Starvation Mode

Options
1…457910…13

Replies

  • PaleoPath4Lyfe
    PaleoPath4Lyfe Posts: 3,161 Member
    Options
    I save my higher calorie treats for whenever I'm low on calories. If you like pistachios, they're perfect. Just a few will bump, up the calories a lot.

    P.S. The starvation mode thing is not a scare tactic. I was anorexic for a long time and would have died as did a friend of mine. The research (you know- the actual, peer reviewed, scholarly journal type; not the online "he said/she said" type) shows that losing weight that way leads to a variety of metabolic changes (as well as brain changes) and you'll have to exercise twice as much to get the same benefits as people with normal, healthy metabolism. Trust me, you don't want to go down that road no matter what others may tell themselves (and, invariably, others) about it. There is no conspiracy and there actually is no controversy, either... not among people who actually know how to find/interpret scholarly research rather than wishful thinking and/or pseudoscience). The effects of starvation mode are well known. Of course, you'll die from starvation, nobody said that "starvation mode" = you never have to eat again... how ridiculous! If I run my car without the proper fluids, it will break and cost a lot to fix... does that mean that it will instantly explode within the first 5 minutes a fluid is low? And, if it doesn't, does that mean that I can actually ignore the fluids forever because "they" are lying to me about that? LOL!

    If you want to lose weight, 2 pounds a week is the fastest healthy rate and, usually, for women that means 1200 calories/day. Believe me, I know how to drop weight fast in a variety of unhealthy ways... but, you will find me happily eating the pistachios or whatever to make up the difference to get the 1200 calories and I've been steadily losing 2 lb/week with lots of energy and no particular difference in my level of exercise (though I will improve that over the summer due to cardiovascular problems and osteopenia).

    Come on, please exercise some common sense here. There is a huge difference between someone that is anorexic and someone that is 40 or more pounds overweight.

    And a number (as in calories) is total B.S. This is only the case because no one wants to eat the foods that us humans are intended to eat. Everyone wants cakes, pies, cookies, processed bread, pasta, other noodles, etc.

    If people went back to eating the way we were intended to eat there would be absolutely NO reason to count calories at all.

    There is plenty of scientific research that states that people that have lower metabolic rate have a slower aging process than those with faster metabolic rates.

    I have done plenty of research and have asked the advise of several metabolic endocrinologists at a world renowned medical school.
  • PaleoPath4Lyfe
    PaleoPath4Lyfe Posts: 3,161 Member
    Options
    I would much rather have a slower metabolic rate and eat less, but eat very high nutrient based foods than eating a high calorie, low nutrient based way of eating, which those of you that have the "I eat what I want" mindset, you are eating a very low nutrient based diet.

    http://www.drfuhrman.com/library/metabolism_longevity.aspx

    I have intentionally slowed down my metabolic rate through my eating and intend to keep it this way. This DOES NOT make me anorexic or anything of the sort. This makes me be a person that is very hyper-aware of how and what I eat.
    Do we have any control over our resting metabolic rate? How can we slow it down?
    Resting metabolic rate is largely genetically determined, but our calorie intake has an effect as well.8 Caloric restriction and negative energy balance have been shown to reduce resting metabolic rate, and in contrast overeating increases resting metabolic rate. 9,10 Furthermore, caloric restriction has been consistently shown to prolong maximal lifespan by up to 60% in animals.11 My findings have demonstrated that an optimal micronutrient intake reduces the desire for calories and reduces body temperature and white blood cell counts. This means that if follow a high-nutrient eating style that reduces calorie intake while meeting micronutrient demands, we can reduce our resting metabolic rate and potentially increase our longevity potential dramatically.

