I’m trying and trying and nada
Options
Replies
-
snowflake954 wrote: »serpentegena wrote: »serpentegena wrote: »Based on simple logic, your body is likely in starvation mode. You aren't getting enough food for basic physical processes! If you are jogging and rock-climbing, activities I also do, you need a heck of a lot more than 1224 calories a day!! You are probably losing muscle mass, and that further slows your metabolism. This is really bad. You need to start eating more a day, and forget about "losing" weight for now. Start gaining muscle. Muscle weighs more than fat. Expect gaining some weight, but start by getting healthier, not lighter on the scale. Then (maybe in a few months) you can refocus on losing fat.
FFS, can't we have a message when posting a reply that starvation mode does not exist? What you're describing means that various organs suddenly stop working and instead the body uses the energy to fuel activities. Can you explain how that works? But yes, you are right, TO is not able to do this on 1200 calories per day.
Hello yirara. I apologize for using words that made you curse. Perhaps I should have said "adaptive thermogenesis" instead (which is the scientifically substantiated equivalent according to Healthline: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/starvation-mode), and further patronized the OP with scholarly expressions that go over their heads, without actually trying to help. Instead, I focused on getting out a helpful hint in an attention-grabbing formula, trying to steer them into a constructive direction.
But thank you for criticizing my comment. It reminded me that my time is better spent perfecting my deadlift than talking at strangers online.
"Starvation Mode" is click-bait. Read up on the "Minnesota Experiment-Starvation Mode" and see if it's helpful for the OP. The correct terms are important. People are on here to educate themselves, so we don't presume what will go over someone's head.
I went and read up on that:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/living-eating-disorders/202108/what-we-can-learn-the-minnesota-starvation-experiment
https://www.grunge.com/963892/the-minnesota-starvation-experiments-findings-confirmed-what-we-all-suspected/
https://dieteticallyspeaking.com/the-minnesota-starvation-experiment/
I continue to fail to see what's wrong with what I said. The study results, even then, showed overall reduction of the BMR, manifest depression and other mood disorders, reduced body temp, all consistent with what is colloquially referred to as "starvation mode" in the context of dieting and calorie reduction. It appears to confirm that severe or unusual food restrictions correlate to a slowed down metabolism, which was essentially my point. What has it proven wrong, then?1 -
In fact, nevermind. Really, carry on without me. I agree with the OP's sentiment that I shouldn't have come here.0
-
serpentegena wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »serpentegena wrote: »serpentegena wrote: »Based on simple logic, your body is likely in starvation mode. You aren't getting enough food for basic physical processes! If you are jogging and rock-climbing, activities I also do, you need a heck of a lot more than 1224 calories a day!! You are probably losing muscle mass, and that further slows your metabolism. This is really bad. You need to start eating more a day, and forget about "losing" weight for now. Start gaining muscle. Muscle weighs more than fat. Expect gaining some weight, but start by getting healthier, not lighter on the scale. Then (maybe in a few months) you can refocus on losing fat.
FFS, can't we have a message when posting a reply that starvation mode does not exist? What you're describing means that various organs suddenly stop working and instead the body uses the energy to fuel activities. Can you explain how that works? But yes, you are right, TO is not able to do this on 1200 calories per day.
Hello yirara. I apologize for using words that made you curse. Perhaps I should have said "adaptive thermogenesis" instead (which is the scientifically substantiated equivalent according to Healthline: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/starvation-mode), and further patronized the OP with scholarly expressions that go over their heads, without actually trying to help. Instead, I focused on getting out a helpful hint in an attention-grabbing formula, trying to steer them into a constructive direction.
But thank you for criticizing my comment. It reminded me that my time is better spent perfecting my deadlift than talking at strangers online.
"Starvation Mode" is click-bait. Read up on the "Minnesota Experiment-Starvation Mode" and see if it's helpful for the OP. The correct terms are important. People are on here to educate themselves, so we don't presume what will go over someone's head.
