Starvation mode - advice

On 19 Sep 2004 22:24:02 -0700, (Wee Willie) wrote:

"Cubit" wrote in message . com...
IMHO "Starvation Mode" is a myth. There is a small increase in metabolic
efficiency, if you eat 600 calories per day. This gets exaggerated by
wishful thinking of those who hate to count calories.

http://www.FitDay.com is a great way to find out how many calories you
average. Find your BMR on the internet and the math should be obvious.
Note: Fitday over-estimates caloric burn rate.


You are right that there isn't a starvation mode when it comes to
number of calories consumed in a day, but eventually you do reach a
weight when your body suddenly slows down. You'll notice that you feel
cold especially your hands and feet. The slowdown isn't permanent,
however, your metabolism picks up again should you later pass that
weight.

I concur that 'Starvation Mode' is a complete myth, fabricated by
lazy fat asses who don't want to sacrifice their gluttony for real
weight loss.

I also concur that eating fewer calories than minimum recommended,
is very effective if it is continued over a longer period.

You mention getting most of your diet from protein with a little
lettuce, cucumber r broccoli for color. Are you aware that low
carbing DOES cause vitamin and mineral deficiencies?

How so? I can create a menu that gives me 100% RDA of all vitamins and
minerals, sticking to the Atkins induction foods list alone. You can't say the
same for the USDA food pyramid, it's not possible. So I'm unsure how low
carbing causes deficiencies.
LCing since 12/01/03-
Me- 5'7" 265/165/140
& hubby- 6' 310/188/180
http://f2.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/lcer09/my_photos

You mention getting most of your diet from protein with a little
lettuce, cucumber r broccoli for color. Are you aware that low
carbing DOES cause vitamin and mineral deficiencies?

How so? I can create a menu that gives me 100% RDA of all vitamins and
minerals, sticking to the Atkins induction foods list alone. You can't say the
same for the USDA food pyramid, it's not possible. So I'm unsure how low
carbing causes deficiencies.
LCing since 12/01/03-
Me- 5'7" 265/165/140
& hubby- 6' 310/188/180
http://f2.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/lcer09/my_photos

PJx wrote:
|| On 19 Sep 2004 22:24:02 -0700, (Wee Willie) wrote:
||
||| "Cubit" wrote in message
||| . com...
|||| IMHO "Starvation Mode" is a myth. There is a small increase in
|||| metabolic
|||| efficiency, if you eat 600 calories per day. This gets
|||| exaggerated by
|||| wishful thinking of those who hate to count calories.
||||
|||| http://www.FitDay.com is a great way to find out how many calories
|||| you
|||| average. Find your BMR on the internet and the math should be
|||| obvious.
|||| Note: Fitday over-estimates caloric burn rate.
||||
|||
||| You are right that there isn't a starvation mode when it comes to
||| number of calories consumed in a day, but eventually you do reach a
||| weight when your body suddenly slows down. You'll notice that you
||| feel
||| cold especially your hands and feet. The slowdown isn't permanent,
||| however, your metabolism picks up again should you later pass that
||| weight.
||
|| I concur that 'Starvation Mode' is a complete myth, fabricated by
|| lazy fat asses who don't want to sacrifice their gluttony for real
|| weight loss.

Provide proof of this statement?

||
|| I also concur that eating fewer calories than minimum recommended,
|| is very effective if it is continued over a longer period.

What does this mean? Zero calories is fewer than the minimum recommended.
I'm sure that's very effective if you wish to ruin your body and/or die
quickly.

PJx wrote:
|| On 19 Sep 2004 22:24:02 -0700, (Wee Willie) wrote:
||
||| "Cubit" wrote in message
||| . com...
|||| IMHO "Starvation Mode" is a myth. There is a small increase in
|||| metabolic
|||| efficiency, if you eat 600 calories per day. This gets
|||| exaggerated by
|||| wishful thinking of those who hate to count calories.
||||
|||| http://www.FitDay.com is a great way to find out how many calories
|||| you
|||| average. Find your BMR on the internet and the math should be
|||| obvious.
|||| Note: Fitday over-estimates caloric burn rate.
||||
|||
||| You are right that there isn't a starvation mode when it comes to
||| number of calories consumed in a day, but eventually you do reach a
||| weight when your body suddenly slows down. You'll notice that you
||| feel
||| cold especially your hands and feet. The slowdown isn't permanent,
||| however, your metabolism picks up again should you later pass that
||| weight.
||
|| I concur that 'Starvation Mode' is a complete myth, fabricated by
|| lazy fat asses who don't want to sacrifice their gluttony for real
|| weight loss.

Provide proof of this statement?

||
|| I also concur that eating fewer calories than minimum recommended,
|| is very effective if it is continued over a longer period.

What does this mean? Zero calories is fewer than the minimum recommended.
I'm sure that's very effective if you wish to ruin your body and/or die
quickly.

PJx wrote:
|| On 19 Sep 2004 22:24:02 -0700, (Wee Willie) wrote:
||
||| "Cubit" wrote in message
||| . com...
|||| IMHO "Starvation Mode" is a myth. There is a small increase in
|||| metabolic
|||| efficiency, if you eat 600 calories per day. This gets
|||| exaggerated by
|||| wishful thinking of those who hate to count calories.
||||
|||| http://www.FitDay.com is a great way to find out how many calories
|||| you
|||| average. Find your BMR on the internet and the math should be
|||| obvious.
|||| Note: Fitday over-estimates caloric burn rate.
||||
|||
||| You are right that there isn't a starvation mode when it comes to
||| number of calories consumed in a day, but eventually you do reach a
||| weight when your body suddenly slows down. You'll notice that you
||| feel
||| cold especially your hands and feet. The slowdown isn't permanent,
||| however, your metabolism picks up again should you later pass that
||| weight.
||
|| I concur that 'Starvation Mode' is a complete myth, fabricated by
|| lazy fat asses who don't want to sacrifice their gluttony for real
|| weight loss.

Provide proof of this statement?

||
|| I also concur that eating fewer calories than minimum recommended,
|| is very effective if it is continued over a longer period.

What does this mean? Zero calories is fewer than the minimum recommended.
I'm sure that's very effective if you wish to ruin your body and/or die
quickly.

Now, I wonder if any of you have any experience about getting the body
off starvation mode.
May the force be with you

Arto F.


Yes. The body takes 24-48 hours to react to your food intake. Meaning you
will need to eat more for a couple of days to get yourself back on track. I
suggest upping you food intake and doing some exercise during this time so
you don't gain. If you gain a few, don't worry, it will come right off.
Keep water intake high.

This is my experience and also what I have read.
Curt

Now, I wonder if any of you have any experience about getting the body
off starvation mode.
May the force be with you

Arto F.


Yes. The body takes 24-48 hours to react to your food intake. Meaning you
will need to eat more for a couple of days to get yourself back on track. I
suggest upping you food intake and doing some exercise during this time so
you don't gain. If you gain a few, don't worry, it will come right off.
Keep water intake high.

This is my experience and also what I have read.
Curt

The point of my OP was that starvation mode, as defined by Bev, does not
exist. My view is supported by the info at the link in the OP. The 15%
reduction is triggered by how much body fat one has in relation to one's set
point....

Starvation mode occurs when
you continue to eat below your BMR for longer than about a week, which you
are obviously doing.

Bev

The point of my OP was that starvation mode, as defined by Bev, does not
exist. My view is supported by the info at the link in the OP. The 15%
reduction is triggered by how much body fat one has in relation to one's set
point....

Starvation mode occurs when
you continue to eat below your BMR for longer than about a week, which you
are obviously doing.

Bev