    Keep in mind that although exercise raises total calorie expenditure, it does not raise the body's basal metabolism. Exercise is the only safe way to "raise metabolism" because it activates the peripheral tissues to utilize more calories and also increases muscle mass which in turn increases total calorie expenditure.12 Plus, exercise promotes longevity.13

    The goal here is to eat so healthy that it reduces your desire to overeat and reduces your metabolism slowly, so you can comfortably desire less food, though not get too thin. My nutritarian recommendations actually makes you more satisfied with less food, and actually gives the ability to enjoy food more without overeating.
  • TinkrBelz
    TinkrBelz Posts: 888 Member
    Options
    I know that as a 42 year old woman my metabolism is going to naturally slow down as I age. Why should I speed that process along by eating below my BMR? If I train my body to survive off of 1200 calories and I burn 500 of those exercising....how much will I be able to eat when I am 52 or 62? I will get to a point that I can barely eat without putting on weight. This is not a future that I want for myself.

    I think eating 1200 calories is fine for a while if you are a very overweight woman. You have that fat to burn and yes, the 1200 calories will get that fat off fast. But, there will come a point where you will need to retrain your body to work off of higher calories without gaining weight.

    Crash diets do work, but I choose a lifestyle. I know that I would be miserable if I only ate 1200 calories and exercised. But, to each their own....and if people want to eat below their BMR for the rest of their lives...why should I care.
  • love4fitnesslove4food_wechange
    love4fitnesslove4food_wechange Posts: 6,897 Member
    Options
    I would much rather have a slower metabolic rate and eat less, but eat very high nutrient based foods than eating a high calorie, low nutrient based way of eating, which those of you that have the "I eat what I want" mindset, you are eating a very low nutrient based diet.

    http://www.drfuhrman.com/library/metabolism_longevity.aspx

    I have intentionally slowed down my metabolic rate through my eating and intend to keep it this way. This DOES NOT make me anorexic or anything of the sort. This makes me be a person that is very hyper-aware of how and what I eat.
    Do we have any control over our resting metabolic rate? How can we slow it down?
    Resting metabolic rate is largely genetically determined, but our calorie intake has an effect as well.8 Caloric restriction and negative energy balance have been shown to reduce resting metabolic rate, and in contrast overeating increases resting metabolic rate. 9,10 Furthermore, caloric restriction has been consistently shown to prolong maximal lifespan by up to 60% in animals.11 My findings have demonstrated that an optimal micronutrient intake reduces the desire for calories and reduces body temperature and white blood cell counts. This means that if follow a high-nutrient eating style that reduces calorie intake while meeting micronutrient demands, we can reduce our resting metabolic rate and potentially increase our longevity potential dramatically.

    Keep in mind that although exercise raises total calorie expenditure, it does not raise the body's basal metabolism. Exercise is the only safe way to "raise metabolism" because it activates the peripheral tissues to utilize more calories and also increases muscle mass which in turn increases total calorie expenditure.12 Plus, exercise promotes longevity.13

    The goal here is to eat so healthy that it reduces your desire to overeat and reduces your metabolism slowly, so you can comfortably desire less food, though not get too thin. My nutritarian recommendations actually makes you more satisfied with less food, and actually gives the ability to enjoy food more without overeating.

    What an incredibly fallacious mindset. Just because you eat what you want doesn't mean it's low on nutrients. Im happy that I CAN eat ice cream, cheesecake, pizza, or even candy without flipping out. Does that mean it constitutes the majority of my diet?? Absolutely not. It's called moderation. This isn't black and white as you present it.
  • FlaxMilk
    FlaxMilk Posts: 3,452 Member
    Options
    But that's the thing Tinkerbell--my BMR is below 1200, according to MFP anyway.
  • PaleoPath4Lyfe
    PaleoPath4Lyfe Posts: 3,161 Member
    Options
    I would much rather have a slower metabolic rate and eat less, but eat very high nutrient based foods than eating a high calorie, low nutrient based way of eating, which those of you that have the "I eat what I want" mindset, you are eating a very low nutrient based diet.

    http://www.drfuhrman.com/library/metabolism_longevity.aspx

    I have intentionally slowed down my metabolic rate through my eating and intend to keep it this way. This DOES NOT make me anorexic or anything of the sort. This makes me be a person that is very hyper-aware of how and what I eat.
    Do we have any control over our resting metabolic rate? How can we slow it down?
    Resting metabolic rate is largely genetically determined, but our calorie intake has an effect as well.8 Caloric restriction and negative energy balance have been shown to reduce resting metabolic rate, and in contrast overeating increases resting metabolic rate. 9,10 Furthermore, caloric restriction has been consistently shown to prolong maximal lifespan by up to 60% in animals.11 My findings have demonstrated that an optimal micronutrient intake reduces the desire for calories and reduces body temperature and white blood cell counts. This means that if follow a high-nutrient eating style that reduces calorie intake while meeting micronutrient demands, we can reduce our resting metabolic rate and potentially increase our longevity potential dramatically.

    Keep in mind that although exercise raises total calorie expenditure, it does not raise the body's basal metabolism. Exercise is the only safe way to "raise metabolism" because it activates the peripheral tissues to utilize more calories and also increases muscle mass which in turn increases total calorie expenditure.12 Plus, exercise promotes longevity.13

    The goal here is to eat so healthy that it reduces your desire to overeat and reduces your metabolism slowly, so you can comfortably desire less food, though not get too thin. My nutritarian recommendations actually makes you more satisfied with less food, and actually gives the ability to enjoy food more without overeating.

    What an incredibly fallacious mindset. Just because you eat what you want doesn't mean it's low on nutrients. Im happy that I CAN eat ice cream, cheesecake, pizza, or even candy without flipping out. Does that mean it constitutes the majority of my diet?? Absolutely not. It's called moderation. This isn't black and white as you present it.

    When it comes to oxidation at the cellular level and nutrients, yes, it is very black and white.

    I don't need moderation. I need nutrients and that is what I focus on.

    And let's face it, the research is starting to come out about how unhealthy corn, wheat and soy really are and that makes the foods that are MADE with these products also unhealthy.

    So unless you are eating cauliflower crust pizza, pizza is unhealthy due to the low (no) nutrient content in the crust alone.
  • zoodalia
    zoodalia Posts: 294
    Options
    starvation mode for me its a huge myth.... Ok, lets accept the fact that eating 500 calories everyday would be dangerous for your body, cause you are not getting enough nutrients/protein/vitamins/calcium etc...
    But no way you would enter a starvation mode, or, explain anorexia to me, those girls barely eat 500 cal a day, and they keep losing weight.
    I normally eat 900-1100 a day (ive never gone over my daily 1200), and look, 37 lbs less!.. And Im never hungry, i feel satified with what I eat, nothing in this world would change my mind about it. Maybe if i was eating the 900-1100 and i was with the 200 lbs i had before, i would believe it, but not when im a few pounds away from the 150s.

    So again , that starvation mode is BS for me.. IMO

    Really? Does it need to be explained AGAIN?

    I'm declaring a pandemic of deliberate misapprehension of the term "Starvation Mode."

    first, I NEVER SAID anorexic was healthy, yes people die from that I know it and Im really aware of it.
    second, if people die from anorexia then that proves my post, if starvation mode was real, no anorexic people would die, why?, cause they would stop losing weight as soon as they started eating less than 900 cal. The word anorexia wouldnt even exist.
    thirt, im not starving myself, eating 1000 cal a day, for me is enough and I feel full. If I eat more than that I feel bloated.
    fourth, maybe for me eating 1000 works, maybe for you dont, to each their own, every body is different.

    So stop judging people that dont believe in that myth. Ive lost 37 lbs eating 1000 calories everyday, and u are not gonna change my mind nor make me eat more just cause you say so. Period..

    have a nice day!

    I cannot wait to see you in 1, 2, 3 or 6 months from now crying because you can't have a slice of pizza or normal meals at all for that matter without gaining an instant 5 pounds---people like you deserve to be in the 95% who regain ALL the weight back and usually more. In the face of the information regarding metabolism and healthy weight loss, that the unfortunate regainers lack, you stick to an unhealthy and unsustainable way of doing things. It's completely absurd.

    fyi I eat anything I want.. I had a slice of cheesecake today, last week I ate mexican food and a piece of chocolate donut.. EVEN that way I lost 4.2 lbs... :) So nope, You wont see that, im sorry.

