Starvation

Frankly that's because people mostly throw it around when they hear someone is eating below calories, to try and convince them they're going to get fat and to scare potentially anorexic people.

Yeah, no. I will try and find a source that explains what it is and when it REALLY happens and post it here so you can read all about it...

plenty out there about it, but starvation mode takes a long time with no food.

if you didn't eat at all for five or so days, and your body no longer is having hunger pangs, then it has decided there is no food available and changes your metabolism. It is ended when food is eaten.

It is not easy to enter starvation mode. Almost no one in America has to worry about it....

http://www.weightwatchers.com/util/art/index_art.aspx?tabnum=1&art_id=35501

http://www.laststopfatloss.com/is-starvation-mode-a-myth

and this http://voices.yahoo.com/starvation-mode-dispelling-myths-2900886.html

Right. I thought that's what losing weight is all about?

Some people have magic numbers they think you should not eat below or the sky will fall in - your BMR is one, 1200 is another.

Personally I believe you need adequate protein and nutrients like essential oils, minerals and vitamins and your calorie intake as such does not ensure you meet these (though the more you eat the higher the chance of getting enough without trying).

Frankly that's because people mostly throw it around when they hear someone is eating below calories...

Right. I thought that's what losing weight is all about?

yes...losing weight is about reducing calories to a level below what you would need to remain the same as you are now...i.e going below our "maintenance" level.

the problem is we always think if we go to a real low level under what we need, we will lose weight even faster. Unfortunately, that isnt the case in the long run. If you eat too few calories, you will initially lose a few pounds but your body will go into a conservation mode where it slows down everything to conserve because it thinks you cant find food. Its actually a safeguard. So, to effectively lose all of our excess weight, we need patience and perserverence. A small deficit eill not cause the body to think your food finding skills are lacking and you will lose the weight.

If you're eating below BMR, your body is going to take action to lower the BMR so you can run on the tiny amount of food you are eating.

The reduced BMR happens as a result of calorie restriction even above your BMR, we've known that for 60 years.

Personally, I can't understand why a single person is eating 1200 calories, its beyond foolish to me.

Each to their own. If you had a BMR of 1300 and wanted to lose weight at a rate that you could see then you may have a different view of life.

It perturbs me when people say things like "starving yourself wont make you lose weight, you'll just hang on to whatever weight you have", etc - it's like, tell that to Karen Carpenter!

Edit: No, I don't think starving oneself is a good way to lose weight. Just clarifying.

its something no one here will ever go through.

when you stop eating you matabalism rises for about 3 days then begins to mostly metabalise fats. you loose a little muscle say 1 to 2 pounds over 30 days ive seen quoted a fair few times.
most can last one or so months like this will no complications.

one obese scotsman was fasted on water and suplements for over a year

once your fat stores are gone you enter the final stage of starving.

your body starts eating your muscles and then you die.

so no starving for anyone here haha

The thing I have always heard is that if you eat way under what your body needs it goes into a mode where it refuses to lose weight.. because your body wants to keep as much fat as it can to survive because you aren't giving it enough. So you hold onto fat.. and your body craves like crazy.. it doesn't mean you starve.. it means your body refuses to lose weight because it thinks its starving!
I've gone through what I thought was that.. when I was eating 1200... I couldnt' lose weight.. at all.. which at the time made no sense.. and then I was SO hungry I that I ate and gained back more than I had lost.. I upped my calories to 1550.. and hopefully now I can drop the pounds. (all that I gained back)

The thing is though, what exactly would the body use for energy during it's day-to-day existence if it is holding onto everything?

One of the major reasons people cannot lose weight is because they underestimate the calories in their food and drink (usually because they guess the weight of the foods rather than weighing them to get the correct figure and they overestimate the calories burned during exercise and if they are one of those people that eat back all their exercise calories they will be over their daily allowance before they go anywhere.

The thing I have always heard is that if you eat way under what your body needs it goes into a mode where it refuses to lose weight.. because your body wants to keep as much fat as it can to survive because you aren't giving it enough. So you hold onto fat.. and your body craves like crazy.. it doesn't mean you starve.. it means your body refuses to lose weight because it thinks its starving!
I've gone through what I thought was that.. when I was eating 1200... I couldnt' lose weight.. at all.. which at the time made no sense.. and then I was SO hungry I that I ate and gained back more than I had lost.. I upped my calories to 1550.. and hopefully now I can drop the pounds. (all that I gained back)

If this were true, then no one would be anorexic. <SIGH>

The body stores for times of famine so it has nutrients to survive as essential vitamins and minerals are stored in the fat cells.

Very few in the civilized western world has to worry about times of famine as there is an overabundance of food (and non-food) around.

You've had lots of definitions, so I won't give you another one.... but I will give you my opinion on why it's useful to consider the idea behind the concept (even if the way the concept is often used is flawed!)

I don't believe that there is a defined number of calories (the magic 1200?) which will suddenly cause your body to stop losing weight forever.
I do believe that reducing calories dramatically puts you at risk of not getting enough energy and nutrition to stay healthy and to have the energy to do all the things you want to do in your life.

