Obsession with starvation mode...
Jp83
Posts: 11
I have read all the numerous posts about being under nett cals, being under BMI etc etc
I feel very differently about this.
If I eat 1300 calories a day (5'4. 150lb) and then track some exercise (lets say 500 cals), I am NETTING below my net goal and my BMR, If my BMR is 1300.
BUT - BMR isn't to do with NET carories at all. In a day, assuming the calories were nutritious ones, I have eaten my BMR calories, providing my body with the nutrients it needs. This is the key point I think people are missng.
Let me explain. If I STARVED my body to say 800 cals a day without exercise, I am unlikely taking in the nutients required by my body. This would result in starvation mode.
If i EAT 1300 cals and my BMR is 1300 cals then my body is getting its nutirents and energy. If I then burn 500 cals in cardio then my body will resource energy from my stores i.e. fat. My body will not starve... I am overweight like most people on this site, of course I won't starve, my body will use its energy reserves e.g. fat
TO MAKE MY POINT I'D LIKE TO SHOW YOU THAT IF YOU 'LOG' THE DAY AT UNDER GOAL CALORIES, MFP WILL TELL YOU YOU ARE IN STARVATION MODE. THIS IS TRUE BECAUSE YOU TRULY AREN'T GETTING ENOUGH NUTRIENTS TO FUEL YOUR BODY.
IF YOU EAT YOUR GOAL, THEN LOG EXERCISE CALORIES, MFP DOESN'T TELL YOU ARE IN STARVATION MODE, EVEN IF YOU MIGHT BE AT 600 NET
This is because you already ate your BMR in nutrition (hopefully!). Whatever you burn off is from body reserves which us overweight people have plenty of!
We all got overweight by eating too much. It makes me laugh so much when people are now saying they are struggling to eat their calories due to exercise etc We didn't have a problem eating them not so long ago but now we have a problem reaching them?
To summarise, BMR requirements are GROSS not NET.
I feel very differently about this.
If I eat 1300 calories a day (5'4. 150lb) and then track some exercise (lets say 500 cals), I am NETTING below my net goal and my BMR, If my BMR is 1300.
BUT - BMR isn't to do with NET carories at all. In a day, assuming the calories were nutritious ones, I have eaten my BMR calories, providing my body with the nutrients it needs. This is the key point I think people are missng.
Let me explain. If I STARVED my body to say 800 cals a day without exercise, I am unlikely taking in the nutients required by my body. This would result in starvation mode.
If i EAT 1300 cals and my BMR is 1300 cals then my body is getting its nutirents and energy. If I then burn 500 cals in cardio then my body will resource energy from my stores i.e. fat. My body will not starve... I am overweight like most people on this site, of course I won't starve, my body will use its energy reserves e.g. fat
TO MAKE MY POINT I'D LIKE TO SHOW YOU THAT IF YOU 'LOG' THE DAY AT UNDER GOAL CALORIES, MFP WILL TELL YOU YOU ARE IN STARVATION MODE. THIS IS TRUE BECAUSE YOU TRULY AREN'T GETTING ENOUGH NUTRIENTS TO FUEL YOUR BODY.
IF YOU EAT YOUR GOAL, THEN LOG EXERCISE CALORIES, MFP DOESN'T TELL YOU ARE IN STARVATION MODE, EVEN IF YOU MIGHT BE AT 600 NET
This is because you already ate your BMR in nutrition (hopefully!). Whatever you burn off is from body reserves which us overweight people have plenty of!
We all got overweight by eating too much. It makes me laugh so much when people are now saying they are struggling to eat their calories due to exercise etc We didn't have a problem eating them not so long ago but now we have a problem reaching them?
To summarise, BMR requirements are GROSS not NET.
0
Replies
-
no one wants to reply? Is it because I questioned people making any excuse (even under MFP) to still eat loads?( Eat your exercise calories back.... make sure you net your BMI.... help! I don't know how to eat to my net target). OF COURSE YOU DO IF YOU ARE OVERWEIGHT! It was 't long ago since you ate to excess to gain those pounds.This is just making excuses to keep on eating more which we all know got us to where we are?!0
-
That makes perfect sense and I lose weight when I follow that rule. I gain weight when I eat my exercise calories.
Thank you!0 -
Thanks for replying! The principle I follow is as long as I gross my BMR I am feeding my body. Excess energy above BMR comes from our reserves which we are trying to lose. I would never recomend to gross under your BMR because your body won't get the nutrients it needs. Netting under it is a completely different thing though.0
-
Thank you for this! I quite frequently eat around my 1200 (I will admit some days I'm 100 cals or so under) and I exercise around 300 - 600 calories 6 days per week so some days I end up at around 600 NET. The amount of tsk tsk I get from friends on here and comments about not eating drives me insane!!!