    Yes, but at 1000 calories a day, you didn't eat much more than a slice of cheesecake.
    Not condemning the low calorie diet but she didn't say she had Cheesecake Factory. lol I have made cheesecake that is less than 300 cals a slice. I don't agree with the 1000 a day but I can see where she could have had cheesecake and tons more to eat staying in her 1000 calorie range.

    See, I wouldn't say that even if her cheesecake only contained 300 that 700 is a lot remaining for three good, solid healthy meals. However, everyone is different. I talk from my own personal experience in which I did very low-calorie dieting and thought I was doing well for having half a pasty and a Mars bar a day. I don't tend to worry about calories as much now (although usually have anything between 1200 and 2000 a day), I worry about nutrition.

    P.S. For the record, I lost 21 pounds in 5 weeks and gained back 45 over the following two years. 'Starving', 'restricting', 'controlling', whatever word one chooses to use - it eventually hits back with a vengeance.
  • neares49
    neares49 Posts: 12
    Options
    If your calories are under 1200 calories then,you will stop or slow done the process of weight loss. Can't compare it to Gastric bypass. Hope that helps.
  • love4fitnesslove4food_wechange
    love4fitnesslove4food_wechange Posts: 6,897 Member
    Options
    I would much rather have a slower metabolic rate and eat less, but eat very high nutrient based foods than eating a high calorie, low nutrient based way of eating, which those of you that have the "I eat what I want" mindset, you are eating a very low nutrient based diet.

    http://www.drfuhrman.com/library/metabolism_longevity.aspx

    I have intentionally slowed down my metabolic rate through my eating and intend to keep it this way. This DOES NOT make me anorexic or anything of the sort. This makes me be a person that is very hyper-aware of how and what I eat.
    Do we have any control over our resting metabolic rate? How can we slow it down?
    Resting metabolic rate is largely genetically determined, but our calorie intake has an effect as well.8 Caloric restriction and negative energy balance have been shown to reduce resting metabolic rate, and in contrast overeating increases resting metabolic rate. 9,10 Furthermore, caloric restriction has been consistently shown to prolong maximal lifespan by up to 60% in animals.11 My findings have demonstrated that an optimal micronutrient intake reduces the desire for calories and reduces body temperature and white blood cell counts. This means that if follow a high-nutrient eating style that reduces calorie intake while meeting micronutrient demands, we can reduce our resting metabolic rate and potentially increase our longevity potential dramatically.

    Keep in mind that although exercise raises total calorie expenditure, it does not raise the body's basal metabolism. Exercise is the only safe way to "raise metabolism" because it activates the peripheral tissues to utilize more calories and also increases muscle mass which in turn increases total calorie expenditure.12 Plus, exercise promotes longevity.13

    The goal here is to eat so healthy that it reduces your desire to overeat and reduces your metabolism slowly, so you can comfortably desire less food, though not get too thin. My nutritarian recommendations actually makes you more satisfied with less food, and actually gives the ability to enjoy food more without overeating.

    What an incredibly fallacious mindset. Just because you eat what you want doesn't mean it's low on nutrients. Im happy that I CAN eat ice cream, cheesecake, pizza, or even candy without flipping out. Does that mean it constitutes the majority of my diet?? Absolutely not. It's called moderation. This isn't black and white as you present it.

    When it comes to oxidation at the cellular level and nutrients, yes, it is very black and white.

    I don't need moderation. I need nutrients and that is what I focus on.

    And let's face it, the research is starting to come out about how unhealthy corn, wheat and soy really are and that makes the foods that are MADE with these products also unhealthy.

    So unless you are eating cauliflower crust pizza, pizza is unhealthy due to the low (no) nutrient content in the crust alone.

