does starvation mode really exist?

[MJinZ]

Plus, can I just say - GET BIG LEGS PEOPLE. Easiest way to lose weight is to start getting those quads up big.

 

[nageov3t]

Plus, can I just say - GET BIG LEGS PEOPLE. Easiest way to lose weight is to start getting those quads up big.

my calves are like the bane of my existence... presumably from having to carry around 400+ pounds for a decade, my calf muscles are huge and all I want to do is be able to wear skinny jeans. lol.

 

[MJinZ]

my calves are like the bane of my existence... presumably from having to carry around 400+ pounds for a decade, my calf muscles are huge and all I want to do is be able to wear skinny jeans. lol.

YOU ARE RETARDED!!!!!!!!!!! :awe:

Seriously, many body builders would KILL for big calves.

Why the F do you want to wear skinny jeans? Men who wear skinny jeans have women's legs. Why? WHY?

 

[brikis98]

Re: Endorphins - they make you feel good when your body has been taxed enough. It's a good indication of a good workout, that's all I was saying.

Babbling about endorphins just reveals your ignorance. They have nothing to do with weight loss or judging the effectiveness of your workout. Moreover, if you are after endorphin release, heavy weight lifting is not the way to go. For one thing, aerobic exercise tends to produce far more endoprhin release than resistance exercise. Second of all, endorphin response to resistance exercise varies massively from individual to individual. Third, some studies show that heavy weight training tends to illicit virtually no endorphin release, while others indicate that lighter, easier weight training does (read more here and here).

I was saying for most people, you don't need to count calories or figure out a calorie deficit. By lifting hard enough and working out your heart (not doing aerobic for burning calories), you'll get there without having to be hungry. Hungry + weight lifting = useless IMO.

And it works long term because you eventually reach a good balance of muscle & body fat % and heart health, and if you really wanted to lose more fat to gain the really lean/cut look, then you can start cutting back calories and doing more cardio.

The theory here is that even if you maintain a steady diet and you keep gaining muscle, you'll be effectively cutting your calories (and you'll really lose a lot of fat while doing it).

And yet again, you are showing your ignorance. Weight training has plenty of wonderful benefits - which is why SC and I strongly recommend it - but for the majority of people, it won't magically make you lose fat. Yes, muscle burns more calories than fat, but we aren't talking a huge amount here: over the course of a day, it's about 6 calories per pound of muscle and 2 calories per pound of fat (read more here). So if you gain 20lbs of muscle in a year - an impressive accomplishment - you are only burning about 120 calories more per day. And of course, muscle gain always comes with fat gain. The exact ratio of muscle to fat varies quite a bit depending on genetics and diet, but it is typically somewhere between 1:1 and 2:1. So in the best case (ie, beginner gains), that 20lbs of muscle comes with 10lbs of fat. If you started out as a typical overweight male, say 200lbs and 20% body fat, you'd end up at 230lbs with ~22% body fat. That's right, the body fat percentage has gone UP!

Now, this isn't always a bad thing, as it's possible that with 20lbs of extra muscle, the person looks better even at a higher body fat percentage, and of course, they are likely stronger & healthier too. But if the goal was to lose fat, doing solely weight training will not get them there. And it won't happen by accident. The only way to do it is to watch your diet, which involves tracking calories. It's not "just for chicks" and since 2/3 of the country is overweight (and 1/3 obese), people clearly don't automatically regulate their diets.

 

[MJinZ]

Babbling about endorphins just reveals your ignorance. They have nothing to do with weight loss or judging the effectiveness of your workout. Moreover, if you are after endorphin release, heavy weight lifting is not the way to go. For one thing, aerobic exercise tends to produce far more endoprhin release than resistance exercise. Second of all, endorphin response to resistance exercise varies massively from individual to individual. Third, some studies show that heavy weight training tends to illicit virtually no endorphin release, while others indicate that lighter, easier weight training does (read more here and here).



