# The "Starvation Mode" Debate



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

As nutrition science and fitness are hobbies of mine, I read fitness boards and see a lot of debate on the topic of "starvation mode." 

Legend has it, if you drop too far below your basil metabolic rate (find yours here BMR Calculator ), your metabolism will slow down, or stop completely, causing you to stop losing weight, or actually gain weight. 

I see it on fitness boards all the time "I'm only eating 1200 calories a day, and burning 600 in my kickboxing classes, but I haven't lost a lb in months!!!" 
Then the responses pour in: "You must be in starvation mode, try increasing your calories to boost your metabolism."

I'm officially calling bullshit, and here is why:

Minnesota Starvation Experiment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A year without food › Dr Karl's Great Moments In Science (ABC Science)

(And there is another study that I can't find at the moment, but I'll link it when I do, where basically they were on 1000 cals every day, did some weight training, actually lost the fat and retained the muscle. No one gained, no one stopped losing weight on this diet.)

Which brings me to my second point: If you aren't losing weight, you're probably not burning the calories. Apparently most dieters underestimate how many calories they're taking in. 






Dietary underreporting by obese individuals--is it specific or non-specific? | BMJ

Unexplained disturbance in body weight regul... [J Am Diet Assoc. 1995] - PubMed - NCBI

And here is something that I found interesting: In this documentary, two thin journalists try to get down to size double-zero. Most who read this probably won't watch it all the way through, so I will share the more relevant part: the us size 8 lady who had a brief stall in her weight loss (on 500 cals a day) then shed it very quickly by adding exercise. In my opinion it seems as if the weight-loss did slow down on that little amount of calories, but then with the added exercise, it fell off even though she was already very thin (your body will not give up fat nearly as easily when you are already thin because it wants you to live):







Other resources:

Starvation Mode: Is It A Myth? Is It Real? Is Your Body In It Now?

The Starvation Myth

So apparently eating a very low calorie diet (and counting calories *accurately*) combined with -actually- getting exercise, is effective even for thin people like these two journalists (its much harder for a size 8 to lose weight, than it is for a size 20). 



_Disclaimers: I am at a healthy bmi/my gp says my weight is perfect, and I am in no way promoting what is going on in this second video as a reasonable lifestyle, I'm merely showing it to demonstrate once and for all, that it is not "starvation mode" causing you to stop losing weight on a diet. _


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

Gaining muscle is highly important as it burns the fat off... I have a decent amount of muscle mass for my age however I would not be surprised if I lost a small amount as it happens with age though my weight hasn't changed much for years.

I do exercise a lot: I run an hour on the treadmill at 10-11 mph, I don't know what you call it but I can do a push-up which basically involve pushing off the ground, crossing both arms, then repeating. Hell my stepchildren were stunned that I could do some of the stuff I do. My son however seemed to get my genetics for strength and fortunately he fit in better than I did and wasn't constantly involved in brawls to "hold down" bullies.


----------



## the_natrix (Aug 10, 2011)

I'd wager that it's over "diagnosed" and misunderstood, but is a thing that can happen.

Leptin regulates metabolism-> fat and muscle produce leptin-> certain level of fat+muscle = "set point"
Solution-> build muscle so it can replace fat in leptin production 

I'm testing this now because when I did the standard work out and eat less I started losing muscle instead of fat.
In case anyone's wondering the diet was 40/40/20 protein/carbs/fat 1800 cal, and I was completely anal about it at the time so it's accurate.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

the_natrix said:


> I'd wager that it's over "diagnosed" and misunderstood, but is a thing that can happen.
> 
> Leptin regulates metabolism-> fat and muscle produce leptin-> certain level of fat+muscle = "set point"
> Solution-> build muscle so it can replace fat in leptin production
> ...


From what I can tell, one will lose a lot _less_ muscle mass if they keep working the muscles even while doing a very low calorie diet. 

This would be whats done during "recomping" I believe. 

And it makes sense - if you're using the muscles, the body realizes you need them to go find food.