    Let's see how long you last on this kick. I would rather enjoy my food and have a healthy relationship with it than to be so preoccupied with the very negligible impact of an occasional treat. I see a propensity toward eating disorders on people who attempt to rationalize vlcds by using such "scientific" proof that what they're doing is healthy.
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    I would much rather have a slower metabolic rate and eat less, but eat very high nutrient based foods than eating a high calorie, low nutrient based way of eating, which those of you that have the "I eat what I want" mindset, you are eating a very low nutrient based diet.

    http://www.drfuhrman.com/library/metabolism_longevity.aspx

    I have intentionally slowed down my metabolic rate through my eating and intend to keep it this way. This DOES NOT make me anorexic or anything of the sort. This makes me be a person that is very hyper-aware of how and what I eat.
    Do we have any control over our resting metabolic rate? How can we slow it down?
    Resting metabolic rate is largely genetically determined, but our calorie intake has an effect as well.8 Caloric restriction and negative energy balance have been shown to reduce resting metabolic rate, and in contrast overeating increases resting metabolic rate. 9,10 Furthermore, caloric restriction has been consistently shown to prolong maximal lifespan by up to 60% in animals.11 My findings have demonstrated that an optimal micronutrient intake reduces the desire for calories and reduces body temperature and white blood cell counts. This means that if follow a high-nutrient eating style that reduces calorie intake while meeting micronutrient demands, we can reduce our resting metabolic rate and potentially increase our longevity potential dramatically.

    Keep in mind that although exercise raises total calorie expenditure, it does not raise the body's basal metabolism. Exercise is the only safe way to "raise metabolism" because it activates the peripheral tissues to utilize more calories and also increases muscle mass which in turn increases total calorie expenditure.12 Plus, exercise promotes longevity.13

    The goal here is to eat so healthy that it reduces your desire to overeat and reduces your metabolism slowly, so you can comfortably desire less food, though not get too thin. My nutritarian recommendations actually makes you more satisfied with less food, and actually gives the ability to enjoy food more without overeating.

    This is an incredilby sweeping assumption with no basis in fact. All of the people that I knnow that are of the 'eat more mindset' do not eat what they want without any regard to nutrients. From my perspective, its more of an 80/20 rule. Because I eat about 1900 a day, I can 'afford' to have a few hundred of those be less nutritious as the majority (and over 1200) is nutrient rich. I eat fruits, veggies, seeds and nuts and get my protein and good fats and I from the MFP folks I know that are on higher calorie targets are the same. When you are on 1200, you cannot 'afford' to have things that are low in essential micronutrients.

    I agree that there are studies out there that show a lower metabolism may lead to a longer lifestyle - and you are approaching it knowingly. However, there are many many people who cannot sustain that level of eating and and up gainoing weight back and essentially, not being able to live the life they want.
  • PaleoPath4Lyfe
    PaleoPath4Lyfe Posts: 3,161 Member
    Options
    I would much rather have a slower metabolic rate and eat less, but eat very high nutrient based foods than eating a high calorie, low nutrient based way of eating, which those of you that have the "I eat what I want" mindset, you are eating a very low nutrient based diet.

    http://www.drfuhrman.com/library/metabolism_longevity.aspx

    I have intentionally slowed down my metabolic rate through my eating and intend to keep it this way. This DOES NOT make me anorexic or anything of the sort. This makes me be a person that is very hyper-aware of how and what I eat.
    Do we have any control over our resting metabolic rate? How can we slow it down?
    Resting metabolic rate is largely genetically determined, but our calorie intake has an effect as well.8 Caloric restriction and negative energy balance have been shown to reduce resting metabolic rate, and in contrast overeating increases resting metabolic rate. 9,10 Furthermore, caloric restriction has been consistently shown to prolong maximal lifespan by up to 60% in animals.11 My findings have demonstrated that an optimal micronutrient intake reduces the desire for calories and reduces body temperature and white blood cell counts. This means that if follow a high-nutrient eating style that reduces calorie intake while meeting micronutrient demands, we can reduce our resting metabolic rate and potentially increase our longevity potential dramatically.

