Question about the starvation mode myth

13»

Replies

  • DanaDark
    DanaDark Posts: 2,187 Member
    I think the poster was referring to the fact that starvation mode is a real physiological response to an extremely low calorie intake, not that the OP was suffering from being in starvation mode.

    Yes. It is only present in extreme... EXTREME... cases. Most Americans and Europeans will never even SEE it in someone else, let alone be in it themselves.

  • ReaderGirl3
    ReaderGirl3 Posts: 868 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Wow, lots of unnecessary arguments in this thread, with almost everyone missing the obvious stuff!

    OP, with your stats, you are already at a healthy weight, so your rate of any further loss will be really slow and your calories have to be on point. I peeked at your diary and it looks like you aren't logging. My suggestions:
    1. Set your goal to one-half lb per week.
    2. If you don't have one, buy a digital food scale.
    3. Start logging everything, accurately and consistently, using the food scale as often as possible for ALL solids.
    4. Log your exercise and eat back half your calories.
    5. Do this for 6-8 weeks and see what happens.

    If you aren't using a food scale, small miscalculations in portion size could be causing your problem. I am 5'4", and at 140 lbs, I thought I was eating @ 1500 cals and wasn't losing. I got a food scale and soon realized I was actually eating more like 1800 cals. I started eating 1500 cals for real, increased my steps, and was able to lose 15 lbs, but it was S-L-O-W.

    Sorry your thread was hijacked unnecessarily. Starvation mode is not something the average dieter needs to worry about, whether it technically exists or not. Best of luck!

    ETA: As others have suggested, search the forum for "recomp", this might be a better plan for you. But as another 5'4" woman, I am considering going down to 120 now that I've lived at 125ish for a few months, so I understand wanting to lose a little more!

    This is spot on. I'm 5ft, 6in and currently at 128lbs. I've been in maintenance for several years now but am currently working on losing a few more 'vanity' pounds. Even setting my weekly loss to .5lbs a week I have very little wiggle room for calories. Using a food scale set in grams is crucial, as well as accurately logging every calorie I eat /drink. When you get into the lower weight end you really need to tighten things up.
  • cerise_noir
    cerise_noir Posts: 5,468 Member
    edited April 2016
    OP, why the variation in calories? Do you have a fitbit linked?

    Also, are you using a food scale? With so little to lose, your deficit would be very small, so you'd have to be incredibly accurate.. even with 100 cals extra a day, you could be wiping out your deficit, so eating more would not the solution. Weight gain is caused by eating more than you need to maintain.
    biocowgirl wrote: »
    Starvation mode is not a myth, if you are severely restricting your calories you can cause your body to store more fat and build less muscle, even when working out. Check out his nifty calculator to see how much you should be eating (complete with breakdown of your macros): https://legionathletics.com/how-many-calories-should-i-eat/
    And this great, although lengthy article about building muscle while losing fat : http://www.muscleforlife.com/build-muscle-lose-fat/
    No. The way you described it, no. If it was the case, how do people starve to death? Please provide sources to prove the starvation mode theory..

    Ewww. Don't call Starvation Mode a theory. Gravity is a theory. Evolution is a theory. Germ Theory is a theory. Starvation mode is a joke at best and outright lies at worst.
    Damn, you're right @CoffeeNCardio dayum!
    Starvation mode crapwoo.
    There. :)

  • AlanainCanada
    AlanainCanada Posts: 11 Member
    OP--127lbs for being 5 foot four and 33 years old is fantastic. Why do you think you need to lose more weight? You may be just right where you are.
  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,159 Member
    edited April 2016
    @jvs125 The below is the best short science based article that I have read on the subject. In short it is a term that means different things to different people in different times. A read from end to end was helpful to me.

    https://authoritynutrition.com/starvation-mode/

    What Does “Starvation Mode” Imply?

