starvation mode

I always try to eat at least half of my exercise calories back or I eat more protein & veggies

I kept hearing over and over about starvation mode in these forums. I don't believe that people are not losing weight because they are in starvation mode.

http://www.sharecare.com/question/weight-loss-plateau-starvation-mode

It should have been logical enough for me, but after hearing it over and over, I started to think it must be true. But after reading these answers about it in the link above, I have to say that it makes sense that if you are truly in starvation, then you are not going to gain weight. So if eating back calories works for you then by all means. But is it possible that your calories burned measurement is off? Or the number of calories you are consuming is not correct?

I know that I personally am not sure of the calories I am burning because often I just use whatever calories are in the database here. But those calories could be for a 400 lb person which I am not. I also don't know that if I select a food in the database here and add it to my food diary that the number of calories that I am consuming is correct. It could be wrong. Unless I weigh/measure everything I eat and calculate the caloric content myself, and unless I have some device that is going to accurately tell me exactly the number of calories i am burning, then it just might be that my math is off.

I probably need to just eat a little less and exercise a little more.

Starvation mode very unlikely unless really abusing yourself.

Suppressed or slowed metabolism very easily done, especially eating even less and exercising even more than safely recommended on a costant basis (oh, MFP is willing to set your goal daily calories below your BMR, while maybe not unsafe, not really smart either).
But you won't starve, you don't burn more muscle, your body just slows down everything all the time, so less calories burned than what could have been burned. Every day.
And if you do a binge here and there after you get discouraged because of the stall, it doesn't raise itself, it just stores it away for future use.

http://www.exrx.net/Questions/StarvationEffect.html

A similar case study was published by Jampolis (2004). A 51 year old patient complained of a 15 lb weight gain over the last year despite beginning a strenuous triathlon and marathon training program (2 hours per day, 5-6 days per week). A 3 day diet analysis estimated a daily intake of only 1000-1200 Calories. An indirect calorimetry revealed a resting metabolic rate of 950 Calories (28% below predicted for age, height, weight, and gender). After medications and medical conditions such as hypothyroidism and diabetes where ruled out, the final diagnosis was over-training and undereating. The following treatment was recommended:

Increase daily dietary intake by approximately 100 Calories per week to a goal of 1500 calories
32% protein; 35% carbohydrates; 33% fat
Consume 5-6 small meals per day
Small amounts of protein with each meal or snack
Choose high fiber starches
Select mono- and poly- unsaturated fats
Restrict consumption of starch with evening meals unless focused around training
Take daily multi-vitamin and mineral supplement
Perform whole body isometric resistance training 2 times per week

After 6 weeks the patient's resting metabolism increased 35% to 1282 Calories per day (only 2% below predicted). The patient also decreases percent fat from 37% to 34%, a loss of 5 lbs of body fat.

---

So her RMR went up over 300 calories. 2100 calories of free burn had been lost each week at the lowered BMR level.

I think the term "starvation mode" is thrown around the site too much and is not understood.

The science behind it is fundamentally quite simple

Your body is a machine, a very smart one. It needs energy to live. If you don't provide the energy it needs to live it will start protecting itself by hoarding the yummiest, richest energy source it can find, fat . It will burn carbs, protein, convert muscle mass to energy and will hold on to it's last resort, fat, as long as it can.

People should invest in getting their body analysed if possible by a professional, determine their fat %, lean mass % and determine their BMR. From that invest in finding a good sports nutritionist who will take all that data and tailor a meal plan specifically for your personal needs.

This is your life, it's worth the investment.

The calories in the MFP database are calculated by weight. So you would not be given an amount that would be burned by a 400 pounds person.

I was waiting for this...
I don't know why I found it very amusing

I'm quite skeptical when people say they are eating 1200 calories, exercising like crazy, and not losing weight. It doesn't add up to me. The body cannot become exponentially more efficient at doing the same amount of work just because it goes into some starvation mode. If your body goes into starvation mode, then by definition it is not going to be possible to exercise like crazy because it thinks its starving.

People are either 1) underestimating calories consumed, or 2) overestimating exercise, or more than likely both.

I kept hearing over and over about starvation mode in these forums. I don't believe that people are not losing weight because they are in starvation mode.

http://www.sharecare.com/question/weight-loss-plateau-starvation-mode

It should have been logical enough for me, but after hearing it over and over, I started to think it must be true. But after reading these answers about it in the link above, I have to say that it makes sense that if you are truly in starvation, then you are not going to gain weight. So if eating back calories works for you then by all means. But is it possible that your calories burned measurement is off? Or the number of calories you are consuming is not correct?

I know that I personally am not sure of the calories I am burning because often I just use whatever calories are in the database here. But those calories could be for a 400 lb person which I am not. I also don't know that if I select a food in the database here and add it to my food diary that the number of calories that I am consuming is correct. It could be wrong. Unless I weigh/measure everything I eat and calculate the caloric content myself, and unless I have some device that is going to accurately tell me exactly the number of calories i am burning, then it just might be that my math is off.

I probably need to just eat a little less and exercise a little more.

Starvation mode very unlikely unless really abusing yourself.

