Is there REALLY a "starvation mode"???

Options
Sveltenhealthy
Sveltenhealthy Posts: 15 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I've heard of this mysterious "starvation mode" and so I've tried not to eat too few calories, but obviously I'm doing that a bit too well because I'm on MFP to lose weight! :-)

Is there really such a thing? Mathematically it seems that the less calories you have in your body the more weight you'll lose. What's the difference between exercising your calories away and simply not eating sometimes? (Aside from gaining muscle)

Ideas? Thanks!
«134

Replies

  • agthorn
    agthorn Posts: 1,844 Member
    Options
    Mathematically it seems that the less calories you have in your body the more weight you'll lose.

    Bodies are not perfect mathematical equations - they are fine-tuned to keep you alive in the face of limited resources. So when you have a lot of weight to lose, you are probably not going to be in starvation mode in the face of a large deficit because your body sees that it still has a lot of fat reserves to draw from. When you are already at a reasonable BMI and only have a little bit of weight to lose, too large of a deficit makes your body say "OMG all the antelope are gone and there's no berries within walking distance of my cave - conserve conserve conserve!" So your body will adapt itself to hang on to every bit of fat it can, since it doesn't know when you will be getting adequate calories again and its ONLY goal is to keep you alive until that happens.
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    Options
    Your metabolism WILL slow down if you're not eating enough.

    However, until I see some fat anorexics running around, no one will convince me that weight loss will stop or reverse by eating too little.
  • 4theking
    4theking Posts: 1,196 Member
    Options
    The more drastic you go with a caloric deficit whether it be from eating less or lots of exercise, your body will adjust your metabolic rate downward. Of course it doesn't stop you from losing weight but does decrease the number of calories it takes for you to maintain your weight. Everyone responds to it differently.
  • maddyg1989
    maddyg1989 Posts: 108 Member
    Options
    All the trainers I've talked to all said that you need calories to excercise otherwise you'll lose energy and starve your muscles. However, you shouldn't eat more calories than needed. You eat the calories you need, and excercise. They've actually told me to try not to eat the calories I've burned because eating the calories will not lead to weight loss. I guess, if you workout inbetween meals is best since you have calories to burn and you still get to eat after (as long as you follow your healthy plan). Just don't not eat.... that's the worst thing you could do to your body. Talking about a rebound!!!
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    Options
    Your metabolism WILL slow down if you're not eating enough.

    However, until I see some fat anorexics running around, no one will convince me that weight loss will stop or reverse by eating too little.

    have you seen a HEALTHY anorexic?
  • Sveltenhealthy
    Sveltenhealthy Posts: 15 Member
    Options
    Ahhh interesting. It never really made sense to me but I like your explanation. Thank you!!

    Since I have 50+ to lose I doubt I'll hit "starvation mode" anytime soon.
  • tonkitragedy
    tonkitragedy Posts: 7
    Options
    Not eating enough isn't good for your body because you risk depriving it of important nutrients.
    That way your organs can't function properly etc.
    I believe there was a post in the forum treating that topic, just search for it :)
  • agthorn
    agthorn Posts: 1,844 Member
    Options
    They've actually told me to try not to eat the calories I've burned because eating the calories will not lead to weight loss.

    Then you didn't correctly explain to them how this site works. You already have a deficit created through diet alone. So when you exercise, MFP adds those calories back to maintain your original deficit. If you don't eat those extra calories you are not fueling your body correctly for your actual activity levels, and as I said in my first response, you run the risk of creating too large of a deficit and hampering your efforts.
  • Sveltenhealthy
    Sveltenhealthy Posts: 15 Member
    Options
    Right, I can see not eating the calories you've burned - otherwise, you'd stay the same.

    I'm not anorexic by any stretch of the imagination. I just wondered if there was any validity to this starvation mode thing.

    Thank you for taking a moment to answer my questions. I appreciate it.
  • erinrose07
    erinrose07 Posts: 140
    Options
    You can thank our ancestors/cavemen for this. Our bodies are designed to help us make it through by storing fat when necessary because in the past, humans didn't know where their next meal would come from and going without food was a common part of life. If you're not taking in enough calories, your body thinks it needs to store the food to prepare for the hard times to come. This is especially true as the cold months get closer. So yep....you've got to keep your body thinking that you have enough and that there is no need to panic!
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,021 Member
    Options
    Yes and no. Starvation response happens when the body is already at a very low body fat percentage, and in the body last ditch effort for survival in tries to preserve the low amount of body fat from it's existing fat stores for that survival......death is imminent. Starvation mode as it's commonly referred to over the internet is the metabolic slowdown from dieting, which is normal and blaming starvation mode as to a plateau or the lack of weight loss is either the body hitting a new maintenance level, which again is normal if someone has a lot of weight to lose and had a moderate deficit. If it's a big deficit and the person has a good percentage of body fat then it probably a matter of simply miscalculation of the energy balance equation.....metabolic disorders aside.
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    Options
    Your metabolism WILL slow down if you're not eating enough.

