Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Calorie-counting

Discuss calorie counting, including tips, challenges and real-life experiences. Mumsnet hasn't checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. You may wish to speak to a medical professional before starting any diet.

Starvation mode is a myth...

20 replies

TTTatty · 01/02/2015 15:45

Read this through a link on here last week (sorry I don't have the link!) and have found it really refreshing. It said that the starvation thing is not true and if you eat less calories than you use you WILL lose weight.
I always struggled with the train of thought when you are doing really well that 'you are not eating enough' and once I think I have to eat more I fail!

Just logging calories and knowing that if there is a deficient I will lose weight feels great :-)

I do think there are different ways to create that deficient be it 1200-1500 a day or fasting or reducing carbs but the theory still stays true.

I am using NutraCheck - eating under my limit and losing weight :-)

OP posts:
poppyseedbagel · 01/02/2015 15:48

TBH, i disagree to an extent.

If i eat very little throughout a day in general, I know I will not lose weight. But if I eat plenty -of the right stuff- then i feel better and lose weight.

I think healthy eating and exercise is the way to go!

TRexingInAsda · 01/02/2015 15:53

TTTatty - it's Michael Moseley who has a lot to say about this (of 5:2 fame). I lost a lot of weight on it. I love his refreshing, science-based approach to dieting. Much better than companies relying on old myths to flog you their brand of diet crap.

TTTatty · 01/02/2015 16:01

Thank you, will try to find a link, it has made such a difference to my dieting thought process.

I think there is a lot of pressure to diet the 'right' way - and I have found 'helpful' comments from people who say 'oh, you need to eat more' are actually not helpful! Friends and family who, even with the best intentions, are actually sabotaging my efforts.

Much more simple to remember that if I continually eat less calories I will lose weight (repeating myself now lol)

OP posts:
InternetFOREVER · 01/02/2015 16:06

Yes, I've noticed that the automatically response on lots of diet-related thread is that you need to eat more if you're not losing... I lost 4 stone before on a VLCD diet (600 cals a day) so I know for sure this isn't true! (Put it back on but thats another story Blush)

TTTatty · 01/02/2015 16:11

I agree - see it all the time.

I do think it is easy to underestimate how many calories, I have been actually counting everything for last four days and now know I had been eating more than I thought. Also the amount of calories you need does go down as you lose weight so what works for a while does stop. Although that is a long way off for me as I have around 4/5 St to lose! 1st 5lbs off so far though :-)

OP posts:
CortisolandCaffeine · 01/02/2015 19:47

Totally agree. Good to hear some dieting sense for a change.

LokiBear · 08/02/2015 09:03

I think the 'starvation mode' is misunderstood. It isn't that you will stop losing weight if you eat less, more that when you do eat more your body stores the fuel as fat for times of starvation. It messes up your metabolism. Eating less over a sustained period of time is the best was to lose and maintain weight loss. You can't go back to eating 2000 calories a day after eating just 600 for months and expect not to gain. I've had a history of ed and I'm a healthy weight now. However whenever I do want to lose a few pounds I never drop my calorie intake below 1600. Any less is dangerous territory for me. My weight fluctuates by 7 lb and I always see a gain when I over indulge, usually post Christmas and during the winter. For me, the only thing that works is eating well and moving more.

Hurr1cane · 16/02/2015 07:19

Your body storing more fat is also a myth.

I diet like that VLCD and when I go back to eating 'right' I don't put any more on. I maintain or lose very slowly.

The thing about starvation mode not working is because it isn't maintainable. So, people get down to the weight they like and think 'yes I've done it!' And then go back to eating more calories than they burn and slowly put it all back on again. That's why it doesn't work.

I have friends who have had anorexia, they aren't fat now just because they eat healthily after starving themselves and making themselves ill for so long.

I tend to do VLCD after christmas periods, or periods of being really poorly. Over Christmas I ate a ridiculous amount of takeaways and chocolate and drank loads of alcohol and sat on my arse watching TV all day, for about 2 months. Then I got very poorly mid January and just lay on the sofa eating food and being waited on, so not moving at all.

