logging every bite and weighing food could help.

    Indeed, the term is called "adaptive thermogenesis" and takes a large deficit with a good amount of time before this happens.
    But to answer the question " starvation mode" is a myth.
    Just to put it out there, as it seems every single response so far has been to tell you, how youre lying to yourself in regards to logging food.
    In certain instances especially with women. Where they do crazy amounts of cardio and eat like 900 calories a day the body will flip out and not lose weight. In fact can quite possibly gain.
    Doubtful that is the case here as you did not mention those specifics.

    What you call "flipping out" is what others are calling starvation mode. Which you correctly say does not exist.
  • atypicalsmith
    atypicalsmith Posts: 2,742 Member
    Options
    Eat less. Move more. Eating under 1200 calories for a YEAR??? And haven't lost even a pound? Either you are underestimating calories eaten or overestimating calories burned.

Categories