Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

not losing weight when you don't eat enough

perkymommy
perkymommy Posts: 1,642 Member
edited November 16 in Debate Club
It never makes sense to me when I hear someone say if I don't eat enough calories each day that I won't lose any weight. Why is it then that I go out and see homeless people on the streets that are so frail and small from not eating enough food? or the anorexic who starve themselves pretty much to be thin? I struggled with anorexia in my teen years and young adult years and remember how easy it was to lose the weight by simply not eating much. So it is very possible to lose weight when you don't eat enough every day.

Replies

  • Purplebunnysarah
    Purplebunnysarah Posts: 3,252 Member
    Think it's a combination of things, lthough im pulling this out of my *kitten* and don't have any evidence, just hypotheses.

    1. Water retention from cortisol, as mentioned above.
    2. Just enough metabolic slow down that they're eating at maintenance. Biggest Loser effect.
    3. They're lying about how much they're eating. Often the one they are lying to is themselves...
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    edited March 2017
    sarahthes wrote: »
    Think it's a combination of things, lthough im pulling this out of my *kitten* and don't have any evidence, just hypotheses.

    1. Water retention from cortisol, as mentioned above.
    2. Just enough metabolic slow down that they're eating at maintenance. Biggest Loser effect.
    3. They're lying about how much they're eating. Often the one they are lying to is themselves...

    You're in the ballpark. A read to help understand it better: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/another-look-at-metabolic-damage.html/

    A choice excerpt:
    ...Because in no study that i have ever seen or ever been aware of has the drop in metabolic rate (whether due to the drop in weight or adaptive component) EVER exceeded the actual deficit whether in men or women. Fine, yes, it may offset things, it may slow fat loss (i.e. if you set up a 30% caloric deficit and metabolic rate drops by 20%, your deficit is only 10% so fat loss is a lot slower than expected or predicted) but it has never been sufficient to either stop fat loss completely (or, even to address the even stupider claim being made about this, to cause actual fat gain)...

    ...Because the science doesn’t support it in any way shape or form. No study in humans in 50 years has ever shown the claimed phenomenon. I mean not ever. Not a single study showing truly stopped fat loss in the face of a controlled deficit much less fat regain. And with plenty of other mechanisms (like water retention) to explain the “apparent” lack of fat loss that make more logical sense (Occam’s razor for the win).
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    perkymommy wrote: »
    It never makes sense to me when I hear someone say if I don't eat enough calories each day that I won't lose any weight. Why is it then that I go out and see homeless people on the streets that are so frail and small from not eating enough food? or the anorexic who starve themselves pretty much to be thin? I struggled with anorexia in my teen years and young adult years and remember how easy it was to lose the weight by simply not eating much. So it is very possible to lose weight when you don't eat enough every day.

    It's just another excuse for not losing weight. I know, I've used just about all the excuses, and I also have an eating-disorder past.
  • Pale_Green
    Pale_Green Posts: 64 Member
    I hate the term starvation mode. The body is not starving. But adaptive thermogenesis is a real thing. And it doesn't make you so you stop losing...but it can slow the process.
  • 3rdof7sisters
    3rdof7sisters Posts: 486 Member
    cushman5279 wrote: »
    kommodevaran wrote: »
    People just resent the idea of eating less. "Starvation mode" is such a convenient excuse to not make an effort to lose weight.

    This!

    Believe me, if you don't eat, you'll lose weight (and be totally unhealthy)!