I still didn't go over weight, but I was big for me and hated the mirror. So I'm doing a VLCD for a couple of weeks until I'm happy with what I see then I'm dieting slowly.

This for me personally is much more healthy, because if I don't, I don't see enough progress, get upset and start with the binging and throwing up, which firstly, doesn't help you lose weight and secondly, rots your insides and your teeth.

But that's me. Basically you have to do what works for you. If you'll go back to binging after eating a lot less for a week, then there's no point doing it and you should focus on losing slowly.

PetulaGordino · 16/02/2015 07:29

As with all these things, Your Mileage May Vary

Amaxapax · 06/03/2015 10:04

The problem with the VLCD approach is that you will lose some fat, but you will also lose muscle. And, of course, it is increasing muscle that improves your metabolic rate. That's why, in the long term, it isn't a brilliant approach.

HappenstanceMarmite · 06/03/2015 10:08

I've always thought that theory was tosh. After all, how many prisoners in the awful concentration camps of WW2 held onto fat after being starved?

laughingcow13 · 12/04/2015 15:46

sorry o don't believe it is a myth.if you lose weight too quickly (ie starvation mode) you burn lean muscle which slows down your metabolic rate.

Stealthpolarbear · 12/04/2015 15:50

yes I've long thought it a myth. I went on an evidence hunt a little while ago and didn't find anything that convinced me

senrensareta · 12/04/2015 16:06

I think that you can prove anything you like with science depending on which evidence you use and the spin you put on it. As Petulina said too, everybody is different, we don't all conform to what is expected

I think the logic of "eating more to lose weight" is that you eat more of planned healthy food so you are less likely to fill up on calorie-dense foods and snacks on impulse

There is some truth on all sides here. A calorie deficit will definitely lead to weight loss but losing lean muscle will reduce metabolic rate going forward.

GunShotResidue · 12/04/2015 16:19

I think the term 'starvation mode' is used for different things. I've heard people say that if you're on a VLCD and not losing weight/putting on weight it's because you're in starvation mode. Which is crap.

It's pretty much impossible to put on or maintain your weight if you're eating at a deficit. Which some people claim is starvation mode. But losing weight too quickly can slow your metabolism slightly and will lead to losing more muscle so it's generally not recommended.

Vijac · 12/04/2015 16:29

I do believe the starvation mode thing but for me it's not so much that you don't lose whilst 'starving'. It's that as soon as you have a normal day/week your body stock piles and you put weight back on really fast. This happened to me when I was doing lightweight sport. Plus I do think it messes with your metabolism.

HelenF350 · 12/04/2015 16:56

I do agree that it doesn't exist, as in it won't stop you losing weight. However it is not good for the body as it shuts down functions and it will encourage you to gain weight back quicker when you stop eating vlc. Not a long term healthy solution imho!

Mintyy · 12/04/2015 17:04

I believe that some people have extremely unforgiving metabolisms and so if they restrict their calories, their body simply "clings on" to every calorie they do eat as if for dear life.

I base this on many years of trying to lose weight, in all sorts of ways, and failing every time.

Including 9 months on the 5:2 diet, during which time my husband lost 2 and a half stone, and I lost a big fat Zero.

GunShotResidue · 12/04/2015 18:03

The reason people put weight on as soon as they go back to regular eating is either because of glycogen stores replenishing or, rarely, from serious damage to the metabolism, which can usually be fixed if you slowly increase your calories.

The body can't make energy out of nothing. Every cell respires and this takes energy. If you eat less than this takes than the body has to use fat stores/muscle. The body can cut down on how many calories it needs by shutting organs down, periods stopping, hair loss etc.

99% of the time when people cut down on calories and don't lose weight they are either overestimating how many calories they burn, underestimating how many they eat (very easy unless you weigh everything with a decent food scale, lots of YouTube videos on bad portion sizes), or both.

LilyBobtail · 23/04/2015 16:24

Is it this one? www.aworkoutroutine.com/starvation-mode/
Makes a lot of sense to me.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread