Another non-believer of "starvation mode"?
Replies
-
sorry to say i disagree.......:yawn:The less you weigh, the less calories you need to fuel your body. So if you are thin, lowering your calorie intake below 1200 won't necessarily put your body into starvation mode and stop your metabolism. Plateaus are natural, and will happen, but starvation mode is actually a myth.
Starvation mode happens when you don't eat ANYTHING at all...that's your body's way of coping with NO food. Eating less than you should on a daily basis won't cause your body to shut down.0 -
Just a thought...
You can eat A LOT more food for 1200 calories if you're not eating processed food/fast food. Agree?
And you can eat EVEN MORE food - and should - if you're exercising. Agree?
So...if you're exercising and eating mostly nice, clean food...how is it starving?
Also, wouldn't "Starvation Mode" vary from person to person, since all caloric requirements are different for each of us, based on weight, age, genetics and activity levels?
Just things that make me go hmmmmmmmmmm....0 -
I've become a non-believer after years of swearing by it! In my first year of weightloss, I didn't know about starvation mode and lost 60 pounds. Then I became educated and changed things around to avoid starvation mode. After two YEARS of diligently logging what I eat and working out 1-2 times a day after everyone telling me I'm not eating enough and accommodating starvation mode, I have not lost a single pound. And DEFINITELY not for a lack of trying. I'm frustrated to the point of tears and cutting back on my calories significantly to see where that gets me. Maybe it works for some people but two years of it tells me that it doesn't work for me.0
-
The less you weigh, the less calories you need to fuel your body. So if you are thin, lowering your calorie intake below 1200 won't necessarily put your body into starvation mode and stop your metabolism. Plateaus are natural, and will happen, but starvation mode is actually a myth.
Starvation mode happens when you don't eat ANYTHING at all...that's your body's way of coping with NO food. Eating less than you should on a daily basis won't cause your body to shut down.0 -
Here's some numerical evidence about my own body.
I started the journey in July at 245 lbs. I lost 20 lbs or so really fast on 1700 calories. Around December I plateaued. I was running at the time 6-10 miles a day 4x a week plus weights (in reality I was overtraining) and sticking to 1700 calories.
I couldn't lose a damn thing all December and up to 10 days ago. I stuck around 220-223 lbs. Overtraining, undereating, my body gave me the high middle finger.
10 days ago I got with a nutritionist and a personal trainer. I upped my calories to 2200 a day and slacked off on the exercise. I still work out 5x a week for 60-90 minutes a day. I've lost 8 lbs in the past 10 days.
Do what works for you. "Starvation Mode" may not apply to some of you but for many people, to include myself, limiting my calories and working out harder doesn't achieve anything visually or on the scale after my body throttles back and gets used to it even though by the math I should be 195 lbs today.0 -
The less you weigh, the less calories you need to fuel your body. So if you are thin, lowering your calorie intake below 1200 won't necessarily put your body into starvation mode and stop your metabolism. Plateaus are natural, and will happen, but starvation mode is actually a myth.
Starvation mode happens when you don't eat ANYTHING at all...that's your body's way of coping with NO food. Eating less than you should on a daily basis won't cause your body to shut down.
Totally agree!! Want to lose weight...eat less and exercise more...the more you burn...the less you weigh
0 -
"Starvation mode happens when you don't eat ANYTHING at all...that's your body's way of coping with NO food. Eating less than you should on a daily basis won't cause your body to shut down"
I must admit that i agreed with this statement a 110%0 -
Starvation mode happens when you don't eat ANYTHING at all...that's your body's way of coping with NO food. Eating less than you should on a daily basis won't cause your body to shut down0
-
I personally don't believe in starvation mode, take a look at annorexic/bulemic people.. they practically never eat, and look how thin they have become. I don't condone the annorexia or bulemia part, but I was more so speaking about the saying that you should have atleast 1200 calories or your going to fail. Bull, I have a strict calorie intake set at 890/ day, and before exercise, I ususally have about 150-200 calories to spare. Since January 22, 2012 I have lost 12 lbs. That's 12 lbs in ten days. So, if the saying was correct about HAVING to take in 1200 calories to be sucessful, then why have I lost 12 lbs ? Just a thought for everyone to consider.. I didn't mean to start a riot or a fight about who's right or wrong.
