… because it slows down your metabolism.
Is there a minimal quantity and type of food(s) that could be eaten over the course of the day to keep the metabolism going and result in the minimum caloric intake.
I’m looking for specifics like… one glass milk, one hard boiled egg, six almonds etc.
A number that I seem to see mentioned a lot is 1200 calories/day. The clinic where I was for a month five years ago put all us fatties on that - FWIW as a 1.86 m (6’ 1’’) male doing moderate exercise (walks, swimming, gymnastics) I did not go into starvation mode.
While we’re still early in the thread, can I ask a related question on this topic that has always bothered me? I always hear, “Don’t starve yourself, because if your calories go too low you won’t lose weight anymore!”
How does this even make sense, long-term? I can see how maybe over a couple weeks or so, you could slow your metabolism down and burn fewer calories because your body enters “starvation mode” or whatever, but eventually if you keep your calorie intake very low, you’re going to lose weight, right? Otherwise nobody would ever starve to death.
I feel like this is a dumb question and yet I don’t really understand the answer to it.
You will certainly lose weight if you stop eating altogether. You’ll lose weight if you chop your arm off too.
In both cases there are long term (if not permanent) damage and consequences. it’s just that a damaged and severely lowered metabolism, damaged heart muscles, and neurological damage isn’t as obvious as a severed arm.
The recommended way to get around the metabolic issue is to increase physical activity so that you burn more calories than you are taking in.
Perhaps bordering on a Pit issue, but IMHO, people who start the “but if you stop eating, you’ll have to lose weight” argument need to be stopped by the moderators because that is incredibly bad and dangerous medical advice.
Yes, but nobody willingly starves themselves for that long. People decide to go on a diet, starve themselves for three days, fuck up their metabolism, then give up and go binge on ice cream sundaes, pizza, and beer.
If you’re in a situation where you really don’t have access to food, then of course you’ll start losing weight. But it won’t be pleasant.
You’re right. Your metabolism slows down somewhat, but if you eat even less than your new maintenance requirement, that, you will still lose weight, The most extreme case of this in the scientific literature is only 30% reduction, in that WWII starvation study.
The participants in the Minnesota Starvation Experiment got 1800 calories for 6 months and did experience reduced metabolic rates (as well as physical starvation). For exercise, they walked approx 22 miles per week.
This seemed like a pretty high calorie count for a semi-starvation diet, considering that 2000 calories is generally considered a pretty healthy calorie intake.
Then i saw that their 1800 calories consisted of “potatoes, rutabagas, turnips, bread and macaroni.” Not a lot of good protein or vitamins and minerals in there. It’s not just the number of calories you eat, but what sort of calories they are.
Later studies give mixed results on how much a person’s base metabolic rate is reduced by. Some show it reduced in proportion to muscle loss, and some show more. There’s not one answer. Some advice I have seen says to reduce calories by 10-15% at a time (say, every few weeks). Starvation diets are bad for your health, hard to maintain, and don’t help you control your weight once you come off them.
I’ve read that starvation will also cause bloating, though I am having trouble finding a reliable cite.
Isn’t this the reason why so many of the starving African kids appear to have full bellies?
Edema (i.e., swelling caused by fluid imbalance) is a symptom of kwashiorkor.
The metabolism thing is real but only to a minute effect. Johns Hopkins did a study back around 2003 and they found that people that “starve” and do the “Yo-yo” diet thing do lose less weight.
They average about 75 calories LESS a week.
That is not even noticable, you’re talking those dieters had a 3,900 calories PER YEAR less than those who didn’t.
Since a pound is approx 3,500 calories, we’re talking only little more than a pound. So you can see, it would have no cosmetic effect.
I’ve seen websites where people claim because of yo-yo diets they now eat 1,100 calories a day and STILL gain weight. Yeah right…LOL
So your metabolism will go down but in such small amounts that you can’t notice any effect.
Think about it if you yo-yo diet you will lose an average of 75 calories LESS. A candy bar is about 230 - 280 calories. You’re talking about one THIRD of a candy bar.
People suffering from Anorexia Nervosa do.
For Pete’s sake, I’m not making an argument, and I’m certainly not giving medical advice! I’m not even giving dietary advice. I am giving no advice at all. I was just asking about the mechanics of how this works, because it didn’t make sense to me. I am not, nor would I ever, contemplate a starvation diet.
Thanks for the informative responses so far, everybody.
This is absolutely true. The idea that you can just eat fewer calories of any sort and lose weight while maintaining adequate health is the basis for the failure of reducing diets in general.