I went and read up on that:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/living-eating-disorders/202108/what-we-can-learn-the-minnesota-starvation-experiment
https://www.grunge.com/963892/the-minnesota-starvation-experiments-findings-confirmed-what-we-all-suspected/
https://dieteticallyspeaking.com/the-minnesota-starvation-experiment/
I continue to fail to see what's wrong with what I said. The study results, even then, showed overall reduction of the BMR, manifest depression and other mood disorders, reduced body temp, all consistent with what is colloquially referred to as "starvation mode" in the context of dieting and calorie reduction. It appears to confirm that severe or unusual food restrictions correlate to a slowed down metabolism, which was essentially my point. What has it proven wrong, then?
What most people who come here and complain consider to be starvation mode is that they don't lose any weight (like TO), or even gain weight while most certainly being in a calorie deficit. Using a word such as 'starvation mode' confirms and strengthens this erroneous belief and just isn't helpful at all in this situation. Look at it from this point of view:
We say: sorry, you can't only be eating 1200 calories per day, be super active and not lose weight for months. Something must be off.
Someone: it's starvation mode!!!
Some TO, picking that one answer that shows they are not underestimating: Oh yeah, I ate too little. Need to eat more.
We see this here over and over again, and it's just not helpful.
I hope you understand were we're coming from and stick around. We're generally quite nice (though I do curse quite a bit. Comes with being an underwater sheep, really)5 -
serpentegena wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »serpentegena wrote: »serpentegena wrote: »Based on simple logic, your body is likely in starvation mode. You aren't getting enough food for basic physical processes! If you are jogging and rock-climbing, activities I also do, you need a heck of a lot more than 1224 calories a day!! You are probably losing muscle mass, and that further slows your metabolism. This is really bad. You need to start eating more a day, and forget about "losing" weight for now. Start gaining muscle. Muscle weighs more than fat. Expect gaining some weight, but start by getting healthier, not lighter on the scale. Then (maybe in a few months) you can refocus on losing fat.
FFS, can't we have a message when posting a reply that starvation mode does not exist? What you're describing means that various organs suddenly stop working and instead the body uses the energy to fuel activities. Can you explain how that works? But yes, you are right, TO is not able to do this on 1200 calories per day.
Hello yirara. I apologize for using words that made you curse. Perhaps I should have said "adaptive thermogenesis" instead (which is the scientifically substantiated equivalent according to Healthline: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/starvation-mode), and further patronized the OP with scholarly expressions that go over their heads, without actually trying to help. Instead, I focused on getting out a helpful hint in an attention-grabbing formula, trying to steer them into a constructive direction.
But thank you for criticizing my comment. It reminded me that my time is better spent perfecting my deadlift than talking at strangers online.
"Starvation Mode" is click-bait. Read up on the "Minnesota Experiment-Starvation Mode" and see if it's helpful for the OP. The correct terms are important. People are on here to educate themselves, so we don't presume what will go over someone's head.
I went and read up on that:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/living-eating-disorders/202108/what-we-can-learn-the-minnesota-starvation-experiment
https://www.grunge.com/963892/the-minnesota-starvation-experiments-findings-confirmed-what-we-all-suspected/
https://dieteticallyspeaking.com/the-minnesota-starvation-experiment/
I continue to fail to see what's wrong with what I said. The study results, even then, showed overall reduction of the BMR, manifest depression and other mood disorders, reduced body temp, all consistent with what is colloquially referred to as "starvation mode" in the context of dieting and calorie reduction. It appears to confirm that severe or unusual food restrictions correlate to a slowed down metabolism, which was essentially my point. What has it proven wrong, then?
The problem is that out in the real world, most people do not equate 'starvation mode' to adaptive thermogenesis. They equate 'starvation mode' to a point where your body literally quits burning calories and saves all of the calories that you eat as fat to protect you from starving to death.5 -
I think people can understand adaptive thermogenis - in its true meaning - ie people who eat very little then adapt their energy output to try to compensate - so you are in a POW camp or a famine and you are way under eating over long period of time and your body adapts to putting out less energy - ie you feel tired, move less, your hair and nails stop growing - your body is conserving energy just to stay alive.