    "What people generally refer to as “starvation mode” (and sometimes “metabolic damage”) is the body’s natural response to long-term calorie restriction.
    It involves the body responding to reduced calorie intake by reducing calorie expenditure in an attempt to maintain energy balance and prevent starvation.
    This is a natural physiological response, and isn’t really controversial. It is well accepted by scientists, and the technical term for it is “adaptive thermogenesis” (2)"

    Results of (2):
    ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3673773/
    "The increasing prevalence of obesity and its co-morbidities reflects the interaction of genes that favor the storage of excess calories as fat with an environment that provides ad libitum availability of calorically dense foods and encourages an increasingly sedentary lifestyle. While weight reduction is difficult in and of itself, anyone who has every lost weight will confirm that it is much harder to keep the weight off once it has been lost. The over 80% recidivism rate to pre-weight loss levels of body fatness after otherwise successful weight loss is due to the coordinate actions of metabolic, behavioral, neuroendocrine, and autonomic responses designed to maintain body energy stores (fat) at a CNS- defined “ideal”. This “adaptive thermogenesis” creates the ideal situation for weight regain and is operant in both lean and obese individuals attempting to sustain reduced body weights. Much of this opposition to sustained weight loss is mediated by the adipocyte-derived hormone “leptin”. The multiplicity of systems regulating energy stores and opposing the maintenance of a reduced body weight illustrate that body energy stores in general and obesity in particular are actively “defended” by interlocking bioenergetic and neurobiological physiologies. Important inferences can be drawn for therapeutic strategies by recognizing obesity as a disease in which the human body actively opposes the “cure” over long periods of time beyond the initial resolution of symptomatology......."
  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,159 Member
    edited April 2016
    Removed at kimny72 request.



  • nutmegoreo
    nutmegoreo Posts: 15,532 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Could you please stop hijacking this thread? It seems you managed to scare away the OP who needed help by arguing about something that doesn't even apply to her. Start a Debate thread if you want.

    This seems to be becoming more common.
  • CoffeeNCardio
    CoffeeNCardio Posts: 1,847 Member
    DanaDark wrote: »
    Very well. Educate us, if you think you have the evidence. Evidence is all that matters here. You wouldn't find a more willing group outside an Atheist convention that could so easily be swayed by actual evidence. So put up.

    You aggressive attitude is unappreciated.

    Your body's energy output depends significantly on the activities within it.

    On MFP, most people that believe they are in 'starvation mode' may be actually suffering from mild malnutrition. Your body will engage in many activities, but most of them require resources. For a time, the body can cannibalize itself for said resources. However, many are not easily and readily available. So, the activities the body normal does with them, will slow. This means less energy expenditure.

    In 'starvation mode', there is a combination of malnutrition and lack of energy. So even with the resources, the energy required to perform an action is not readily available, so the process waits. Remember, most biological energy is chemical, not electrical, so it physically needs to move, unlike an electrical field which is established when connecting a circuit. Think of it this way, if your liver needed 300 calories a day for optimal performance, it could be ran at 250 calories a day instead for sub-par performance. However, this can and does lead to organ damage. Worth noting, most chronic anorexics die of organ failure.

    This is also why thyroid problems (Hypo and Hyper) are medical issues that should be resolved.


    But the idea that you'll store extra fat in 'starvation mode' or that you skipped lunch and thus are in 'starvation mode' etc. is mostly false.

    My aggressive attitude is only aggressive in your mistaken interpretation of it. As was MY mistaken interpretation of what you meant by starvation mode. Nothing you said is inaccurate. I wholly agree. But so often here the woo is loud and obnoxious, and indecipherable from your actual meaning when you use identical terms (starvation mode), so I assumed you meant the commonly referred to starvation mode myth (the one that says you must eat more than 1400 calories a day or your body will "hold onto fat", or "you're not losing weight because you're not eating enough" or similar absurd notions). I am glad that you didn't mean that and further elated that your explanation of what it ACTUALLY is is now available for anyone to read who may be confused by the peddlers of woo. Thank you for your clear, concise, and well reasoned explanation:)
  • skjaimini9
    skjaimini9 Posts: 6 Member
    jvs125 wrote: »
    Ok, so I keep reading starvation mode is a myth.

    But, after being on a calorie deficit for months and working out 6 days per week, weight training and cardio, My weight loss has completely stalled. For months now, and I don't care much about scale, but inches aren't coming down.

    I was thinking maybe I should increase my calorie intake to see if it helps the fat loss process but if starvation mode is a myth, then that would not help... So what would help?

    I'm 33, female, 5'4", 127 pounds and currently eat between 1200-1500 cals daily..

    You are on right track just do a slight change,
    1. Keep doing whatever exercise+diet you were doing jus add some calories(it should be protein only) so all you need to do add 30 to 50 gram of protein(from natural sources... No supplement) ad to your diet, i hope you'll be seeing results starting from within a week time.