Thank you for being a voice of reason.0 -
I have read all the numerous posts about being under nett cals, being under BMI etc etc
I feel very differently about this.
If I eat 1300 calories a day (5'4. 150lb) and then track some exercise (lets say 500 cals), I am NETTING below my net goal and my BMR, If my BMR is 1300.
BUT - BMR isn't to do with NET carories at all. In a day, assuming the calories were nutritious ones, I have eaten my BMR calories, providing my body with the nutrients it needs. This is the key point I think people are missng.
Let me explain. If I STARVED my body to say 800 cals a day without exercise, I am unlikely taking in the nutients required by my body. This would result in starvation mode.
If i EAT 1300 cals and my BMR is 1300 cals then my body is getting its nutirents and energy. If I then burn 500 cals in cardio then my body will resource energy from my stores i.e. fat. My body will not starve... I am overweight like most people on this site, of course I won't starve, my body will use its energy reserves e.g. fat
TO MAKE MY POINT I'D LIKE TO SHOW YOU THAT IF YOU 'LOG' THE DAY AT UNDER GOAL CALORIES, MFP WILL TELL YOU YOU ARE IN STARVATION MODE. THIS IS TRUE BECAUSE YOU TRULY AREN'T GETTING ENOUGH NUTRIENTS TO FUEL YOUR BODY.
IF YOU EAT YOUR GOAL, THEN LOG EXERCISE CALORIES, MFP DOESN'T TELL YOU ARE IN STARVATION MODE, EVEN IF YOU MIGHT BE AT 600 NET
This is because you already ate your BMR in nutrition (hopefully!). Whatever you burn off is from body reserves which us overweight people have plenty of!
We all got overweight by eating too much. It makes me laugh so much when people are now saying they are struggling to eat their calories due to exercise etc We didn't have a problem eating them not so long ago but now we have a problem reaching them?
To summarise, BMR requirements are GROSS not NET.
You are mistaken.
However, you've already read everything on here so I won't bore you. Good luck with your plan.0 -
Never mind!0
-
I think the key is finding what works best for you. For me, if I don't eat at least some of those calories, my weight loss stops. I have been averaging 2-3 pounds lost a week while eating my calories back, where as when I didn't, I hardly lost any weight. My point is...that is what works for me, but it may not work for you.
Let's be honest, most of us are on here because we have had issues with our weight. I really doubt any of us are in a position to tell someone else that what they are doing is wrong, especially when it works for them.0 -
I guess the question is can you eat 1200 calories for the rest of your life? I think you should eat your TDEE minus 10-20%(if you are trying to lose) and be realistic about your actitvity level when calculating your tdee and not eat back excercise calories. If you are eating your bmr then you should definately be eating back your excercise calories. I just find it easier to eat my tdee and not eat back excercise calories...but I have been at goal for 2+ years so what would I know.
0 -
You have everything figured out and when we say to eat more we just want you to be unsuccessful. So ^^^ what she saidI have read all the numerous posts about being under nett cals, being under BMI etc etc
I feel very differently about this.
If I eat 1300 calories a day (5'4. 150lb) and then track some exercise (lets say 500 cals), I am NETTING below my net goal and my BMR, If my BMR is 1300.
BUT - BMR isn't to do with NET carories at all. In a day, assuming the calories were nutritious ones, I have eaten my BMR calories, providing my body with the nutrients it needs. This is the key point I think people are missng.
Let me explain. If I STARVED my body to saiy 800 cals a day without exercise, I am unlikely taking in the nutients required by my body. This would result in starvation mode.
If i EAT 1300 cals and my BMR is 1300 cals then my body is getting its nutirents and energy. If I then burn 500 cals in cardio then my body will resource energy from my stores i.e. fat. My body will not starve... I am overweight like most people on this site, of course I won't starve, my body will use its energy reserves e.g. fat
TO MAKE MY POINT I'D LIKE TO SHOW YOU THAT IF YOU 'LOG' THE DAY AT UNDER GOAL CALORIES, MFP WILL TELL YOU YOU ARE IN STARVATION MODE. THIS IS TRUE BECAUSE YOU TRULY AREN'T GETTING ENOUGH NUTRIENTS TO FUEL YOUR BODY.