But these people are not over weight and they are not doing like OP "I walk an average of 66km a week that includes rock climbing, hills and jogging. I mow and do a lot of gardening and have a physical job."
So, has no relevance for your ordinary dieter trying to lose weight from overweight position and the catchy term "starvation mode' has no application in this setting.
Hope that explains what is wrong with using it
5 -
I like that one. Mine no longer needs batteries. It's nice side effect of buying a mechanical medical scale.Carriehelene wrote: »Umm, normal water fluctuations would cause the scale to change daily. You’re saying you “haven’t lost a gram”. So my question is, when’s the last time you changed the battery on your scale?
2 -
@kt9pk2xwwc If you're eating that few calories and are doing that much exercise, and are not losing weight - it's time to see a doctor. I tried for years to lose weight but couldn't lose more than 10 lbs, but finally got treatment for a hormonal disorder. Now I've lost 50lbs so far in less than 6 months doing the same thing that "didn't work" (beyond 10 lbs) for years - down to using the same exact food scale. If that's the case for you, you'll need a doctor's help (and probably blood work and some trial and error) to get the right diagnosis and treatment.3
-
serpentegena wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »serpentegena wrote: »serpentegena wrote: »Based on simple logic, your body is likely in starvation mode. You aren't getting enough food for basic physical processes! If you are jogging and rock-climbing, activities I also do, you need a heck of a lot more than 1224 calories a day!! You are probably losing muscle mass, and that further slows your metabolism. This is really bad. You need to start eating more a day, and forget about "losing" weight for now. Start gaining muscle. Muscle weighs more than fat. Expect gaining some weight, but start by getting healthier, not lighter on the scale. Then (maybe in a few months) you can refocus on losing fat.
FFS, can't we have a message when posting a reply that starvation mode does not exist? What you're describing means that various organs suddenly stop working and instead the body uses the energy to fuel activities. Can you explain how that works? But yes, you are right, TO is not able to do this on 1200 calories per day.
Hello yirara. I apologize for using words that made you curse. Perhaps I should have said "adaptive thermogenesis" instead (which is the scientifically substantiated equivalent according to Healthline: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/starvation-mode), and further patronized the OP with scholarly expressions that go over their heads, without actually trying to help. Instead, I focused on getting out a helpful hint in an attention-grabbing formula, trying to steer them into a constructive direction.
But thank you for criticizing my comment. It reminded me that my time is better spent perfecting my deadlift than talking at strangers online.
"Starvation Mode" is click-bait. Read up on the "Minnesota Experiment-Starvation Mode" and see if it's helpful for the OP. The correct terms are important. People are on here to educate themselves, so we don't presume what will go over someone's head.
I went and read up on that:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/living-eating-disorders/202108/what-we-can-learn-the-minnesota-starvation-experiment
https://www.grunge.com/963892/the-minnesota-starvation-experiments-findings-confirmed-what-we-all-suspected/
https://dieteticallyspeaking.com/the-minnesota-starvation-experiment/
I continue to fail to see what's wrong with what I said. The study results, even then, showed overall reduction of the BMR, manifest depression and other mood disorders, reduced body temp, all consistent with what is colloquially referred to as "starvation mode" in the context of dieting and calorie reduction. It appears to confirm that severe or unusual food restrictions correlate to a slowed down metabolism, which was essentially my point. What has it proven wrong, then?
The problem is that out in the real world, most people do not equate 'starvation mode' to adaptive thermogenesis. They equate 'starvation mode' to a point where your body literally quits burning calories and saves all of the calories that you eat as fat to protect you from starving to death.
Exactly. This misinterpretation hangs in the ether like a bad smell.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 389 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions