Probably a stupid question (regarding starvation mode)

R

Razberriez

New member
First let me say, I don't have any plans of actually doing this.. I'm just curious.

I've been reading a lot about starvation mode (as to avoid it, while keeping my daily calories down)

And one question I thought of, that I can't really seem to find a clear answer on is this..

I understand eating too few calories can trigger the metabolic slow down/starvation mode, but what if you were to eat things low in calories very often throughout the day.. (Celery, pickles, something)

Would the fact that your constantly eating keep the metabolism going, atleast somewhat more compared to just eating a 200 calorie meal a day, or because the daily calories would be so low you'd still be starving yourself just as much as a person who only ate once?

(I hope this makes sense, and you guys see what I'm trying to ask.. I just had another baby a month ago, and I'm quite sleep deprived, so my brain is kinda mushy)

:blush5:
 
Spend some time reading around the forum - especially the stickied threads and you will get your answer
 
No, that would not work. Your bodies keeps 'tabs' on energy intake and reserve. Not the amount of times you nibble.

Search for the words starvation and response using the forums search feature for posts made by me. I've discussed this extensively in multiple threads.
 
I'm no professional by any means, but through my researching, just calculate your BMR and atleast eat that amount of calories. For the longest time I was sticking to 1200 calories because I've heard so much that that was the minimum calories a person should consume, so of course I decided to try that for "fast weightloss".....I actually stuck to that (or lower :eek:) with no luck at my weightloss journey! I was even working out...didn't understand. Then I was like "Hm, maybe my body is in this starvation mode people are talking about". Well I recently calculated my BMR which is approx. 1430---so my body needed more calories just to "survive". For the past week and a half I've been sticking to 1450-1500 .....I've weighed myself randomly and noticed that I'm not gaining from the 300 calorie increase and I've probably even lost a pound or so (I'm on an elliptical for an hour, 4-5 times a week). Not totally sure on the specific amount of weightloss I may have had because I was weighing myself so much when I was doing the 1200 calorie "diet" and I cant remember exactly what I was when I started increasing calories, lol!
I just found out that you pretty much need to learn what your body responds to (like everyone has been saying!). Honestly, I been "seriously trying" since April, when I went to a trainer 2 days a week (just to learn things I could do on my own)....from there I joined a gym and made myself go atleast 3 days a week, once i got used to that I worked on my eating habits. It might take time, but I'm sure it will pay off in the end--my friends have been telling me they can notice that I've been working hard, so that definitely helps as well! Good luck to you---just shoot for getting ATLEAST the BMR calories. You can search the net for calculators, and then calculate calories to maintain (BMR multiplied by a factor based on activity level) and that can be your calorie range.
 
It's not like you go down to 1200 calories and your body instantaneously holds on to everything.

So I don't know what was 'off' with your situation, but something was....

The starvation mode, as people like to call it, is an adaptive response. Not a switch that turns on and off.
 
okay, well i was just giving insight onto what i experienced, i said I was no professional...seems like some people can be kind of rude with the way they word responses so I don't know if you were trying to be or not. People come here for advice, not to be made to feel like they're stupid. I gave a suggestion and that was that. I work out hard and ate very little, so my GUESS was that i was in starvation mode---didnt say it was a switch...just from what I was reading I was guessing that was my case because I wasn't losing weight for all the hard work I was doing. so thanks?
 
MeganLindsay24 said:
okay, well i was just giving insight onto what i experienced, i said I was no professional...
Click to expand...

Yea, I read AND comprehended that. Not sure what it has to do with anything?

seems like some people can be kind of rude with the way they word responses so I don't know if you were trying to be or not.
Click to expand...

This is sort of ridiculous, to be honest. I wasn't trying to be rude at all. Why even take a factual based discussion down the path of personal judgement?

People come here for advice, not to be made to feel like they're stupid.
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight. If someone who has experience and knowledge clarifies an important, related fact regarding the conversation at hand, and said clarification isn't in line with your reasoning... the 'professional' is trying to make you look stupid?

I sincerely hope you see the flaw in this reasoning. I didn't think you were stupid at all. I wasn't trying to make you feel stupid. My intent is pretty much always to maintain the integrity of sound advice and information. Simple as that.