IF YOU EAT YOUR GOAL, THEN LOG EXERCISE CALORIES, MFP DOESN'T TELL YOU ARE IN STARVATION MODE, EVEN IF YOU MIGHT BE AT 600 NET
This is because you already ate your BMR in nutrition (hopefully!). Whatever you burn off is from body reserves which us overweight people have plenty of!
We all got overweight by eating too much. It makes me laugh so much when people are now saying they are struggling to eat their calories due to exercise etc We didn't have a problem eating them not so long ago but now we have a problem reaching them?
To summarise, BMR requirements are GROSS not NET.
You are mistaken.
However, you've already read everything on here so I won't bore you. Good luck with your plan.0 -
I also have not found "starvation mode" to work quite like internet rumor and this website purport. I don't lose weight when I eat more. So I don't follow that advice.
I'm not going to argue that it works for some people. Whatever works...I just wish people would stop being so smarmy and smug and sanctimonious (love alliteration) when others say that lower calories works better for them.
Obviously once you are at your goal weight you eat at a maintenance level that is higher than your weight loss level of calories. Why would you have to live your life under 1200 calories? I certainly didn't gain weight from eating sensibly on maintenance level and working out. I gained weight because I am 100% sedentary and never work out and have been eating A TON of high-carb, high-sugar, junk food. It really isn't rocket science.0 -
My BMR is not 1300. But I don't even want to eat 500 below my BMR. No thanks...0
-
I also have not found "starvation mode" to work quite like internet rumor and this website purport. I don't lose weight when I eat more. So I don't follow that advice.
I'm not going to argue that it works for some people. Whatever works...I just wish people would stop being so smarmy and smug and sanctimonious (love alliteration) when others say that lower calories works better for them.
Obviously once you are at your goal weight you eat at a maintenance level that is higher than your weight loss level of calories. Why would you have to live your life under 1200 calories? I certainly didn't gain weight from eating sensibly on maintenance level and working out. I gained weight because I am 100% sedentary and never work out and have been eating A TON of high-carb, high-sugar, junk food. It really isn't rocket science.
Because 1200 calories and not eating back your excercise is an extreme diet and extreme diets don't work in the long term was my point all that happens is that you gain it back...I know this from years of dieting and the weight always came back once the diet ended. Slow and steady wins the race. You need to eat the way you will be for the rest of your life so that you can maintain it for the rest of your life.
edited to add that as you lose weight your calorie requirement decreases.0 -
http://www.weightwatchers.com/util/art/index_art.aspx?tabnum=1&art_id=35501
http://fattyfightsback.blogspot.com/2009/03/mtyhbusters-starvation-mode.html
http://fitnessblackbook.com/main/starvation-mode-why-you-probably-never-need-to-worry-about-it/
http://caloriecount.about.com/forums/weight-loss/truth-starvation-mode
http://www.adonisindex.com/how-to-get-into-starvation-mode/
Maybe people should do some looking and get the facts on how the whole "starvation mode" myth started. Unless you have less than 6% body fat and work out most of your waking hours you will NEVER experience this.0 -
In response, I am saying:
Your body needs a recommended number of calories for basic metabolic functions (BMR)
Say this amount is 1300.
You eat 1300 calories of nutirent rich food
You meet your bodies daily requirement, you will not stave, your body got its quota of nutrients for the day - its quite happy!
IRRELEVANT of exercise burn you still fuelled your body with the nutrients it needed.
For energy for the exercise calories your body converts adapose cells to carbs for fuel to provide energy for your exercise. The old fashioned way of exerciing for weight loss.0 -
I spoke with my Endocrinologist and Nutritionist about this on April 6th. I meet with them every 3 months. I send in my food log to them twice a week for analysis. The simple answer they gave me is in order to lose weight, you must burn more calories than you consume. They explained to me that eating back the calories you burned off during exercise makes the burn off moot... I started just eating the calories my Nutritionist set up for me and not eating back the exercise calories and the weight began coming off after a long plateau.
Basically, I believe that everyone is different. Some of us can't get the weight off by eating back the calories we burn off, others can. Nobody loses weight in the same manner. For some of us it takes a long time while others are able to lose quickly. Learn what's best for your body and stick with it!
Cheers and much success to all! 0 -
I also have not found "starvation mode" to work quite like internet rumor and this website purport. I don't lose weight when I eat more. So I don't follow that advice.
I'm not going to argue that it works for some people. Whatever works...I just wish people would stop being so smarmy and smug and sanctimonious (love alliteration) when others say that lower calories works better for them.