    Keep in mind that although exercise raises total calorie expenditure, it does not raise the body's basal metabolism. Exercise is the only safe way to "raise metabolism" because it activates the peripheral tissues to utilize more calories and also increases muscle mass which in turn increases total calorie expenditure.12 Plus, exercise promotes longevity.13

    The goal here is to eat so healthy that it reduces your desire to overeat and reduces your metabolism slowly, so you can comfortably desire less food, though not get too thin. My nutritarian recommendations actually makes you more satisfied with less food, and actually gives the ability to enjoy food more without overeating.

    What an incredibly fallacious mindset. Just because you eat what you want doesn't mean it's low on nutrients. Im happy that I CAN eat ice cream, cheesecake, pizza, or even candy without flipping out. Does that mean it constitutes the majority of my diet?? Absolutely not. It's called moderation. This isn't black and white as you present it.

    When it comes to oxidation at the cellular level and nutrients, yes, it is very black and white.

    I don't need moderation. I need nutrients and that is what I focus on.

    And let's face it, the research is starting to come out about how unhealthy corn, wheat and soy really are and that makes the foods that are MADE with these products also unhealthy.

    So unless you are eating cauliflower crust pizza, pizza is unhealthy due to the low (no) nutrient content in the crust alone.

    Let's see how long you last on this kick. I would rather enjoy my food and have a healthy relationship with it than to be so preoccupied with the very negligible impact of an occasional treat. I see a propensity toward eating disorders on people who attempt to rationalize vlcds by using such "scientific" proof that what they're doing is healthy.

    Just because someone doesn't want to eat JUNK doesn't mean they have an unhealthy relationship with food.

    This isn't a kick as you put it, it is my lifestyle. I am content, satisfied and happy with it so I will sustain for the rest of my life.
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    I would much rather have a slower metabolic rate and eat less, but eat very high nutrient based foods than eating a high calorie, low nutrient based way of eating, which those of you that have the "I eat what I want" mindset, you are eating a very low nutrient based diet.

    http://www.drfuhrman.com/library/metabolism_longevity.aspx

    I have intentionally slowed down my metabolic rate through my eating and intend to keep it this way. This DOES NOT make me anorexic or anything of the sort. This makes me be a person that is very hyper-aware of how and what I eat.
    Do we have any control over our resting metabolic rate? How can we slow it down?
    Resting metabolic rate is largely genetically determined, but our calorie intake has an effect as well.8 Caloric restriction and negative energy balance have been shown to reduce resting metabolic rate, and in contrast overeating increases resting metabolic rate. 9,10 Furthermore, caloric restriction has been consistently shown to prolong maximal lifespan by up to 60% in animals.11 My findings have demonstrated that an optimal micronutrient intake reduces the desire for calories and reduces body temperature and white blood cell counts. This means that if follow a high-nutrient eating style that reduces calorie intake while meeting micronutrient demands, we can reduce our resting metabolic rate and potentially increase our longevity potential dramatically.

    Keep in mind that although exercise raises total calorie expenditure, it does not raise the body's basal metabolism. Exercise is the only safe way to "raise metabolism" because it activates the peripheral tissues to utilize more calories and also increases muscle mass which in turn increases total calorie expenditure.12 Plus, exercise promotes longevity.13

    The goal here is to eat so healthy that it reduces your desire to overeat and reduces your metabolism slowly, so you can comfortably desire less food, though not get too thin. My nutritarian recommendations actually makes you more satisfied with less food, and actually gives the ability to enjoy food more without overeating.

    What an incredibly fallacious mindset. Just because you eat what you want doesn't mean it's low on nutrients. Im happy that I CAN eat ice cream, cheesecake, pizza, or even candy without flipping out. Does that mean it constitutes the majority of my diet?? Absolutely not. It's called moderation. This isn't black and white as you present it.

    When it comes to oxidation at the cellular level and nutrients, yes, it is very black and white.

    I don't need moderation. I need nutrients and that is what I focus on.