And yet again, you are showing your ignorance. Weight training has plenty of wonderful benefits - which is why SC and I strongly recommend it - but for the majority of people, it won't magically make you lose fat. Yes, muscle burns more calories than fat, but we aren't talking a huge amount here: over the course of a day, it's about 6 calories per pound of muscle and 2 calories per pound of fat (read more here). So if you gain 20lbs of muscle in a year - an impressive accomplishment - you are only burning about 120 calories more per day. And of course, muscle gain always comes with fat gain. The exact ratio of muscle to fat varies quite a bit depending on genetics and diet, but it is typically somewhere between 1:1 and 2:1. So in the best case (ie, beginner gains), that 20lbs of muscle comes with 10lbs of fat. If you started out as a typical overweight male, say 200lbs and 20% body fat, you'd end up at 230lbs with ~22% body fat. That's right, the body fat percentage has gone UP!

Now, this isn't always a bad thing, as it's possible that with 20lbs of extra muscle, the person looks better even at a higher body fat percentage, and of course, they are likely stronger & healthier too. But if the goal was to lose fat, doing solely weight training will not get them there. And it won't happen by accident. The only way to do it is to watch your diet, which involves tracking calories. It's not "just for chicks" and since 2/3 of the country is overweight (and 1/3 obese), people clearly don't automatically regulate their diets.

Well, all I know are the big guys out there eat like 3000 - 4000 + calories a day just to maintain their muscle mass.

Perhaps it's rocket science if you want to be super efficient about it, fine....but humans are not built to be fat... especially not men. Being active and using resistence training will solve the biggest problem.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

Well, all I know are the big guys out there eat like 3000 - 4000 + calories a day just to maintain their muscle mass.

Perhaps it's rocket science if you want to be super efficient about it, fine....but humans are not built to be fat... especially not men. Being active and using resistence training will solve the biggest problem.

Yes, big guys do eat a lot to maintain muscle mass. Do you know that nearly 40% of your caloric expenditure comes from the thermic effect of activity and the thermic effect of food? It's their activity levels that require them to eat so much, not necessarily their muscle mass. Like brikis pointed out, gaining 20 pounds of muscle really only ups your caloric expenditure by 120kcal/day. That's a cookie. Eat that and you just went onto the caloric surplus side.

The body is just as complicated, if not more, than rocket science. You are saying exactly the opposite of what is true. Humans ARE built to be fat. If you give us calories, we are evolutionarily built to store those calories so we can survive during a time of fasting. We are fat-storing machines. We are some of the most efficient energy-savers out of all the animals. Resistance training will allow for muscle maintenance in a caloric deficit. We don't recommend it because it has voodoo effects. We recommend it because, IN A CALORIC DEFICIT, every other way of losing weight activates the loss of muscle as well. Lifting doesn't make you lose weight. Eating less makes you lose weight. Just because you lift and you lose weight doesn't mean that somebody else with a differently working satiation system will work that way. By the way, have you ever looked at the best weightlifters in the world? They're fat as hell. Your point has no physiological basis (and actually has research against it) and you need to quit talking like you know what's up. You don't. You're just spreading conjured stories of an imaginary world that we don't live in.

 

[brikis98]

Well, all I know are the big guys out there eat like 3000 - 4000 + calories a day just to maintain their muscle mass.

Really? How "big" are these guys? And how do you know how much they eat? Guestimate? Or did you *gasp* actually record food and calculate the caloric intake? But I thought that was just for chicks? In reality, most of those guys probably eat less than you think or if they eat that much, they are probably gaining weight (nothing wrong with that, but it's not helping them drop weight, which is what the argument is about). Moreover, many of those extra calories would go into fueling their activity levels - that is, the exercise they do - rather than just their muscle mass.

And once more, just to be clear: I am in no way arguing against weight training or exercise. In fact, I'm very much in favor of it. But for most people, adding exercise without making a conscious effort to modify diet will rarely allow them to accomplish their weight loss goals.

 

[elitejp]

But for most people, adding exercise without making a conscious effort to modify diet will rarely allow them to accomplish their weight loss goals.

Now this i agree with. Since its been the lack of exercise and the bad diet that has got them in the spot that they are in now. OR it is the reason why you have plateaued . If things arent working for you the way you want you need to change one of these aspects, diet or exercise. If you need a pen and paper to do it then so be it. The more serious i get the more I right stuff down. It lets me find the problem and break through whatever plateau im at.

And to the OP I highly encourage you to increase your exercise and continue to lose weight to your liking. I think your doctor likes settling for mediocrity.