There are a few basic facts about nutrition with which everyone should be acquainted:
[ul]
[li]The average person needs to eat about 1 to 1.5 kilos (2-3 lbm) of food mass a day in order to feel satiated, regardless of calorie content. Caloric Density (CD) is a measure of the calories per unit weight of food; low CD foods are inherently more filling and will satisfy the required food mass.[/li][li]Good nutritional health requires a calorie balance of approximately 50-55% carbohydrates, 25-30% proteins, and 20% fats, along with adequate fiber and a balance of micronutrients that help stimulate enzyme production or catalyze metabolic and nervous system functions. Certain types of athletic diets may increase the carbohydrate portion for aerobic sustainment or decrease fats to no less than 10%, but these are not long-term diets.[/li][li]Foods that have a high Glycemic Index (GI) contain a lot simple carbohydrates (sugars) of will break down into glucose quickly and spike blood sugar levels, stimulating insulin response. This burst of insulin will be followed by sluggishness (the so-called ‘food coma’) and will stimulate appetite. [/li][li]Caloric intake is consumed at a level predicated by the Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR) plus a rate associated with aerobic activity level. Excess calories are generally converted into subcutaneous and visceral body fat.[/li][li]Body fat is consumed by physical exercise in the anaerobic regime. This requires first depleting blood glucose levels to stimulate anaerobic glycolysis. (High protein/high fat/low carb diets attempt to simulate this condition without exercise with variable results and some significant drawbacks.)[/li][li]When calorie intake and blood sugar is inadequate, but the activity level is low, muscle tissue (protein) breaks down easier than fat; hence, fasting causes a reduction of lean muscle mass more than body fats.[/li][li]BMR increases with regular aerobic activity and decreases with calorie restriction.[/li][li]BMR increases somewhat with increased lean muscle mass.[/li][/ul]
It can be seen from above that someone with a low physical activity level and who practices fasting will have difficulty consuming sufficient food bulk and sustaining requisite caloric intact without ‘starving’ (feeling constantly hungry) or increasing body fat stores, especially if the foods consumed are high GI and high CD foods. This is particularly true of many staples of the Western diet, such as soda, crackers and chips, bread and pastries, potatoes, processed grains and ‘soft’ cultivars like corn, cheese, et cetera. Many diet food products, particularly ‘baked’ products, while having less calories (generally by reducing fats) still have a high GI and high CD, and so are unsatisfying and tend to spike blood sugar levels. Most table meats in Western menus have been bred and fed to develop high levels of interstitial saturated fat to improve taste and texture. Many of the fats and oil added to foods in preparation are also saturated or hydrogenated, which tend to promote oxidation and are harder to break down for energy.
While it may seem that having a high BMR is desirable, one should recognize that this is attended by increased oxidation, accelerated cellular growth and turnover, and (especially with high protein diets) excessive creatine production, all of which are correlated to increased risk of developing tumors (both malignant and benign). Regular athletic training will help mitigate this to some extent, but longevity studies have indicated that caloric restriction reduces the incidence of cancer and many other chronic health problems of late middle age and old age. A faster BMR also comes with a higher calorie demand, which will be converted to body fat if the activity level is not maintained.
The most desirable condition is to have a moderate to low BMR with a regular activity aerobic activity level and occasional anaerobic exertion. This can be achieved by moderate caloric restriction while consuming sufficient food bulk (eating low GI and low CD foods, particularly vegetables and unprocessed pulses and legumes, moderate amounts of lean meat, and unsaturated fats like olive or canola oil), daily physical activity of 30-45 minutes of elevated aerobic exertion (walking, swimming, dancing, tennis, et cetera), and a moderate amount of anaerobic activity that maintains lean muscle mass. Fasting and reducing diets produce the opposite condition. The constant spiking of blood sugar and ‘training’ of insulin response results in a high BMR but typically leaves the subject lethargic and not capable of sustained aerobic exercise. Fasting results in loss of lean muscle mass more than body fat and is not recommended as a weight loss or “toxin purging” technique.
Want a cite or further information? Read Exercise Physiology: Energy, Nutrition, & Human Performance, McArdle, Katch, Katch, the most widely used exercise physiology textbook in the United States. For information on healthy caloric restriction, see The Okinawa Program, which is based upon the results of a 25 year study on the traditional diet and lifestyle of Okinawan elders.
Stranger
And here’s a good example…
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/842563/young-mum-starves-to-death-on-soup-diet