Suppressed or slowed metabolism very easily done, especially eating even less and exercising even more than safely recommended on a costant basis (oh, MFP is willing to set your goal daily calories below your BMR, while maybe not unsafe, not really smart either).
But you won't starve, you don't burn more muscle, your body just slows down everything all the time, so less calories burned than what could have been burned. Every day.
And if you do a binge here and there after you get discouraged because of the stall, it doesn't raise itself, it just stores it away for future use.

http://www.exrx.net/Questions/StarvationEffect.html

A similar case study was published by Jampolis (2004). A 51 year old patient complained of a 15 lb weight gain over the last year despite beginning a strenuous triathlon and marathon training program (2 hours per day, 5-6 days per week). A 3 day diet analysis estimated a daily intake of only 1000-1200 Calories. An indirect calorimetry revealed a resting metabolic rate of 950 Calories (28% below predicted for age, height, weight, and gender). After medications and medical conditions such as hypothyroidism and diabetes where ruled out, the final diagnosis was over-training and undereating. The following treatment was recommended:

Increase daily dietary intake by approximately 100 Calories per week to a goal of 1500 calories
32% protein; 35% carbohydrates; 33% fat
Consume 5-6 small meals per day
Small amounts of protein with each meal or snack
Choose high fiber starches
Select mono- and poly- unsaturated fats
Restrict consumption of starch with evening meals unless focused around training
Take daily multi-vitamin and mineral supplement
Perform whole body isometric resistance training 2 times per week

After 6 weeks the patient's resting metabolism increased 35% to 1282 Calories per day (only 2% below predicted). The patient also decreases percent fat from 37% to 34%, a loss of 5 lbs of body fat.

---

So her RMR went up over 300 calories. 2100 calories of free burn had been lost each week at the lowered BMR level.

Thanks for this. One of my favorite posts on MFP ever.

I personally am just coming out of starvation mode. I measure everything and I wear a HRM whenever I work out. I stopped losing weight for 2 months and tried everything I could think of to get my weight loss going. I increased my calories by 150 - 200 calories per day and a week and a half later I have started losing weight again.

I do eat my exercise calories back, but as I said I measure & monitor everything.

I have to admit I didn't believe it.... but now I absolutely do!

If you were eating your were not on starvation mode. Eating a little bit more, just kicked your metabolism a notch, so congratulations for losing again.

"Starvation mode" is one of the oldest fitness myths. It can be traced back to the Minnesota Starvation Experiment in which subjects were literally fed only enough to survive. As a result, yes, their bodies broke down protein and bone for emergency sustenance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Starvation_Experiment

Here's another fact that absolutely fascinates me. The lead researcher on the project was Ancel Keys, the very same guy who is responsible for the widespread yet erroneous belief that saturation fat is somehow worse for you that unsaturated fat. This would later become known as "The Lipid Hypothesis," which was quickly demonstrated to be fraudulent.

Sadly, the margarine manufacturers latched onto Keys' baloney research, and used it as a springboard for their business. And that's why people hate saturated fat! Small world right?

Your seriously going to bring up the Starvation Experiment, the same one that resulted in self mutilation, depression and loss of sexual appetite?

I starvation mode :glasses:

This post wins!!! :flowerforyou:

I was wondering about eating those "extra" calories back - I am thinking not.

Think again,
Eat back your exercise calories.
MFP calculates our total daily calorie intake WITHOUT exercise to lose 1 pound or so per week.
And after we log exercises, our daily calorie limit increases.
Why?
Because MFP telling us to eat our exercise calories.
Large deficits are unhealthy, because while you will lose weight, what's the quality of the weight loss?
In many cases you'll lose lean body mass - MUSCLE - which LOWERS your metabolic rate, making weight loss harder.
These crash diets work well for a season -- and sure enough, the pounds melt away. But when you eat so
few calories, you train your metabolism to slow down. Once the diet is over, you have a body that burns calories
more slowly -- and you gain weight.
Be smart.
Exercise well both cardio and resistance, and eat back the calories.
The exercise will RAISE your metabolism and burn more fat at rest.

I'm quite skeptical when people say they are eating 1200 calories, exercising like crazy, and not losing weight. It doesn't add up to me. The body cannot become exponentially more efficient at doing the same amount of work just because it goes into some starvation mode. If your body goes into starvation mode, then by definition it is not going to be possible to exercise like crazy because it thinks its starving.

People are either 1) underestimating calories consumed, or 2) overestimating exercise, or more than likely both.

No, how about doing some research?
When calories are restricted, metabolism slows down in response.
That's universally accepted kind of like the moon not being made of cheese.

Can you still lose weight? Of course!
Is it the healthiest way to go about your diet?
No way!
What is the point to this? Just decide what you really want, then go for it.
And if that included some absurd starvation diet, be my guest.

See for yourself; just COUNT ME OUT!
I choose health as is recommended on this site.
1 pound of weight loss per week folks. It's not a race.

I wear a monitor also, I actually kept it on all day and saw the kcal I burned for the day, glad you mentioned bumping up the calories when you are stuck, I am going to be paying attention to that. Did you increase your water intake also?

HRM calorie calculations are ONLY valid in the range of aerobic type exercise, about 90-150 bpm.

Outside that range the calculations are very inaccurate, especially on the low end.

You can forget that value for wearing all day as having any value.

Study is linked to here.
http://www.braydenwm.com/calburn.htm

The additional fun part of lowered metabolism - now your HRM calorie count is off.

Since you whole system is slower, the amount of increase for exercise may go up the same quontity (9 x BMR for instance), but it is not as high a level, because it's based on a lower base footing now.
The HR may stay the same, everything has just slowed down.

May not even notice - unless you had been in the habit of really pushing yourself at some point. Really doing 1 min intervals at full tilt, recovery for only 2 min, ect.
Since the system is working slower, you'll see that effort can't be reached anymore, even though the HR may get to the same level.

But normal cardio levels, probably won't even notice, except gee, this pace used to be 10 bpm less.

The good HRM's do a BMR calculation in there too, much rougher because even the Polar only has age and weight (sometimes height on some models).
And then the calcs for calorie burn are based on adding to the BMR calc.

Which if it lower because of being suppressed, then the real calorie count would be too.

So partly right to say possible overestimating exercise calories - especially now.

Sadly, I'm sure this comment will now be taken to eat back even less calories from exercise, but whatever.