0 -
People who say they are working out XX amount and eating YY amounts and not losing are usually miscalculating somehow. Unless they are eating less than 50% of their BMR for extended periods of time, they aren't really in danger of "starvation mode". It is extremely easy to erase one's perceived deficit with estimate errors and then throw the whole plan out the window as "not working".
However, there are those, like Auticus, who really are undereating and overexercising and their bodies don't cooperate in this whole weight loss thing until adequate nutrition is provided.
If starvation mode doesn't apply to YOU, that's fantastic, but saying it doesn't exist for anyone isn't exactly accurate.
And TBL is a reality show. 'Nuff said.
ETA: Starvation "mode" is NOT the same as starvation (like anorexics or third world countries).0 -
I don't know about "starvation mode" and won't go into details about it nor am I speaking for everyone but I've eaten 500-600 calories a day before...sometimes even less and personally, it was a terrible feeling. I was rude, mad, exhausted ALL the time! I did lose weight but i ALSO lost the person I was (energetic and social). Not to mention, I lost a lot of my muscle mass!!
Now when I look back at it, i was incredibly stupid because I put my body through so much crap to get to the "ultimate skinny" look. Maintaining 500 calories is impossible for the rest of your life. If you stop giving your body fuel, it will give up one day! That is a fact which is why so many people die a year from anorexia and such.
I don't really care about anything except that I fuel my body with right nutrients, once in awhile eat what I want to keep my mind happy and maintain my health through exercise and being active. Even 1200 calories seems to less for me...I get super hungry so I always eat more but that's fine because that's me. It's all on the individual.
Oh and personal experience, when I did start eating properly after..my body fat shot up like crazy and gained to a higher weight than I started with...0 -
^^^^^^the "Starvation Mode" IS BULLSH*T! There has been studies done to show if you "stop yourself from eating" you cannot GAIN weight simply because your not EATING anything to make u gain! Think about it, how do all anorexic people stay skinny? They dont eat, and when they dont eat, they LOSE weight, not GAIN. Not saying this is right to do, just saying the truth
WRONG!
Anorexic people stay skinny, because they've shut down their metabolism and forced their bodies to cannibalize lean body mass.
And what does that do?
Further stifle metabolism.
And you said studies? What studies?
Cite one study where diet restriction does not stifle ie slow down metabolism.
Don't bother, they do not exist. You are making things up.0 -
^^^^^^^^^^It's science, guys. You metabolism does slow. It becomes so very hard for your body to break down food when it's not used to breaking down certain amounts. Look at recovery from eating disorders - they're put on meal plans that are only around 1200 calories, if at that, yet they still experience weight gain. Why? Because their bodies weren't used to it.
I think everyone needs to remember that "starvation" refers to less than 600 calories a day, I believe. 1200 is the recommended weightloss calorie intake (for women), just because you're going lower than that, doesn't mean you're starving. Also, people need to remember that other things will boost your metabolism, thus speeding up a metabolism that may have been slowing down from decreasing intake. Things like exercise, muscle mass, green tea and caffeine etc. all help boost the metabolism.
Whilst in the depths of my ED that was what I used to 'maintain' a 'normal' metabolism. I lived off tea and black coffee, and exercised ridiculously; convinced that this was speeding my metabolism up, balancing the fact that body was starving and basically destroying itself. Of course, these tactics didn't help when recovery was forced upon me. 15kg went on very, very easily. Had I perhaps maintained the 1200 calories and done everything by the book; my weight probably wouldn't have gone back on in such a fashion. Because I wouldn't have mucked my metabolism up so much.
Also, when you are starving (in terms of the medical definition; i.e. 600 odd calories), your weight loss will slow. You will have to step up your calorific outtake in order to maintain steady loss. This goes for people who are in the 'healthy' BMI section. Those who are in the overweight or obese categories experience faster weightloss. I think of it as perhaps their bodies thanking them, as most of us have that one weight that we stay at or sink to. Once you meet that anchoring weight, then things become harder. Perhaps that's your metabolism going "stop, we're good here", and hindering you from losing more weight.
THIS!0 -
There's been studies showing that a VLCD will still produce fat loss. However, you will probably look like a pile of skin like on The Biggest Loser.
EDIT: Link to a study showing this. I'm not saying it won't possibly slow metabolic rate (seeing as the study even says it will), but you don't magically stop losing weight because you're on a VLCD. And once again, I'm not advocating a VLCD for anyone. I think it's a dumb idea unless it's doctor prescribed. I just want the facts to be put out there.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2016490?dopt=Abstract0 -
owlbabi - Much of that 12 pounds is water. The first time I ever dieted, I lost 11 pounds in one week, eating ~2000 net calories per day. When you're overweight, pounds will melt off the first week or two you eat significantly less, whether it's a healthy amount, still too much, or too little. At 800 calories/day you are quite likely starving yourself unless you are extremely small.0
-
I personally don't believe in starvation mode, take a look at annorexic/bulemic people.. they practically never eat, and look how thin they have become. I don't condone the annorexia or bulemia part, but I was more so speaking about the saying that you should have atleast 1200 calories or your going to fail. Bull, I have a strict calorie intake set at 890/ day, and before exercise, I ususally have about 150-200 calories to spare. Since January 22, 2012 I have lost 12 lbs. That's 12 lbs in ten days. So, if the saying was correct about HAVING to take in 1200 calories to be sucessful, then why have I lost 12 lbs ? Just a thought for everyone to consider.. I didn't mean to start a riot or a fight about who's right or wrong.
Sadly you won't listen to anyone now, but you'll pay the price for this later. Trust me, I've been there and done that already.
Your gonna be sorry for starving yourself
0 -
I guess I'll come out with it: I think "starvation mode" is silly.
I watched a documentary about anorexia and the doc (world-renowned researcher too) explained "starvation mode", saying there is some truth to lowered calories and poor weight loss because of a "crashed" system (he didn't put it quite like that). However, he said the body burns fewer calories than expected at certain low calorie levels, not that it stops altogether and actually conserves (which is what I've typically heard from SM proponents). From an endocrine standpoint, fat cells may indeed conserve fat in response to lowered fat/calorie intake but it wont last long. When faced with "lose muscle" vs "lose fat", the body will prefer fat if it's available. It wont stop releasing glucose from muscles but it will reduce that release - the "conservation of metabolism" factor.
I have a conspiracy that "starvation mode" is a plan to keep the 1st world fat so we'll survive armageddon.0 -
Agree'd - wow!I personally don't believe in starvation mode, take a look at annorexic/bulemic people.. they practically never eat, and look how thin they have become. I don't condone the annorexia or bulemia part, but I was more so speaking about the saying that you should have atleast 1200 calories or your going to fail. Bull, I have a strict calorie intake set at 890/ day, and before exercise, I ususally have about 150-200 calories to spare. Since January 22, 2012 I have lost 12 lbs. That's 12 lbs in ten days. So, if the saying was correct about HAVING to take in 1200 calories to be sucessful, then why have I lost 12 lbs ? Just a thought for everyone to consider.. I didn't mean to start a riot or a fight about who's right or wrong.
Sadly you won't listen to anyone now, but you'll pay the price for this later. Trust me, I've been there and done that already.
Your gonna be sorry for starving yourself
Any time somebody needs to cite what anorexics and bulimics do to justify themselves, you know you are dealing with delusion.0 -
I personally don't believe in starvation mode, take a look at annorexic/bulemic people.. they practically never eat, and look how thin they have become. I don't condone the annorexia or bulemia part, but I was more so speaking about the saying that you should have atleast 1200 calories or your going to fail. Bull, I have a strict calorie intake set at 890/ day, and before exercise, I ususally have about 150-200 calories to spare. Since January 22, 2012 I have lost 12 lbs. That's 12 lbs in ten days. So, if the saying was correct about HAVING to take in 1200 calories to be sucessful, then why have I lost 12 lbs ? Just a thought for everyone to consider.. I didn't mean to start a riot or a fight about who's right or wrong.
Yes and how many of them once they've recovered from their ED start piling on the weight?
I lost that same amount of weight in the same time frame. I was eating 1800 calories. So would you rather eat very little and lose 12 pounds or eat a lot and lose 12 pounds? I'm going to wager I felt better and had no hunger pains. I'm also here six months later. I hope you're the exception to the rule but after being here six months the people who come on and claim they've lost weight by eating less aren't here within three months. They've given up, still overweight and still struggling.0 -
I guess I'll come out with it: I think "starvation mode" is silly.
