# "Starvation Mode" is a myth.



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

This has been bugging me for a while.

As summer approaches, a lot of people are posting their diets for critique. A lot (because they are on a limited time scale) are fairly low calorie, circa 1200-1800kcal per day. I've seen quite a few regular posters on here suggesting that low calorie diets lead to "starvation mode", well I wanted to point out that this is simply untrue.

True "starvation mode" only occurs when you get below the essential level of fat that a human should carry, for a man this is below 5%. Not many people (if any at all) will approach that level of leanness, but some competitive bodybuilders might approach that for a few days around a show.



> *if you are overweight/overfat, you can not cause your metabolism to decrease below a level needed to lose weight while you have extra weight/fat on you, and you can not "**lose more weight by eating more calories/food**."* This is a misunderstanding of the principles of metabolism that does not apply to overweight people trying to lose weight.


Essentially, what really happens when you drop calories low is that you subconsciously drop activity to match (unless you're actively monitoring it that is). The "Energy Out" side of the energy balance equation reduces, and therefore you see a drop off in weight loss. You are NOT entering starvation mode when this occurs. Other annoying things like water weight and the fact that fat loss is never linear can make people think their approach isn't working.

Full anyone interested the full article is here: Are you in starvation mode or starving for the truth?


----------



## Fatstuff (Mar 2, 2010)

Lyle mcdonald seems to think it exists, something to do with cortisol, dont know the ins and outs though!!


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Fatstuff said:


> Lyle mcdonald seems to think it exists, something to do with cortisol, dont know the ins and outs though!!


Only if you chronically diet with a VLCD (very low calorie diet) for extended periods dude. You can off set small drops in metabolism with refeeds, yes, as metabolism will drop slightly with any diet. You won't enter starvation mode though.


----------



## XRichHx (Mar 7, 2012)

Fatstuff said:


> Lyle mcdonald seems to think it exists, something to do with cortisol, dont know the ins and outs though!!


I actually posted an article from Lyle I the diet section. Was a good read actually.


----------



## badly_dubbed (Nov 21, 2011)

Cortisol, the stress hormone is elevated when the body is out to extremes ( also during mental stress and lack of sleep) when cortisol is elevated, fat loss can be greatly blunted...hence the term starvation mode (holding onto what stores it has)

Periodic refeeds can control the hormones like cortisol and leptin to aleviate this effect however


----------



## Malibu (May 13, 2010)

If it didnt exist, you would be able to eat nothing for a week and lose weight. Which doesnt work...


----------



## badly_dubbed (Nov 21, 2011)

If you ate nothing for 7 days I garuantee you would loose weight.

Not the weight you wish to be, but a fair amount all the same


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Lyle covers what you need to now about it here: Lean Body Mass Maintenance and Metabolic Rate Slowdown - Q&A


----------



## Fatstuff (Mar 2, 2010)

badly_dubbed said:


> If you ate nothing for 7 days I garuantee you would loose weight.
> 
> Not the weight you wish to be, but a fair amount all the same


U would be heading down the road to crackheadsville style physique lol


----------



## gymgym (Mar 20, 2012)

Been dieting only on fresh Pomegranate juice and believe me after a week I was leaner than lean! lol


----------



## Malibu (May 13, 2010)

badly_dubbed said:


> If you ate nothing for 7 days I garuantee you would loose weight.
> 
> Not the weight you wish to be, but a fair amount all the same


Not actual weight I meant, say if your maint was 3.5k and you didnt eat for a week you wouldnt lose 7lbs


----------



## Fat (Jan 2, 2010)

gymgym said:


> Been dieting only on fresh Pomegranate juice and believe me after a week I was leaner than lean! lol


Remember the diet of the warriors? :lol:


----------



## Fatstuff (Mar 2, 2010)

bayman said:


> Only if you chronically diet with a VLCD (very low calorie diet) for extended periods dude. You can off set small drops in metabolism with refeeds, yes, as metabolism will drop slightly with any diet. You won't enter starvation mode though.


Yeah I believe u as I haven't read into it, I just remember him mentioning something on a podcast that I listened to a while back.


