Is starvation mode a myth?

[sleepyjean 0]

I turned on the tv this morning and Extreme makeover was on. One of the people getting the makeover was this guy Jeff who'd lost 200 pounds in one year (diet and exercise only, no surgery). His skin was loose and baggy all over his body so the surgeon was going to do a "full body tuck" on him. I didn't stay to watch the show, so I don't know what kind of weight loss program he was on, but he had to have just about starved himself and worked out for hours daily. So why didn't "starvation mode" hit him? Is this going to be one of those reasons why men lose weight faster than women do?

http://abc.go.com/primetime/extrememakeover/bios/jeff.html

http://www.ienhance.com/extreme-makeover-s2e10.asp

[cinward2001 0]

I think that, in the way most people refer to it, starvation mode IS a myth. Calories in vs. calories out. It's physics. Your body needs energy to function and it gets that energy either from food, stored calories in the form of glycogen, stored fat, or Protein.

If you reduce the calories you take in, your body first uses readily available glucose in the bloodstream, then glycogen stored in the muscles, then fat, and in some cases, Protein.< /p>

There is NOT a mechanism that says "Oh, let's not use this fat, let's hold onto it until tomorrow." If your body needs energy, it WILL use your fat stores.

I do, however, think that your metabolism can slow down a bit when you're eating very few calories. I do NOT think it slows down enough to make a difference in the long term. After all, we can't hibernate. It's also easy to counteract this simply by increasing your activity.

Also, very low calorie diets can cause muscle loss (from protein being used for energy), so they often cause more problems in the long run. It's why anorexics often have heart failure. And as your muscle mass decreases, your metabolism decreases because muscle uses more energy (even at rest) than fat.

Most often, though, I think people use "starvation mode" as a reason to eat more. I also think that, without the band, when people try to stick to a 1000 calorie diet/day, their hunger sabotages them. So in a sense, your body DOES want more calories...but it can't "hold on" to fat stores if you continue to eat fewer calories than you need.

[cashley 0]

I think the starvation mode is a myth... I do because I have failed on diets repeatly telling me I should lose weight on 1100 - 1300 calories (or whatever weight watchers is) and If I wasn't losing then they assumed I was cheating.... Well now I know I need to eat only 600 - 800 (a 1000 max) to lose.

At weight wathers they always told me not to go that low and their method was proven... I say proven to fail!

Without the lapband I'd be miserable eating only 600-800 calories and would feel like I was staving. It would be hard to do long term but with the band it makes it possible.

I'm sad that it takes so few calories to actually lose but I'm glad at least I'm losing.

[Jachut 487]

In a way, I mean obviously people that stop eating get very skinny.

But if you try to lose weight that way you dont do your body any favours. Losing fat and preserving as much lean tissue as possible requires you to eat properly and exercise quite a lot, the right way. If you want to lose all your muscle tissue so that your metabolism is stuffed for ever (because of course a body without as much muscle burns way less calories) they the way to do that is to crash diet on low levels of calories.

So no matter what your body and your metabolism will keep ticking over if you eat very little but it wont be as healthy a body as someone who focuses on losing fat by eating properly, eating enough and exercising. And you'll never be able to eat as much as that person without gaining weight either. And you could quite easily weigh a lot less but have more fat too.