Obviously once you are at your goal weight you eat at a maintenance level that is higher than your weight loss level of calories. Why would you have to live your life under 1200 calories? I certainly didn't gain weight from eating sensibly on maintenance level and working out. I gained weight because I am 100% sedentary and never work out and have been eating A TON of high-carb, high-sugar, junk food. It really isn't rocket science.
Because 1200 calories and not eating back your excercise is an extreme diet and extreme diets don't work in the long term was my point all that happens is that you gain it back...I know this from years of dieting and the weight always came back once the diet ended. Slow and steady wins the race. You need to eat the way you will be for the rest of your life so that you can maintain it for the rest of your life.
edited to add that as you lose weight your calorie requirement decreases.
For me there is a big difference between a maintenance lifestyle and an irresponsible choices lifestyle. I am not actually overweight, I should add. I am pretty much dead center of my healthy BMI range. But in my adult life, the few times I've been at this weight have been my heaviest and I don't care for it. It happens because I become totally sedentary and stress eat junk during some really difficult extenuating circumstances, not because sensible maintenance eating and lifestyle choices are untenable for me at my preferred weight.0 -
What is your BMR, what is your TDEE and what set number of calories did your doc tell you to eat?I spoke with my Endocrinologist and Nutritionist about this on April 6th. I meet with them every 3 months. I send in my food log to them twice a week for analysis. The simple answer they gave me is in order to lose weight, you must burn more calories than you consume. They explained to me that eating back the calories you burned off during exercise makes the burn off moot... I started just eating the calories my Nutritionist set up for me and not eating back the exercise calories and the weight began coming off after a long plateau.
Basically, I believe that everyone is different. Some of us can't get the weight off by eating back the calories we burn off, others can. Nobody loses weight in the same manner. For some of us it takes a long time while others are able to lose quickly. Learn what's best for your body and stick with it!
Cheers and much success to all!0 -
Good luck with your super slow metabolism and lean muscle loss! :flowerforyou:0
-
I just think if ANYONE is extremely concerned about their bodies entering "starvation mode" from a particular caloric intake..You should consult your doctor or nutritionist. I'm not sure if this (MFP) is the best resource..I'm just saying..0
-
I also have not found "starvation mode" to work quite like internet rumor and this website purport. I don't lose weight when I eat more. So I don't follow that advice.
I'm not going to argue that it works for some people. Whatever works...I just wish people would stop being so smarmy and smug and sanctimonious (love alliteration) when others say that lower calories works better for them.
Obviously once you are at your goal weight you eat at a maintenance level that is higher than your weight loss level of calories. Why would you have to live your life under 1200 calories? I certainly didn't gain weight from eating sensibly on maintenance level and working out. I gained weight because I am 100% sedentary and never work out and have been eating A TON of high-carb, high-sugar, junk food. It really isn't rocket science.
Because 1200 calories and not eating back your excercise is an extreme diet and extreme diets don't work in the long term was my point all that happens is that you gain it back...I know this from years of dieting and the weight always came back once the diet ended. Slow and steady wins the race. You need to eat the way you will be for the rest of your life so that you can maintain it for the rest of your life.
edited to add that as you lose weight your calorie requirement decreases.
For me there is a big difference between a maintenance lifestyle and an irresponsible choices lifestyle. I am not actually overweight, I should add. I am pretty much dead center of my healthy BMI range. But in my adult life, the few times I've been at this weight have been my heaviest and I don't care for it. It happens because I become totally sedentary and stress eat junk during some really difficult extenuating circumstances, not because sensible maintenance eating and lifestyle choices are untenable for me at my preferred weight.
So if you stopped eating crap all the time you would be all good! Sometimes that's all it takes! So you are on the right track. The OP maybe not so much! 0 -
Since being on here, I've wondered where people get the energy to exercise before eating since, as They Say, eat back your exercise calories. What is your body using before you eat?
I have eaten back the calories and usually never met my BMR net/gross, depending on what formulae you use to calculate BMR and TDEE. Now I'm going with a flat 1700 cals and my activity set to light. TBH, the pumped up numbers from gaining extra cals confused the hell out of me.0 -
I eat around 1200 -1400 calories a day & I never eat back my net calories . I always gain weight & I'm eating low fat , low carb organic diet . So I don't know how much more extreme I can get on this . I have only seen healthy 1-2lbs / week weight loss by not eating back my calories . Plus I just listen to my grandmother whom I live with . She just tells me to exercise 45 min . / day . Don't eat after 7pm & Eat 3 small meals / day . If I'm hungry I can have small snack in between . But when I switched my diet over to organic I haven't been eating as much because I get full faster . Reason why is there is no additives in these organic foods that make you over eat . When I ate unhealthy I could eat large portions and not be full . Besides the fact that my metabolism is high now , thanks to this supplement I take ( Cayenne Fruit ) . So I don't have to worry about slow progress either . So far I've lost 9lbs this past month slowly but surely . It's all a matter of what works for each individual person , everyone's body reacts differently to different things . Good luck with your weight loss though ! :flowerforyou:0
-
We all got overweight by eating too much. It makes me laugh so much when people are now saying they are struggling to eat their calories due to exercise etc We didn't have a problem eating them not so long ago but now we have a problem reaching them?