----------



## badly_dubbed (Nov 21, 2011)

Fatstuff said:


> U would be heading down the road to crackheadsville style physique lol


Muscle catabolism would begin around 72hours in order to fuel parts of the brain and red blood cells via gluconeogenesis

You would eventually look like a smacked up junkie lol


----------



## Fatstuff (Mar 2, 2010)

gymgym said:


> Been dieting only on fresh Pomegranate juice and believe me after a week I was leaner than lean! lol


Your obsessed with dieting lol


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Malibu said:


> If it didnt exist, you would be able to eat nothing for a week and lose weight. Which doesnt work...


As badly dubbed said, you would lose weight for sure, but you'd also lose muscle. NOT what we're looking for.

An obese man "fasted" for 382 days, the only side effect was weight loss...



> A 27-year-old male patient fasted under supervision
> 
> for 382 days and has subsequently maintained his
> 
> ...


He lost 275lb in total!

Full study: http://pmj.bmj.com/content/49/569/203.full.pdf


----------



## badly_dubbed (Nov 21, 2011)

Malibu said:


> Not actual weight I meant, say if your maint was 3.5k and you didnt eat for a week you wouldnt lose 7lbs


Of course not as weight loss isn't linear.

Google the whoosh effect for example


----------



## Ballin (Aug 24, 2011)

In the process of losing best part of 7 stone I found at first I was losing weight rapidly just through a severe calorie deficit. This was out of naivity and ignorance of just eating less to lose weight.

However, I reached a plateau about 3 stone in where I was not losing anything really and I was suggested that I was in a starvation mode where all fod was turned to fat. I was then educated by reading around to reduce the deficit so my body has enough energy to function happily and keep a "slow burning effect" to keep the burning up rather than eating little and have the body grab it and try and store it.

This may be total BS medically speaking but I swear eating more helped me to lose weight and my diet remained pretty constant with high protein low carbs. I also think this made me more active so eating say 200 calories more may have meant I burnt 300 more at the gym so to speak.

A typical day for a guy who was 6'5 and 23+stone:

Am:

90 calorie Alpen bar

Apple

Lunch:

Can of Soup

Apple/Banana

Dinner

Half a roast chicken with salad

Muller Light yougurt

I literally had that for 9 months. I know it was not ideal and it's why I lost all my muscle mass but job done and I'm happy I acomplished my goals!


----------



## Fat (Jan 2, 2010)

badly_dubbed said:


> Muscle catabolism would begin around 72hours in order to fuel parts of the brain and red blood cells via gluconeogenesis
> 
> You would eventually look like a smacked up junkie lol


is that the process where your protein turns to energy?


----------



## Ballin (Aug 24, 2011)

gymgym said:


> Been dieting only on fresh Pomegranate juice and believe me after a week I was leaner than lean! lol


You seriously only drank juice for a week?

God damn! How much did you lose? Bet you had fun going to the loo!!


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Fat said:


> is that the process where your protein turns to energy?


Well, kinda. Protein (amino acids) is used to produce glucose.


----------



## badly_dubbed (Nov 21, 2011)

Fat said:


> is that the process where your protein turns to energy?


It's the process where proteins are converted to glucose.

Certain parts of the brains and RBC can ONLY work From CHO, now it doesn't have to be CHO consumed as we know that it's not an essential macro. Fat and protein however are, (omitting these in your diet, you will die eventually) there is NO specific need fro CHO for human survival.

This is where gluconeogenesis plays its role. By supplying the specific need for carbohydrate to certain parts of the body that absolutely require it to function.

Short explanation is if you do not eat it, the body will make it.


----------



## Fat (Jan 2, 2010)

So technically the people who fear carbohydrates and consume a small amount are technically paying more for protein which will get converted to glucose anyway?


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Fat said:


> So technically the people who fear carbohydrates and consume a small amount are technically paying more for protein which will get converted to glucose anyway?


Yes. Although you don't need a huge amount of carbs to prevent gluconeogenesis.


----------



## cub (Jul 14, 2011)

It does get harder the more you lose. I lost 30 pounds over two and a half months on a 1,600 calorie a day diet. However after I'd lost the 30 pounds to lose the 7 pounds was over a much longer period and much harder to lose even though I stuck to the same diet as before. Your body is trying not to lose the weight...


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

cub said:


> It does get harder the more you lose. I lost 30 pounds over two and a half months on a 1,600 calorie a day diet. However after I'd lost the 30 pounds to lose the 7 pounds was over a much longer period and much harder to lose even though I stuck to the same diet as before. Your body is trying not to lose the weight...


Well of course. Your resting metabolic rate has reduced as you weigh less overall. This happens on any diet, it is not indicative that you've entered starvation mode however.