    ^This

    And you absolutely can, and will, starve to death if you do not eat.
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    think of it this way ..if starvation mode is real, then why do people die of starvation...?
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    It doesn't make sense because it's not true.
  • JohnnyPenso
    JohnnyPenso Posts: 412 Member
    Pale_Green wrote: »
    I hate the term starvation mode. The body is not starving. But adaptive thermogenesis is a real thing. And it doesn't make you so you stop losing...but it can slow the process.
    Correct and I think this is what people are either experiencing or referring to when they talk about starvation mode. AT can slow you enough that it might appear temporarily that you aren't losing weight, especially if combined with a cortisol response to lower caloric intake. One could go weeks without appearing to lose weight while eating a very low number of calories.
  • dfwesq
    dfwesq Posts: 592 Member
    It's also worth considering that losing a lot of weight while remaining healthy requires time. A diet that's too low in calories or nutrients probably isn't sustainable over time, at least not for most people. It's not healthy and you feel awful and can't wait to get back to "normal" eating. And even if it is temporarily sustainable, it doesn't take care of the problem of maintaining a healthy weight. So as a practical matter for most overweight people, eating far too few calories won't lead to long-term fat loss.
  • Gallowmere1984
    Gallowmere1984 Posts: 6,626 Member
    dfwesq wrote: »
    It's also worth considering that losing a lot of weight while remaining healthy requires time. A diet that's too low in calories or nutrients probably isn't sustainable over time, at least not for most people. It's not healthy and you feel awful and can't wait to get back to "normal" eating. And even if it is temporarily sustainable, it doesn't take care of the problem of maintaining a healthy weight. So as a practical matter for most overweight people, eating far too few calories won't lead to long-term fat loss.

    Pretty much. It's essentially a niche dieting strategy best left to those who A: know what they are doing, and B: have monk level self-control. Is that elitist of me? Yeap. It's also extremely realistic.
  • Tacklewasher
    Tacklewasher Posts: 7,122 Member
    JohnnyPenso wrote: »
    Pale_Green wrote: »
    I hate the term starvation mode. The body is not starving. But adaptive thermogenesis is a real thing. And it doesn't make you so you stop losing...but it can slow the process.
    Correct and I think this is what people are either experiencing or referring to when they talk about starvation mode. AT can slow you enough that it might appear temporarily that you aren't losing weight, especially if combined with a cortisol response to lower caloric intake. One could go weeks without appearing to lose weight while eating a very low number of calories.

    Most talking about starvation mode are just underestimating their intake. Fix the tracking and the weight loss picks back up.
  • inertiastrength
    inertiastrength Posts: 2,343 Member
    My aunt is famous for this. She's probably 80lbs overweight and insists dieting in her early 20's (she's now 55) ruined her metabolism and she can't lose weight. Then I watch her eat about 10 servings of crackers with Helluva good dip as a SNACK and washes it down with prosecco. Never less than a whole bottle lol. That metabolic damage will get you every time!
  • devrinator
    devrinator Posts: 79 Member
    I wonder if when we become obese we are in a form of starvation mode, though. I know that when I just eat whatever I want, I eat a lot of whatever I eat, whether it's healthy or not. More often than not, I end up eating non-nutritious foods in abundance. So, I wonder if when I restrict my calories but eat healthier foods how that compares to when I don't worry about my foods and end up eating gobs of pasta and low-nutrient foods.

    Also, I find it very difficult to naturally control calories. When I watch what I eat, I tend to go for quantity--low-calorie quantity. I'll eat a lot of veg with measured olive oil, etc, and sometimes find I'm just at 1000 calories for the day. Trying to up the calories feels unnatural at that point. I'm then surprised at how few calories I've eaten when I've added high calorie foods such as almonds and avocado. I think once I hit obesity (or just before), my eat-o-meter broke. I couldn't tell I was full, and that's why I kept gaining weight. I probably needed more nutrients, gained weight, needed more nutrients and the cycle continued. Decreasing calories while attempting to get a more complete nutritional diet curbs my appetite, but maybe I'm getting more nutrients this way than by eating a surplus of junk?

    I find "starvation mode" thing to be at odds with the common American diet which can oftentimes be high in calorie but low in nutritional quality. If one cuts out all the worthless junk food from his diet, he may only be eating 400 to 800 calories of valuable foods. --or even less than that. So what happens hen he goes on an 800-1000 calorie diet full of nutrient dense foods? Does that make a difference?

This discussion has been closed.

Categories