I watched a documentary about anorexia and the doc (world-renowned researcher too) explained "starvation mode", saying there is some truth to lowered calories and poor weight loss because of a "crashed" system (he didn't put it quite like that). However, he said the body burns fewer calories than expected at certain low calorie levels, not that it stops altogether and actually conserves (which is what I've typically heard from SM proponents). From an endocrine standpoint, fat cells may indeed conserve fat in response to lowered fat/calorie intake but it wont last long. When faced with "lose muscle" vs "lose fat", the body will prefer fat if it's available. It wont stop releasing glucose from muscles but it will reduce that release - the "conservation of metabolism" factor.
I have a conspiracy that "starvation mode" is a plan to keep the 1st world fat so we'll survive armageddon.
This. People need to read some peer reviewed, scientific journals before making false statements. The human body is an amazing and complex system. I recall a study on starvation mode that showed lean muscle mass was only burned after body fat percentage reached <5%.0 -
That's interesting. I've participated in a study that showed that lean muscle mass is burned if complex carbs are not present when working out.
Which one is right?
0 -
I've also personally known two people with documented eating disorders.
Both were stick thin but had eating disorders for years. If you eat very few calories for years, you will eventually get to the point where there is only bone and something resembling skin covering you.
Second, when they started eating normal their body piled on weight quick, much to their lament. When I say normal I don't mean 3000 calories or more, I'm talking they went "up to" 1200 calories a day...0 -
You're not going to gain weight if you don't eat. People saying so misunderstand the premise behind the whole 'starvation mode' thing. Also starvation mode is a pretty bad name for it.
You need a caloric deficit to lose weight, period. That weight loss doesn't all come from fat, however. The manner in which you lose weight (i.e. the nutritional makeup of the food you are eating, how much you exercise, the size of your deficit, and genetics) is what determines where that weight loss will come from. If you have too large of a deficit, your body will cannibalize lean body mass at a higher ratio to fat (LBM will basically always be lost with weight loss, the question is how much). Some people don't seem to care much about LBM, but in addition to the physical health implications having a higher proportion of LBM to body fat goes a long way towards making you look good. That's of course my opinion (and fortunately the opinion of most folks at least that I've seen) and it goes for both men and women.
Additionally, if you don't give your body enough fuel to operate (this baseline amount differs drastically from person to person) it will slow your metabolism as a safety measure. Primary organ function starts to take precedence over things like your immune system or hair and nail growth. In extreme cases, your body simply starts to shut down.
So the argument that someone with something as serious as anorexia isn't fat is a moot point. No you won't gain weight eating 100 net calories a day, but you almost certainly won't look good (if not external looks than internally with the damage you'd be doing to your body) doing it either.0 -
Studies, shows, magazine articles, ww, mfp gurus....none of which are things you should take as gospel. Work what works for you, if you have questions, find a doctor, get specialists involved, have regular check ups to monitor your vitals etc.
Woops! Did i just give advice again? Soooo, 71 pounds down, haven't found myself in starvation mode....not losing muscle, gaining it in fact....but my plan is just that, a plan for ME.
Stay healthy people!0 -
I eat a very VLCD. I eat 5 meal replacements a day and one real meal. However, I only exercise at the most 45 minutes a day doing moderate exercise. WHEN I start doing hard core exercise I have at eat two real meals and 4 of the supplments. Simply because my metabolism is flying. I am not one big huge piece of skin and have been eating this low calories for over a year. Granted I messed around which is why I am not at my goal weight..my own fault..not the diet.
I know that I can not live on 800 calories a day for life. I will hurt someone...seriously...I hate it. I like to eat..so I exercise. I could stop doing the VLCD but it produces results.0 -
I dont know, but I workout 2x a day and watch everything I eat. I skimp on carbs, cutout fats and stick to protiens and veggies. I also drink alot of water. In 7 weeks I lost 1.4 pounds. My calorie intake would be about 700 a day. Now I have added different foods because I was in "starvation mode" we'll see what happens...0
-
I doubt that.I guess I'll come out with it: I think "starvation mode" is silly.
I watched a documentary about anorexia and the doc (world-renowned researcher too) explained "starvation mode", saying there is some truth to lowered calories and poor weight loss because of a "crashed" system (he didn't put it quite like that). However, he said the body burns fewer calories than expected at certain low calorie levels, not that it stops altogether and actually conserves (which is what I've typically heard from SM proponents). From an endocrine standpoint, fat cells may indeed conserve fat in response to lowered fat/calorie intake but it wont last long. When faced with "lose muscle" vs "lose fat", the body will prefer fat if it's available. It wont stop releasing glucose from muscles but it will reduce that release - the "conservation of metabolism" factor.