----------



## badly_dubbed (Nov 21, 2011)

cub said:


> It does get harder the more you lose. I lost 30 pounds over two and a half months on a 1,600 calorie a day diet. However after I'd lost the 30 pounds to lose the 7 pounds was over a much longer period and much harder to lose even though I stuck to the same diet as before. Your body is trying not to lose the weight...


It's because the less you weigh....the less cals you require  not because it's trying not to loose weight.


----------



## gymgym (Mar 20, 2012)

Fat said:


> Remember the diet of the warriors? :lol:


lol Indeed. After 6 days I could roll my finger 1/4 of an inch in between my mid section..



Fatstuff said:


> Your obsessed with dieting lol


Haha!!.. I was actually unable to move pretty much so had the juice stocked in a mini fridge in my room to keep me alive lol



Ballin said:


> You seriously only drank juice for a week?
> 
> God damn! How much did you lose? Bet you had fun going to the loo!!


Would never do it again. Yes I got more than 6 solid packs but at what price ? It wasnt fun. Def lost in mass, was very lean but looked so muscular from being so lean if u get what am saying..


----------



## badly_dubbed (Nov 21, 2011)

bayman said:


> Yes. Although you don't need a huge amount of carbs to prevent gluconeogenesis.


Around 30g iirc will prevent gnc..

Though the requirement for the brain daily is 150g or so afaik...


----------



## badly_dubbed (Nov 21, 2011)

Bear in mind also, that if cho is low...but protein moderate....gnc may not occur.

If cho is low to zero but protein is stupidly high then it will 

Protein power by the eades is a good read for those wishing to dive more into it...


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

badly_dubbed said:


> Around 30g iirc will prevent gnc..
> 
> Though the requirement for the brain daily is 150g or so afaik...


120g dude.


----------



## 36-26 (Jun 30, 2009)

Malibu said:


> If it didnt exist, you would be able to eat nothing for a week and lose weight. Which doesnt work...


Yes that would work why wouldn't it? You would lose a lot of weight in a week if you ate nothing.


----------



## Guest (May 8, 2012)

36-26 said:


> Yes that would work why wouldn't it? You would lose a lot of weight in a week if you ate nothing.


you're our new guinea pig


----------



## 36-26 (Jun 30, 2009)

FrankDangerMaus said:


> you're our new guinea pig


Ha I just noticed your sig and I was like, how the fcuk could so many like it straight away lol. Oh and no not a hope, although I have lost 11lbs on the first week of keto in the past


----------



## WilsonR6 (Feb 14, 2012)

You can not eat for 7 days and not die?


----------



## Fat (Jan 2, 2010)

WilsonR6 said:


> You can not eat for 7 days and not die?


Only water is essential


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

I agree that starvation mode in the sense mentioned is not an issue until very low levels of bodyfat are reached... or unless there is sustained total absence of essential nutrients in diet.

I do have just a couple of small observations though, the first being that no matter what your level of bodyfat, reducing calories to a point considerably lower than your BMR does have one rebound type effect that can, and for many people does stall weight loss.

Is mainly the way the body tries to achieve homeostasis by decreasing circulating leptin and reducing thyroid to encourage appetite and discourage activity... for some people the effects of these adaptations, even when they are fairly small, seem to be significant on their behaviour and perceived energy levels can make them automatically far less active and eat (or want to eat) a lot more. For this reason I think it's best to diet slowly and moderately to avoid these kinds of issues.

A second reason why I like the slow diet approach with a moderate calorie restriction is that (I think) it preserves muscle mass far better long term (i.e., losing 20lbs of fat over 10 weeks might well be accompanied by 2lbs of muscle loss, whereas losing 10lbs of fat over twenty weeks only 1lb). Have seen this discussed but not demonstrated clearly in studies, but it also fits with my own personal observations.


----------



## Guest (May 9, 2012)

Dtlv74 said:


> , losing 20lbs of fat over 10 weeks might well be accompanied by 2lbs of muscle loss, whereas losing 10lbs of fat over twenty weeks only 1lb). Have seen this discussed but not demonstrated clearly in studies, but it also fits with my own personal observations.


In that instance the ratio of fat to muscle is still the same.

with a PSMF you lose very little muscle mass anyway.

I recommended one on here to an obese person a year/18 months ago and got flamed to hell, but they're a very effective way to drop weight fast, especially for the obese


----------