----------



## the_natrix (Aug 10, 2011)

Promethea said:


> From what I can tell, one will lose a lot _less_ muscle mass if they keep working the muscles even while doing a very low calorie diet.
> 
> This would be whats done during "recomping" I believe.
> 
> And it makes sense - if you're using the muscles, the body realizes you need them to go find food.


Yeah... just don't do "Insanity" with the plan of recomping; not enough resistance. I never knew I could lose my neck muscles like that. Personally I'll go with build muscle first, then shed the fat... probably the healthier plan.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

the_natrix said:


> Yeah... just don't do "Insanity" with the plan of recomping; not enough resistance. I never knew I could lose my neck muscles like that. Personally I'll go with build muscle first, then shed the fat... probably the healthier plan.


I agree. I see people in the fitness community say all the time, they wish thats what they'd done to begin with - lifting all the way.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

I suspect that we will soon develop technology which will accurately tell us how many calories we consume and how many calories we burn. I'm hoping this will help with nutrition and fitness.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

Yeah, starvation mode is a lie. Most people don't accurately count their calories. In other cases, they're also not counting the nutrients they're ingesting, and so you'll see people drink not enough water to flush the salt they've had that day (which will result in water retention.) 

People on The Biggest Loser are on seriously calorie restrictive diets while exercising 5-6 hours a day. You still see them shedding weight, and clearly it's not all muscle weight, since they do lift.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

the_natrix said:


> I'd wager that it's over "diagnosed" and misunderstood, but is a thing that can happen.
> 
> Leptin regulates metabolism-> fat and muscle produce leptin-> certain level of fat+muscle = "set point"
> Solution-> build muscle so it can replace fat in leptin production
> ...


There are tons of hormones regulating metabolism, why are you just focusing on leptin? 
I think the leptin produced by other tissues is negligible compared to the amount from adipose tissue.

on topic:
the metabolism can never "stop completely" because BMR is what your organs need to function in a day. It is possible however to use less energy, but I don't think it's important when you want to lose weight. The same thing happens, for example, in hypothyroidism, when it can slow down as much as 50% and thus people gain weight.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

I'll copy a post I made in another thread recently:

Eating when hungry and drinking when thirsty is like putting gas in your car when it is on E. You shouldn't wait for those mechanisms. By then, it is too late. You should eat and drink consistently all day. This is the problem. Energy spikes and dips. Imagine your energy level is a horizontal line. It spikes when you eat, and dips down between meals. So it is always going up and down. That isn't what you want. What you want is the bar to stay steady the whole day. You should eat something every few hours, even if not hungry. And drink water steadily.











_There is a limit to how much energy (i.e., calories) the body can handle properly at one time. By satisfying our total energy requirements through infrequent eating opportunities, this limit is passed and problems occur. In addition, infrequent eating does nothing to address normal blood sugar fluctuation. Blood sugar peaks about one hour after eating, and is back to pre-meal levels about two hours after that. That means that we can expect a normal range of blood sugar for about three hours. Unless something is consumed to satisfy the need for blood sugar every three hours, gluconeogenesis can result with a loss of lean mass. While the amount of lean mass loss at any one time is likely to be extremely small, the additive effect of constantly allowing blood sugar to drop is likely to be real, resulting in a lower metabolic mass. To make matters worse, eating when blood sugar is low is likely to result in a hyperinsulinemic response, regardless of the composition of the food consumed. Too much insulin translates into too much fat produced. In addition, eating when blood sugar is low is likely to result in out-of-control eating because of the hunger that results from this eating paradigm. The alteration in body composition makes it more difficult to burn the consumed calories (i.e., lower metabolic mass), and almost guarantees a higher insulin response to food (i.e., higher fat mass). There was a time when people did something to assure that blood sugar stayed normal (have you ever heard of morning and afternoon tea with a crumpet?), but now we try to mask the natural physiological need for energy with no-calorie caffeinated products. Put simply, neither having too much at one time nor waiting too long to eat is good for you.\

_*Blood glucose will fluctuate at least every 3 hours, regardless of energy expenditure. Therefore, even low energy expenditure people should consider having a 100 to 200 calorie snack between meals to keep blood sugar stable. A failure to do this causes havoc with personality, weight, body composition, attention span, sense of well-being, and performance.