I gave a suggestion and that was that. I work out hard and ate very little, so my GUESS was that i was in starvation mode---didnt say it was a switch...just from what I was reading I was guessing that was my case because I wasn't losing weight for all the hard work I was doing. so thanks?
Click to expand...

Yea, next time I won't open my mouth around you. Your blinders lead to some serious emotional outbursts that do more harm for the thread than good.

Sorry for the stress I have caused you.
 
When your body is "starved" for energy (calories), it taps into its reserves (fat) to get the energy it needs. Like Steve said, starvation mode isn't a switch that flips on at some magical caloric intake. As soon as you get less calories in a day than you use, your body will respond by using up its reserve of energy in the form of fat.

In extreme starvation cases, where you're getting way too few calories, your body can also tap into muscle and use that for energy. That's why it's important not to lose the weight too quickly and to get an adequate amount of protein in your diet because you don't want to lose your lean body mass, you just want to drop off the fat.

To find how many calories per day will lead to healthy weight loss and what types of foods to eat to get adequate protein, read through the stickied threads. You probably don't have time to go through all of them in one sitting, but if you take as much time as you need and read through them all, you'll be a wealth of knowledge.
 
Thanks for the clarification on "starvation mode"! I don't know how many times I've heard that from people when I mention I'm having trouble losing a few pounds. It NEVER made any sense to me that my body would supposedly attack lean muscle instead of the extra fat. Hello - I've got fat - why would I use the muscle for survival? LOL!

Anyway - good information!
 
If you're lean trying to get leaner, your body most certainly will use muscle instead of fat. Especially if you aren't taking the precautionary steps like eating enough, getting in adequate amounts of protein, lifting weights appropriately, etc, etc.

The more fat you are carrying, the less you have to worry about losing muscle.
 
This is a very interesting post and I agree with much of the content here. I have to agree with Steve that starvation mode is definately a reaction by the body due to prolonged severe calorie restriction.

But the following study stirs some thought in my mind:

Bryner et al.
Effects of resistance vs. aerobic training combined with an 800 calorie liquid diet on lean body mass and resting metabolic rate.
J Am Coll Nutr. 1999 Apr;18(2):115-21.

The resistance training group lost significantly more fat and did not lose any lean muscle, even at only 800 calories per day. Additionally, the resistance training group actually increased metabolism compared to the aerobic group which decreased metabolism.


This obviously doesn't give us the details of what the 800 calorie diet consisted of (carbs, fat, protein), but I can take a few wild guesses:).

I have had several clients who were taking in way too few calories and my initial thought was that their body was in starvation mode, but now I'm wondering if it was what they were eating (percentages of carbs, fat, protein) had more to do with it then the total calorie amount.

I think a lot of it has to do with the individual client and their history of consumption; what have they done in the past. Because the body adapts to all stresses we place on it (nutrition restriction, nutrition overconsumption, exercise), so depending on an individuals history one may need a severe calorie restriciton while others need to up their calories.

Sorry for the open thoughts, I'm thinking out loud. This is a great thread and it has evoked a lot of thought on my end.
 
formerfatkid said:
This obviously doesn't give us the details of what the 800 calorie diet consisted of (carbs, fat, protein), but I can take a few wild guesses:).
Click to expand...

Or you could go to PubMed, and see that the full text of the study is available online.

The VLCD consisted of a liquid formula (40% protein, 49% carbohydrate, 11% fat) ingested five times a day yielding a total of 800 kcals daily. Two multivitamin tablets were also consumed daily. Diet and vitamins were provided by Health Management Resources Inc., Boston, MA. Participants were asked to refrain from other food or non diet beverages. All subjects met with an investigator weekly and were questioned about their medical condition and their compliance to the dietary protocol. Only 1 week worth of supplement was given at a time requiring subjects to be present at the weekly weigh-in and meeting sessions. Adherence to the diet was questioned if weight loss was less then 2 lbs per week. Each subject was asked to give a verbal declaration of adherence to the diet at each weekly meeting. Self-reported compliance was excellent.
Click to expand...
 
Completely depends on the person and fatness. The fatter the individual, theoretically, the longer they can diet without break. That's speaking strictly physiologically.

Psychologically adds more uniqueness to the situation.
 
I read in mens healths about fasting for 24 to 36 hours once a month could be good for you.. there was a whole article on this guy. I wouldnt do it, no food means no energy!!
 
interesting forum here!:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top