    And let's face it, the research is starting to come out about how unhealthy corn, wheat and soy really are and that makes the foods that are MADE with these products also unhealthy.

    So unless you are eating cauliflower crust pizza, pizza is unhealthy due to the low (no) nutrient content in the crust alone.

    So what, I can get my mucronutrients from the 1600 other calories I eat in the day. I can 'afford' to waste those couple hundred.
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    Options
    If your calories are under 1200 calories then,you will stop or slow done the process of weight loss.

    it doesn't help, because it's wrong.

    Nothing happens at 1180 calories that doesn't also happen at 1220 calories. Two teaspoons of sugar per day will not transform your weight loss performance, in either direction.
  • PaleoPath4Lyfe
    PaleoPath4Lyfe Posts: 3,161 Member
    Options
    I would much rather have a slower metabolic rate and eat less, but eat very high nutrient based foods than eating a high calorie, low nutrient based way of eating, which those of you that have the "I eat what I want" mindset, you are eating a very low nutrient based diet.

    http://www.drfuhrman.com/library/metabolism_longevity.aspx

    I have intentionally slowed down my metabolic rate through my eating and intend to keep it this way. This DOES NOT make me anorexic or anything of the sort. This makes me be a person that is very hyper-aware of how and what I eat.
    Do we have any control over our resting metabolic rate? How can we slow it down?
    Resting metabolic rate is largely genetically determined, but our calorie intake has an effect as well.8 Caloric restriction and negative energy balance have been shown to reduce resting metabolic rate, and in contrast overeating increases resting metabolic rate. 9,10 Furthermore, caloric restriction has been consistently shown to prolong maximal lifespan by up to 60% in animals.11 My findings have demonstrated that an optimal micronutrient intake reduces the desire for calories and reduces body temperature and white blood cell counts. This means that if follow a high-nutrient eating style that reduces calorie intake while meeting micronutrient demands, we can reduce our resting metabolic rate and potentially increase our longevity potential dramatically.

    Keep in mind that although exercise raises total calorie expenditure, it does not raise the body's basal metabolism. Exercise is the only safe way to "raise metabolism" because it activates the peripheral tissues to utilize more calories and also increases muscle mass which in turn increases total calorie expenditure.12 Plus, exercise promotes longevity.13

    The goal here is to eat so healthy that it reduces your desire to overeat and reduces your metabolism slowly, so you can comfortably desire less food, though not get too thin. My nutritarian recommendations actually makes you more satisfied with less food, and actually gives the ability to enjoy food more without overeating.

    What an incredibly fallacious mindset. Just because you eat what you want doesn't mean it's low on nutrients. Im happy that I CAN eat ice cream, cheesecake, pizza, or even candy without flipping out. Does that mean it constitutes the majority of my diet?? Absolutely not. It's called moderation. This isn't black and white as you present it.

    When it comes to oxidation at the cellular level and nutrients, yes, it is very black and white.

    I don't need moderation. I need nutrients and that is what I focus on.

    And let's face it, the research is starting to come out about how unhealthy corn, wheat and soy really are and that makes the foods that are MADE with these products also unhealthy.

    So unless you are eating cauliflower crust pizza, pizza is unhealthy due to the low (no) nutrient content in the crust alone.

    So what, I can get my mucronutrients from the 1600 other calories I eat in the day. I can 'afford' to waste those couple hundred.

    You do what you want to do.

    I don't eat if I am not hungry because someone says I need a certain QUANTITY of food. I eat if I am hungry, don't eat if I am not.

    Some days I eat around 700-800 calories and other days I eat way more. It averages out to around 1,000-1,100 and I am happy with that.
  • TinkrBelz
    TinkrBelz Posts: 888 Member
    Options
    But that's the thing Tinkerbell--my BMR is below 1200, according to MFP anyway.

