Starvation mode?

He dropped weight for The Machinist and for The Fighter... it must be do-able

wasn't that also probably rapid weight loss? He may have been able to maintain for as long as needed but in order refrain from regaining, wouldn't he have to continue to malnurish his body? I don't know how easy it would be for a human to constantly surive on a can of tuna and an apple

well lucky me, after gastric bypass sugery i only consume between 400-850 calories a day! so hmmm? i had my surgery on july 20, 2011 and now, 11 weeks and 2 days later i weigh 59 pounds less.

Yes I agree with the original poster. For the ones that are eating 900 calories a day, (THIS IS MY OPINION ONLY and you can admit your faults or not), they aren't including cream, sugar in their coffee, they aren't including the 140 calories of oil they use to fry an egg, they aren't truly measuring their food, they don't know what an ounce is or feels like. They aren't eating 900 calories a day.

I clicked on this thread because I wanted to see what bogus idea about starvation mode was being discussed this time.

Starvation mode is for when you are 90 lbs and your body is literally starving.. not when you are 110+ lbs. But also, the idea that Muscle weighs more than fat.. is ridicoulsy misunderstood as well. Some people just want to hear excuses. I've always said the "muscle weighs more than fat" is what you tell "fat" people to make them feel better about the water gain in their body while working out.. Why lie to them? It is what it is.. It's OK It's a good thing!!

WHO cares Be happy, workout because you want to be healthy and fit, not because the scale NEEDS to go down Live life, eat some chocolate, eat some blueberries, don't limit yourself and enjoy.. you have the rest of your life to lose 50 lbs.. Why rush? What's the big hurry?

It's calories in, calories out! I had gastric bypass surgery too. 5 years ago. I lost 30lbs in 30 days.. I was barely consuming calories. Calories in, Calories out.. It gets complicated when you are trying to build muscle or training for an event.. if you aren't, it's just calories in, calories out.. not rocket science.

Ok I'm done Good Luck to all

Great question...

I've done a little reading on this topic myself.

Google the Minnesota Starvation Experiment when you get a chance.

I had never heard of this, and it was rather interesting to see some of the findings (thanks for sharing it). These men's calorie intake was only cut down to 1560 (a big cut considering they were eating twice that previously), and they had severe issues mentally, physically, psychologically, emotionally, and sexually.

I do believe you could lose weight eating that little...anorexics do it all the time. That does not mean it's HEALTHY. Big difference. Anorexics are in danger of organ failure, including heart failure (Karen Carpenter). To me the picture of Christian Bale at 120 pounds looks like the picture of an anorexic. Not healthy, and not attractive. And who knows what adverse effects he may experience down the road?

The important thing is to eat enough to make sure your body is healthy. Speaking of which...time for my last snack of the day! :happy:

I rarely eat 1200 calories. Not because I dont want to its because I am just not hungry enough to and I dont believe you should eat just to reach the calories. If I start eating just to eat I will be back to my old ways. I've only hit one plateau and my weight loss varies.

I believe starvation modes exist if you are the type to eat only once a day or goes days without eating. You body will hold on to whatever fat you put into your body which will cause weight gain or no weight loss and the loss of muscle.

I have nothing to contribute. I just want to be able to find this when I want to read it again.

I think the issue with starvation mode is maintenance. I agree that if you actually starve yourself, you will lose weight and lose weight rapidly. I don't think you could be gaining weight because you're eating too little. I always cringe when I see that on this site. However, I do think eventually the body gets scared that it's not getting enough nutrients and will try to hold onto any little it has left and if you go back to eating normally, you will gain it back just as quickly as you lost it. Plus, starving yourself may also make it more likely that you will want to overindulge and binge. After all, you can't just live on tuna and an apple. And as soon as you go back to a higher calorie diet, your body may pack on the pounds. Starving yourself may also mean that losing those last few pounds becomes even harder because the body is so reluctant to let go of it. It will try everything to try to slow your metabolism down. You'll feel tired, less energetic - possibly too tired to work out. Meanwhile if you just continued to eat normally (obviously less than whatever got you overweight to begin with) and worked out a little more, you'd still lose the weight, albeit more slowly but without feeling like crap and reducing your chance of ending up in a big dieting yo-yo cycle.

I notice in that study that th men were starved of nutrients more than calories. 1500+ cals would be fine if it were well balanced but they were given mostly starches, bread and pasta.

What each person does is their own business (unless they're seriously hurting themselves), so whether or not someone eats their exercise calories is up to them. Personally? I lost more eating more, and believe that other weight loss attempts failed because I wasn't eating enough. I foolishly believed that to lose more weight, I'd have to eat even less food, and that wasn't something I was willing to do. So I was amazed that even in my late 30s, when you'd think my metabolism wouldn't be so great, losing weight was pretty easy while eating a normal (never feeling deprived or hungry) amount of food.

That said... can we please make Christian Bale stay around 190?