    :smile:
  • mumbles2013
    mumbles2013 Posts: 289 Member
    Of course starvation mode is a myth otherwise where do anorexics come from? Why are there people in the world right now dying of hunger??? If you are not losing weight you are consuming more calories than you think
  • Maxematics
    Maxematics Posts: 2,287 Member
    skjaimini9 wrote: »
    jvs125 wrote: »
    Ok, so I keep reading starvation mode is a myth.

    But, after being on a calorie deficit for months and working out 6 days per week, weight training and cardio, My weight loss has completely stalled. For months now, and I don't care much about scale, but inches aren't coming down.

    I was thinking maybe I should increase my calorie intake to see if it helps the fat loss process but if starvation mode is a myth, then that would not help... So what would help?

    I'm 33, female, 5'4", 127 pounds and currently eat between 1200-1500 cals daily..

    You are on right track just do a slight change,
    1. Keep doing whatever exercise+diet you were doing jus add some calories(it should be protein only) so all you need to do add 30 to 50 gram of protein(from natural sources... No supplement) ad to your diet, i hope you'll be seeing results starting from within a week time.

    :smile:

    This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. How would adding calories help? What is the extra protein going to do for weight loss?
  • allenpriest
    allenpriest Posts: 1,102 Member
    My elderly father with cognitive impairment also believes anything he reads that says it was authored by a medical professional and that proposes some sort of secret ingredient supplement that isgoing to cure whatever ails him.
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,725 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Could you please stop hijacking this thread? It seems you managed to scare away the OP who needed help by arguing about something that doesn't even apply to her. Start a Debate thread if you want.

    What exactly is your problem with discussing the title of the post and the content of the OP's first post? And why do you make assumptions about why she hasn't posted back? You've posted a supposedly helpful response, if she's read it, ain't that /thread?
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,725 Member
    And I was just curious how long exactly the OP has totally stalled as I didn't see this mentioned anywhere? We could be talking two weeks here, for all we know. Sometimes dieters expect fully linear weight loss and freak out when they haven't lost in what is ultimately a very short amount of time
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,919 Member
    Stalls happen for basically a couple of reasons:

    logging or accuracy isn't as accurate
    the body has adapted to activity (physical) and has "learned" how to allot calories needed to support it. Or in other words homeostasis.

    Changing physical activity will help along with changing with a slightly higher intake for a short time.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,013 Member
    JaneiR36 wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Could you please stop hijacking this thread? It seems you managed to scare away the OP who needed help by arguing about something that doesn't even apply to her. Start a Debate thread if you want.

    What exactly is your problem with discussing the title of the post and the content of the OP's first post? And why do you make assumptions about why she hasn't posted back? You've posted a supposedly helpful response, if she's read it, ain't that /thread?

    The thread devolved into a scientific argument that was far beyond anything the OP asked for, and I was under the impression that the scientific back and forth was now supposed to be contained in the Debates thread for exactly that reason. So that posters who were looking for practical advise didn't lose their thread to angry arguments over cited sources. Yes, I made an assumption about why she didn't return, sorry if that was out of line.
  • jwcanfield
    jwcanfield Posts: 192 Member
    jvs125 wrote: »
    Ok, so I keep reading starvation mode is a myth.

    But, after being on a calorie deficit for months and working out 6 days per week, weight training and cardio, My weight loss has completely stalled. For months now, and I don't care much about scale, but inches aren't coming down.

    I was thinking maybe I should increase my calorie intake to see if it helps the fat loss process but if starvation mode is a myth, then that would not help... So what would help?

    I'm 33, female, 5'4", 127 pounds and currently eat between 1200-1500 cals daily..

    Do you need to lose more weight? You're already in the range already - see the healthy BMI recommendation- you're right in the middle which is a sweet spot. And you're already exercising and getting fit. What size dress/pants do you wear?

    Ideal Weight Calculator
    Result
    Based on the Robinson formula (1983), your ideal weight is 123.0 lbs
    Based on the Miller formula (1983), your ideal weight is 129.1 lbs
    Based on the Devine formula (1974), your ideal weight is 120.6 lbs
    Based on the Hamwi formula (1964), your ideal weight is 119.7 lbs
    Based on the healthy BMI recommendation, your recommended weight is 107.8 lbs - 145.6 lbs