 

[elitejp]

Like brikis pointed out, gaining 20 pounds of muscle really only ups your caloric expenditure by 120kcal/day.

WHAT! Those people must be in a coma.

 

[SludgeFactory]

OP, it would help a lot to know your bodyfat %. Bodyfat is a big influence on the major metabolic hormones. (And it would also help to know what your ultimate goal is here.) At 1100-1300 calories, your food intake basically has no where else to go, it's hit bottom. Your diet is low-protein, and I can't see that you're doing any resistance training. Since Skoorb brought up the POW physique, there isn't a much better way to achieve that than low calories, low protein, lots of cardio, and no weights.

You might be best served by figuring out what your maintenance calories are over the next 2 weeks and taking a break from your diet. (Note that is not going hog wild. If you approach it without discipline, it'll be a huge mistake.) I'd also start introducing regular refeeds if and when you resume dieting. Start lifting weights if you're not already doing it.

Also I would be curious why your doctor told you to stop losing weight. It'd be nice if he gave you a real reason, rather than you approaching some arbitrary weight that he deems "unhealthy."

 

[SociallyChallenged]

WHAT! Those people must be in a coma.

If you calculate the RMR, it only adds 120kcal/day extra. If you increase activity levels, then this will increase as well... but all else the same, it doesn't really change much. Nutritional intervention is the most sure way to consistently lose weight.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

EDIT: Doh, misread. I'm a tard.

 

[elitejp]

Sludge was saying thats the worst way to lose fat 🙄

 

[kamper]

Why should the OP have low intake of protein, high amounts of cardio, and no weights?

He said that's a good way to get a PoW physique, not that the OP should actually do that. I did a double take when I first read that too 😛

 

[SociallyChallenged]

He said that's a good way to get a PoW physique, not that the OP should actually do that. I did a double take when I first read that too 😛

Doh, somehow I missed the general point of that statement. My bad. Must've missed the acronym or misunderstood it. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

Sociallychallenged you do the same thing to my posts all the time. You skim through it and then take it out of context. Sludge was saying thats the worst way to lose fat 🙄

You're right. My bad. I definitely missed something from that post. :hmm:

 

[MJinZ]

Yes, big guys do eat a lot to maintain muscle mass. Do you know that nearly 40% of your caloric expenditure comes from the thermic effect of activity and the thermic effect of food? It's their activity levels that require them to eat so much, not necessarily their muscle mass. Like brikis pointed out, gaining 20 pounds of muscle really only ups your caloric expenditure by 120kcal/day. That's a cookie. Eat that and you just went onto the caloric surplus side.

The body is just as complicated, if not more, than rocket science. You are saying exactly the opposite of what is true. Humans ARE built to be fat. If you give us calories, we are evolutionarily built to store those calories so we can survive during a time of fasting. We are fat-storing machines. We are some of the most efficient energy-savers out of all the animals. Resistance training will allow for muscle maintenance in a caloric deficit. We don't recommend it because it has voodoo effects. We recommend it because, IN A CALORIC DEFICIT, every other way of losing weight activates the loss of muscle as well. Lifting doesn't make you lose weight. Eating less makes you lose weight. Just because you lift and you lose weight doesn't mean that somebody else with a differently working satiation system will work that way. By the way, have you ever looked at the best weightlifters in the world? They're fat as hell. Your point has no physiological basis (and actually has research against it) and you need to quit talking like you know what's up. You don't. You're just spreading conjured stories of an imaginary world that we don't live in.

What I meant was humans were not meant to be "fat", that is distinctly different than "store fat".

Historically, humans have had plenty of activity so our bodies never became fat in the first place.

I still disagree - Eating the same amount and increasing your activity (aka weight lifting) may make you gain weight, but you lose fat and gain muscle. As long as you make sure to cut the 1000 calorie burgers and junk food, it can't be any easier. And most likely, doing this will make you lose weight because your activity and caloric consumption from activity will exceed your caloric intake.

And that is very very simple and irrefutable. I'm just saying that if you're hugely overweight and obese and need more than that, fine, but I don't think most men do.

 

[nageov3t]

Also I would be curious why your doctor told you to stop losing weight. It'd be nice if he gave you a real reason, rather than you approaching some arbitrary weight that he deems "unhealthy."