    However, until I see some fat anorexics running around, no one will convince me that weight loss will stop or reverse by eating too little.

    have you seen a HEALTHY anorexic?

    Did I say I had?
  • agthorn
    agthorn Posts: 1,844 Member
    Options
    Right, I can see not eating the calories you've burned - otherwise, you'd stay the same.

    You can avoid exercise completely and still lose weight with the way MFP is set up. It creates your deficit to meet your goal through diet alone. So if your maintenance level to maintain your current weight is 2000, MFP will tell you to eat 1500 to lose a pound a week. If you burn 200 calories though exercise, your maintenance level for that day was actually 2200, and MFP will tell you to eat 1700 - which is still your original 500 calorie deficit.

    Cut calories from your diet to lose weight, exercise to be healthy and to look better when you get to your goal weight.
  • Rae6503
    Rae6503 Posts: 6,294 Member
    Options
    I've read a few things on it and this is what I've found: Your body WILL lower the amount of calories it burns when on low calorie diets for an extended period of time. I think I've read 15%. Additionally you burn calories to digest food, therefore the less food you eat, the less you burn from digesting resulting in another lowering of burned calories. Finally you just stop moving, stop figeting, have subconsciously lower actively level again, resulting in lower calories burned throughout the day. So yeah.... all these can result in a pretty substantial lowering of burned calories.

    Additionally and more importantly I feel so much better when operating on small calorie deficits. I have way more energy to work out, I get less head aches, my digestion runs smoother, I don't feel as tired in general. AND I like to eat.
  • Rae6503
    Rae6503 Posts: 6,294 Member
    Options
    As far as eating exercise calories thing of it this way: eating 1200 calories and burning 800 is the same as eating 400 calories which we all know isn't healthy.
  • Espressocycle
    Espressocycle Posts: 2,245 Member
    Options
    Eating too few calories does slow down your metabolism, so that instead of 3500 calorie deficit causing 1 lbs of weight loss, you will need more like 4,000. You will still lose weight, but not as much as might be expected given the deficit. Some research does suggest that extreme deficits and fast weight loss can slow your metabolism long-term. Slow and steady wins the race.
  • Yanicka1
    Yanicka1 Posts: 4,564 Member
    Options
    There is starvation mode but what we see here is mostly conservation mode. If you do not feed your body, it will try to survive, the best way it to lose muscle mass because muscles are taking alot of energy. You will also tend to move less to conserve energy. This will work to a point...then real starvation mode will come but we are talking anorexia.
  • asyouseefit
    asyouseefit Posts: 1,265 Member
    Options
    In my experience, eating too few calories will result in slower weight loss, crappy mood, hunger and possibly binges.
    Why do that to yourself when you can lose at a steady pace and feel good about what you eat?
  • maidentl
    maidentl Posts: 3,203 Member
    Options
    In my experience, eating too few calories will result in slower weight loss, crappy mood, hunger and possibly binges.
    Why do that to yourself when you can lose at a steady pace and feel good about what you eat?

    This is what I don't understand, why some folks are so hell-bent on eating as little as possible. It's almost like it's some sort of badge of honor.
  • solpwr
    solpwr Posts: 1,039 Member
    Options
    Ahhh interesting. It never really made sense to me but I like your explanation. Thank you!!

    Since I have 50+ to lose I doubt I'll hit "starvation mode" anytime soon.

    How much you have to lose has no bearing on "famine mode". Your body will adjust to protect its biological systems at any weight.

    A common misconception though is that "famine mode" is triggered by even one day of going under 1,200 NET calories. That's simply not going to happen. With regard to famine mode, calories eaten becomes the important factor, because you are giving the body something to work with. A day or two of a low net calorie because of a big exercise effort won't trigger it, i.e. eating 2,400 calories and burning 1,500 in a day. But if that is sustained for weeks, possibly, along with other problems like over-training, getting the cold or flu, etc.

    Even eating lower than 1,200 in a day may not trigger it if its just one single day, and your weekly average during that week is more than 1,200 calories eaten.

    Sustaining very low calories eaten and sustaining very low NET calories - is asking for problems and complications. It's not sustainable. Your body will behave in ways that are ultimately not healthy for you in the long run. Plan now to eat in a way that you can sustain indefinitely - a modest calorie deficit now, with a decreasing deficit (increasing NET) as you get closer to your goals.

Categories