No one is saying to overeat. Eating above your BMR and below maintenance is still a deficit.
You come off as pretty rude by the way, and you have no scientific peer reviewed studies here to back up what you're saying. There are hundreds of studies in medical journals, however, that do support eating at least your BMR.
But you go ahead and eat your 1200 calories.
I will eat my 1600 and be much happier. As you can see I have lost almost 20 lbs....but I guess it's not working.0 -
I just think if ANYONE is extremely concerned about their bodies entering "starvation mode" from a particular caloric intake..You should consult your doctor or nutritionist. I'm not sure if this (MFP) is the best resource..I'm just saying..
Possibly the best advice I've read on this site yet.0 -
Good luck with your super slow metabolism and lean muscle loss! :flowerforyou:
For your info, I'm eatining my TDEE of 1700(sedentary) and logging my exercise calories plus any deficit in my calories. I average 850 deficit.
This BMR calorie thing is really annoying me now. Your body needs x amount of vitamin A, x amount of vitamin C etc per day. In a good diet meeting BMR these requirements will be met.
So now you burn some off, physiologically your body doesn't care if it uses calories recently ingested or stored calores. So, in this situation it will use stored calories.
BUT... as far as BMR goes, your have met it, you have fuelled your body in its daily nutients.
To test this try logging MFP at 800 cals gross, assuming goal/BMR of 1300. It tells you that you are under calories and in starvation mode.
Try logging it with your targer calories met and then take off your exercise. It no longer warms your of starvation mode. Point proven no?
MFP is therefore happy you fuelled your body for the day (at BMR and exercise doesn't come in to it!)0 -
I agree with you.0
-
I just think if ANYONE is extremely concerned about their bodies entering "starvation mode" from a particular caloric intake..You should consult your doctor or nutritionist. I'm not sure if this (MFP) is the best resource..I'm just saying..
Possibly the best advice I've read on this site yet.
Yes good advise except I would replace doctor and nutritionist with dietition because most doctors are not schooled much in nutrition and anyone can call themselves a nutritionist. Dietitions are educated and regulated.0 -
I eat around 1200 -1400 calories a day & I never eat back my net calories . I always gain weight & I'm eating low fat , low carb organic diet . So I don't know how much more extreme I can get on this . I have only seen healthy 1-2lbs / week weight loss by not eating back my calories . Plus I just listen to my grandmother whom I live with . She just tells me to exercise 45 min . / day . Don't eat after 7pm & Eat 3 small meals / day . If I'm hungry I can have small snack in between . But when I switched my diet over to organic I haven't been eating as much because I get full faster . Reason why is there is no additives in these organic foods that make you over eat . When I ate unhealthy I could eat large portions and not be full . Besides the fact that my metabolism is high now , thanks to this supplement I take ( Cayenne Fruit ) . So I don't have to worry about slow progress either . So far I've lost 9lbs this past month slowly but surely . It's all a matter of what works for each individual person , everyone's body reacts differently to different things . Good luck with your weight loss though ! :flowerforyou:
Wow. Just wow.0 -
hmm I wonder why I have lost so much more after upping my calories then. compared to when I was trying for over a year and only netting 600-800 with workouts and eating clean. only lost like 10 lbs that year... so strange... lololololololololololololololololol. lost 20 in 3 months by upping my calories, maybe its just me0
-
The OP never suggested eating below BMR.
We all got overweight by eating too much. It makes me laugh so much when people are now saying they are struggling to eat their calories due to exercise etc We didn't have a problem eating them not so long ago but now we have a problem reaching them?
No one is saying to overeat. Eating above your BMR and below maintenance is still a deficit.
You come off as pretty rude by the way, and you have no scientific peer reviewed studies here to back up what you're saying. There are hundreds of studies in medical journals, however, that do support eating at least your BMR.
But you go ahead and eat your 1200 calories.
I will eat my 1600 and be much happier. As you can see I have lost almost 20 lbs....but I guess it's not working.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
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K 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
- 96.3K 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