I'm assuming he made the judgment based on my overall health and body composition, having seen me naked.

I have some free weights and do push-ups on a regular basis, but I'm kind of in a crappy situation as far as real weight lifting goes... I can't (comfortably) afford any of the gyms around me (which are like $50+/month) and my lease explicitly bans exercise equipment inside the apartment.

hoping to change that in the next couple months when I move into a 2-bedroom apartment and convert the extra bedroom into a work out room.

 

[MJinZ]

I'm assuming he made the judgment based on my overall health and body composition, having seen me naked.

I have some free weights and do push-ups on a regular basis, but I'm kind of in a crappy situation as far as real weight lifting goes... I can't (comfortably) afford any of the gyms around me (which are like $50+/month) and my lease explicitly bans exercise equipment inside the apartment.

hoping to change that in the next couple months when I move into a 2-bedroom apartment and convert the extra bedroom into a work out room.

You definitely need to find a gym. If your health isn't worth $50/ month (and many insurance companies will pay for your gym membership) .....

 

[nageov3t]

You definitely need to find a gym. If your health isn't worth $50/ month (and many insurance companies will pay for your gym membership) .....

I'm like pretty healthy.

well, probably. my blood work doesn't come back for another couple days but I'm probably pretty healthy.

 

[MJinZ]

I'm like pretty healthy.

well, probably. my blood work doesn't come back for another couple days but I'm probably pretty healthy.

That doesn't come from just dropping lots of pounds, it comes from a good amount of cardio, eating healthy, and keeping your body's activity in check.

 

[brikis98]

Historically, humans have had plenty of activity so our bodies never became fat in the first place.

Actually, obesity and overweight levels started to skyrocket in the 1980's and this sharp spike did not correlate with a decrease in physical activity. In fact, I think a higher percentage of people are exercising regularly now than back then, but the obesity rate is incomparably worse. Therefore, the reason for it probably has a lot more to do with diet than exercise.

I still disagree - Eating the same amount and increasing your activity (aka weight lifting) may make you gain weight, but you lose fat and gain muscle.

No, it won't. With the exception of short lived beginner gains, losing fat and gaining muscle at the same time is incredibly difficult and impractical. With your suggested approach, after increasing activity levels, there are only 3 possibilities:

(1) You end up in a caloric deficit. In this case, you lose weight. If you are doing resistance training, most of the weight loss will be fat. You will not gain much muscle mass, but you can still get stronger.

(2) You end up in a caloric surplus because you (over) compensate for the increased activity levels by eating more. This is what the overwhelming majority of people do if they aren't tracking calories. The result is weight gain that will consist of both muscle and fat. Your body fat percentage will most likely stay the same or go up a bit. Strength gains will be very rapid.

(3) You end up eating caloric maintenance. Your bodyweight will mostly remain unchanged. You'll grow stronger, but won't gain too much muscle mass.

Most people will only be interested in one of the outcomes above. The only way to ensure that they get it is by tracking calories. If they don't, the vast majority end up at option #2. If a lower body fat percentage is the goal, #2 will not get them there.

 

[MJinZ]

Actually, obesity and overweight levels started to skyrocket in the 1980's and this sharp spike did not correlate with a decrease in physical activity. In fact, I think a higher percentage of people are exercising regularly now than back then, but the obesity rate is incomparably worse. Therefore, the reason for it probably has a lot more to do with diet than exercise.


No, it won't. With the exception of short lived beginner gains, losing fat and gaining muscle at the same time is incredibly difficult and impractical. With your suggested approach, after increasing activity levels, there are only 3 possibilities:

(1) You end up in a caloric deficit. In this case, you lose weight. If you are doing resistance training, most of the weight loss will be fat. You will not gain much muscle mass, but you can still get stronger.

(2) You end up in a caloric surplus because you (over) compensate for the increased activity levels by eating more. This is what the overwhelming majority of people do if they aren't tracking calories. The result is weight gain that will consist of both muscle and fat. Your body fat percentage will most likely stay the same or go up a bit. Strength gains will be very rapid.

(3) You end up eating caloric maintenance. Your bodyweight will mostly remain unchanged. You'll grow stronger, but won't gain too much muscle mass.