    It very well may be 1200. Mine is 1304 according to http://www.fitnessfrog.com/calculators/bmr-calculator.html

    BMR is: "Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR) quantifies the number of calories your body burns in its idle state. "

    This is what my body needs to just sit and survive. And, I think that someone can eat just their BMR if they are not exercising. But, if they are exercising...where is that energy going to come from? Sure, their body will pull it from fat...but what about when you get thinner and you do not have as much fat to lose? What then? Or what happens when your body adjusts to only eating 1200 calories and you still have 15lbs to lose? Will, you lower your calories again to create a deficit?

    From what i have learned the best calculation is TDEE-20% Your TDEE takes into account how much you workout.

    http://www.fitnessfrog.com/calculators/tdee-calculator.html

    My TDEE is 2250 because I work out everyday. So: 2200-450 (20%)= 1800 calories. This is what I need to fuel my body to workout and to lose weight. I do not eat back exercise calories because TDEE already took that into account. Now, I do spike my calories once a week because I do not want my body to adjust to 1800 calories. I like to keep my body confused.
  • love4fitnesslove4food_wechange
    love4fitnesslove4food_wechange Posts: 6,897 Member
    Options

    You do what you want to do.

    I don't eat if I am not hungry because someone says I need a certain QUANTITY of food. I eat if I am hungry, don't eat if I am not.

    Some days I eat around 700-800 calories and other days I eat way more. It averages out to around 1,000-1,100 and I am happy with that.

    I love it!! Let's see what tune you're singing several months from now when this way of eating has lost its appeal, when you look at yourself in the mirror wishing you saw some definition in the body you starved yourself to get, and I will continue building muscle, eating 2000+ calories, and maintaining a sub 15% body fat (yes at 4'11 and ~100 pounds). When you want advice about a healthier approach I'm a message away. Cheers
  • stormieweather
    stormieweather Posts: 2,549 Member
    Options
    Before you can "listen to your body", you have to get your hormones working properly, because hormones are what cause hunger pangs and satiation sensations. If you've been underfeeding, then it is highly likely that they are NOT working properly. Google leptin, ghrelin, insulin, and metabolic hormones.

    Starvation "mode" does not mean actual starvation (ie: people in third world countries or anorexics). It means a slow down of the metabolic functions. This is not always obvious at first. I can tell when my metabolism slows down because I have less energy, my hair starts to fall out, I'm no longer hungry...ever, I get cranky and my mental clarity gets fuzzy. This is a big fat sign that I need to eat at maintenance for a week or two and get my hormones back in balance.

    1200 calories is not a magic number. It's a number that was decided by the WHO (World Health Organisation) as the minimum needed by the average woman, in order to prevent malnutrition. Smaller people may less, older people may need less, men need more, more active people need more. The reason it is used on this site is because there needs to be some threshhold used when warning people not to eat too little.

    Also, I make my own pizza dough from scratch and use all organic ingredients in my pizzas. They are not nutrient deficient and are a lovely treat now and then. I do not consider my pizza as "junk" any more than spaghetti with mushroom sauce (same basic ingredients, sheesh). :grumble:

    Food is fuel, it keeps us functioning. Without adequate fuel, we sputter and things start to break down. There is no reason to suffer....eat, enjoy, and treat your body well. It has to serve you for the rest of your life.
  • FlaxMilk
    FlaxMilk Posts: 3,452 Member
    Options
    I have between 13-17 lbs left to lose, depending on how I look with the muscle I have been building. I alternate between 1200 and 1500 days, 1200 on non-exercise days. I am at a healthy weight where I am (BMI in the 22 range), so I won't feel the need to drop my calories lower than where I am now.
  • FightGirl83
    FightGirl83 Posts: 30
    Options
    If you had 85 lbs to lose you were carrying around extra fuel for your body to lose. When you are very overweight you can restrict your calories to that low, if you're not walking around with your own energy stores and you're not eating, you will starve. It's not a myth, it's not a scare tactic, it's not a conspiracy, it's science. Just eat good food, not too much, not too little.
  • SinkTheBismarck
    SinkTheBismarck Posts: 133
    Options
    The level of **** in this thread is too damn high.

Categories