We all know that we have to "eat less and move more" to lose weight. The problem is that it is easy to think that if a bit of a calorie deficit can help you lose weight, then a BIG calorie deficit must make it happen even faster.
It may or may not happen this way (we are all different) but it's not likely to be a safe or healthy approach for most people.

I think it is easy to lose sight of the fact that calories are good. They aren't inherently evil and something to be avoided at all costs. Calories are the fuel that keeps our bodies alive and healthy. The real challenge is finding the right number to lose weight but stay healthy and feeling good for the long term, and that number is going to be different for different people.

I have no idea what people mean when they say it.

It means you can safely ignore their postings, perhaps even use the little arrow under their profile picture to Ignore them permanently.

Their world view does not fit with any reputable scientific observations. If you want some fun ask them to explain the guy who fasted for over a year http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2495396/pdf/postmedj00315-0056.pdf

I've been interested in this term too. I feel like I always eat a full day of food. I never not let myself eat or go to sleep starving or anything but I'm always below my calories. When I exercise I try to eat extra protein but unless I fall back to "filler foods" I have no idea how I'd eat as much as MFP suggests.

However, out of the nutrients I track, I get almost all of them. I do need to get more calcium but I've started eating more kale and spinach to try and meet that. I don't feel like I'm depriving myself of anything so I don't get how I could go "into starvation mode". I eat full meals, have a few snacks, I just eat a ton of veggies which aren't high in calories. It seems silly to me.

There are so many great (helpful) responses on here. The "magic 1200" has confused me for a long time. I have never had a medical test to determine my BMR but I have a very slight frame and when I eat according to appetite my calories are very low. I don't usually reach 1200 naturally and I experience little or no hunger throughout the day. That is one of the reasons I have been so perturbed by advice to eat more to avoid 'starvation mode'. I always thought hunger was a pretty good indicator of how much energy a person needs

im fat (hey i call it like i see it LOL) but i too naturally dont usually eat more than 1200 calories - even when im 'over' - its still less than 1300 at the most (since beginning to track). Since I've stopped drinking sodas all day every day, and switched to plain water, I've eliminated 700-800 calories per day (that is not counted in that 1200), so effectively in the past two weeks, I've dropped my calorie count from around 2000ish/day to 1200, which is what MFP is recommending for me to eat anyways, given my size/weight/lifestyle

if im hungry, i will eat. During the weekdays i dont eat much. what ive noticed though is that on the weekends i want to eat more. whether its psychological or boredom or what i dont know, but ive been trying to be much more mindful of it....

There is one way to lose weight. Keep the calories you ingest and process below the calories you use for daily activities.

You have easy control over the first, and more difficult control over the second (and the first is ONE of the controls you have over the second).

As you eat less, and especially if your food intake is out of balance, your metabolism will slow down to adapt.

The trick is finding the caloric intake that allows your body to function "properly" (and by that I mean sleeping well, not excessively fatigued or tired, able to do some awesome workouts), while still running a sufficient caloric deficit to lose weight at a reasonable pace. For the vast majority, that's somewhere between 1-2 pounds a week

CAN you lose weight by restricting your caloric intake further? Absolutely. But your body will naturally adapt and burn fewer calories, so you end up in a cycle where you are chasing your body's caloric burn rate down as your weight goes down, you're generally going to be hungrier, more prone to cheating, more prone to poorer food decisions, and have such a small calorie budget that you'll have to work really hard to make sure you are getting all the nutrients your body needs. Vitamin supplement and a concentration on making sure you get decent amounts of protein and lots of water highly recommended.

I chased the calorie rabbit down the hole for a year. I reached the point where I was doing 2-3 day water-only fasts to break plateaus, and I was doing so on a fairly regular basis. At the end of a year, I had successfully lost about 50 pounds. I was pretty useless during that year - I was tired a lot, concentrating on anything was hard, and I was unable to exercise - I simply lacked any energy. When I reached my goal, despite my best efforts at reintroducing additional calories slowly, every calorie I ate for the next month or so felt like it went straight to my belly and I gained 10 pounds back in the first two weeks, even though my energy levels were coming up and I was trying really hard to exercise.

I'm much closer to my ideal weight now, quite a few years older, and now I'm maintaining a relatively controlled diet where I eat a 1,000 calorie deficit every day. I'm losing weight faster than I did during my "year of hunger". I'm riding my bike back and forth to work frequently (14 miles each way in somewhat hilly terrain). I'm training for the Trek Across Maine - a 3-day 180-mile charity bike ride. I hike multi-thousand foot mountains on a lark. I have all the energy I need to do anything I want to do. I literally, in the middle of a weight loss regimen, without stimulant assistance, feel the best I have in my entire life.

You CAN chase calories down to lose weight. Doing so more slowly and gradually while eating enough to remain energetic and happy is just way more pleasant.

Your body, your rules. Best of luck whatever you choose.