Most people will only be interested in one of the outcomes above. The only way to ensure that they get it is by tracking calories. If they don't, the vast majority end up at option #2. If a lower body fat percentage is the goal, #2 will not get them there.

OK..

1) Fine with me. This should be a long term plan, so...

2) True, I guess I expect too much from people for estimating their food intake.

3) I disagree. If you lift hard and caloric "maintain", you'll grow stronger and the gains will be consistent. It will be slower but you will get big eventually without falling back into obesity, like most people do when they want something quick and easy. IMO being healthy is a life-long and is not good to be on and off.

At some point, if your muscles aren't big enough for you, you might start to up your calories, start supplements etc, but honestly, will you still be a fatty? I doubt it... so this no longer really applies to people trying to lose fat.

 

[brikis98]

1) Fine with me. This should be a long term plan, so...

The caloric deficit + weight lifting plan is exactly what SC and I have been recommending. It's a great way to reduce body fat percentage. However, for most people, it won't happen "by accident": they'll have to track calories to ensure they are in a deficit.

2) True, I guess I expect too much from people for estimating their food intake.

It is too much. Research has shown time and again that people routinely over-estimate their activity levels and under-estimate their food intake. That's probably one factor in how they got fat in the first place.

3) I disagree. If you lift hard and caloric "maintain", you'll grow stronger and the gains will be consistent.

Growing stronger does not mean your muscle mass is increasing. Strength has an enormous neurological component to it, as you can see from competitive weight lifters & power lifters who stay in the same weight class but get stronger year after year.

It will be slower but you will get big eventually without falling back into obesity, like most people do when they want something quick and easy.

If you are not happy with your body composition, eating maintenance calories will be a VERY VERY slow way to change it. So slow, that most people will give up long before they achieve their goals. Alternating cutting and biking cycles - which requires precise monitoring of food intake - is a MUCH faster way to change body composition. As a very rough example, if your goal is to drop 10lbs of fat and add 10lbs of muscle, you can probably achieve it by cutting for ~4 months (drop ~20lbs of fat, ~5lbs of muscle) and bulking for for ~4 months (gain 15lbs of muscle, 10lbs of fat). Achieving the same results while eating maintenance will most likely take multiple years, if you ever get there at all.

IMO being healthy is a life-long and is not good to be on and off.

I agree that a life-long approach is necessary. This is why SC's fat loss sticky also discusses the type of food to eat and not just the quantity. However, if you need to change your body composition, some tweaking of the quantity is necessary as well. Moreover, learning portion control is an essential part of a long term diet. And since people are notoriously bad at estimation, the only accurate way to do it is by tracking calories. Once your desired body weight is reached, you switch to eating maintenance calories and continue exercising to keep the results for the long term.

 

[Powermoloch]

Mid february 2010 I was 222 lb 5'10". I know i had to do something about it (I blame it on my bad habits and MMORPGs). Of course I did stop playing games almost entirely (except for MW2 😛 ). The first week or 2 was pretty bad in terms of dieting, I really kept my calories restricted to almost 1000 Cal a day. I know I'm not doing something right D:

Then I started eating more properly without hitting my body to starvation mode, and now I'm losing 1-1 1/2 lb a week on avg. My usual diet is high in fiber, A very good amount of protein and moderation in fat. Which consists of:

- High grain bread (12 grain) complex carbs. NO high starchy food (no jasmine rice, potatoes, etc) Since almost of my life is consist of rice eating every meal...It's hard to beat but after 2-3 months into it, I'm feeling much better w/o it.
- Pork n beans (that takes cares of my fiber) or any other beans available
- Salad
- Chicken breast/white meat (roasted/oven)
- Faux meat (Tofurkey, very tasty no cholesterol 😀 )
- Broiled fish (tilapia/salmon/bass)
- 2 granola bars, one of each in before lunch and dinner.
- 2-3 servings of whey protein drink after a 30-40 min strength training everyday. (chocolate flavor )

Of course I always have a fat friday which I can eat anything ( in moderation of course) to keep myself happy. And it's usually a subway sandwich 🙂

So far at this route I'm trying to create a 500-600 Calorie deficit a day. Which equates to 3500 Calories per week = 1 lb of fat at least. As a result since the start I have lost close to 27 lbs @ 195 at the moment. Never felt better and I'm getting my upper body definition as expected with stength training.