*http://www.burnthefatinnercircle.com/members/269.cfm

^^interview with top researcher who was a guest lecturer in a nutrition course I took.


----------



## the_natrix (Aug 10, 2011)

Red Panda said:


> There are tons of hormones regulating metabolism, why are you just focusing on leptin?
> I think the leptin produced by other tissues is negligible compared to the amount from adipose tissue.
> 
> on topic:
> the metabolism can never "stop completely" because BMR is what your organs need to function in a day. It is possible however to use less energy, but I don't think it's important when you want to lose weight. The same thing happens, for example, in hypothyroidism, when it can slow down as much as 50% and thus people gain weight.


Why just leptin? This isn't endocrinology school where everyone gets 3 free migraines in the first semester.

Also from Leptin: a review of its peripheral actions and interactions :

"Thus, leptin may act as an indicator of general well-being: that sufficient muscle mass has developed (and is in a phase of anabolic growth) and that a commensurate level of body fat has been deposited, such that it is favourable for puberty (and its consequences, such as pregnancy) to proceed."

So these guys agree with me

Also- Of course BMR can stop... its called being dead. Reduced BMR in short means you get reduced body temperature and constipation.


----------



## Tad Cooper (Apr 10, 2010)

I think the thing with 'starvation mode' is that people don't get the info right. They think they stop losing weight etc, but in reality it's more starvation mode will result in a loss of muscle and a retention of fat and sometimes also water. So basically it's just not good to starve yourself because you screw stuff up (having been anorexic and recovering I can attest to the fact I lost a lot of weight starving myself, but also exercised and so retained some muscle, but it was definitely declining just before I started to get therapy). 
Muscle also burns more calories than fat, so is useful for aiding weight loss if you need to. You have to eat the right stuff for muscle though or it wont stay around (i.e. carbs after exercise to replace the stores lost in muscle and then protein and fats to aid building and general health. Yes, people need fats, and it's good to get them from nuts and fish generally).


----------



## 45130 (Aug 26, 2012)

There's no starvation mode. The cells and general mass of your body all just use a tiny bit of energy that comes from what you eat. So if you weigh 100 kg you will need to eat more food to keep your weight constant, compared to when you weigh 50kg. This creates a feedback loop where your body settles on a certain weight based on the amount of energy you ingest... This does have to be combined with many other factors though, like your genes, daily behavior and hormones.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

Infinnacage said:


> use a tiny bit of energy


make that about 70% :tongue:


----------



## 45130 (Aug 26, 2012)

Red Panda said:


> make that about 70% :tongue:


you probably misunderstood what I wrote... try again =w=


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

Infinnacage said:


> you probably misunderstood what I wrote... try again =w=


You said that the cells in our body use a bit of energy from what we eat right?


----------



## 45130 (Aug 26, 2012)

Red Panda said:


> You said that the cells in our body use a bit of energy from what we eat right?


I meant that every single cell eats up a bit of the energy you ingest. So the more cells (and the more mass in and around them) you have, the more energy you need.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

Infinnacage said:


> I meant that every single cell eats up a bit of the energy you ingest. So the more cells (and the more mass in and around them) you have, the more energy you need.


OK it's clear now. :kitteh:


----------



## DemonAbyss10 (Oct 28, 2010)

@Promothea just a heads up, your BMR calculator link = dead. Here is another I found that works.

BMR Calculator


----------



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

I do think people underestimate the amount of calories they consume so that could be one cause. There's also the law of thermodynamics so there's energy in and energy out and if you're burning more calories than you are consuming, you will lose weight. On the other end of things, I do think there is a starvation mode but it merely is your body seeing your calorie deficit is too high so it slows your metabolism down and then you are sluggish in hopes that you will use less energy. Now if you push yourself through the sluggishness and burn calories, you will lose weight if you are still burning more calories than consuming.


----------