I have a conspiracy that "starvation mode" is a plan to keep the 1st world fat so we'll survive armageddon.
This. People need to read some peer reviewed, scientific journals before making false statements. The human body is an amazing and complex system. I recall a study on starvation mode that showed lean muscle mass was only burned after body fat percentage reached <5%.
Cite the study.0 -
After 31 months and losing 295 lbs. and all the trial and error that I have went through and I am speaking from my own experience of course there is such a think as creating such a huge deficit between your diet and exercise that your body responds by slowing down your metabolism and start retaining nutrition that you are feeding it because with the deficit you are giving it , it has no idea when the next meal is going to come hence the term starvation mode effect get thrown around. I don't necessarily like the term in its general form but the effects are real.. believe me..... I have lived and learned the hard way. just my 2 cents........
I agree. Key word here is NUTRITION. I think if you can restrict calories and still get the necessary nutrients that the body needs (and the RDAs are crap - we need way more than they tell us) the starvation mode won't happen - but I do think there is a point of going too far on the calorie restriction.
Unfortunately unless you are eating real, whole food it is impossible to get the necessary nutrients while on a calorie-restricted diet (also known as a semi-starvation diet). To restrict calories while eating a processed food 'diet' will ensure that you don't get the necessary nutrients and the body will respond by holding onto what it can.
Google Chronic Cardio. Too much exercise can stop weight loss. To your body exercise is stress and it will treat too much of it as such.
I can blow the RDA out of the water 1,000 calorie Primal/Paleo lifestyle. My body holds onto a certain amount of fat - it won't go below 18% and it hovers between 18-19% right now - I don't count calories and I don't look at portions. I just monitor the amount and type of carbs I eat and make sure I eat real food. Most of my food I eat consists of one ingredient (which I might mix together of course). I exercise sporadically - no routine - just when I feel like it.
I also use a BodyMedia Fit Armband - to keep track of my activity - and I can tell you my metabolism hasn't slowed and I haven't lost any lean muscle mass. I burn somewhere around 1700-2300 depending on my day but I never eat that much on any day and I do IFs quite a bit.
I follow a low-carb, moderate-protein, high-fat eating plan. Lots of saturated fats and I'm healthy as can be at 41 while everyone around me is already heading downhill in the health - and uphill in the weight - department while following the USDA guidelines. Most are already taking numerous prescriptions. No pills for me!!!0 -
I don't believe that eating very little can make you GAIN weight, but I have found that eating very little was counterproductive. Weight loss was painfully slow, and losing so much muscle mass meant that I looked heavier and flabbier than I was.
Eating more, my weight loss was on target (If I ate to lose a half pound a week, that's what I lost), I kept my lean muscle mass, and I'm much smaller at the same weight. Eating under 1000 calories a day, I was a size 8 at 130#. Eating around 2000 calories a day, I'm a size 2 or 4 at 130#. http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/449570-mfp-mythbusters-losing-weight-fast-exercise-calories-girl0 -
I don't think the point is that people HAVE to eat at least 1200 to lose weight. You've lost 12lbs in 10 days on an extremely low calorie diet, but most likely you'll hit a plateau at some point and you won't be able to keep losing weight without either reducing this intake further and/or increasing exercise. Then when you reach your target weight you'll have killed your metabolism to the point where, to maintain your target weight you'll have to stick to a very low calorie diet for the rest of your days. That's the point people are trying to make about not eating less than 1200 calories (which is too low anyway for most people). The point of not creating too large a defecit is that you can avoid plateau-ing and will be able to maintain your target weight with a healthy (and enjoyable) level of calories, rather than trying to survive on a tiny amount of food. The thing is, it takes longer to see the results, but it's also a long term solution rather than a quick fix.
I also think people forget that food is not just about calories and weight, it's about nutrition, and there's no way people on extremely low calorie diets will be able to get all the vitamins and minerals the body needs to stay healthy.
As for anorexics, I am sure there is a point at which the metabolism cannot be crushed any further and the body has no choice but to consume itself in order to survive. Besides, anorexics are killing themselves so I don't think that's an example of how to lose weight that I want to follow!0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions